The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 All  This Thread  Reviews  Gear Database  Synths for sale     Latest  Trending
New Roland Fantom 2019 Vs Jupiter 80
Old 3 weeks ago
  #1
Here for the gear
New Roland Fantom 2019 Vs Jupiter 80

Was looking to buy the Jupiter 80, and Roland has just released the new Roland FANTOM. How do these 2 compare? Anyone bought it already?

I am Keyboardist and buying one for gigging as an aux board for synths and realtime LFO and OSC controls.

Any insight will be appreciated.

Thanks!

https://static.gearslutz.com/board/i...sanimated1.gif
Old 3 weeks ago
  #2
Lives for gear
 

Duplicate content.
Old 3 weeks ago
  #3
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by JB_masterkeyz View Post
Was looking to buy the Jupiter 80, and Roland has just released the new Roland FANTOM. How do these 2 compare? Anyone bought it already?

I am Keyboardist and buying one for gigging as an aux board for synths and realtime LFO and OSC controls.

Any insight will be appreciated.

Thanks!

https://static.gearslutz.com/board/i...sanimated1.gif
https://www.roland.com/us/support/by...wners_manuals/

https://www.roland.com/us/support/by...wners_manuals/
Old 3 weeks ago
  #4
Lives for gear
 
syntonica's Avatar
Unless you need DAW in a box, consider the Jupiter-X. It's more comparable to the 80.
Old 1 week ago
  #5
Here for the gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by realtrance View Post
Duplicate content.
Searched and didn't find any discussion about it. Kindly refer me to the thread as the Roland Fantom is a very new gear released this year (2019).
Old 1 week ago
  #6
Here for the gear
Hi,

I have gone through the manuals. What I seek is to know how the sounds compare to each other from anyone who has used both and can give a comment. I personally cannot access them as there is no store to go have a feel before I buy
Old 1 week ago
  #7
Lives for gear
 
DJRAZZ's Avatar
 

The Jupiter-X will not have the super natural sounds that are in the 80. It is more of a VA with some RD piano tech, and some old JV and D-50 type sounds. The new Fantom is a workstation with the newest generation of super natural sounds and some VA and VR stuff as well. The Jupiter 80 falls in the middle. If you like the 80 I would think the Fantom would be closer in the family.
Old 1 week ago
  #8
Just a correction there, the Fantom doesn’t have any supernatural sounds. It just has that toy keytar of theirs sound library, a basic va and the reduced version of the v-piano from the RD2000. It sounds pretty naff, a super expensive Casio but with a nice keybed.

Potentially it might get some supernatural sounds down the line, I keep seeing people say “it’s going to have new e-piano and organ supernatural sounds and multisampled instruments support” but I’d take that with a grain of salt because the only citations seem to be of other non Roland people saying they also heard this “somewhere”, I’ve not found any original Roland source for this.

Last edited by mdme_sadie; 1 week ago at 05:03 PM..
Old 1 week ago
  #9
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by mdme_sadie View Post
Just a correction there, the Fantom doesn’t have any supernatural sounds. It just has that toy keytar of theirs sound library, a basic va and the reduced version of the v-piano from the RD2000. It sounds pretty naff, a super expensive Casio but with a nice keybed.

Potentially it might get some supernatural sounds down the line, I keep seeing people say “it’s going to have new e-piano and organ supernatural sounds and multisampled instruments support” but I’d take that with a grain of salt because the only citations seem to be of other non Roland people saying they also heard this somewhere, I’ve not found any original Roland source for this.
Old 1 week ago
  #10
Quote:
Originally Posted by realtrance View Post
What? Wot? It’s technically correct. There are no supernatural sounds in there, and is there any actual evidence that the “platform” as a Roland calls it will progress in this aspect any right now?

There are three sound engines in there - V-Piano (fully modeled like Pianoteq but not as good sounding or versatile, not supernatural), Z-Core (VA synth + PCM sample library taken from the Axe-Edge, also not supernatural) and Drums (sample based system, but simple triggers not supernatural).

Contrary to others I think Roland feels this is a finished platform and product. It does everything that they claim it does, even if only half heartedly to you or I. It even does technically have multisampled instruments already and even a sampler Even if it doesn’t have the supernatural midi script running on any of them, you can’t tweak layers, you can’t import stuff or build your own instruments with your own samples but samples is how most of the more characterful synth sounds exist in the unit and all but the piano acoustic sounds exist. The GUI and workflow is fairly polished, there are no buttons that do nothing, maybe a few ports on the back but I honestly get the impression that Roland think what’s in offer right now is sufficient and complete. Therefore you should really be sure and know what you are buying right now rather than buying based on potential, on “product as service”.
Old 1 week ago
  #11
Lives for gear
 
VennD68's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdme_sadie View Post
What? Wot? It’s technically correct. There are no supernatural sounds in there, and is there any actual evidence that the “platform” as a Roland calls it will progress in this aspect any right now?

There are three sound engines in there - V-Piano (fully modeled like Pianoteq but not as good sounding or versatile, not supernatural), Z-Core (VA synth + PCM sample library taken from the Axe-Edge, also not supernatural) and Drums (sample based system, but simple triggers not supernatural).

Contrary to others I think Roland feels this is a finished platform and product. It does everything that they claim it does, even if only half heartedly to you or I. It even does technically have multisampled instruments already and even a sampler Even if it doesn’t have the supernatural midi script running on any of them, you can’t tweak layers, you can’t import stuff or build your own instruments with your own samples but samples is how most of the more characterful synth sounds exist in the unit and all but the piano acoustic sounds exist. The GUI and workflow is fairly polished, there are no buttons that do nothing, maybe a few ports on the back but I honestly get the impression that Roland think what’s in offer right now is sufficient and complete. Therefore you should really be sure and know what you are buying right now rather than buying based on potential, on “product as service”.

The RD modelled piano is quite frankly a better piano than the Integra's SN-A one,has unlimited polyphony with control over sypathetic resonance, damping, cavity size, hammer action, individual key tuning and so on.
The VA engine on the Zen Core is miles ahead feature wise in comparison to the SN-S engine too.
Calling the VA basic is ironic in the fact that your statement sounds well "basic".....but I digress.


lastly.......you are so going to be proven wrong on that final paragraph. LMAO
Old 1 week ago
  #12
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by syntonica View Post
Unless you need DAW in a box, consider the Jupiter-X. It's more comparable to the 80.
The X (with the normal sized keyboard) is coming in April 2020, so that's going to be a bit of a wait.
Old 1 week ago
  #13
Quote:
Originally Posted by VennD68 View Post
You are so going to be proven wrong on that final paragraph. LMAO
I really hope I am wrong but like I said, I’ve not been able to find any evidence to the contrary currently and it does currently do everything they claim albeit a bare minimum effort. Do you have anything concrete to the contrary direct from an actual Roland source?
Old 1 week ago
  #14
Lives for gear
 
VennD68's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdme_sadie View Post
I really hope I am wrong but like I said, I’ve not been able to find any evidence to the contrary currently and it does currently do everything they claim albeit a bare minimum effort. Do you have anything concrete to the contrary direct from an actual Roland source?
Not in a position to say - I was one of the sound design crew for the Zen Core engine along with Gattobus & Co so make of that what you will.
Old 1 week ago
  #15
Quote:
Originally Posted by VennD68 View Post
The RD modelled piano is quite frankly a better piano than the Integra's SN-A one,has unlimited polyphony with control over sypathetic resonance, damping, cavity size, hammer action, individual key tuning and so on.
The VA engine on the Zen Core is miles ahead feature wise in comparison to the SN-S engine too.
Calling the VA basic is ironic in the fact that your statement sounds well "basic".....but I digress.
I never experienced the Integra, I have no idea how the “zen core” is meant to be more advanced than anything else out there, but it just sounds and acts like a cheap old ROMpler to me and the sounds don’t seem to have much in the way of layers or even more than a single sample for the entire key range, it seems to use the sample like an LFO which is cool but doesn’t give you all the LFO options. Regardless it is not “supernatural” and it seems quite a few other people disagree with your assessments on Rolands own forum because the number one request in the thread asking for feedback was “bring back supernatural”.

With regards the Piano, having a bunch of controls doesn’t automatically make something good. The core sound it produces is ok for an upright, not great for an attempt at a grand, the thing is you can tweak all the controls all day and it will only sound like that same piano. Maybe the full V-Piano is better and more versatile. But It’s not in there and frankly it’s a decade old digital tech and sounds it.
Old 1 week ago
  #16
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by mdme_sadie View Post
I never experienced the Integra, I have no idea how the “zen core” is meant to be more advanced than anything else out there, but it just sounds and acts like a cheap old ROMpler to me and the sounds don’t seem to have much in the way of layers or even more than a single sample for the entire key range, it seems to use the sample like an LFO which is cool but doesn’t give you all the LFO options. Regardless it is not “supernatural” and it seems quite a few other people disagree with your assessments on Rolands own forum because the number one request in the thread asking for feedback was “bring back supernatural”.

With regards the Piano, having a bunch of controls doesn’t automatically make something good. The core sound it produces is ok for an upright, not great for an attempt at a grand, the thing is you can tweak all the controls all day and it will only sound like that same piano. Maybe the full V-Piano is better and more versatile. But It’s not in there and frankly it’s a decade old digital tech and sounds it.
Unfortunately, you are flying blind without any instruments in your assertions.

I will allow you to figure out over time how wrong you are; not worth an argument here at this point.
Old 1 week ago
  #17
Quote:
Originally Posted by realtrance View Post
Unfortunately, you are flying blind without any instruments in your assertions.

I will allow you to figure out over time how wrong you are; not worth an argument here at this point.
No, go ahead. If you have some good insight into why “zen core“ isn’t just marketing gibberish, or even what it actually is then I’m sure I’m not the only one that would love to hear it. You are right, I absolutely am flying blind as is everyone because Roland have very little communication.

As far as I can read between the lines it’s got pretty much nothing to do with the actual sounds themselves and everything to do with a unified API for different sound engines to be written for/connected to and exposed in an OS. There’s virtually nothing said about the sound engines currently in there themselves.

If you’re talking about the Piano, I’ve spent the past couple of weeks with it. I’ve dived through all the settings many times, even got creative with fx and eq, and my opinion hasn’t changed. I mean there’s only so much (very little in this case) you can do to change the nature of the beast, the hammer noises even pitch to the notes >_< (which is weird for an allegedly 100% algorithmic piano). It’s not great. Could someone make great music with it? Sure. But people have made great music with kazoos, that doesn’t mean much other than ”great musician sounds great”.
Old 1 week ago
  #18
Lives for gear
 

If you don’t like it, no need to pay it any further attention, eh?

You’ve been around this stuff for awhile; might as well focus on what you enjoy.

Talking about music is like writing PHP scripts about sex, anyways; it’s kinda pointless!
Old 1 week ago
  #19
Quote:
Originally Posted by realtrance View Post
If you don’t like it, no need to pay it any further attention, eh?

You’ve been around this stuff for awhile; might as well focus on what you enjoy.

Talking about music is like writing PHP scripts about sex, anyways; it’s kinda pointless!
C’mon, you’re being deliberately abstruse! Out with it, if you know something then don’t just be all mysterious about it. Otherwise you're gonna make me think you don’t.

What do you know about the zen core that makes it... whatever it is you feel that it is that I’m just not getting?
Old 1 week ago
  #20
Lives for gear
 
gentleclockdivid's Avatar
 

@ sadie
You are so wrong o many levels .
If you understand the basic pcm structure of any roland rompler , then you would understand the power of the zen core engine and all the things it ads to that already powerfull engine .
Forget about the supernatural synth engine ( SYNTH not ACOUSTIC ) , it was flawed from the beginning due to it's limited modulation etc ..
Zen core unifies a solid basis ( pcm engine ) + new VA additions .
Old 1 week ago
  #21
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by mdme_sadie View Post
C’mon, you’re being deliberately abstruse! Out with it, if you know something then don’t just be all mysterious about it. Otherwise you're gonna make me think you don’t.

What do you know about the zen core that makes it... whatever it is you feel that it is that I’m just not getting?
Man, people calling me abstruse, disingenuous, well, it beats other things...

Let me try to say this more patiently: how am I, over the internet, on a music forum, going to persuade you, with your own ears, tastes, experience of The Thing (Fantom in this case), that what you are experiencing is in some way, "wrong"? Can't be done.

If we were in the same room, for hours, going over the same instrument, discussing what we like and don't like, and able to point out what does or doesn't do what, and why that matters to us, sure; we'd both come away with something learned, and some changed perceptions.

But this?...... it's thin, and impossible! It's not real communication, there's no real presence in front of us, the details are completely open to radical misinterpretation every step of the way. It's hollow, and dysfunctional, therefore.

That's how I see it. It is entertaining, for sure, but it never goes anywhere, for the reasons mentioned above.

So, my take on Zen Core from what I know about it so far, and can convey in words, here, with my fingers on my computer keyboard, my hope Windows 10's latest update has actually fixed something distracting me while I type:

Zen Core replaces SN synthesis, which in its turn, replaced AP synthesis (the stuff that is on V-Synth, and which used a combination of time stretching and resynthesis algorithms to manipulate samples to provide details in the structure of the microarticulations that more closely represent and expose to player control the nuances of playing particular instruments. If I had my V-Synth out at the moment I'd go over the details of, say, the AP Violin example, for starters, a simple but good one).

My understanding of SN synthesis -- and it never appealed to me enough to really care to "upgrade" Roland stuff I already have -- is that, rather than providing the end user/player with all the kinds of control over different, in essence, physical models of microarticulations particular to a specific variety of instruments were "snapshotted" into the SN engines -- read this blog here for Roland's details, such as they are:

https://www.rolandus.com/blog/2013/0...-supernatural/

So, some of the capabilities of AP synthesis, but restricted to parameters particular to the modeled instrument at hand (AP synthesis allows you to use the models for one instrument on entirely different sounds, which is cool and can lead to either really cool or really abominable results, depending on your musical tastes).

It seems like Roland has done away with SN synthesis (for now) on the new Fantoms, and focused on Zen Core instead. SN is good for emulating particular non-electronic instruments, and had some capabilities, though restricted, for synth sound modeling as well.

Zen Core is -- from what I can tell with my own ears/eyes -- focused on giving you subtler control over a variety of factors that haven't been available to the level of granularity they are now with the latest iteration of Roland's core engine (why do I feel like I'm on interview to be a technical manual writer?!UGH! Oh well.....). Go into any Partial Edit on the Fantom/Jupiter-X/MC-707, and review all the parameters for each section of the partial's architecture, oscillators, filters and modulators. Independently, for each partial, consisting of two oscillators, which can be PCM, PCM-Sync, VA, multiple filter types, etc. Then look up a level to see the architectural adjustments possible at the tone level on top of those, which is kind of a "final mix" of the partials.

Is all of this dramatically "new"? Of course not. A LOT of it has been around since 1996 and before. What's new, though, is that instead of, say, just the two eight-stage Time-Level envelopes you had before (4 time values, 4 level values), you now have such four-stage envelopes for a variety of other purposes, Pitch envelope, for example. You also have for the LFOs (2 per partial) the step modulator (16 steps) alongside the traditional LFO settings (making the LFO a little sequencer for each partial). Instead of a global velocity setting for a tone, you have all sorts of new velocity and velocity sensitivity options, at the partial level, even just for the oscillators before they hit the filters, even for the filters before they're hit by the envelopes and LFOs, I can't even remember how many velocity/sensitivity locations there are now, in partial editing.

You've got to then work your way up the architecture from there. You have per-partial EQ settings, so you can completely sculpt the tonality, per partial, of the sound you're working on. At the tone level you have one of the more sophisticated compressors I've seen built into a synth, and this is before you're getting anywhere near the FX and Multi-FX section.

All of these technical details, however, mean nothing if the end result in the sound isn't to your taste.

I think the problem for most people is that the massive suite of existing Roland patches are, at root, no matter how complex many of them may sound, relatively vanilla. If Roland had another couple of years to iterate on what they could do with all the banks of patches they've included with the new instruments, they could bring everything up to current levels of control, delicacy, subtlety and tonal shaping.

The good news is, it's all in there for you to do with, but I'm sure for many, that's a big job. For others, who're just the "oh, I throw away all the presets and make my own" folks, well.... it's still a big job, even to make just one patch.

When you think about how this kind of sound sculpting capability also goes down to the per-pad drum sound level (which is where I've been fiddling with it lately on my MC-707), with 16 sounds per drumkit, well, your work is cut out for you!

Beyond that would have to be the sit-down discussion at length, methinks.
Old 1 week ago
  #22
Lives for gear
 
syntonica's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdme_sadie View Post

What do you know about the zen core that makes it... whatever it is you feel that it is that I’m just not getting?
Zen core (that's a new music genre for the peaceful crowd! ) appears to be a shotgun wedding of Roland's traditional 4-partial patch structure with their Supernatural analog technology, making it more flexible overall. The ability to select analog-modeled waveforms instead of PCM samples and the ability to select analog-modeled filters over the usual TVFs. Roland seems to be rather tight-lipped as to what all this means in terms of which Supernatural bits got left out and how this affects polyphony since the new filters are probably CPU killers compared to the old ones.

To my ears, the analog stuff is better here than in the older Supernatural. It still can be a bit plasticky in tone, but that overall sound is more pleasing to my ears than the old, cartoonish sound the original Fantoms and FAs can have.

I'm currently of two minds regarding their SN piano. It sounds good and nobody in the audience will really notice its deficiencies, but there are things that I notice as a piano kinda person that disappoint. You mention hammer noise--if that's true, that would drive me nuts if I played one with phones on. The thing I notice is that it can sound kinda thin in the woodiness of it. The lower octaves just don't have a very rich sound to my ears, like the piano is made of MDF. And the upper ranges can sound overly strident. Admittedly, I haven't played the Roland vpiano in person, but all the comparison videos I listen to show my preferences lie more to the sampled pianos out there for overall tone, cross-fading and tail looping notwithstanding. Basically, with current workstations, there's a trade-off with either approach. Roland is more organic, but the tone is lacking; however, sampling has a better tone, but may display artifacts without using GBs upon GBs of samples.
Old 1 week ago
  #23
Lives for gear
 
grasspike's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by VennD68 View Post
The RD modelled piano is quite frankly a better piano than the Integra's SN-A one,has unlimited polyphony with control over sypathetic resonance, damping, cavity size, hammer action, individual key tuning and so on.
And since none of that is actually available on a real piano it's a neat trick in theory but in the real world when you just want something to sound like an actual grand piano it's not very useful. And if I am trying to create Ambient or other weird sounds that kind of sound like a piano but kind of not, there are a myriad of other tools for that.

When played live as part of an ensemble or band the SN Piano that's in the Integra or Jupiter 80 sounds fantastic, truth be told the one in the JV series sounds fine also, same could be said for piano sounds in a mix in the studio

For a classical solo Piano performance nothing sounds like the real deal.

What makes the RD series a joy to play live is the action of the actual keys.
Old 1 week ago
  #24
Lives for gear
 
gentleclockdivid's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by realtrance View Post
Is all of this dramatically "new"? Of course not. A LOT of it has been around since 1996 and before. What's new, though, is that instead of, say, just the two eight-stage Time-Level envelopes you had before (4 time values, 4 level values), you now have such four-stage envelopes for a variety of other purposes, Pitch envelope, for example. You also have for the LFOs (2 per partial) the step modulator (16 steps) alongside the traditional LFO settings (making the LFO a little sequencer for each partial). Instead of a global velocity setting for a tone, you have all sorts of new velocity and velocity sensitivity options, at the partial level, even just for the oscillators before they hit the filters, even for the filters before they're hit by the envelopes and LFOs, I can't even remember how many velocity/sensitivity locations there are now, in partial editing.
:
There were always time, level envelopes for pitch , amp , filter and 2 LFO'S ( with a user 16 STEPS ) per partial since the xv5080 and four indpendent modulation matrices
I have repeated this countlesss times , the basic zen structure and it's modulation is not so verry new , except for the added VA duties and a more complex step lfo ( exponential , log curves ) where on the xv it was either linear or no interpoaltion between steps
The new modulation destinations in the zen core are the added va capabilities
In the xv engine there 109 mod sources ( including midi cc's ) and 29 modulation destinations
Zen core has 11 new destinations ( 7 of which are related to v.a. )
It baffles me that hardly anyone knows their gear
Old 1 week ago
  #25
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by gentleclockdivid View Post
There were always time, level envelopes for pitch , amp , filter and 2 LFO'S ( with a user 16 STEPS ) per partial since the xv5080 and four indpendent modulation matrices
I have repeated this countlesss times , the basic zen structure and it's modulation is not so verry new , except for the added VA duties and a more complex step lfo ( exponential , log curves ) where on the xv it was either linear or no interpoaltion between steps
The new modulation destinations in the zen core are t the added va capabilities
In the xv engine there 109 mod sources ( including midi cc's ) and 29 modulation destinations
It baffles me that hardly anyone knows their gear
I recall the pitch envelope being simpler than this time, but that could just be faulty memory. Sorry.

What I don’t recall is the variety of velocity controls, but maybe I’m just misremembering those, too.
Old 1 week ago
  #26
Lives for gear
 
gentleclockdivid's Avatar
 

PItch envelope was also time/level
Attached Thumbnails
New Roland Fantom 2019 Vs Jupiter 80-1.jpg  
Old 1 week ago
  #27
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by gentleclockdivid View Post
PItch envelope was also time/level
4 of each? Oh well.
Old 1 week ago
  #28
Ok, so I get where you're coming from. Yes the Fantom does have all of that, it's not new just a different layout, and yes you're right for me what I hear is my own tastes and definitely I don't like a single one of the PCM samples that come with the unit apart from the synths because they're much more characterful than the results I've been getting from the VA. I also don't like that there's no layer control over those PCM's, you basically pick a sample and obviously can't import your own, can't have a sample per note (because you'd run out of partials/zones), and even with splits if you're aiming to make a single instrument it doesn't help because there's no pitched samples e.g. wurly c4, c5, c6 etc, just wurly pp, mf, ff etc, no control over head/sus/tail portions etc. The PCM might be a multisample set for several key ranges but it's not clear and there's no control if you want to adjust blending etc. If Roland are planning on releasing a new E-Piano or Organ and it doesn't use a new engine, but is just a new patch built using what's in there right now it's not going to sound different to what's already there.

What I'd ideally want is for each partial to contain it's own fully featured multisampler like Reason's NNXT, with all the ranges/splits etc that you would expect so I don't have to use up partials and zones for a single instrument (one of my personal peeves with the Montage approach especially as you're limited to one scene for the sequencer), and additionally delay mode options based on which of the triggers gets triggered in order to deliver a realistic hammond (which has an odd behavior as it's drawbars get triggered in a sort of semi-random order as the key goes down). But I digress, not least because I currently don't believe that Roland will add such a thing.

Anyhow, it still doesn't have supernatural instruments. I don't know if they were better, a lot of people seem to want them, so maybe the samples were better. I know that it had a bunch of midi programming stuff in it so that e.g. quick successive notes would result in realistic legato etc all that "smart" triggering stuff that isn't replicated currently, the current setup seems more geared towards synth less towards natural instruments. I still stand by the idea that if you buy a Fantom you're buying it for what it is right now. If you're in the crowd that see's it as currently incomplete then you'd be foolish if you were buying it based on a future that Roland themselves haven't talked about.
Old 1 week ago
  #29
Lives for gear
 

I don’t disagree with any of that. I long ago left large multisample-based synthesis behind on keyboards, and rely principally on NI for anything like that. You’re not going to get the approach you’re looking for with the core Roland PCM samples, it’s true, especially for instruments that need each note sampled at multiple levels, from ppp to sforzando, as we’ve discussed here before.

In the brief time I ever spent trying to multisample on my own, to the depth needed to get adequate simulation, it was such a chore that I’d rather be reading through bug reports in Basecamp than doing that, and I’d rather be out in the hot sun in Phoenix in August breaking rocks than either of those.

Is Roland’s V-Piano the best modeled piano? No, I leave that honor to Pianoteq. I’d be happy if anyone licensed that for inclusion in their keyboard.

So it goes back to the beginning of my post in response: I really don’t think, given what you say, you’ll find what you’re looking for in the Fantom.

The Nord Stage and other instruments at that scale in their lineup would be better worth your time investigating. They’ve really got piano and organ emulation nailed, and I don’t think anything else touches what they do in a keyboard at present.
Old 1 week ago
  #30
I hear you and am interested in the Nord, it's piano and organ get such glowing reviews and the demos do indeed sound alright. But yeah, the hammer action keybed of the Roland seems to be better by all accounts, and from personal experience definitely better than any Fatar that I've tried (I believe the Nord has the TP40 in there).
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearslutz Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Forum Jump
Forum Jump