Just trying to locate all the Roland XP users on the site so we can all hook up and help each other with tips and troubleshooting. I myself have been a Roland XP user for about 5-6 years. These machines are EXECLLENT but can be a bit complex when you get past the basic functions. Holla back and let's talk XP...............
Who are the Roland XP users on this site?
- Thread starter Rob Bec
- Start date
BigBrotherMotown
Grand Sage of Songwriting
I have a Roland XP-80
it is my FIRST workstation and my FIRST love.....
I will NEVER get rid of it.......
I have had SEVERAL people tell me that some of the sounds are more IMPRESSIVE than those in my Fantom X6......
some of the basses are unbelievably FAT....
the XP series boards were some of the most PRACTICAL and well Designed boards in roland History!
it is my FIRST workstation and my FIRST love.....
I will NEVER get rid of it.......
I have had SEVERAL people tell me that some of the sounds are more IMPRESSIVE than those in my Fantom X6......
some of the basses are unbelievably FAT....
the XP series boards were some of the most PRACTICAL and well Designed boards in roland History!
Last edited:
BigBrotherMotown
Grand Sage of Songwriting
Rob Bec said:Why???????????????? Roland is the shiznit kido...........
Why? Because today's Roland synths are a bunch of mass market crap that tries to get by on the reputation of their golden years from over 2 decades ago now. Seriously, what have they produced since the Jupiter series? The only notables are the D-50, JP8000, and V-Synth. That's not a very impressive record, given the length of time it took for those to come out.
Xabiton said:
Haha, you're funny
Last edited:
Xabiton
Cupcake God
I love the machine its just that for whatever reason when I try to sequence it on my ESQ-1 whatever instrument is on part 1 in performance mode plays over everything regardless of what midi channel the part is set to. Is this some sort of omni mode and if so how can I turn it off? I have also noticed that when I slave my xp 30 to the pc in performance mode it freezes up and my computer does as well. So I have been making my songs in patch mode which is fine patch mode has better sounds anyway but I'd like to know how to properly use it. The manual is horrible.BigBrotherMotown said:
are you denying the greatness of the Fantom? I haven't been doing this music thing for 20 years but I have played wtiht he D-50, the Jp8k, the Fantom and the XP 30 and my alpha Juno and I havent seen anything bad come from roland. Even the Juno D and Juno G are fairly decent entry level boards. U r a bad man lol.Array said:Why? Because today's Roland synths are a bunch of mass market crap that tries to get by on the reputation of their golden years from over 2 decades ago now. Seriously, what have they produced since the Jupiter series? The only notables are the D-50, JP8000, and V-Synth. That's not a very impressive record, given the length of time it took for those to come out.
Haha, you're funny
Last edited:
I'm not the least bit impressed with the Fantom, or the Motif or M3 for that matter. These products have had very small and evolutionary updates ever since the Korg M1 set the paradigm for "workstation" class keyboards. As such, the Fantom, in my eyes, is no more than an M1 with higher quality samples, better effects, and a resonant filter. Big whoop. Where are my sound design tools?
Why am I STILL not able to cross modulate between the oscillators on the Fantom? Why am I not able to perform audiorate modulations between the oscillators and the filter on the Fantom? As a matter of fact, why are there no non-PCM based oscillators on the Fantom at all? Boring, boring, boring!
Alesis was on the right track in terms of packing a lot of synthesis options, i.e. FM, PM, VA, PCM, and sampling, into one product. As a result, it was not just a tool for composition, but also a very competent sound design tool. Too bad they got bad PR for launching with a buggy OS and did little to no marketing after the fact. Numark totally dropped the ball on that one, but at least the VA engine has made its way into the MPC 5000.
Aside from all that, the Nord Wave is the engine that I think EVERY "workstation" should try to implement. Unlike the Fusion, the Wave allows for the mixing of wavetable, sample, VA, and FM oscillators in a single patch. Now THAT is a sound design tool.
It's good that you bring up the Roland Juno-G and D, by the way. Those boards are EXACTLY what is wrong with the big three. A perfect example of deceptive marketing by way of trying to sell people on the reputation of the synths of yesteryear.
And finally, it's dickheads like these who keep the "workstation" business model alive. No one demands anything of the Big 3, and as a result they have no incentive to innovate.
I hope you enjoy your life of mediocrity, Rob.
Why am I STILL not able to cross modulate between the oscillators on the Fantom? Why am I not able to perform audiorate modulations between the oscillators and the filter on the Fantom? As a matter of fact, why are there no non-PCM based oscillators on the Fantom at all? Boring, boring, boring!
Alesis was on the right track in terms of packing a lot of synthesis options, i.e. FM, PM, VA, PCM, and sampling, into one product. As a result, it was not just a tool for composition, but also a very competent sound design tool. Too bad they got bad PR for launching with a buggy OS and did little to no marketing after the fact. Numark totally dropped the ball on that one, but at least the VA engine has made its way into the MPC 5000.
Aside from all that, the Nord Wave is the engine that I think EVERY "workstation" should try to implement. Unlike the Fusion, the Wave allows for the mixing of wavetable, sample, VA, and FM oscillators in a single patch. Now THAT is a sound design tool.
It's good that you bring up the Roland Juno-G and D, by the way. Those boards are EXACTLY what is wrong with the big three. A perfect example of deceptive marketing by way of trying to sell people on the reputation of the synths of yesteryear.
Rob Bec said:
And finally, it's dickheads like these who keep the "workstation" business model alive. No one demands anything of the Big 3, and as a result they have no incentive to innovate.
I hope you enjoy your life of mediocrity, Rob.
Last edited:
Xabiton
Cupcake God
You are looking for something totally different than what most people are looking for with those boards. Most people using them are purely composers in my experience. They want good organic sounds that they can write songs with and I think all of the boards mentioned are very capable of that. I understand what you are getting at but most people outside of making more electronic music (DNB, Trance, Techno, House ect) I don't think are looking for that out of these boards. I myself make hip hop, soul, r&b and the like so I only need something that sounds very organic thats easy to use with a ton of variety and a sampler with a good sequencer and I am happy as are most everyone else who uses such tools in my experience.Array said:
People are only happy with those boards as long as they dont get bored of using the presets and don't care about sounding just like everyone else out there. But even the aforementioned folks would benefit greatly if the Big 3 made a push to include better synth engines. How many times on this forum do you see someone asking whether or not the "synth sounds" on the Fantom are better than those on the Triton? Why even ask that question when neither product is a synth in the general sense of the word? It's beyond absurd.
Even people looking for acoustic sounds would benefit...what if someone wants to dirty up that boring old PCM string sample with a bit of FM modulation via a noise source? Or layer a real bell sample with a wavetable or FM based bell? Or hell, why not include a physical modeling synth for making string, wind, and percussive sounds? Even if users don't dig into the synth engines themselves, they'll still have access to presets that sound more dynamic, and/or realistic, and definitely more expressive.
Even people looking for acoustic sounds would benefit...what if someone wants to dirty up that boring old PCM string sample with a bit of FM modulation via a noise source? Or layer a real bell sample with a wavetable or FM based bell? Or hell, why not include a physical modeling synth for making string, wind, and percussive sounds? Even if users don't dig into the synth engines themselves, they'll still have access to presets that sound more dynamic, and/or realistic, and definitely more expressive.
Last edited:
Xabiton
Cupcake God
I don't disagree with you on that standpoint. I know myself tho I choose romplers and a lot of other people choose romplers for easy and quick access to good sounds without having to do all of that. To most of us a good string is a good string. If I wanted to get deep into programming and creating patches I'd just open up Reason and have at it. I use most hardware romplers purely for presets. I don't even get deep into making patches on my ESQ-1. I use it as a midi controller and I've made like 4 patches in the 9 months I've had it lol.
Xabiton said:
Oh man, the ESQ-1 is actually a very capable synth. You should put it to good use. Check out this video:
http://insidesynthesis.blogspot.com/2007/12/episode-two-using-lfos-as-sequencers.html
You can even download the patches if you want to try them out.
Xabiton
Cupcake God
interesting video. i have actually been looking for some videos to help me get further in depth with the synth programming on the ESQ-1. While I know how to do some basic programming I am not great at it and I have an easier time doing it in Reason or even on my Alpha Juno 2. I haven't gone into programming new sounds on my XP-30. Having only had it a week I still need to get a feel for the machine before I do that. The video however doesn't apply to my drum programming because I have a cd3000i and I sample my drums into it and program them that way. Great machine.Array said:
)