Roland JV-1080 finally, as virtual instrument!

[Frantz]

Some people, myself included, don’t like to have a mouse in our hands nearly every minute spent creating music.

I know a place that sells trackballs at good prices.

[beely]

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.

Having not been able to work out some undefined system bytes from the 5080 format, I'm looking at the Fantom X6 format, which is filling in some of the gaps.

Of course, most of the data format is the same or more or less the same, as they are all based on the same engine and Roland don't reinvent the wheel, but it does seem that at least in some cases, the data format is closer to the Fantom X, which is derived from, and extended over the 5080...

Thankfully, like the D50 plugin, the data formats follow the layout as documented in the hardware manuals, which is really good at describing the data. I should have the plugin format completely decoded and described by the end of today, and can then start to work on the conversion...

[Spirit2017]

Great beely can't wait to load the syx

[fmr]

Thankfully, like the D50 plugin, the data formats follow the layout as documented in the hardware manuals, which is really good at describing the data. I should have the plugin format completely decoded and described by the end of today, and can then start to work on the conversion...

Good work. And many thanks for it

Does the Integra engine differs from the Fantom? Because I thought that the plug-in engine was closer to the Integra, although with the effects of the Fantom...

[beely]

Does the Integra engine differs from the Fantom? Because I thought that the plug-in engine was closer to the Integra, although with the effects of the Fantom...

I'm not sure offhand, I haven't looked. I thought that the Integra was more or less the previous engines (5080/Fantom) in one box, with all the expansions included...

[Ingonator]

Does the Integra engine differs from the Fantom? Because I thought that the plug-in engine was closer to the Integra, although with the effects of the Fantom...

Compared to the JV-1080 plugin Fantom X and Fantom G PCM engines are similar while they offer additional samples (Fantom G around the double amount as the JV-1080 plugin) and also loading custom samples (+ adding expansion boards).
As mentioend earlier the 78 FXs in the JV-1080 plugin are similar to the Fantom X and this also seems to be true about Fantom G.
Fantom G could the newer ARX expansion boards with SuperNatural sounds while by default the Fantom G does not seem to include a full featured SuperNatural engine (opposing to e.g. the Jupiter-80 synth and the Integra-7). Both Fantom G and the ARX boards seem to be discontinued now (which is also true about Jupiter-80).

Integra-7 again has the same PCM engine as the JV-1080 plugin and XV/Fantom synths but additionally offers all SRX expansion boards and the SuperNatural engine for both acoustic instruments and synth sounds. Independent of the expansions the SuperNatural engine seems to be the only real advanced feature compared to the JV-1080 plugin and Fantoms.

While the Fantom G series is not very old you already get it for arround 1000 to 1700 € second hand (also depending on how many keys). Fantom G has a big display and AFAIK you could even attach a mouse to the keyboard.

[fmr]

Does the Integra engine differs from the Fantom? Because I thought that the plug-in engine was closer to the Integra, although with the effects of the Fantom...

Compared to the JV-1080 plugin Fantom X and Fantom G PCM engines are similar while they offer additional samples (Fantom G around the double amount as the JV-1080 plugin) and also loading custom samples (+ adding expansion boards).
As mentioend earlier the 78 FXs in the JV-1080 plugin are similar to the Fantom X and this also seems to be true about Fantom G.
Fantom G could the newer ARX expansion boards with SuperNatural sounds while by default the Fantom G does not seem to include a full featured SuperNatural engine (opposing to e.g. the Jupiter-80 synth and the Integra-7). Both Fantom G and the ARX boards seem to be discontinued now (which isl lso true about Jupiter-80) and the latest FA-06/07/08 workstations more or less seem to be inferior compared to the Fantom G (BTW the keyboard tehre has no aftertouch...).

Integra-7 again has the same PCM engine as the JV-1080 plugin and XV/Fantom synths but additionally offers all SRX expansion boards and the SuperNatural engine for both acoustic instruments and synth sounds. Independent of the expansions the SuperNatural engine seems to be the only real advanced feature compared to the JV-1080 plugin and Fantoms.

While the Fantom G series is not very old you already get it for arround 1000 to 1500 € second hand (also depending on how many keys). Fantom G has a big display and AFAIK you could even attach a mouse to the keyboard.

OK then. Thanks for clarifying. So, Fantom it is

[Ingonator]

Does the Integra engine differs from the Fantom? Because I thought that the plug-in engine was closer to the Integra, although with the effects of the Fantom...

Compared to the JV-1080 plugin Fantom X and Fantom G PCM engines are similar while they offer additional samples (Fantom G around the double amount as the JV-1080 plugin) and also loading custom samples (+ adding expansion boards).
As mentioend earlier the 78 FXs in the JV-1080 plugin are similar to the Fantom X and this also seems to be true about Fantom G.
Fantom G could the newer ARX expansion boards with SuperNatural sounds while by default the Fantom G does not seem to include a full featured SuperNatural engine (opposing to e.g. the Jupiter-80 synth and the Integra-7). Both Fantom G and the ARX boards seem to be discontinued now (which isl lso true about Jupiter-80) and the latest FA-06/07/08 workstations more or less seem to be inferior compared to the Fantom G (BTW the keyboard tehre has no aftertouch...).

Integra-7 again has the same PCM engine as the JV-1080 plugin and XV/Fantom synths but additionally offers all SRX expansion boards and the SuperNatural engine for both acoustic instruments and synth sounds. Independent of the expansions the SuperNatural engine seems to be the only real advanced feature compared to the JV-1080 plugin and Fantoms.

While the Fantom G series is not very old you already get it for arround 1000 to 1500 € second hand (also depending on how many keys). Fantom G has a big display and AFAIK you could even attach a mouse to the keyboard.

OK then. Thanks for clarifying. So, Fantom it is

Actually concerning both the PCM engine and the 1083 included PCM samples the plugin is similar to the XV-5080 and Integra-7 but besides that the plugin has all 78 FXs of Fantom X. AFAIK there is no Roland hardware synth that combines a similar PCM engine, sample set and FXs as in the JV-1080 plugin.
Especially with the included FXs there seems to be a big variation along the Roland ROMplers and only the Fantom X is really similar to those in the plugin.

The Fantom X series and G series got a different sample set compared to the JV-1080 plugin, XV-5080 and the Integra-7 PCM engine while many or most of the XV series samples might be included (i have not checked this in detail yet). The waveform numbers in the Fantoms are different so new samples were not simply added to the list.
Same is true with the 1083 samples in the plugin, XV-5080 and Integra-7. While all 448 samples of JV-1080/2080 are included the waveform numbers are different.

[gentleclockdivider]

Yes integra has fewer effects then the xv 5080 .
Like ingonator says , the only real advantage lies in the supernatural engine and inclusion of all srx boards , which get pretty expensive on the second hand market .

The supernatuRAL synth engine should not be a motifator to buy the integra ; I think it's kinda meeeh , except for the great sounding filters ) .
She Supernatural acoustic , hELL YEAH ;
All in all , the integra is a fine box

[sinemotor]

AFAIK there is no Roland hardware synth that combines a similar PCM engine, sample set and FXs as in the JV-1080 plugin.
Especially with the included FXs there seems to be a big variation along the Roland ROMplers and only the Fantom X is really similar to those in the plugin.

The Roland FA-06 technically has the 78 FXs of the JV-1080 VST as "IFXs" (=MFX for the all 16 parts studio set) and it has all the PCM waveforms from the XV-5080.

Roland is good at recycling its PCM engine. They've been doing that for 20 years. Just changing waveforms and FXs here and there between their synths, but since nobody really care about it they can rebrand all they want, every time.

[fmr]

Roland is good at recycling its PCM engine. They've been doing that for 20 years. Just changing waveforms and FXs here and there between their synths, but since nobody really care about it they can rebrand all they want, every time.

Yes, I've been saying it since the beginning (many, many years ago). I called it "repackaging"

[EvilDragon]

Everybody repackages. Korg's synth engines have things going back to M1 (down to Kronos only being able to have just two main "oscillators" - even though each osc is a synth engine, the limitation is still there. Their arranger PA series have up to 24 oscillators possible IIRC, for example). Lots of ye olde sample data goes through iterations of Korg workstations, too.

Kurzweil? Yeah, them too.

[beely]

I've got the data in the 1080 plugin format mapped out, apart from a 4Kish block at the end of each patch.

Basically, the 1080 plugin bin file contains some header stuff, then each patch has the following block layout:

128x
- System Common/Setup block (derived from Fantom X, not all parameters are used in the plugin)
- Patch Common
- Patch Common MFX
- Patch Common Chorus
- Patch Common Reverb
- Patch Tone Mix Table
- Patch Tone (x4, one for each of the four tones)
- Rhythm Common
- Rhythm Common MFX
- Rhythm Common Chorus
- Rhythm Common Reverb
- Rhythm Tone (x87, one for each key 21-108)
- *Unknown*

There does appear to be data in this last unknown block, as it varies in the preset patches, but I don't think it's data that is used in the plugin, as everything that appears in the plugin is pretty much accounted for. It could be remnants of the data layout from the Fantom - arpeggio data, chord data etc - there are a bunch of blocks it could be, but none of those are used in the plugin so I can likely just initialise this to default values in the conversion without problems - and the data doesn't give any useful clues to help figure out what it is (eg, names, or obvious parameter values that I can use to figure out what it is.)

[gentleclockdivider]

AFAIK there is no Roland hardware synth that combines a similar PCM engine, sample set and FXs as in the JV-1080 plugin.
Especially with the included FXs there seems to be a big variation along the Roland ROMplers and only the Fantom X is really similar to those in the plugin.

Roland is good at recycling its PCM engine. They've been doing that for 20 years. Just changing waveforms and FXs here and there between their synths, but since nobody really care about it they can rebrand all they want, every time.

Finally someone who get's it

[Caine123]

I've got the data in the 1080 plugin format mapped out, apart from a 4Kish block at the end of each patch.

Basically, the 1080 plugin bin file contains some header stuff, then each patch has the following block layout:

128x
- System Common/Setup block (derived from Fantom X, not all parameters are used in the plugin)
- Patch Common
- Patch Common MFX
- Patch Common Chorus
- Patch Common Reverb
- Patch Tone Mix Table
- Patch Tone (x4, one for each of the four tones)
- Rhythm Common
- Rhythm Common MFX
- Rhythm Common Chorus
- Rhythm Common Reverb
- Rhythm Tone (x87, one for each key 21-108)
- *Unknown*

There does appear to be data in this last unknown block, as it varies in the preset patches, but I don't think it's data that is used in the plugin, as everything that appears in the plugin is pretty much accounted for. It could be remnants of the data layout from the Fantom - arpeggio data, chord data etc - there are a bunch of blocks it could be, but none of those are used in the plugin so I can likely just initialise this to default values in the conversion without problems - and the data doesn't give any useful clues to help figure out what it is (eg, names, or obvious parameter values that I can use to figure out what it is.)

this is great knowledge! im excited every time you post