Mixing VA and PCM within the tone is a basic feature of the SN-Synth engine, so that's nothing new (unless you actually meant something different).

So the Jupiter X and the Xm use the new zen sound engine? What sounds are inside the MC boxes? Are both the Jupiters and the MCs able to load expansions?

As I said: something Roland has been doing since the D-50.

They do have tone stretching to some extent on samples, probably a subset of what they provide as one piece of the tuning equation for V-Piano.

It will be interesting to see how that can be used.

Really, Roland has mostly thought of virtually everything you can imagine for synthesis, it's just a question of understanding it.

The Fantom is the new Roland that surprised and impressed me the most. Really exceeds my expectations of how they would do this sort of synth in 2019.

It’s way too salty for me though at this point...

Now let’s see a new V-Synth with the same feel.

Oh, sorry. I gave Nick Batt the benefit of the doubt.

The Jupiter-X, Jupiter-Xm, MC-707, MC-101 and Fantom all use the Zen-core architecture. And they are expandable by firmware updates.

Thanks, that’s great!

So, nothing new then, a re-hash of their usual synth engines repackaged under a new name.

Understanding it won't be a problem once Roland releases the parameter guide.

Tribalism, plain and simple.

As old as humanity itself.

People literally can't help themselves.

Some are just more susceptible than others.

Nor do I. The amount of innovation on display in rethinking the workflow and making what the instrument has to offer accessible in these units is really impressive. Roland hasn't reinvented synthesis or re-issued some treasured relic, but what they have done is very customer focused by making what they've done before more immediately available than ever. That's progress, and will be absolutely be welcomed by a segment of the market.

Kurzweil owners would do just about anything to see this kind of fundamental rethinking about how you get at the power under the hood.

Does anyone know an ETA for the Fantom and the Jupiter X?

I think Fantom is either out now or very soon.

Sounds like same is true for JP-Xm.

JP-X Senior should be out April May 2020, Roland's usual spring release time.

thomann and sweetwater have the Fantom right now.

The Tanzbar 2 demos sound like **** too, but when you hear it in person it blows you away-especially when you learn it and make it your own.

Well, it's still in it's infancy and improvements could be added, but even if they're not this will still be a big seller because of it's immediacy and fun-factor when making tunes.

Jupiter Xm getting brutalized in comment section.
Personally, I thought it sounded pretty good.
Price is ridiculous though.
Plenty of other better options for that $$

Calling them Jupiters was crazy and invites it.

I'd hope most demos of the new Rolands are well recorded through quality interfaces, though software vids skip that transformation altogether. Who knows, but it's probably best to reserve final judgement until you put a Zen Core synth on the stand.

To me, two Fantom innovations are to include a triple sensor keybed and a stereo analog filter on a workstation, if those things are true. For synth stuff - Kronos can do its style of synthesis, from what I've seen so far. I HOPE Roland has something new in there, and I just haven't caught on. It's a different UX, that seems innovative. Fantom beats Kronos handily in computer, outboard and CV connectivity. Better, more and any at all. That's also innovative for a workstation.

But nothing groundbreaking. I wish they'd made an 8 voice ACB SH-5 with worthy extras, a real analog grit module, individual voice panning, PolyAT. I bet it would be a challenge to get it right, and they'd have to innovate. But you know, they'll sell more Jupiters. The modern Jupiters look and sound like high end modern Junos to me.

Kronos still rules in sound-generating capability.

But I don't think that's important to the mass market.
Fantoms excel in workflow, reputation, and look.
And beats!
That will automatically gain a good share of the market.

I personally am jealous of that Fantom workflow.

But how do you make beats on it?

Most new synths sound too fizzy and harsh to me - even when played in person or bought (then sold).
Personally I think the ASM Hydrasynth online demos are yuk
I owned an MKS80 for years, as well as Roland 100M and Juno 60. When I demoed the Behringer Deepmind I didn't like the sound at all. Fizzy and harsh again. Sounded like a poor man's Juno 106 to me - which is actually what it is.

A most welcome voice of reason and civility.

This morning, I made the mistake of reading some of the comments on the JUPITER-Xm video on YouTube.

I know, I know. YouTube comments. For breakfast.

The degree of negativity some musicians have regarding Roland products is truly astounding.

Meanwhile, wherever I travel, I see it being used and appreciated in countless contexts.

There would seem to be a disparity between the internet and the reality I experience as a working musician out in the field.

Not that ordinary people can't accurately demo new gear, I'm sure they can, but BoBeats is what? an online video maker.
Gear like this is made to be used by actual musicians making actual music. This is not to pick on BoBeats alone. The whole Youtube gear scene is dominated by people who have never made a record, never gone on tour, and as such (for me) you watch their videos but don't assume they are the gospel truth.
I mean.....if they don't give a product a glowing review, they won't be receiving that company's next product months before the average customer.

You make a good point, which ties in with your earlier comments about real-world v Gearslutz expectation.

Touring musicians (especially) could care less about the minutiae that is fussed over here.

With regards to Roland, I fell out of love with them not long after the D50 but that’s just me - I simply don’t find them inspiring any more. I’m a firm believer in the punk ethos - it doesn’t matter how a track is made, as long as it sounds good. And in the right hands, any one of these new Roland gizmos could produce an outstanding track.

See i miss the good old days with bands like rush, who knew that they must use the obxa and minimoog to get the synths to sit in a track with big guitars and bass and drums... HEHEHEHEHEEHE i guess the modern musicians like muse, they give a **** still. Pop artists hmmm most of them sound like **** live from what i have seen. So yeah, im gunna listen to the people who sound amazing for advice not some whatever musician saying that a dull workstation is going to cut in the mix live.. ok... Whatever..

DF

Ha, ha, you are actually making my point for me.
We have entered a world of audio detectives searching for flaws.
You've written several posts RAVING about Massive X and comparing it's amazingness to what you see as poor quality Roland synths.

First context - I write and record music for a living.
Being an old massive owner and user, within a few days of Massive X becoming available I upgraded and downloaded it. I was working on a couple of tracks for my new EP so I ended up scrolling through a few of the Massive X presets. Found a couple I liked, edited them a bit with a few tonal tweaks here and there, then recorded the parts into Live and they ended up in the final mix of my tracks (about to be released).
A few days later I wanted to figure out something in Massive X, so I searched Youtube for some video tips on Massive X. What came back in the search results were a number of very popular videos by vloggers screaming about some flaws in massive X. Loudly warning viewers to not buy the synth. Claiming Native Instruments had f***ed up and also claiming NI had released Massive X knowing it was ass, and by implication knowingly ripped off their customers.
So watching through a couple of the videos it turned out you had to set Massive X to some kind of unreal setting - all filters open, all oscillators playing at the top of their range (or something like that), and if you strained you ear you might be able to hear something weird. Well I never could.
But in short, I had just happily used two Massive X sounds in my tracks, alongside my expensive analog synths.
So I don't know. If that's your gig, if that's how you attract viewers to your Youtube videos and therefore earn money from Google, you can probably find some flaw in ANY new product.

Hmm, do what you like I guess.
There is a huge difference between some vlogger who has had a synth in their bedroom studio for a week, and someone who has used a synth on a pressure recording date with a demanding producer. Or who has played shows with a synth in adverse conditions - like bad acoustics, or poor monitoring.

Like I said, these vloggers live by their subscriptions and how much advertising they can attract due to their video views. So what they say about any new product is critical to their mortgage payment next month.
Me? I make my living from making music.

To be honest, I’m not sure what you're going on about now. I know from experience that a hit record can be made with a cheap (ironically) Roland sampler which, to quote you, sounded totally “meh”. Did it sound great live? Probably not - but the audience didn’t seem to care

The thing that made old analog so great and so iconic was it's imperfection.
I have owned most of the great stuff, and still own some.

I am also a camera enthusiast.
There are two obsessions online today, in both music and photography....
1) The latest and greatest.
In truth, they say Ansel Adams made his incredible and iconic pictures on a camera much lower quality than your standard point and shoot today. Likewise, amazing albums made on four track tape with a couple of cheap mics.
2) The ultimate goal to be the first blogger/vlogger to find a flaw. In photography it's called pixel peeping. In music you post screenshots of your Oscilloscope, or you open up every filter and ads on the synth and boost the volume by 24db, then you might hear some weird artefact.

What is good? You've got to KNOW what is good for you is not going to be the same for someone else. For example Massive X, which you've raved about in this thread, but Youtubers claim is unusable.