Why do people bash Roland?

[tranel]

It seems (I may be wrong) that Roland is perceived by many as being "less innovative" and "stuffier" than Korg or Yamaha. Why is this—surely the V-synth(s), with their elastic synthesis, are pretty cool and innovative? And the Fantom G and the Supernatural boards surely do break some new ground, no?

Sorry, I am not particularly biased toward Roland or any other company, just wondering...

Regards,

T

[Audio Gnostic]

lol i dunno man, but ill tel you wat, if you want to find innovation and creation just look at yamaha. that company is insane, they make eveyrhting top of the line from dirtbikes to boats to guitars to electronic instruments to piano emulations and whatever the hell else they make. i bet you coudl start some kind of funky museum for yamaha showing all the random shit theyve made, i bet theres a yamaha brand product for eveyr need known to mankind. its a little wild i think how much stuff yamaha makes, next i woudl expect them to make a car or soemthign lol. it wil probably be the next mercedez benz probably some shit with killer acoustics and a killer engine. or sum yamaha toothpaste, id buy that shit

[SuperFly76]

Because they are on top. I do the same thing to Nike, and Apple. Yeah... I know, Apple is the underdog in the general population, but it isn't in the post production world.

Something in me just seems to loathe what's on top. I like to root for the underdog.

That being said... I own some roland gear and it rocks.

[Benedict]

Roland from the mid 90's on tended to play it rather safe and there became something rather samey about most of their synths. The Roland Sound, immediately arresting but hard to alter in an instrument. At least that is what I felt.

However the Fantoms offer a lot of bang for the buck (not as much as the Alesis) and I adored my SE-70 fx unit which was a bit off the wall. The new SH-01 thingee also sounds pretty nice - if limited down the track.

[brambos]

lol i dunno man, but ill tel you wat, if you want to find innovation and creation just look at yamaha. that company is insane, they make eveyrhting top of the line from dirtbikes to boats to guitars to electronic instruments to piano emulations and whatever the hell else they make. i bet you coudl start some kind of funky museum for yamaha showing all the random shit theyve made, i bet theres a yamaha brand product for eveyr need known to mankind. its a little wild i think how much stuff yamaha makes, next i woudl expect them to make a car or soemthign lol. it wil probably be the next mercedez benz probably some shit with killer acoustics and a killer engine. or sum yamaha toothpaste, id buy that shit

Question is... do they make potato products?

[jupiter8]

It seems (I may be wrong) that Roland is perceived by many as being "less innovative" and "stuffier" than Korg or Yamaha. Why is this—surely the V-synth(s), with their elastic synthesis, are pretty cool and innovative? And the Fantom G and the Supernatural boards surely do break some new ground, no?

Sorry, I am not particularly biased toward Roland or any other company, just wondering...

Regards,

T

If you should bash anyone on those premises it has to be Yamaha. They stopped making synthesizers ten years ago. They made brilliant ones up to that point and now they're rehashing the same old sampleset in endless Motif variations.

Korg makes the Oasys and Roland makes the V-Synth.

People are just pissed that they don't make the 303,909 and Jupiter 8 anymore which would be utterly pointless.

[rp314]

and I adored my SE-70 fx unit which was a bit off the wall.

I still use (adore is a term I reserve for guitars, art, and women ) one. I'll get something new if it ever needs repairing but until then it's still doing just fine, limitations and all.

[hibidy]

One thing you can always say about roland (or boss) is they don't make much cheesy "flimsy" stuff. It's pretty much built like a tank by and large. Not sure that's exactly the case with korg and yamaha (though I own much of their stuff happily too)

[z_old_account]

Roland's lawjers threatened us that they would sue us, because of the VST synth Junox2 (which was similar to the Roland Alpha Juno). We were forced to remove it from the market, because the 'gui' and the 'look and feel' of the synth would be too similar.

[jupiter8]

Roland's lawjers threatened us that they would sue us, because of the VST synth Junox2 (which was similar to the Roland Alpha Juno). We were forced to remove it from the market, because the 'gui' and the 'look and feel' of the synth would be too similar.

So you should be able to protect your Intellectual Properties but they should'nt ?

It was clearly an attempt to cash in on Rolands popularity that they have built up during the years without paying them a nickle. I really don't see your point.

[Benedict]

and I adored my SE-70 fx unit which was a bit off the wall.

I still use (adore is a term I reserve for guitars, art, and women ) one. I'll get something new if it ever needs repairing but until then it's still doing just fine, limitations and all.

What limits? For the time it would let me chain some stupid number of fx compared to my Quadraverb (Guitar algo I think) and the vocoder was lovely.

Just been listening to old albums of mine from when I had Emax II, Casio CZ-1000, Yamaha DX-100 and a Roland JV-880 which I barely used. FX were Boss SE-70 and Alesis Quadraverb. No real compression. I think I had a Boss Peak Limiter I rode light. Mastered to MiniDisc and bounced back to PC to burn to CD. Geez the sound is great.

Anyway I digress. Roland can be good or bad depending on the product and perspective.

[Rangtangtang]

Roland from the mid 90's on tended to play it rather safe

Are we trying to start some kind of debate here cause the whole thread seem's a bit lame so far? I think Roland sought of started to loose the plot whitn the alpha Juno which might have been FM? Maybe someone could enlighten us about that one i.e Roland and Yamaha? Then they went hybrid, then ROM, then VA and now what is next?

One thing you can always say about roland (or boss) is they don't make much cheesy "flimsy" stuff.

Roland can be flimsy as Yamaha, depends on the model. For example, the Roland RS-09 is a fair example of a well built synth, a metal box whith wooden sides. The programable one's are bit of a potential meitenance worry. Though don;t knock those cheap plastic toy ones too quickly cause they don;t have knobs or wires, they are just a circuit board whith press buttons?

It seems (I may be wrong) that Roland is perceived by many as being "less innovative" and "stuffier" than Korg or Yamaha.

Im not sure about now but Roland certaintly has had its innovative momments. For example Roland trying to emulate a drum kit whith just good old fashion electronic circuit design is quite amazing. You can;t say that computer controlled sequencing and midi was not innovative. I some how think that over a fairly short period of time that maybe Roland has been way too innovative too many times?

[hibidy]

yeah, I guess they can be "the same". I had an ediorol controller that was a POS, I forgot about it till a couple of minutes ago........guess I'm thinking more of the boss fx and roland "boxes" that are tank built........sorry bout that........

[Mr Arkadin]

i'm an absolute Roland whore, here's what i own:
CR-78, CR-80, RE-501, Jupiter 4, SH-09 ,CSQ-600, MC-202, R-8M, PB-300, DC-50, D-10 (only synth i've ever sold, it was crap), JD-800, JD-990

Also Boss SE-70, RC-50 and loads of compact pedals.

Spot the fact that there's nothing post JD-990. Have to say i think they've gone pretty crappy after that. Where's all the quirky stuff? i mean the 303, 808 and 909 created whole genres. Of the new stuff only the V-Synth and V-Drums really excites and i'd probably get an RD-700 as a 88-note weighted controller but that's about it. The rest is re-cycled S&S (new Junos etc.).

Bring back my old Roland .

[quantize]

It was clearly an attempt to cash in on Rolands popularity that they have built up during the years without paying them a nickle. I really don't see your point.

pffff what pig ignorant statement...f absurd..the similarities were fleeting at best...Roland think they own combinations of numbers and letters now...despite the fact they haven't made anything vaguely interesting themselves using such names for many years.