http://www.roland.co.uk/arrangerkey_room_catdet.asp?ID=GW8

Bill

Well, there goes the rumor that Roland are quitting the arranger market

Interesting product blurb:

-------------------------------------------------
The GW-8 is the next generation of Roland's unique GW-series workstations with intelligent backing-track functionality. With its fresh, contemporary sound-set and expressive musical styles from pop to rock, plus authentic ethnic styles and a multi-format USB Memory Player feature, the GW-8 will bring a world of music to your fingertips. It's especially well suited for "one-man-band" performance.

• Contemporary music workstation with high-quality 128-voice sound engine derived from Roland's renowned sound-module lineup
• Wide variety of contemporary sounds and intelligent backing styles, plus additional banks of ethnic sounds and styles from around the world
• USB Memory Player feature allows direct playback of MP3, WAV, AIFF, and SMF files from USB key; Centre Cancel feature for audio files enables karaoke-style sing-along
• Newly designed graphical display, plus Style Select button, Analogue Modify knob, and D-BEAM
• Style Converter and Playlist Editor software included
• Onboard 16-track sequencer for saving your interactive performances

Flagship Sound Engine with Easy User Interface
With Roland's world-leading sound technology at its core, the GW-8 rivals any workstation on the planet with its rich, expressive sound. The GW-8 comes loaded with hundreds of the freshest and most essential sounds culled from Roland's top sound modules. In addition to its authentic sound set, the GW-8 is equipped with many user-friendly control devices, such as the expressive D-BEAM and the Analogue Modify knob, which instantly adjusts sounds to suit your taste. The GW-8 is perfect for live entertainers who play multiple roles in their performances.

Intelligent Backing Styles
The GW-8 is packed with a huge collection of styles, representing a broad range of music genres, from contemporary rock, pop, dance, jazz and beyond. In addition to the excellent library of contemporary sounds and styles, the GW-8 is equipped with ethnic instrument sounds and authentic regional musical styles.* Each backing style has four intros, four main patterns, and four ending progressions for you to craft your own arrangements live.

*Style selection may vary from country to country. For details, please contact our Customer Service Team on 01792 702701.

USB Memory Player Feature
One of Roland's most popular new features is built into the GW-8: the Multi-format Song Player that allows song data to be played directly from USB Flash memory (accepts MP3, WAV, AIFF, and SMF format). In addition, the GW-8's Centre Cancel function can minimize main vocals from pre-recorded songs, great for karaoke-style performances or music practice.

Style Converter & Playlist Editor
Bundled with each GW-8 is Roland's Style Converter software for PC, which lets you convert your own MIDI data into GW-8 backing styles via commercially available USB Flash memory devices.

Also included is the Playlist Editor for customising the order of songs. Users can easily create a dedicated Playlist for each gig
-------------------------------------------------

Quite a few of our oft-stated needs here... Direct from memory playback of audio, 'Analogue Modify' knob for the synth crowd (only one, but it's a start!), center cancel for the karaoke crowd, playlist editing...

But some of the wording leads me to perhaps an interesting conclusion. "128-voice sound engine derived from Roland's renowned sound-module lineup" is curious... What IS Roland's current 128 voice module line-up? FantomG Rack and Sonic Cell, I think. This leads me to conclude that this is probably based on the Sonic Cell module.

That's a seriously well equipped sound set This thing probably sounds GREAT!

One other thing struck me, that I have been saying for years... "Style selection may vary from country to country". Brilliant! No-one needs bank after bank of ROM styles that have no relevance to their market. With these things using flash ROM to store styles instead of the old hardware ROM chips, there's no reason why each country can't have a totally different selection of styles based around what styles are most popular IN THAT COUNTRY.

Maybe, when this makes it's way to the US, we can finally have an arranger with purely American styles, not schlager and beer-hall favorites of no use outside Wisconsin..!

Take this to it's logical conclusion, and perhaps the day when you can chose what styles you want in ROM yourself, online, AFTER you have bought the arranger, is not too far off.

Whether Roland have really hit the nail on the head with this one will have to wait until it's release. I think they have erred by not including speakers, but the karaoke and playlist features seem to suggest a more 'pro' orientation (giggers, that is), as most home players buy arrangers, strangely enough, to actually PLAY, not be an overpriced iPod!

But for all the gleeful spreaders of Roland's imminent demise, a sad day

Personally, I welcome a hiatus in high end development, while Roland put themselves back on track, and rediscover what players actually NEED, rather than what their tech wonks have been telling them we need. THEN get a new TOTL 76 out. I can wait until maybe a combination of Sonic Cell and FantomG technology is available to the arranger division before I will think about trading my G70...

Interesting times...

Just as a TC Helicon Harmony M onto this baby & your ready to rock!! oh yeah!

http://www.voicetonepedals.com/harmonym.html


[This message has been edited by Dnj (edited 06-12-2008).]

From the picture this GW8 looks almost identical to the current GW7. I am worried about there not being a quick way to call up sounds and styles. In the GW7 there isn't a numeric keypad. You must use the data wheel to scroll through everything to find what you want. The GW7 sounds good but there is no style editing like on most arrangers and I think the GW8 is almost the same technology.


------------------
George Kaye
Kaye's Music Scene
Reseda, California
818-881-5566
www.kayesmusicscene.com

Good to see that Roland hasn't bitten the proverbial arranger dust...should be wonderful news for the Rolandites amongst us...but, for some reason...it is not 76 keys.

What gives?

Perhaps there will be a later version with a larger keybed? The GW-80 perhaps?

Was there a inititally a 61 note speaker-less version of the G70...maybe that would give a clue?

Ian

GX90 coming soon

If there's a GW8, will there be e55/65/85? Now updating that trio would bring some interesting results. And where's the G80?

Like I said... Take their time, get it RIGHT. Another half-finished arranger series will kill Roland for sure.

For all Ian's baiting (he's a master of it ), Roland have always concentrated most of their line on 61's (as he well knows ), and have only made one, or possibly two 76's in the entire line. While Roland understand that the majority of the market is fine with 61, at least they don't abandon their more advanced players, and force them into the competition's arms. Where they seldom return from.

I don't think Roland were EVER going to stop making arrangers, and I have never even hinted at that in other posts I have made.

All I passed on was info from a Roland rep that there was no new ***76 NOTE*** arranger on the way, for the forseeable future (18 months or so).

Now Donny, you keep harping on about a "gx90"...so is this just BS on your part or have you actually spoken with someone at Roland?

Come on man give it up if you have got this from a contact at Roland or elsewhere and please don't reply with cutesy winky avatars either..

You either know and therefore you should perhaps quote a source, as I have, or stop sticking it up there like you know everything that is going on everywhere all the time.

Whether it's Donny's BS, or BS form a dealer or a rep (no shortage of BS from either of those types!), or even BS from you, miden (no offense, it's just that second hand knowledge is NOT knowledge at all... even a 'reliable' rep or dealer can be BS'd to by a higher up ), there sure is plenty of it to go around

Even an 18 month hiatus for the G-series wouldn't put it much outside it's regular production cycle, especially if you consider that two MAJOR software upgrades have turned it into a FAR different keyboard from the one that was first released.

I'm far from panicking, anyway, and still too satisfied with the G70 to even remotely consider the competition right now... Heck, even if the G90 came out tomorrow, with today's economy (resort travel is down a bit this year), I probably would still try to get a couple more years out of the G70

Good points Diki, and too true when you really get down to it.

The Roland rep is more than likely on a "need to know" basis and is telling the truth as HE knows it.

Donny if you read this, don't worry about a reply to my question, Diki's post has brought the reality back to my thoughts.

For all I know it is BS from me, via a third party!!

Cheers
Dennis

Ahhhh...I never thought of the GW7 until George mentioned it...so the GW8 is more likely the next generation of the former.

That makes sense.

So as I see it, there is still real no confirmation there will be a G70 replacement.

No doubt the E-series will continue, and perhaps as Cassp has said, there may be an E-65...that wouldn't be too far fetched as they already have the basic layout, tone generator and style engine...they just have to upgrade it a bit.

T'would be nice to see a G90 (or whatever it will be called)...no need of Korg getting all of the 76 note crowd, limited as it may be.

And Diki would be able to spend all that loot he's hoarding away (well, he's not spending it on gear!) on a cool new arranger.

Ian

I've always thought yamaha was so popular because they had great entry level boards.
My first arranger was a psr 540 since then I've always bought another yamaha.
Maybe Roland is now starting to think that way, give 'em a great inexpensive keyboard to start on and build brand loyalty.

[This message has been edited by mikeathome1 (edited 06-12-2008).]

And there is NO confirmation there won't be a new G-series, either.

But the rumor mill grinds on, doesn't it, Ian Still, it gives you a break from justifying Yamaha's bottom-line business model, doesn't it?

Actually, I am very happy to see this product... I have always thought that Roland make great arrangers, once they don't have to worry about the sound source itself (not their strong point, IMO). Most of the really popular Roland's were based on one or another model of the Sound Canvas series, which was voiced and used samples developed by the main Roland division, who are not short of resources or money (unlike most arranger divisions, at least compared to the main divisions!). So, IMO, they were voiced VERY consistently, and homogeneously (so all the sounds fitted together with no further work) and provided a consistent sound set for the arranger gurus to work with.

Not so in the G70 and E50/60/80 (and the previous V/VA series), which don't have a complete sound-set based around any other single Roland product, but rather a cobbled together set from several different sources. This has proved problematic, if not solvable. You certainly CAN balance all the sounds, and very well indeed, by using the voice editing and 3 band parametric EQ, but it doesn't come OOTB like that, which the old Sound Canvas based arrangers DID...

So, moving the arranger line (at least the lower end, to start) over to the Sonic Cell would seem like a step back towards what made Roland's great in the first place. A well balanced soundset developed by the main Roland division, and then used by the arranger division, who now only have to concentrate on operational features, rather than voicing the damn thing...

Time will tell.

In the meantime, hopefully I've got LOTS of time to save up for anything significantly better than my G70 It hasn't been made yet by ANYBODY, so no rush. At this rate, maybe I'll just get a Scala and four roadies to haul it for me

Actually, Diki, my friend, I really do hope there is a G70 replacement.

As I said earlier, "Competition always improves the breed."

If it does well, then maybe Yamaha will make a 76'er....then again....maybe not.

I hope you don't have to waste money on a Scala (you'll need a white suit, too) and roadies(not a bad idea if they are like the ones Fran hires), although I'm sure you'll still have enough veeta left over in your stash to get a new "G".

Besides...it would get awfully boring around here if all we had to do was lavish praise on the Tyros3.

Ian

George is right...the lack of a keypad is why the GW-7 I bought from him is unused. It's also why I am reluctant to buy from any source than a local dealer again, without thoroughly checking out and knowing the product before I order (my bad). There were none in this area, and I took a shot based on recommendations, but it has not worked out.

That's my fault and no one elses.

Russ



[This message has been edited by captain Russ (edited 06-13-2008).]

Well, I suppose, especially as Roland specifically brand this one as more of a WS than arranger (gotta love those marketing dweebs, don'tcha? ) that a more WS-like method of choosing patches is likely. I hate to break it to you, but quite a large number of WS's have no keypad either.

I guess it's an approach thing... With WS's, you primarily set everything you need up in advance. Splits, patches, levels, effects, etc.. On the whole, WS's are far harder to run on-the-fly, but usually make up for it with vastly greater flexibility than arrangers. So here we have an odd duck... Neither fish nor fowl (or some kind of flying fish ). An arranger with a WS OS, or a WS with some arranger capabilities... Your pick.

I've been using arrangers, even in regular band situations for a long time now for precisely this reason. Most of the TOTL WS (I've got K2500 and a Triton, as well as some older WSs) suck royally when it comes to making a tone change on the fly. Simply calling up a sound, with it's associated effects, levels, pan, and position on the keyboard in the middle of a song is just not practical in the heat of battle, unless it is a simple one patch across the whole keyboard. I rarely play like that.

So the arranger has been of great use in roles you would normally use a WS for, simply because of the flexibility. I can do pickup gigs on the G70, and dial every tone up before the intro is over, and fast edit during the song to something that would take a WS user until the next song to even get close!

So, if you are a 'run it on the fly' kind of arranger player, the 'Free Panel' type, this GW series does not seem a good match. But if you are from more of a WS background, and want something with an arranger-like capability, you may be far more likely to enjoy it...

It certainly seems to point to the need (and many keyboards could benefit from this) for someone to make a MIDI keypad, programmable to send any PC#/CC00/32 with a simple maybe three digit code...

But be warned. With modern TOTL arrangers having THOUSANDS of patches, the old numeric keypad isn't quite the shortcut to patch selection it used to be. Simply remembering all you favorite patches' four digit number is quite a task! My personal favorite system is on the Triton and K2500, where you can gather all your favorite patches and combis all on one screen (or two or three!), no matter WHERE they reside in memory, or what type of patch they are, and select them from there. Simple and customizable.

Just what the doctor ordered!

A bit confused here. Where does this GW-8 fit? Where is it on the "level-scale" compared to E-09, E-50, E-60, G-70, E-80?

Bart, the GW-8 is an entry level...placing it with the E-09..although I would take a GW over an E-09..
The E-50 has more advanced SMF/chord read/lyrics/sequence edits/ and better get around ..than the GW-7 for sure..and I would think..than the GW-8 too..

I don't know about that, Fran... Obviously, we've got to hear one up close and personal, but although the arranger features ARE probably a bit more basic than the E50, it's Sonic Cell engine may prove to be of better overall quality, and it's audio playback features are on no Roland arranger short of the E80 V2 ($3k more!).

I don't think any direct comparison is fair, because of it's hybrid WS/arranger nature, but for someone doing more than just arranger playing, this one may be at least equivalent to an E50, and may better it in some regards... If all you want is a bare bones arranger, with some audio capability and WS type control, this may be a great product...

I wouldn't really count on the GW-8 performing like a "workstation". Sound wise this new model is going to be interesting now that it's using Sonic Cell, and Fantom X sounds. However..., Roland has still crippled this unit in the recording area. No user created styles.., limited post editing of user songs.., and the MFX are only there for real-time play. The MFX cannot be recorded into the sequencer.

Personally I think Roland is a bit loose with the term Workstation. You're going to get much better "internal" recording options on the E series. I don't think the GW line is an any way a "Workstation". It's more of a performance arranger IMO.

That's it in a nutshell, squeak... it isn't an arranger, it isn't a WS, it's a hybrid.

And, in today's environment of the majority of sequencing, recording and editing being done on computers, with a simple transfer to the keyboard once the work is done (pretty similar to the S900, in a way, with having to use software to make up for limited on-board editing), much of the 'missing' features are kind of moot.

Personally, I haven't used an on-board sequencer for decades! Style creation is also primarily handled by software these days, although Roland do have what I think is the best on-board out there, but I think most people work on styles with things like EMC, etc., nowadays.

Don't forget it's price point... At well under a grand, it seems like a bargain to get Roland styles and sounds, even if you DO have to give up some editing flexibility...

To be honest Diki.., I think at the very least Roland could have added style recording. This is supposed to be (by their statements) an arranger workstation. What's the point of an arranger workstation that doesn't even have the ability to record user styles. I also agree that software is filling a lot of gaps you're not getting on the hardware.. however, even if it didn't have a 16 trk seq.., at the very least it being an arranger workstation, it should record user styles.

I also understand price point.., BUT in this case I have to point out that both of my previous (very dated) Yamaha PSR's (PSR-540 and PSR-550) $500 cheap arrangers they were too--had the ability to record user styles..., and although the sequencer was disk based--had WAY more recording power than both the GW-7 and GW-8.

Even if the GW didn't have a 16 trk recorder and just recorded user styles... I'd still say it was one hell of a bargain, because the user would at least have the ability to customize the board.

From the product page...

"Bundled with each GW-8 is Roland's Style Converter software for PC, which lets you convert your own MIDI data into GW-8 backing styles via commercially available USB Flash memory devices"

...which I would take as a software route towards making your own styles out of whatever you want, MIDI-wise.

That's still not the same thing as creating your own styles. The software takes "you" out of the picture. IMO a very important feature on ANY arranger that costs nearly $900 should be the ability to record user styles.

What $900 arrangers CAN record their own styles? I was under the impression that Yamaha needed software...

Plus, you've got to take into consideration that anyone looking to only spend $900 or less isn't probably the power user that WOULD do much with making their own styles. I would be willing to bet that 99% of all GW-8 buyers never have made a user style in their life on anything else... why would they start now?

At least (particularly as it is marketed to WS users, who are probably less computer-phobic than most arranger users) there IS a software route to your own styles... Personally, I would always prefer to be able to record and assemble the parts in a computer, with it's vastly superior editing and display, than have to work under the confines of the tiny displays built-in to our arrangers.

But to dismiss a product in this price range for missing something that even the market leader (especially in this price range) doesn't even have without software support seems shortsighted. It's $500 cheaper than an E50, has twice the polyphony, audio playback capability, and possibly better sounds.

Not too shabby...

Not long ago a person COULD buy an arranger for under $900 and record user styles. Problem is these keyboard companies have gotten so greedy that they've dropped this feature on lower models. If a $499 PSR-540 and PSR-550 could record user styles then there is no way in hell why a $900 Roland can't do the same thing. Serioulsy how much would it have cost to add user style recording to a keyboard that cost $895...?

It's all greed man. Yamaha's rep responses are a good example on the Motif forum. Yammie's MM6 has gotten a lot of complaints about some basic features missing. Everytime you mentioned something about the MM6 missing (something that's a basic feature you should find on ANY keyboard claiming to be a synth).., Yamaha's response was always.., "You want this feature.., buy the MO 6/8".

With technology getting so cheap today.., there's no reason IMO why a $900 arranger shouldn't be able to record user styles. If current cellphones have higher technology than the freakin lunar module of 69 and sell for much less than what it cost to build that thing.., then there's NO REASON a $900 arranger can't record user styles. It's GREED! simple as that. Makers are dropping these features on models to push the sales of upper line... $900 for an arranger that can't record styles or even freakin loop record..., geez! Hell the Roland Juno-G does circles around the GW-8 and does it for a mere $100 more.

Think about that... Juno-G has 4 track audio recording, 128 note poly, 16 trk seq with loop, twice the synth power, SRX expansion, and TADAAA!!!!! DRUM ROLL!!!... Fantom Sounds... The G sells for $995....

I know one's an arranger and one a synth, but can't you see my point? If Roland can pack as much as they did in the Juno-G for $995..., there's no excuse for an $895 arranger keyboard not being able to record user styles..., and not being as crippled in the recording section as the GW-8 is.

Also you can't expect everyone to go the software route Diki--just because you feel it's the best. Since when did using your keyboard to record userstyles become "outdated".







[This message has been edited by squeak_D (edited 07-12-2008).]

But no styles...

You have to face it that, dollar for dollar, you get a generally better product in the WS line than the arranger, and that is due, IMO, to economy of scale. WS's outsell arrangers probably at least ten to one. Probably much more, in truth.

Arranger users have always, IMO, got the short end of the stick, but we only have ourselves to blame. We LET arranger manufacturers pawn off shoddily constructed barely toy quality keyboards on us at premium prices, and make little fuss when major features are dropped (as in style creation or my Chord Sequencer ). In all fairness, it's difficult to justify some of these features if no-one uses them... That's got to be how the manufacturer feels. It is well known that only the tiniest fraction of arranger players ever create their own styles. Why spend a fortune in R&D if no-one uses it?

At least we ought to be grateful that they provide ANY path to user style creation, given how few actually DO...

Diki.., I couldn't agree with you more man.. I have been saying arranger players have been getting the short end for years, and I just couldn't understand how everyone was just accepting it. I've been met with some hostile remarks for saying this in posts as well.

Arranger players do get JACKED when it comes down to comparing price against features. Look at the price difference of a pro arranger and a pro synth. Don't even get me started about styles--because just as much hard work goes into making the arps on a synth (anyone here ever even consider how much work it takes to get those guitar arps to sound the way they do on the Motif line???)

A Tyros 2 (online) is still going for around $3,500. Now tell me where this makes sense.... YOU CAN BUY THE TOP END YAMAHA MOTIF XS8-with Yamaha's TOP QUALITY 88 graded action keybed FOR LESS than the Tyros 2... Please tell me where in the HELL does a person have to live for that to make sense..????

[This message has been edited by squeak_D (edited 07-12-2008).]

I still think that Roland has on the whole done a good job with the GW-8... It's very likely I'll end up buying one of these. I've been wanting to add an arranger to my synth set up for some time now. (I'll probably go for the more oriental version though-lately I've been having a blast doing hip hop with a middle eastern twist).

I just don't like how the pricing is done on these arrangers when you compare them to what you get on a synth in the same price category.

The GW-8 will fit my needs (good sounds, ability to create user patches, good styles, and REAL TIME CONTROL KNOBS!.., why isn't that standard on pro arrangers I'll never know... I'll go the software route for recording because simply the arranger market forces you to go this route.

I will say I'm very surprised that more people don't create their own styles though. I would think that alone is one powerful feature on an arranger keyboard. Even if you take out the 16trk seq.., recording user styles (to me) only makes sense......

[This message has been edited by squeak_D (edited 07-12-2008).]