Roland JV-1080 finally, as virtual instrument!

[Caine123]

Have to say, (unscientifically) flipping between the JV-1080 plugin and the XV-5080 (digital I/O) on the same presets when level matched, there is hardly much difference at all.

Which is pretty amazing.

Edit: (Disclaimer: Non scientific observational test at this point)
So, on headphones, the plugin and the 5080 via digi i/o sound identical to me - I can't tell them apart, comparing presets. I've found one preset that had a different delay setting (a longer delay) than the same preset on the plugin, which was shorter/faster.

All the FX, distortions, reverbs etc in the patches that I've tried sound identical.

Given that it sounds the same digitally as the XV-5080, has all the 5080 waveforms and most of the FX (I haven't checked these in detail yet, though the list in the plugin appears to be a bit different to the 5080), we can say that the plugin is in fact more or less a 5080-spec instrument, at least, and therefore sounds *better* than the original JV-1080 which had lower quality waves.

Things the plugin *doesn't* have compared to the hardware include:

- Performance/Multi mode (you can layer multiple instances via your host for this, but obviously can't directly use the multi presets)

- The ability to load your own samples (my XV-5080 has 128MB sample ram) and to use your own samples and/or Roland/Akai format libraries - this is a cool 5080 feature - so you could, for example, run your own audio through the FX, or load up your 5080 with eg Korg Wavestation waves and run them through the Roland engine.

- The ability to use expansions (though these are still expensive to buy and are of questionable value) - although maybe that might come to the plugin in the future.

sorry for asking stupidly!
but how did you compare the same presets? doesnt the jv1080 have different presets than the xv5080?
i checked the preset 1 on both and have different name

[EvilDragon]

XV-5080 is patch-compatible to JV-1080. Patches might not have the same numbers, but they're there.

[beely]

but how did you compare the same presets? doesnt the jv1080 have different presets than the xv5080?
i checked the preset 1 on both and have different name

The first four banks of the JV1080 *plugin* are the same patches as the first four banks of the XV5080.

That was what I was comparing. I don’t have the 1080 hardware.

And yes, I have a ton of 1080 sysex banks in my 5080 as well...

[Ingonator]

I quoted the previous demos as most of them represent a kind of "evolution" towards a new patch that i just created based on the patch in the the last audio demo that i posted here (which was based on the "MK-80 EP A" E-Piano sample).

Before i explain the changes here is the audio demo of the new patch:
JV-1080 plugin_IW - Glassy BP 2 - Demo 1

The new patch uses the same sample as the previous one but this time for the first two tones/layers i used a more complex "structure" with a serial routing of the filters of both tones and additional ring modulation. The filters in tones 1 + 2 were changed to HPF and LPF modes while those in the tones 3 + 4 remained at the BPF mode.

FXs used are built-in Reverb and Chorus FXs plus an external Limiter (from Live 9).
A small amount of vibrato was added to the patch (more of it is available with Modwheel and aftertouch).

Here is an audio demo of an improvisation using a layer of my new pad sound posted today (see the quote above) and the "MK-80 EP" E-Piano factory preset included with the JV-1080 plugin (bank PR-A, preset 025) where both patches do use the same "MK-80 EP A" PCM waveform:
JV-1080 plugin_IW - Glassy BP 2 pad + MK-80 EP - Demo 1

Lkiek in previous demos the only external FX used was a Limiter (from Live 9) at the master bus.

[Caine123]

Tjx evildragon!

but how did you compare the same presets? doesnt the jv1080 have different presets than the xv5080?
i checked the preset 1 on both and have different name

The first four banks of the JV1080 *plugin* are the same patches as the first four banks of the XV5080.

That was what I was comparing. I don’t have the 1080 hardware.

And yes, I have a ton of 1080 sysex banks in my 5080 as well...

Thx a lot!

What would be just awesome if the rest of rhe patches from the xv5080 would be possible to be available in the 1080 vst as well

[beely]

What would be just awesome if the rest of rhe patches from the xv5080 would be possible to be available in the 1080 vst as well

Yep - I'm also looking at that as I look at doing a SYX to Bin convertor for the 1080 plugin...

[Caine123]

What would be just awesome if the rest of rhe patches from the xv5080 would be possible to be available in the 1080 vst as well

Yep - I'm also looking at that as I look at doing a SYX to Bin convertor for the 1080 plugin...

thx a lot!!!!

[longbongsilver]

This looks (and most importantly sounds) cool actually, I'm surprised they did this. I'd love to get it and program new stuff with it, that's the one thing I liked about the old school digital PCM stuff -- deliberately taking advantage of the fact it wasn't analog to do weird sh1t. That and the occasional pseudo-acoustic patch to use as a counterpoint to whatever big modern ROMpler you're already running... sweet.

[Ingonator]

Worst thing about JV-1080 plugin is that i start to like it so much that i seriously consider buying one of the Roland hardware synths again...

The Roland Fantom G workstation seemed to be an interesting option due to the huge display until i realized that this is no touchscreen. This would have been the only real advantage over the modules if it would be a touchscreen.
So far i never owned one of the synths/workstations with a built-in touchscreen so i have no real experiences using those.

Now i also realized it was a bad idea to sell my XV-3080 (including a few expansion boards).

On the other hand the workflow when using/programming the plugin overall might be superior to what is possible with all those hardware ROMplers. Using the hardware in multimode is also not exactly simple compared to using multiple instances of a plugin.

[kmonkey]

Sorry if already answered.

Can plugin load 1080 sysex banks like D50 plugin can? If not is there some kind of online translation tool from 1080 sysex to 1080 plugin converter?

[Ingonator]

If not is there some kind of online translation tool from 1080 sysex to 1080 plugin converter?

Maybe have a look at the posts of beely at this page...

[kmonkey]

If not is there some kind of online translation tool from 1080 sysex to 1080 plugin converter?

Maybe have a look at the posts of beely at this page...

I see he is working on converter. Cool. Thanks for pointing that out.

Maybe Roland itself will make it happen like they did for D50 plugin after they released it.

[beely]

Further evidence of the engine heritage in the plugin is in the data format - the JV-1080 hardware sysex is 644 bytes per patch (ie, less than 1Kb).

The plugin stores about *23Kb* per patch.

This is much closer to the XV-5080 sysex format, which is around 17Kb per patch. I'm still in the early days of figuring out the exact data format the plugin stores - if it's anything like the D50 implementation, it should be relatively close to the MIDI specs of the existing hardware (which iniially seems to be the case) - I'm working to the 5080 format for now, but if there is anything that differs, I'll go to the later models like the Integra, Fantom stuff for their data formats if necessary.

Once the plugin file format is reverse engineered, then I can do the import code to import 5080 sysex, and check whatever FX translations I need to do to import those patches.

After that, I'll look to do the 1080 importing and the necessary conversions (I can compare this to how the 5080 itself imports 1080 sysex).

[Frantz]

Worst thing about JV-1080 plugin is that i start to like it so much that i seriously consider buying one of the Roland hardware synths again...

Why would you want an expensive piece of hardware that sounds identical to what you already have in software?

[quantum7]

Worst thing about JV-1080 plugin is that i start to like it so much that i seriously consider buying one of the Roland hardware synths again...

Why would you want an expensive piece of hardware that sounds identical to what you already have in software?

Some people, myself included, don’t like to have a mouse in our hands nearly every minute spent creating music. I’d pay good money to have some of my favorite software synths in hardware form just to use the mouse less.