I think Roland sux.

Who thinks optinone should find a different forum for his highly articulate posts?

My question is exactly what does Roland suck? There must be an object for this verb.

All what Roland needs is to make competitive Keyboards to compete with it's compotators.like the Korg Triton and the Yamaha Motif. the Fantom that they released is very not smart that even the Korg Karma can out perform.that's why they Suck.in my opinion. Also talking about their arranger keyboards.why did they make the VA-3/5/7/76 have a touch screen while the Phantom does not have a touch screen?.

Vic

P.s my comment doesn't go for their "sound engines" as Roland to be fair have very good acoustic sounds.

This is really an old discussion..

In my opinion, all the synth manufacturers have their ups and downs. Roland make high quality, but a bit "conservative" synths. They are weak on effects, but sound quality and synthesis is better than most. They don't look cool ore have tons of "cool" features like touch screens, but they do the job!

Korgs have a lot of effetcs-processing-power, but has normally a weaker synthesis. Someone here mentioned the Karma.. Well, I have had a clos look at a Karma, as my brother owns one.. It is a great synth, but I don't think it is in a "different league" from my XP-60. Some things are better, some things are worse.

Yamaha delivers great synths, but their technical solutions are not always the best.. They've also had software-issues etc

I also think it unfair to compare synths of totally different price-levels. The Korg Triton is (in my country) 1,5 times more expensive than an XP-80. So, why does not the Fantom have a touch-screen? Maybe because every little gadget like that makes the synth more expensive.

All that said, I think what synth is "best", depends on what the user likes, and what the user wants to do with the synth.

Stig

Who needs a touch screen?? I've tested the trinity as well as the triton, but I get a real horror when I have to use this f****** touch screen. Take knobs, sliders and poties, that's much more comfortable.

I don't understand one thing:
Nearly everybody in this Forum says that Roland has a thin and basic sound (some say that (only?) the acoustic sounds are good), while they love the tritons or trinity's sound. I don't think that Korg has better sounds. Or I have got a different type of XP80. My XP's sounds are fat and great (not EVERY sound of course). Korg's sounds are okay, but not better than Roland's. And the piano in the trinity/triton is TERRIBLE.

Sorry if any Korg user is hurt by this post.

I don't know every english "slang" word: what does "sux" mean??

[This message has been edited by Stalker (edited 11-09-2001).]

Perhaps Roland have released a new MIDI based vacuum cleaner?

------------------
The Sonic Energy Authority - a sound investment

TheSonicEnergyAuthority
Pretty funny, and ironic too. There is a vacuum cleaner called fantom.

Stalker:
I agree completely with you. I don't think a Korg sounds any better than an XP-60. Besides, Korg-synths depend heavily on effects to sound great, so when you enter performance-mode, it is often a different story. The same goes for Roland of cours, but because of the more flexible synthesis, it is easier to make great sounds without effects.

And one more thing.. The piano-patches that Korg use are...well...completely terrible. Even the pianos on their piano expansion board are hopeless... I am no piano-expert, but they are really no good.

I think Roland-synths are strong in all types of sounds. That is why I bought one.

Stig

[This message has been edited by stigf (edited 11-10-2001).]

Hi!
Stigf: "I think Roland-synths are strong in all types of sounds. That is why I bought one."
Yeah! And that's why I want to buy a second one (JD 800) . I hope to get one during the next weeks...

Hi Stalker:
Wow, a JD800?? I've never actually seen one of those in real life. They look incredibly cool though.

And when it comes to sound.. I've played my brothers Korg Karma, and it is not in a "different class" when it comes to sound, in my opinion. A good synth, but I prefer my XP-60, both when it comes to sound and otherwise..

Stig

first of all I think the best thing Roland ever created is the XV-5080.it's got very very good sounds. offers 128 polyphonic and 32 parts + a smart media card takes more storage. not a floppy drive.it also loads samples!.the fantom is just an improved XP-80.doesn't offer any thing really new except for the arp. thing.it's basically an mc-80 + XV-5050 + an arp. that should compete with the Karma.

talking about the Touchscreen thing.if you guys noticed that one of the main reasons why a professional would not buy the VA-7 it's because of it's touch screen it just makes you slow when your selecting sounds.why I said they should put it in the fantom?. well the way it's designed is very not good.not many buttons and too many menus.with a touch screen you can access those menus. besides.please let me know if you seen the fantom on a gig.I really think that if any body gets it will just make it a home use!

after all, I agree with Stigf ...
//All that said, I think what synth is "best", depends on what the user likes, and what the user wants to do with the synth.//

------------------
vic:)

Hi Stig!
The first time I had seen a JD 800 was at some "Sparks" appearances in tv at the end of 1994. I had played the JD at a dealer nearby two years ago and was enthusiastic. But unfortunately I didn't have enough money. A few month ago I met a professional (but not really well known) musician who owns over 30 synths, from analog to digital. The synths that impressed me most of all were a Juno 60 and -of course- the JD 800, although he owns a minimoog, an odyssey, a CS70m, a MS20 and so on as well. I've always dreamed of owning a JD 800 and now I hope this dream can come true.
But I'm some kind of a pessimist and only believe in things when I have them!

I don't know much about the karma. I've read something about this sound system "K.A.R.M.A", but didn't really understand it. Is this a real instrument or does it play on its own??

The Fantom I only know from the Roland HP. The first thing I thought was: "Damned, now there's NO black synth anymore !" You're right, vic83! There are nearly no buttons on it. Looks very boring.

I was very surprised when I read that the "little" RS synth has no aftertouch. The Yamaha S03 doesn't have it either. What's up with the music industry? Even my Yamaha SY35 has aftertouch. It was not very expensive and is not really modern. Although aftertouch can be a "keyboard-terminator" (some of my XP's keys rattle since I've used too much power) I don't want to miss it.

Stalker:
The Karma is basically a synth workstation, something like a Triton light. It has the synthesis of a Triton, minus the sampling, and it has a sequencer.

On top of this is the K.A.R.M.A, which is a sort of arpeggiator, only much more advanced. Lots of functions, but difficult to use. It has a very high "wow"-effect, but is not what you will use most in everyday use.

In reviews of the Karma, almost all the focus has been on this function, but the Korg Karma is also a nice all-round synth-workstation.

Stig

Stig:
I didn't know that it's a real workstation. Right as You said: every magazine concentrated on this "Karma-gimmick". And that's what made me confused and let me be prejudiced against it.

Greetings to Norway!
Nils

Stalker:
I know, I believe few instruments have been more misjudged than the Karma. It was a mistake by Korg to focus only on the K.A.R.M.A.-part of the synth, i think that scared away lots of potential buyers.

Thanks for the greeting.

Stig

Roland Rules.

You know, I have a big problem when people say something "sucks" in general...being that it is only ONE person's opinion. I think if you learn how to utilize your equipment fully, then whatever you have can be great. You can do so much stuff on the XP that you can make your own great sounds! How, then, can you say it sucks?
-Tracey

Perhaps he doesn't know how to do it?

After buying a Kurzweil K2500x I needed to buy a Roland JV1080 because the Kurz couldn't accomplish Hi Hat shoops, nor did it have china, crash mutes...
I dig both synths but the Roland is way easier for me to comprehend.

I know Roland doesn't sux!!!

To me mye Roland XP-60 has great sound, and that is what is most important. All synths have enormous possibilities when it comes to programming, and they all have their strength and weaknesses.

Conclusion: To say that a synth "sux" is far too easy! Besides, there is no "best" synth, as we all have different needs.

Stig

Good answer Stigf. I totally agree.