what up everyone.

Iam up set with roland becouse they didnt
come out with anything that would rival
the korg or yamaha motif. Ive been waiting
a long time for something new and this fantom
is not it! Sure big screen, thats soppose
to make me scream? The same old sounds set
and no sampling, thats why i took my money
off of an Xp60 , my xp50 got stole so i
thought i would get the xp60, but after
playing the yamaha Motif and all the features and the price is even better than a
triton, i decided to kick roland to the curve
Anyone feel like i do, say it loud, dont be
shame, let roland know ant nothen changed!

Hi

I both agree and disagree with you..

I agree that Roland has not produced much new in the Fantom. But let us all face it: PCM-synthesis really hasn't changed all that much in 10 years!!

I feel that the synth-makers are trying to implement more and more useless features, that have a high "wow-factor", but are rarely used when you have had the synth for a week...

I also think that Korg and Yamaha often include too much in their synths. It makes them expensive and sometimes unstable. Besides, I don't think an onboard sampler in a synth can compete with a computer or dedicated unit..

Some could say that Roland makes "boring" synths, but at least they work! Both Yamaha and to a lesser extent Korg have had problems with some of their flagship synths. (Yamaha EX-series...) Besides, Korg Triton is FAR TO EXPENSIVE!

All that said, the most "innovative" part of the Fantom is perhaps the design and the name.. And that is not much at all.. I cannot understand why it has been given 64-voice poyphony..

Just my opinion..

Stig

I have an xp-80, and I'm going to stick with that. I'm considering getting a XV5080 in addition. nothing about the Fantom sounds that appealing to me. I don't know why they keep installing those same JV XP sounds in their synthes. That's one of the reasons I'm undecided about getting the 5080. I know they have a few new waves, and I know about the SRX boards, but that's not enough. Why can't they at least fill it up with the quality of sounds you can get on the SRJV boards? I don't want the same bass sounds I've already got on the XP! I at least want the quality of bass sounds on the SRJV expansion board. That's just an example. I want something new! I don't want the same stuff just frilled up a little.

[This message has been edited by FAEbGBD (edited 08-22-2001).]

I can see both sides too, but for gods sake what are Roland doing, you dont release a flagship 5080 with 128 voices and then next drop it down to 64, they look like they've lost lost the plot. More likely they develop a processor with a certain amount of power, then they use the same one, take the polyphony down, use the rest of the power to do the sequencer etc. I think its a con, especially in the days of dual 800mhz g4's!

Let's face it. This is why I got my fully expanded Roland S760. I have a Roland XP60 (fully expanded) and a 32MB Roland S760 sampler. This is essentially a Roland XV5080 (minus a few things). I also have a Roland M120 rack mount line mixer. Everything intergrates very well.

The Infamous Epu.

I think the RS-5 have every thing I wanted from the XV-5080, in Drums and some sounds except for the SRX thing!.I have now an MC-80EX and my Old E-500OR which is Enought from Roland since they didn't actully change or have any new thing in thier "Fart-tom".

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

Totty:

I agree with you; it does not seem sensible that Roland's flagship keyboard-synth has lower polyphony than their modules. The only reason I can think of is price.. Perhaps they want the Fantom to be more affordable.

Another point is that 64-note polyphony still appears to be a widely used standard in keyboard-synths, even after 128-note has become available.. Don't ask me why...

As I said before, the "newest" part of the Fantom is the design and the name. This really applies for most of the synth-makers.. Real innovations are extremely rare. Just look at the Triton compared to the Trinity and the Motif compared to the EX-5..

Stig

stigf,
I think you know well that almost all the sounds in the XV-5080 or fantom uses "4" voices(polyphonic).you think it would act good in a 64 voice postion or 128 voice position. for Korg wouldn't be no Diffrence. thier max is "2" voices so 62 is Enought. for yamaha, you can Expand your polyphonic in the MOTIF to "256" VOICES.tell me how Will Roland solve this? os update? NO WAY, THAT'S ROLAND WHERE TALKING ABOUT HERE!.

stigf

You are probably right about cost. What annoys me is that the technology has been around for this lot since the days of the D50/JD800 generation. All that's changed is Polyphony, sample rate, and convertors. That does not warrant huge amounts of re-engineering to the degree roland charges for their synths. I for one have the XV5080 and the JD990, and I won't even look at another rompler until some manufacturer has the guts to do some radical things.

Here are some ideas I would love to see implemented (of course I dont know whats possible-its food for thought though!!):

1: 128 TRUE polyphony, irrespective of no. of tones etc.
2: Massively overhauled fx routing, why not have the effects available before the filter so reverbs could be filtered.
3: Audible range lfo's, why not? Novas can do it.
4: FX available in series and on every part.
5: Arps on all parts.
6: More filter types-comon roland, why not have as many as emu samplers, its just being lazy.
7: Enough DSP power to produce accurate midi timing when everythings going all out. That one is a serious pain on JV2080's
6: Controllers, Roland why produce the JD800 in 1990 when no-one wanted a thousand sliders, then when every other manufacturer provides at least a few knobs in 2001, you put a few cheap spare parts for knobs from your crud MC505 on your Flagship FARTAM.
7: Sample editing, dont get me wrong I love the 5080's ability to load samples but its a pain in the posterior to have to use numeric values, while your at it give a waveform display please.
8: Floppy drives+FARTAM, FARTAM needs a Zip/smartmedia/firewire ports, for gods sake man, what century are they living in. At least Yamaha and Korg are looking forward with MLAN.

I could go on, but it's a waste of time, Roland will continue to regurgitate the past and sell it by using it's infamous history of Tr's/TB's etc until they wake up and smell the coffee. While im on a rant, when are they gonna get their fingers out their arses and do a proper Virtual Analogue.

Oh I love to hate Roland!!

>>128 TRUE polyphony, irrespective of no. of tones etc.

BTW: I don't have a 5080 and don't plan on getting one, so someone correct me if I'm wrong: but I have been under the (perhaps mistaken) impression that its tonal architecture includes stereo possibility for each tone x 4 possible tones per patch = up to 8 tones for a single note in the patch. That is, press one key in such a patch and you are already using 8 voices of that 128-voice polyphony.

Does anyone know how that really shakes down?

Excuse me if I have misunderstood.

Hi everyone

dnarkosis:
True, the XV uses stereo samples/waveforms, and can use up to 8 tones per key in patch-mode. This is how every PCM-synth ever has worked. The exception is Kurzweil K2xxx-series. They are hybrid PCM/DSP, and polyphony remains constant.

vic83:
I agree with you that the Fantom should have at least 128 voices polyphony. But Korg Triton/Karma has exact the same problem.. Why? Well, have you noticed how Korg always put their focus on combis (layered performances) instead of patches? Combis are one of the most effective ways to use polyphony and generate timing-problems that I know of!! I have no greater belief in the other synth makers: How could Korg release Karma and Yamaha release Motif with only 62-note polyphony out-of-the-box?? Roland is not the only one here..

Totty:
Correct, the PCM-technology being used today is old, it has been used at least since Korg M1. Roland D50/D550 was a bit different.. But, I mean.. The entire definition of a synth and what it should be able to do is more like 30 years old! And now, synth makers are applying cutting edge technology to RECREATE 20-30 year old synths and sounds....

The "dream-synth" that you ask for is not here yet.. There are still limits in computing power, and more important how expensive a synth can be and still find a market.

I agree with you that one of the really strange things with the Fantom is the REDUCTION in number of real-time controllers. They even have fewer foot-pedal inputs...

I think so far Roland has been right in staying away from the virtual-analogue market. Being an "alternative" manufacturer has been an important part of having success in that market.. Roland are sensible enough to do what they know: PCM. The makers of virtual-analogues have really felt the problems of being at the cutting edge of synth-making.. Some of these synths have had greater technical challenges than the Eurofighter Typhoon fighter-aircraft..

And about the other manufacturers: They appear to me no better than Roland.. Korg Karma released this year, is by no means a technological breakthrough. A good synth, but no really important changes.. Yamaha? Well the Motif looks promising, but almost like a downscaled EX-5. The EX-5 had 128 voices you know, and it was more ambitious in every way..

Stig

[This message has been edited by stigf (edited 08-24-2001).]

//How could Korg release Karma and Yamaha release Motif with only 62-note polyphony out-of-the-box?? Roland is not the only one here..//

you do know that Motif can be Expanded in it's polyphonic to up to "256" voices with their boards!. and, you know well that if the Motif came with "128" polyphonic, it would be more Expensive than it's price now. because those chips are Expensive just like a 64MB SDRAM and a 128MB SDRAM.why give you the more Expensive one when you can acutely pay that money later on an simple upgrade that you may use or not and you don't have to pay it on the Motif...you get my point?..for Korg you know the moss adds 6 voice which I know is nothing but at least we know that the MOSS will of course be upgraded in the future to more polyphonic and that of course may reach up to 64 polyphonic.it's a prices things just like Computers.and for Roland and what the Fantom got? if this Keyboard are more than US1599,99.I would say they are cheating very big.ate least they got teh range of US1700 and US 2400(motif and Triton in 76KEYS versions).but I don't know why they kinda made in a very old specification.and Ignore teh sampling that Yamaha and Korg are playing with.at least that Keyboard won't be good for studio stuff Except for sounds and that's about it if you like the XV-5080 which I do.

that's my Point



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

I like the idea of giving users the option to fully expand modules for EFX by utilizing plug-in effects cards, e.g. how the VS-series recorders can use VS8F-2 effects cards. Nice, cuz there if you want, not there if you don't.....

Wish my XV-5080 had such an option.

Chris

[This message has been edited by feefer (edited 08-26-2001).]

vic83:

True, the Motif can expand it's polyphony, but if I have got it correct these extra notes are not "universal", they are part of the expansions. This means that the PCM-part of the synth always has 62 notes, but you can add FM, vrtual analog etc. This is of course useful, but not as useful as pure polyhony..

And when it comes to Korg, my opinion is as follows: NEVER, and I mean NEVER believe it when a manufacturer says that "in a near future the OS of the synth will be upgraded to do this, and the expansions will be able to do that.." Sometimes they do what they promise, but sometimes they don't. Buy synths for what they are today. Remember Yamaha EX5.. Yamaha built a monster-synth, and when the users started complaining about problems, Yamaha answered that it would be addressed in OS-upgrades etc. Suddenly one day the whole EX-series was removed from the product range, along with the support for these models..

What I am saying is that it is great for a synth to have the possibility of expansion, but remember that it is very likely that for example the Korg Triton AND the MOSS-expansion is out of production in 3-4 years..

Feefer:
Kurzweil did have effects that you could expand on their K2500. The problem is that for each such smart little function on a synth, it gets more expensive. And suddenly you are in Kurzweil-land, whose synths have all the gadgets ever made... And then they start making synths that cost more than my car... I hope Roland also in the future continue to make synths I can afford.

Still just my opinion.

Stig