Roland Jupiter X and XM (new synths)

[Orbit-50]

I really wonder how many times Roland wants to sell remakes of their classic synths. As many times as those sell, i guess.

You got it. They're resting on the laurel's built by their predecessors, and giving away the farm as many times as they can. This is not Roland anymore, it's just a bunch of suits bleeding the company that Ikutaro built. It seems to be all the rage these days with other companies as well. It's disgusting where this world is going. There are no more trustworthy brands anymore.

[AnX]

By original I meant the Juno synths, obviously

clearly not

Clearly yes.
If by original I had meant the Ju06, I would have known it

you might, i wouldnt

as you were talking about the new boutique, it makes sense you meant the original boutique

maybe make it clearer next time

I was not talking about "the new boutique", I was speaking about the Ju06a.

which is a new boutique

[JCJR]

They're resting on the laurel's built by their predecessors, and giving away the farm as many times as they can. This is not Roland anymore, it's just a bunch of suits bleeding the company that Ikutaro built. It seems to be all the rage these days with other companies as well. It's disgusting where this world is going. There are no more trustworthy brands anymore.

Dunnp what is trustworthy? If they sell a box that meeis published specs, for published price. If the hardware is built good enough to last.

If the customer wants what is for sale bad enough to pay the asking price. What is not trustworthy?

Deceptive advertising, untruthful price/specs, shoddy quality control, failure to honor warranty. Such might be evidence of untrustworthyness.

But what is untrustworthy about selling an old sound? People don't have to buy the old sound if they don't like the sound anymore or if they think it is too expensive. How does "adventurous biz plan" equal "trustworthy"? Or vice-versa?

Some of the synth companies may be too adventurous still, even bothering to repackage and try to make the same old seem new. What if Steinway said "Sorry we no longer make Grand pianos. That was last year's model. We now sell these entirely different wood and steel megaliths which sound different and are played different from Grand piano. Maybe you can find an old piano on eBay."

Or maybe Martin quits making dreadnaught acoustic guitars because that is last year's model. All we sell anymore is our acoustic instrument v 11.23 which is much better than the old v 1.0 acoustic guitar. Maybe you can still find an old one on eBay if that's what you really want for some silly reason. But actually I shouldn't tell you this but you should wait for the Martin acoustic instrument 12.0 which blows away all the earlier versions.

Unfortunately the v 12.0 is not backward compatible with any earlier acoustic instrument but it is so much better that only a fool would continue his old v 11.x playing habits, much less those luddites who still play old obaolete guitar 1.0

[K-Bee]

To me, the important thing is whether the X/XM are just Roland Cloud plugins in a fancy box with keys and knobs. When starting the thread the wow factor kind of overwhelmed me but the more I think about it, I wonder if it's just another repackage?

[sprnva]

Even if they are it's a step in the right direction. I don't want the limited polyphony of the boutiques or the subscription and regular online activation of the plugins. To me the ACB stuff sounds good enough but so far neither method of delivering it has suited me.

[Orbit-50]

To me, the important thing is whether the X/XM are just Roland Cloud plugins in a fancy box with keys and knobs. When starting the thread the wow factor kind of overwhelmed me but the more I think about it, I wonder if it's just another repackage?

That's exactly what happened to me. No one loves Roland more than I do, but this ain't Roland anymore. I'm finally giving up on them. 8 mono/4 stereo voices of sample playback on a flagship synth weighing in at around $3999.00 in the year 2019? Dude, that's just crazy.

[Orbit-50]

Even if they are it's a step in the right direction. I don't want the limited polyphony of the boutiques or the subscription and regular online activation of the plugins. To me the ACB stuff sounds good enough but so far neither method of delivering it has suited me.

Fair enough, but if you own any Roland products starting from about 2013, you've basically got all of the sounds and tech minus the new sequencer already. They have not moved forward at all, except for charging way more for their existing technology. If you don't have any hardware from them already, then go for it.

[e-crooner]

By original I meant the Juno synths, obviously

clearly not

Clearly yes.
If by original I had meant the Ju06, I would have known it

you might, i wouldnt

as you were talking about the new boutique, it makes sense you meant the original boutique

maybe make it clearer next time

I was not talking about "the new boutique", I was speaking about the Ju06a.

which is a new boutique

But "new" does not refer to an updated boutique, but to new modules being added to the boutique product line. There are about a dozen or so modules already it seems. Every one Roland adds is a new boutique [module], based on original hardware.

[e-crooner]

Regarding Roland's approach, my only problem with it is the voice limit. Other than that, the modules seem to sound very good, they look good, not sure about build quality (it looks solid). Since the originals are no longer made, why not? When they sell so well, obviously most people are happy with those products. And they are cheaper than the original hardware, in some case a lot cheaper.

[Orbit-50]

Regarding Roland's approach, my only problem with it is the voice limit. Other than that, the modules seem to sound very good, they look good, not sure about build quality (it looks solid). Since the originals are no longer made, why not? When they sell so well, obviously most people are happy with those products. And they are cheaper than the original hardware, in some case a lot cheaper.

I totally get what you're saying. My beef is the polyphony thing. They should be moving forward with this, and not backwards. Especially in a day and age where tons of music is made by using samples, either purchased, or recorded by one's self. I was waiting for Roland to come out with a flagship workstation like Korg and Yamaha did. Something to replace my FA-06, but the Phantom and all this other stuff they made now is basically the same as already what I have from them already. Except for the Ableton Live style sequencer which God knows we don't need another fake Ableton Live sequencer which honestly to me, would not be a selling point at that price point when you have full-blown computers that can do run the real thing. The sequencer that they had in their products was actually excellent as it was. I'm just burnt because I gave up on them and I was happy to hear that now they came out with new products, but it's literally the exact the same thing that they put out 6 years ago with a new coat of paint.

[JCJR]

I totally get what you're saying. My beef is the polyphony thing. They should be moving forward with this, and not backwards. Especially in a day and age where tons of music is made by using samples, either purchased, or recorded by one's self. I was waiting for Roland to come out with a flagship workstation like Korg and Yamaha did. Something to replace my FA-06, but the Phantom and all this other stuff they made now is basically the same as already what I have from them already. Except for the Ableton Live style sequencer which God knows we don't need another fake Ableton Live sequencer which honestly to me, would not be a selling point at that price point when you have full-blown computers that can do run the real thing. The sequencer that they had in their products was actually excellent as it was. I'm just burnt because I gave up on them and I was happy to hear that now they came out with new products, but it's literally the exact the same thing that they put out 6 years ago with a new coat of paint.

I guess you are mainly looking at the new Fantom. Sometime maybe will download the user manuals to answer questions I have that probably won't show up in review videos for awhile.

For instance, how fancy is the sampler? The FA06 is probably ok as a "DJ sampler" but piss-poor near unusable for multisampling real instruments. No envelopes, filters, LFO's, etc. If they built-in a "real sampler" in the Fantom it would be more attractive. I don't like using computer virtual instruments and when I had "real hardware samplers" a lot of my favorite sampled instruments I made myself.

Added the V piano and seemed to retain the JV-style PCM engine and the VA engine. I might or might not like the V piano. Thought I'd like the pianos in the FA06 but after about a month they sounded purt bad to me. Sound good somebody else playing em on youtube demos, didn't sound good me playing them in the home studio.

Maybe they retain the "supernatural" engines or maybe not. No mention in videos I've seen. Also no mention about the tonewheel organ engine, which can be coaxed with enough work into sounding pretty good on FA. If they did a little extra work on the tonewheel engine it could be purt good without having to work so hard tweaking it.

I like the bigger screen and it looks more ergonomic, faster to use in early video demos, but that is hard to judge from demo videos as well-- An expert demo guy can make a crappy interface appear slick and smooth. Hands on would be the acid test.

Am guessing if I spend $4000 on a Fantom, or equivalent Yamaha or Korg "top of the line" workstation I would probably be "disappointed" overall with the sounds. Taking a lot of tweaking work to figure out how to fix the situation.

From what I see of the sequencer, it is the main attraction. I did a lot of songwriting on ESQ-1 sequencer and later the similar but less-buggy Ensoniq EPS+ sequencer. Fairly limited-feature 8 track pattern-based sequencers. Make song verse 1, verse 2, chorus, bridge, intro, outtro, string them together into a song and blow a couple of linear tracks over the top of the whole mess.

Quick and dirty. Too much trouble to try anything fancy, just hit record, play a track, select a new track, record a new track, rinse and repeat. Then sit back an listen to the elements to string the elements together into an arrangement.

Anything promising, I would dump into the computer sequencer for "painting the 747 with a Q-tip" tweaky editing, adding audio, etc. But the main thing was, if I couldn't sit down with a friend and completely finish the "bare bones" of a song in 3 or 4 hours, then odds were high that song would never get finished. Friends would come over for songwriting sessions, "We will write and finish a song this afternoon or bust."

Now after the rough demo arrangement, it might take months or years to get around to making a final polished version. The main push is the initial songwriting, finish the damn thing before you forget what you are doing.

That Fantom sequencer "looks promising" to have a similar stripped-down fast way to get-er-done writing. But as with the other features, would have to actually sit down and try to use the thang to find out how practical it is. Something so falling-off-the-log easy that you don't have to think about anything except the songwriting, not the mechanics of operating the sequencer.

Maybe with enough practice and learning shortcuts the FA sequencer would be useful but linear sequencers are great if you have decided on an arrangement, but not so great if you are not even close to reaching the "lets arrange the song" step. I expected the FA sequencer to be more useful. Just too much button pushing and tiny data on a tiny screen, but I didn't work real hard trying to get good at it. Computer sequencer is perfect after you know what you want to record and have a chart written out, etc.

I've thought about trying to write a pad or touch-screen-laptop stripped-down quick-n-dirty sequencer with features similar to old Ensoniq pattern based sequencers, but maybe I'm the only one in the world that would want such a thing. And I'm too fried crispy to take on a programming project that big anymore. Just sayin, even if the Fantom sequencer is "perfect" for quick'n'dirty songwriting, $4000 is kinda a steep price for a sequencer!

[e-crooner]

It does seem to be a rather complex instruments, one would have to get into the designers' way of thinking. But I like the sound of workstations/arranger keyboards, in my view it is closer to studio recordings than individual synths are. 17:10 on for instance sounds cool.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r5yMlMzSSsA

[lfm]

From a quick glance the Xm looks nice. It's like getting most of the Boutiques in a better package. Tad pricey though.

Price €1499 is not that bad, and comparable to introduction of System-8(incl. 3 plugouts) and JD-Xa just about.

But compared with Behringer price range everything seems overpriced.

[sprnva]

I wouldn't be expecting it to come in at Behringer pricing, but at €999 this would probably be an easier sell.

[Fleer]

It’ll get there soon enough. But I’ll wait until the Fantom 8 goes south of $3000.