Roland Cloud

[JamminFool]

You can finally drag the plugin to resize it! It's taken years, but it's finally there.

i wish they would fix this in all the legendary plugs. Right now it is only available in a few. Maybe eventually....

[Funkybot's Evil Twin]

Regarding the Juno, does anyone know what the proper gain staging is for the oscillators? Is full blast meant to be the hardware levels? 50%?

I always assumed full blast but perhaps that drives the filter harder as many presets seem to stick around the halfway point.

[Arashi]

Really? Aren't they essentially the same, with the only difference being the arpeggiator, MIDI and sweepable/stepped HPF?

No. Many differences. Filter sounds very different. Envelope times are much shorter. Depending on the patch you can get them sounding nearly identical, or it might be impossible to exactly replicate a patch from one on the other. They’re different enough to warrant a separate emulation.

[Arashi]

Surely I'm not the only one looking at this and going -- 1. they already have a 106, was this really necessary? and 2. to owner's of TAL's wonderful U-No-LX, surely this is a big, long yawn of a release?

Not very familiar with U-NO-LX, but I can tell you TAL got some of the details wrong on their new Jupiter-8 plugin, and Roland got those details right, so there may be reasons to prefer an emulation from the company that actually created the original synth and has both proprietary docs and a large collection of reference hardware instead of just one unit.

That said, while Roland’s ACB models are mostly excellent, I really hate using them as plugins. Bad UI, excessive CPU usage…just generally unpleasant.

[zvenx]

If this is about the Arp again? No one else seems to care about that, but you.
If what you are saying is even true.
rsp

[Shiek927]

If this is about the Arp again? No one else seems to care about that, but you.
If what you are saying is even true.
rsp

my gosh, the amount of rudeness in this thread

[Arashi]

If this is about the Arp again? No one else seems to care about that, but you.
If what you are saying is even true.
rsp

I assure you, it is, but if you don’t understand it, don’t worry about it.

I wasn’t only talking about the arpeggiator though. There’s also the fact that the two oscillators are perfectly in tune when fine tune is at 0, which is impossible on real analog hardware, and doesn’t happen in Roland’s version. Was discussed at length in the official thread. Unless I’m misremembering, a workaround was added to randomly detune voices, which doesn’t do anything to address the two oscillators within each voice being perfectly, digitally in tune unless manually detuned. It means individual oscillator stability was not modeled.

I don’t think the TAL version is bad, by any means. Some people even seem to prefer how it sounds. But IMO it’s less authentic than Roland’s version. Feel free to tell me why I’m wrong. Maybe you know something I don’t.

[zvenx]

I was part of the discussion about the tuning and as I said then, not going into that again. I haven't changed my opinion, but am grateful for the option in SC.

The last time I played with a real Jupiter 8 would have been in the late 80's early 90's, I can hardly comment with authority about the authenticity of it using 30 year old memories. Also,I have not spent nearly the same time with the Roland Cloud version as I have with the Tal version, I know I definitely prefer the Tal's version but since I didn't have a hardware Jupiter 8 in front of me to compare them I can't really comment which is more authentic.

But I know someone who did exactly this..

Patrick.

rsp

[Arashi]

since I didn't have a hardware Jupiter 8 in front of me to compare them I can't really comment which is more authentic.

But I know someone who did exactly this..

Patrick.

Yes, well, you know who else did?

Roland.

And they have lots of Jupiter-8s, not just one. And also access to the original documents and engineers. So the appeal to authority doesn’t really hold any water here.

[zvenx]

Firstly Patrick's goal was to emulate his own Jupiter 8:

"The TAL-J-8 is a very accurate emulation of the popular 80’s hardware synthesiser and calibrated after our own Jupiter 8 device."


Roland also after examining their many Jupiter 8's, accessing the original documents and engineers left out the dual/split mode too.

I was actually part of a discussion in an Arturia thread about the Dimension D where it seemed that Roland changed the Dimension Mode buttons from the original in their updated foot pedal versions.

So it isn't like Roland is adverse to changing things from their own hardware.

You may be right, but I for one am not blindly willing to accept just your word on it.

I have actually scoured google trying to find someone else speak about it and couldn't thus far (that is speak of the unique nature of the Roland J-8's arp with respect to note order).

Have you asked Patrick about it?


rsp

[audiouser720]

And also access to the original documents and engineers.

Apparently I read it on this very forum someone (another developer - quite highly regarded here) that they don’t. That’s why their emulations are not more reliable than any others. This information could be incorrect of course but that’s what I remember reading once here.

[zvenx]

However.
If indeed this Jupiter 8 is not midi'ed or being triggered by an external arp/sequencer and it is just the internal arp playing, I don't think the Tal J-8 could replicate this;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QtyE9YIpRWI
rsp

[Arashi]

And also access to the original documents and engineers.

Apparently I read it on this very forum someone (another developer - quite highly regarded here) that they don’t. That’s why their emulations are not more reliable than any others. This information could be incorrect of course but that’s what I remember reading once here.

Whoever said that pulled it from their rear end. Quote from an interview:

“With ACB, all you need is a circuit diagram and the actual synth to get pretty decent simulations. But still, you come across things in the development process that you just can't figure out. The JUNO-106's low boost was one such mystery where we were just scratching our heads wondering why they designed the circuits the way they did. So when we came across mysteries like these, we would go speak with the engineers who were actually involved in the development of the originals.”

Interviews:

https://www.roland.com/global/promos/ro ... terview_1/

https://www.roland.com/global/promos/ro ... terview_2/

ACB developers standing next to the creators of the originals.

B9177503-5377-4A10-A6EA-BE328374114E.jpeg

[Arashi]

Roland also after examining their many Jupiter 8's, accessing the original documents and engineers left out the dual/split mode too.

Not on the System-8 they didn’t. I can understand leaving it out on the plugins though, since it’s trivial to stack plugins in a DAW (and you can even combine different ones). Frankly I don’t use it on the System-8 for the same reason I wouldn’t use it on a real JP-8 either — you lose half the polyphony.

You may be right, but I for one am not blindly willing to accept just your word on it.

Absolutely. Try it and see for yourself how it works. If you love arpeggiators like I do, you’ll probably like it. On the System-8 it’s obvious it’s a special behavior that’s unique to the Jupiter-8, because the other plugouts (and System-8 synth itself) don’t have it.

I haven’t mentioned it to Patrick, because I’m not really invested enough in TAL plugins to follow up on it. I just tried the demo and noticed it doesn’t work the same way. Arturia didn’t get it right either (though their new version has expanded arp features and can at least do something similar), so you might be right that no one else cares. I can only say I do.

[zvenx]

Alas don't have access to a System -8 either to verify or not, but I emailed Patrick about it a few minutes ago.
rsp