If Roland made a D50 vst emulation, would you purchase it?

[Ingonator]

So is this a proper emulation or just a sample based mock up? That may account for the lack of sysex.

A full and authentic emulation with all original parameters. The Chase feature and the joystick are included too.

At the moment only Sysex import and maybe an enhanced polyphony seem to be really missing.

The global patch parameters, the parameters for teh two layers and teh paremetrs for the 4 partials seem to be available in 7 edit pages available with the 3 "Common Select" and 4 "Partial Select" buttons.

At the default view in the GUI the joystick might look as you could not set the volume mix of the partials but if you open one of the 4 edit pages for the partials or the Upper/Lower switches at the 3 "Common Select" buttons you could set the value/mix for the partials too. The mix for the layers works in all GUI pages.

If you use partials based on PCM the parameters that could not be used there like e.g. the filter, filter envelope and PWM controls are greyed out.

[kmonkey]

Besides the ROMs, what is the difference between the JV-1080 and the JD-800/JD-990? To me, Roland was simply repackaging the same synthesizer year after year, changing only the ROMs and the cases.

Uh man difference is huge. Like really huge. Not just ROM and case repacking. Come on do your homework.

Different patch structures, different effects, different filters (like completely) even different resolutions in Roms, all yielding to different sonic structures.

JV 1080 does not sound like JD990 i can assure you. It's not my opinion it is a fact.


edit: good article http://www.donsolaris.com/?tag=roland-jd-990 (that guy at the link is actually great person in real life, great sound designer and he is at KVR and GS)

[Chris-S]

Nice video (software D50 played by hardware D50)...

[kbaccki]

Besides the ROMs, what is the difference between the JV-1080 and the JD-800/JD-990? To me, Roland was simply repackaging the same synthesizer year after year, changing only the ROMs and the cases.

Yeah. Korg too. Though I suppose there was a big jump from M1 to T-series, IIRC.

[AnX]

This is probably the original DSP code with original ROM content.
And Roland didn't figured out yet, how to transmit sysex because the code is 30 years old and no one understands it anymore, they just threw it into some digital circuit simulator

If they knew how sysex worked 30 years ago, they still know...

[deastman]

This was an official answer from Roland Virtual Sonics (the company behind Roland Cloud) at Facebook 3 days ago concernig single purchases:

Roland Cloud Dear Axel, the reason we don't offer single sales is that we are a service and not a store. The reasons for this will become more apparent as one uses the service. We suggest you give it a try. And if cloud computing is not for you, consider a purchase of our range of hardware synthesizers. We offer something for everyone and every style of creativity.

But with Roland Cloud, the future is in connectivity because at the operating system level, computers are now designed to be connected. Roland is embracing this connectivity even as we pioneered MIDI.

The capabilities we offer (and plan to offer) go beyond the paradigm of a single computer. Cloud processing and services is what we feel is the bright solution for all of us in music.

Specifically, the capabilities we offer now for just $19.95 per month compete with thousands of dollars in outright purchases. We also support our software 24/7 and we are adding value with each new product that is included in the base membership. Of course, some of our customers have the means to buy tens of thousands of dollars in hardware and software, but we believe in the accessibility and the low cost economic model of shared computing. Cloud means that more people will be able to make and participate in music at a professional level. We think that is a great thing. At Roland, we design the future.

-Jeremy Soule, Corporate Director, Roland Virtual Sonics

FWIW at their Facebook page there are alraedy several requests for having seperate purchases. I mentioned it too there today, at least for the D-50.

FWIW there does not seem to be an official reply concerning D-50 Sysex support yet.

I'm not one to swear, but this response from Roland is complete and utter bullshit and they know it. They want to lock you into dependence on their cloud based tools so you'll have to keep paying forever and ever. I'm sure they're hinting at a cloud-based DAW/collaboration platform where all your songs and way of working with other people is also locked up in their subscription service. Others have tried and failed, and I doubt this will be any different. It isn't like collaboration is actually difficult using existing means, and there is a world full of alternatives for making music. They don't have the market sewn up the way Adobe did, and when it comes to DAWs and VST, they are actually the outsiders. Furthermore, their claims of their service competing against "thousands of dollars" or even "tens of thousands of dollars" is absurd and disingenuous. Komplete Ultimate comes to mind.

I pay my monthly dues to Adobe because I don't have a choice. And now I pay my annual maintenance to The Foundry for Modo, and Allegorithmic for Substance Suite, because I need them for my job. I'd jump at a boutique hardware D-50, or even an outright purchase of a plugin if the price was reasonable. There is no way I will ever get suckered into Roland's cloud pipe dream.

[Ingonator]

Nice video (software D50 played by hardware D50)...

Great video. You see him playing the hardware D-50 all the time and at the end he mentions that the new D-50 VST was used for the sounds used in the video...

So far i could confirm that the plugin sounds really great.

[fmr]

Besides the ROMs, what is the difference between the JV-1080 and the JD-800/JD-990? To me, Roland was simply repackaging the same synthesizer year after year, changing only the ROMs and the cases.

Uh man difference is huge. Like really huge. Not just ROM and case repacking. Come on do your homework.

Different patch structures, different effects, different filters (like completely) even different resolutions in Roms, all yielding to different sonic structures.

JV 1080 does not sound like JD990 i can assure you. It's not my opinion it is a fact.


edit: good article http://www.donsolaris.com/?tag=roland-jd-990 (that guy at the link is actually great person in real life, great sound designer and he is at KVR and GS)

I read the article you linked and, apart from the hyperbole (you know, those "strong" assertions we say when we want to make a point, sarcastically) it seems that he kind of agree with me: Let's pick this paragraph:

"It is a known fact that Super JV’s architecture is based on the JD-990. On top of that it comes with the same type of aggressive filter (as opposed to other JV series like JV-80, JV-90 and JV-1000 which had mellower filter resonance) and it came with the now legendary “structures”. When the XV series came out, Roland continued the DNA line of the Super JV. The only thing “different” was that its SYX patch data was based on JV line of synths. Hence why XV can normally load Super JV patches via sysex, yet is unable to load the JD-990 patches. Then the Fantom came out, which again is based on the same concept. And now we have the Integra, which continues where XV series left, maintaining full compatibility and architecture of the Super JV. All of these synths are based on a revolutionary concept of a JD-990 synthesizer. And this is what makes it so special, along with its wide lush sound."

What he says that's a surprise to me is that the JD-990 goes way beyond the JD-800, when many (me included) always looked at the JD-990 as the module version of the JD-800. He even says that the JD-800 can be regarded as a D-70 with sliders (I think he is being hyperbolic here, too). Regarding the sound, you certainly realize that, in a ROMpler, when you change the ROM, you completely change the sound, right? You don't need to change anything else. And, apparently, even the filter is the same in the two models. So, apart from the ROM, it seems there's very little to justify having TWO emuylations. Maybe one that fuses the two (or three, four, five - JV-80, JV-90 and JV-1000, JV-1080 and JD-990, or even further, up to the XV-5080). Of course, Roland would never do that

Sure, all these models are not "the same" - technology evolves continously, and the more modern models reflect the evolution. But mainly it is the same concept that goes back to the D-50 - as the Homo Sapiens Sapiens goes back to the Homo Sapiens (Cro-Magnon). We learned a few things, but we are basically the same species.

The more modern machines from Roland learned a few things, but they are basically the same species too.

OTOH, VariOS and Variphrase, for example, are really different things.

[kbaccki]

The more modern machines from Roland learned a few things, but they are basically the same species too.

OTOH, VariOS and Variphrase, for example, are really different things.

All I know is that every factory demo I've ever heard has that same synthy B3 organ, and that plucky Roland acoustic piano.

[tristan-]

wait.

My hardware V-Synth XT (which has the built in D50 VC-1 card) loads D50 sysex without any problems. the VC-1 card was programmed by Roland years ahead of the original D50 release.
the fact the D50 VST now can't import .sysex, makes you question the programming. I'm very satisfied with the V-Synth, and I don't think I'll get the cloud (yet) - but I'm still wondering.

[ghettosynth]

This was an official answer from Roland Virtual Sonics (the company behind Roland Cloud) at Facebook 3 days ago concernig single purchases:

Roland Cloud Dear Axel, the reason we don't offer single sales is that we are a service and not a store. The reasons for this will become more apparent as one uses the service. We suggest you give it a try. And if cloud computing is not for you, consider a purchase of our range of hardware synthesizers. We offer something for everyone and every style of creativity.

But with Roland Cloud, the future is in connectivity because at the operating system level, computers are now designed to be connected. Roland is embracing this connectivity even as we pioneered MIDI.

The capabilities we offer (and plan to offer) go beyond the paradigm of a single computer. Cloud processing and services is what we feel is the bright solution for all of us in music.

Specifically, the capabilities we offer now for just $19.95 per month compete with thousands of dollars in outright purchases. We also support our software 24/7 and we are adding value with each new product that is included in the base membership. Of course, some of our customers have the means to buy tens of thousands of dollars in hardware and software, but we believe in the accessibility and the low cost economic model of shared computing. Cloud means that more people will be able to make and participate in music at a professional level. We think that is a great thing. At Roland, we design the future.

-Jeremy Soule, Corporate Director, Roland Virtual Sonics

FWIW at their Facebook page there are alraedy several requests for having seperate purchases. I mentioned it too there today, at least for the D-50.

FWIW there does not seem to be an official reply concerning D-50 Sysex support yet.

I'm not one to swear, but this response from Roland is complete and utter bullshit and they know it. They want to lock you into dependence on their cloud based tools so you'll have to keep paying forever and ever. I'm sure they're hinting at a cloud-based DAW/collaboration platform where all your songs and way of working with other people is also locked up in their subscription service. Others have tried and failed, and I doubt this will be any different. It isn't like collaboration is actually difficult using existing means, and there is a world full of alternatives for making music. They don't have the market sewn up the way Adobe did, and when it comes to DAWs and VST, they are actually the outsiders. Furthermore, their claims of their service competing against "thousands of dollars" or even "tens of thousands of dollars" is absurd and disingenuous. Komplete Ultimate comes to mind.

I pay my monthly dues to Adobe because I don't have a choice. And now I pay my annual maintenance to The Foundry for Modo, and Allegorithmic for Substance Suite, because I need them for my job. I'd jump at a boutique hardware D-50, or even an outright purchase of a plugin if the price was reasonable. There is no way I will ever get suckered into Roland's cloud pipe dream.

The response is exactly what I'd expect from Roland. If you go back to the eighties and read the magazine that they used to distribute they've always been up their own ass. I get that you have to be positive about your products and all good firms have to sell themselves, but there are degrees of skeeze and Roland has been the furniture store of the music industry for some time.

What's a bit interesting is that sometimes their arrogance pays off in unexpected ways. The TB303 is a great example. Roland had no idea whatsoever that it would have a huge impact on dance music. It was their arrogance with respect to what guitar players wanted in the mid 80s that drove its wonky design that was later appreciated.

As much as I want their cloud to crash and burn in spectacular fashion so that they get a reality check, there seems to be no shortage of people drooling over their bullshit "legendary authentic Roland sound."

[Ingonator]

wait.

My hardware V-Synth XT (which has the built in D50 VC-1 card) loads D50 sysex without any problems. the VC-1 card was programmed by Roland years ahead of the original D50 release.
the fact the D50 VST now can't import .sysex, makes you question the programming. I'm very satisfied with the V-Synth, and I don't think I'll get the cloud (yet) - but I'm still wondering.

Well the fact that the Sysex import is not included with the current version of the D-50 plugin does not mean that technically it would not be possible to add it.

Besides that AFAIK hardware DSP code is not the same as programming a plugin in C++. Usually you have to completely re-write the plugin from scratch.

AFAIK even porting the Waldorf Nave plugin from iOS to OSX needed a re-write of the plugin.

[Numanoid]

Of the three big (as I see it) Japanese manufacturers, Korg has been very prolific, Roland is now gathering speed, so where is Yamaha?

Are they content with being Steinbergs banker, and the emus out there like NI's FM8 is enough?

[ghettosynth]

I read the article you linked and, apart from the hyperbole (you know, those "strong" assertions we say when we want to make a point, sarcastically) it seems that he kind of agree with me: Let's pick this paragraph:
....
What he says that's a surprise to me is that the JD-990 goes way beyond the JD-800, when many (me included) always looked at the JD-990 as the module version of the JD-800.

Yes, this is a common misconception. It is, but it very much extended the JD800.

He even says that the JD-800 can be regarded as a D-70 with sliders (I think he is being hyperbolic here, too).

Not so much really. What you have to remember is that the JD800 became popular BECAUSE of the sliders. This was really uncommon then, but, as a rompler, it's not really not all that amazing. It has a pretty weak multimode filter and four layers of samples, no mod matrix, and some decent effects.

I still have mine, BTW, so I'm talking from direct experience and I purchased it during the time that it was all the rage for certain kinds of live electronic music. It was a part of my live rig for some time.

Regarding the sound, you certainly realize that, in a ROMpler, when you change the ROM, you completely change the sound, right? You don't need to change anything else. And, apparently, even the filter is the same in the two models. So, apart from the ROM, it seems there's very little to justify having TWO emuylations. Maybe one that fuses the two (or three, four, five - JV-80, JV-90 and JV-1000, JV-1080 and JD-990, or even further, up to the XV-5080). Of course, Roland would never do that

While I don't care about emulations of these things, you can't have it both ways. The subtle differences do make a difference in sound. So as long as people are arguing that DAC differences matter in emulating samplers or FM synths, as an example, all of those little subtle technical differences will have some effect that people will want.

Don't get me wrong, I think that they are all just variations of the same flavor, but then, I'm not impressed with the D50 either and roll my eyes at the desire to have an emulation.

[quantum7]

Aftertouch isn't working for me, but the modwheel is working. The cloud D50 sound exactly like the real d50 to my ears... at least from what I can remember a few years ago when I owned the hardware.