By Francis Carango:

My first impressions of the Roland Prelude Version 2..

The board instantly impressed me...and I have had very recent higher priced keyboards to compare..

Soundwise..it seems to be the same engine as the Juno Stage...Very good sounds..many outstanding..

Both the G70 and the E80, seem to sound better, most likely not as compressed, or at least more dynamic..

But, without a side by side comparison...the Preludes has the goods..

The MP3 player is a BIG improvement over the Juno Stage, E80 Version 2, and I believe the GW8....why?

It took over 4 minutes for the Juno Stage to scan the MP3's (about 700 files)..to be ready to play..

The E80 just under 4 minutes...The Prelude version 2...does a quick (about a second) read of the thumb drive, and apparently reads each file
just before play...just a bit sluggish to start..maybe less than a second..but seems like the better way to do things..

Version2 also allows the reading of lyrics (they must reside in the internal memory).

The ram must be pretty large...I have about 200 sequences and some styles in the internal memory, and it is not full..

My Prelude is the Latin version,and it has some great styles, and one touch settings to use with the styles..

Names of the styles I have never heard of..but I can recall songs that work well with them...no matter what the name says.

There are some great pianos on board (more sounds than on the Juno Stage)..And some of the best electric pianos found anywhere..

The surprise in the sound department are the sounds (tones) found in the "world" and "special" banks..
Many are from the SRX boards...As an example the organs and brass are better than most other boards I have heard..considerably better than the E50/60..

There are 1,193 tones and the additional "world and special" banks bring the count to 1,533...

The external input is great..a very hot input to handle low volume sources..

There are good volume controls to mix the real time sound, and song, MP3, Wave etc levels..along with the styles..

There is a good selection of effects including insert effects for styles, song, and real-time parts..

The addition of keyboard parts over and above the 16 parts that the sequencer uses is super..
.I hated the Juno Stage when I played sequences the "played" part had to use one of the 16 parts.....The Prelude is 16, plus 2 keyboard parts..

The version2 "make up" tools make the instrument great...both song and style edits in real time..
Not as simple to use as the G and E series, but usable..

All edits can be saved in play list (songs)..and user styles..

I have conversions of Korg styles (used with my E80 and G70)..and they play perfectly in the Prelude..

The Player can read 999 total and as many play list as you need..You can move the songs around, location selections within the play-list.
The Play-list editor works great too..you can rename titles , and spell to conform to 16 letters for SMF's and 32 letters for MP3's..

You can search for the next song (seq or wav/MP3) while a song or style is playing.

a single button for stop/start works great..

Changing the play-list is fast (less than a second)..compared to the E80 ( about 15 seconds)..

I was surprised how I was able to save all the edits as play-list changes on the USB drive..or the internal memory songs (where lyric songs need to be)..

The key feel is better than the JunoG, but not as good as the Juno Stage..I like the feel more than the E50, but not as much as the E60 and E80..

The speakers at 11 watts a side..are loud...much louder than the PSR (Yamaha) line, and louder than the Korg speaker models too..

They handle the full volume with out breaking up, but I would use some reserve and not push to the limit..

The MP3/seq player has additional -12/+12 volume control..and is very loud ..too loud for monitoring from the on board speakers..

The whole package comes in at 17 pounds 4 ounces..

The Roland Prelude with version 2 update..is a BIG TIME winner..

Sounds great - top marks to Roland.
All they need to do now is bring out an E81
(or G71). In the case of the E81, it needs to have range topping additions to the Prelude and be reasonably compact & not too heavy.

I like the E80 but it's just too heavy & cumbersome - although I would happily settle for a module version of it. This would be one way for Roland to increase their sales whilst still using the last keyboard's technology.
They could then, using the same chassis, repeat this with every new range topper which they introduce.
Tony

Still no style part swapping...major bummer.

Roland could have had the jump on other manufacturer's products at or near the same price point, by adding this essential, and extremely useful feature...especially for pros or advanced home users.

Ian the Disappointed

BTW...why is Fran going through you, Donny...as far as I know, he wasn't banned from SZ, and is perfectly capable of posting his own stuff?

good factual observations and assessment, all of which I can concur with as a Prelude owner.


Its worth noteing that unlike some very expensive keyboards who still have USB1.1 the Prelude has high speed USB2.

Gilbert.

[This message has been edited by gilbert (edited 10-13-2009).]

No, not banned ....but dissgusted.
I don't mind being my buddies liason..

What Fran should do is let you review it, and maybe get a more unbiased opinion.

Thanks for the review Fran...I mean, Donny

Don't worry Ian next week I finally have a few days off and will dine with Fran then hopefully he'll give me a tour of the New Roland Prelude in his studio..I look forward to playing it. stay tuned.

ROFLMAO

definitely an accurate review. having the GW-8

I can agree with most of the things in Frans review, but Fran mentioned the MP3 player is better on the Prelude than the GW-8...

I haven't even tried the MP3 player yet but why would Roland have a different MP3 player between these boards? Fran have you tried the MP3 player on the GW-8? what is the difference between the 2 boards??

i guess after 2 weeks of owning the GW-8E i can say i am extremely happy and still surprised i only payed AUD $1350.00 for this board.

the biggest downfall I have found is that with the styles there are no dedicated part mute / select buttons. you need to navigate through the 8 style parts using the UP/DOWN/LEFT/RIGHT Buttons to highlight a track before you can make changes to it.

I have imported all of the G70 styles so far and most of them are very usable - you just need to change some style parts to make them work better in the GW-8.

Nick

Nick,

How are you editing the styles?

Are you using a G70, or a supplied PC program?

Ian, i am doing it all completely on the GW8. all the G70 styles load straight in without any conversion. its just the same as loading in Yamaha styles to a Tyros or PSR...

all i have been doing is re-voicing and changing volumes / effects all on board the GW.

But as you cannot overwrite the factory banks, there is only 127 user style slots available. So adding additional styles are a bit limited and one does need to be selective, although 127 is a LOT

And it can load in another 127 from USB pretty quickly...

yes very true Diki!!

Please do not take it as a criticism of the keyboard, I have already stated elsewhere that I think this is probably the best value, best sounding keyboard in its class...If not for a couple of small things I probably would still have mine, (the GW8 version)

Don't worry about criticizing the board... I already have, for several reasons. Doesn't mean I don't LIKE it, though!

See, that's what I'm LOOKING for, here at SZ. Even though you might LIKE an arranger, even though you might OWN an arranger, you should still be objective enough to point out and criticize its' flaws as well as praise it for its' strong points. Why some of us feel the need to CONCEAL flaws to self-justify a purchase beats me. Say it after me, c'mon, it won't hurt...

THERE'S NO SUCH THING AS THE 'PERFECT' ARRANGER...

The more we discuss flaws in our OWN arranger, the more the industry is going to pay attention to them. They certainly don't really care what someone who owns something ELSE thinks about their product (not that much, anyway ). First and foremost come the owners, and their opinions.

Your arranger is like your kids... Let them grow up without a word of criticism, praise them for everything they do, no matter how much they mess up, and you will raise a spoiled brat, good for nothing ne'er-do-well. Show a little tough love, my friends...

Well said Diki - couldn't agree more.
Amazing how some people get in a huff if you dare criticise the board they own.
Tony

Said the Ketron Salesman

Tony are you still having problems with the Audya?

Btw I played Fran's prelude the other night before we went out for a fantastic Italian dinnnr and was very impressed at what this KB can do. It's a very versitile lightweight arranger that can fill many needs in the right scenario.

[This message has been edited by Dnj (edited 10-17-2009).]

Old (and loved) styles from E-36, E-86, etc. work in E-50 I played in a store, but not so well (I suppose sounds bank is different) as they do in my EM-2000. Because of that, I have not changed my EM-2000.
Now, the new Prelude is a posibility to remplace my old EM-2000...
Are these old styles from E-86 going to play in the new Prelude better than E-50, as they work fine in Em-2000?
Is Prelude not so good arranger than E-50 -at same price-?
BTw... is PSR S710 a better choice at all(only 100 euros more expensive)
Thanks


[This message has been edited by Artaher (edited 05-04-2010).]

Expecting legacy styles to play PERFECTLY in a modern arranger is simply unrealistic. But what Roland have done is make the job of tweaking the legacy styles to use the best sounds and drumkits as easy as it possibly can.

That's about all you can ask, nowadays. Unless you WANT an arranger that is SO similar to the legacy arranger that it hardly bears buying... Or stick with your legacy arranger in the first place.

I doubt in the store you explored the Makeup Tools options, but although tweaking NEEDS to be done, they make it a LOT easier than say tweaking it on an S710 (after you have converted the style in the first place). But the fact is, unless you stick to your old arranger, sooner or later, you will HAVE to tweak or convert your favorite styles. Me, I'd go with whatever brand made this the easiest...

Thanks, Diki
I know it is the time to remplace my old roland EM-2000.
My doubt is to choose between E-50 or Prelude, two Roland kbs at similar price. Prelude may have better sounds and other advantages, it is more modern. E-50 has a better screen and maybe an easier makeup tools for styles. But I don't know too well if there is a great difference in tweaking styles for to go to E-50.
Perhaps there is an internet site when these old styles have been converted for new Roland kbs and may be downloaded...
I see...

Other than the MP3/wave playback feature on the Prelude......the E-50 or better yet E-60 are the better boards..
The E series has better features and ease of use compared to the Prelude and GW8..

That being said, I love the Prelude because of the MP3/Wave playback via play list..
I can't think of a better single keyboard to use with my band..Quick, light and efficient..great for our summer schedule of one nighters..

Big difference between Makeup Tools for Prelude and E series is that E series can Makeup Tool the drumkit, Prelude, not... So if something is a BIT wrong in the style with the kit, you have some major surgery to do (altering the actual note numbers in the Style editor, Division by Division) rather than a simple substitution.

But, OTOH, I think the Prelude (or at least, the GW-8L, because I haven't played a Prelude yet) has a better FX section for the styles, and quite a lot of great Tones. That's a tough call to make, I'm afraid. I think I would probably go with the E50, just for the touchscreen, easier to operate OS and the better Makeup Tools, but I would sure miss some of the Prelude's sounds...

I just don't understand why Roland always tend to completely reinvent the wheel every time they come out with a new arranger. Yamaha are FAR better at keeping the good features from an older arranger while they ADD newer, better features. Seems like Roland don't even TRY to find out what are the best features from the previous arranger, they just start from scratch every time...

I have a question about the Prelude , can someone please answer , thanks:

When playing live can you use a style and set up the "upper part" to play a voice and then layer another voice on the fly , for say the the second verse;

IE; Lower - Style / Upper Piano + 2nd verse add Strings.

Can that be done without interruption ?

Many thanks for your help and replies. )

Gary 

Talk to SZ member Fran Carango he knows the prelude inside out....good luck.

Bump

Hi , Fran , can you help me out with my question ?

Thanks ,

Gary 

YES!!!!!

Hi Fran ,

You have mail !

If that was the answer then many thanks

Take care ,

Gary 

Still waiting for the G70 successor i.e. a 76 key top of the line arranger from Roland.

Roland seems to be teasing us with these inexpensive, albeit decent, 61 key offerings e.g. the GW-8 and now the Prelude, etc. Maybe they're trying to tantalize us before the much anticipated 76 key monster arranger waiting in the wings in the hopefully not too distant future.

I really would like another arranger but these mid-range boards are just not doing it for me especially since they're not 76 key (or 88) and the Audya just isn't cost effective enough for me to even consider, especially with only lousy USB 1.1 and micro amounts of storage memory.

I said a while back that 2011 or 2012 will be the year(s) for high-end arranger innovation with several offerings on the table competing for your dollars, euros, or pounds. Korg's new beast, Yamaha's new offering (maybe 76 keys, maybe not), Roland's G70 successor, Ketron... zip. , Casio - perhaps something revolutionary in arranger technology without breaking the bank?? Who else... maybe a new company entering the fray perhaps?? Stranger things have happened but it would have to be a company that is already recognized around the world and has a lot of customer clout as well as huge financial reserves to invest. We'll see.

All the best,
Mike

Well, finally I have been able to test some old styles from E86 in the Roland Prelude. Unfortunately, my fears have been verified. These styles do not sound as in the E86, especially guitars (much less subtle) and drums kits. I have tried to remplace the guitar voice, but without success at all. I have tried to reemplace also the drums kit by another of the available ones, but without success too. The style do not sound as well.
I do not understand why old yamaha styles sound well in the modern yamaya keyboards, and Roland cannot do it.
Another great disapointment has been playing styles from the usb. The keyboard does not permit to use styles directly from the usb (yamaha´s can do it..): they must be loaded first as user styles.
But styles must be in the usb "styles" folder, so you cannot to have subfolders in it.
Afterwards, Prelude load all existing styles from usb "styles" folder, you
cannot elect one or two.
So ,we must to be loading and disloading styles constantly in user area to test new styles.
And when user area is full (only 128 styles), you cannot load more...
Finally, it is very very slow in loading: some minutes to load 100 styles.
At the end, the procedure seems boring. And, for a Roland player as me, it is a pity to see that yamahas are a lot better in this area.


[This message has been edited by Artaher (edited 05-07-2010).]

I wouldn't base my liking an arranger or not by how it plays legacy styles. First things first... how do the ROM styles float your boat? Bottom line is, if they are MUCH better than your legacy styles (at least as far as dynamics and detail), then you at least know you can tweak and convert older styles to sound like that, and Roland provide by far the best and easiest tools for that task.

And yes, I know it's a hair more convoluted how you load in new styles to try, but c'mon! Is that REALLY as important as how the basic thing sounds? I'll happily put up with all sorts of OS issues (and do!) if the darn thing sounds great.

The reason Yamaha's legacy styles play so well in them is that, to be honest, Yamaha don't really add very much new in each model. A few voices here, a few voices there, but much of it remains the same stuff they've had for the last two or three generations (not just models!).

And, at the other extreme, Roland seem determined to start almost from scratch with many of their arranger lines, sadly tossing out much of the good with the bad.

Heads you lose, tails you lose!