Roland SH01

[Jabberwalky]

I'd certainly try it out once it's been out for 5 years and costs under $200. Those presets are puke

[Ashe37]

most of the presets are rather thin implementations of Jupiter and Juno type sounds. The "Juno strings" type preset (88 iirc) sounds really good, but uses 3 oscillators to product the sound of a 1 osc Juno

[StepLogik]

"It REALLY reminds me of a Jupiter-8!"

[loungedumore]

Were is this " the waveforms are sampled loops " talk coming from ? As far as I know and that's info according to rolands page : h[url]ttp://www.rolandus.com/products/productdetail ... uctId=1074#[/url] Is that the synth engine is all dsp the only PCM is the GM section . I mean that could be wrong or a lie and I missed were the whistle got blown ?
Now that all said I agree ... horribly over priced .
Other than that were they missed out on this synth is not having a user definable unison voice count with detune and not making it at least 4 parts multitimbral I mean it is 64 voices ! Also a simple few drum maps of pcm's instead of the GM mode would have helped sell it a bit more .

[Ashe37]

I dont know where the sampled waveform thing is coming from, I just know what i got from messing with it for an hour.

[Primal Drive]

Ok, my local Best Buy put one on display today...
The sound engine sounds like a glorified 3-osc version of the SH-201

It would be nice for learning synthesis on, but not worth the price that is on it.

That's a buzzkill. Like I stated in my drunken rant I really don't like the sound of the SH201. If it does sound the same I don't think just adding a third "tone" will improve it much. This is too bad because I like the idea of being able to play three separate synths polyphonically.

Still, I'll wait until I can play one before I make my final decision.

I dont know where the sampled waveform thing is coming from, I just know what i got from messing with it for an hour.

I think the sampled waveform rumor comes from the fact that it can only use sync in mono mode like the SH32. This is really odd, since I've recently read and heard that it's synth engine is completely dsp. If my MS2K and AN1x can play sync in poly mode why can't Roland VAs do the same (does the JP80XX do this)?

[meatballfulton]

I'd certainly try it out once it's been out for 5 years and costs under $200

I'll try it out once it's in the store

I agree ... horribly over priced

How cheap would not be overpriced? It's only $100 more than the SH201 and in the same ballpark as Korg's R2, Novation X-Station and way cheaper than a Nord 2X, Korg Radias, Access Virus...

[Electroluver]

Roland had a chance to do something really cool with this synth. Instead it looks like they went for the quick buck and re-designed the SH-201 with a few more bells and whistles.
If they had only implemented a real analog filter and added a drum machine, they might have a success.
It's really sad that Roland is constantly opting for cheapo digital technology.

[Primal Drive]

I got a chance to play this synth for an hour last Saturday. IMHO it's a re-configured, repackaged SH201 (it doesn't come close to sounding like an SH32).

That's really a shame because I was able to set up some complex patches, yet I couldn't get away from it's thin sound. And the aliasing was ridiculous considering it's being made in 2010.

I'm passing on this one.

[nSCOURGE]

Were is this " the waveforms are sampled loops " talk coming from ?

From its obvious architectural similarities to the SH-32.

As far as I know and that's info according to rolands page : h[url]ttp://www.rolandus.com/products/productdetail ... uctId=1074#[/url] Is that the synth engine is all dsp the only PCM is the GM section .

What frequently gets lost in the 'ROMpler' epithets directed against both the SH-01 and the SH-32, is the distinction between Sampled PCM waveforms ala 'ROMplers', and wavetable scanning synthesis techniques(ala SH-32 'Wave Acceleration').

So, these are not 'sampled loops' in the sense of a conventional PCM approach(except in the obvious cases of PCM samples - like with drums samples, etc.) - they are a single cycle implementation(ergo, a degenerate case of 'VA').

Alot of enthusiasts seem quick to condemn Roland stuff on the *sole basis* that it is not analog.

But, in my opinion, it would be foolish of Roland to invest resources in trying to carve out a niche in a competitive, over-crowded(there's *way* more analog synths in circulation than ever before) boutique market.

Besides, what makes anyone assume Roland could ever vindicate their analog heritage?

Roland is a *very* different company from all those decades ago, with a *necessarily* different slant in priorities.

We can't go back again.

But, taken from someone who *prefers* digital to analog(*GASP*), I would suggest that the prospect of the GAIA being c**p has little to do with whether it is analog or digital.

[nSCOURGE]

most of the presets are rather thin implementations of Jupiter and Juno type sounds. The "Juno strings" type preset (88 iirc) sounds really good, but uses 3 oscillators to product the sound of a 1 osc Juno

Which is more or less what we should expect, given that what we are really trying to emulate in the case of the Juno, is the sound of the chorus.

[nSCOURGE]

I stand by my comment on the stupidity of discussing the imagined merits of products which aren't even in production yet though. Roland themselves say "specifications subject to change" cause they're that early on in the process of making this, so how is it that people already have opinions that are so fully formed that they can argue about it on the internet?

Perhaps it is justified skepticism in that Roland's MO has become as predictable as the tide.

[nSCOURGE]

I got a chance to play this synth for an hour last Saturday. IMHO it's a re-configured, repackaged SH201 (it doesn't come close to sounding like an SH32).

Care to elaborate on some of the characteristic differences you observed in your rather brief audition(esp with respect to oscillators, filter, envelope behavior, sync/PWM emulation, FX quality)?

[SamSamba]

It's really sad that Roland is constantly opting for cheapo digital technology.

Alot of enthusiasts seem quick to condemn Roland stuff on the *sole basis* that it is not analog.

But, in my opinion, it would be foolish of Roland to invest resources in trying to carve out a niche in a competitive, over-crowded(there's *way* more analog synths in circulation than ever before) boutique market.

Besides, what makes anyone assume Roland could ever vindicate their analog heritage?

Roland is a *very* different company from all those decades ago, with a *necessarily* different slant in priorities.

My thoughts precisely. Keeping the "enthusiast", analog "niche market" (literally) satisfied isn't in the cards for Roland Japan these days. It's pretty clear what the company's direction and mindset is set on (in the synth market): in addition to the flagship workstation (Fantom) for the pro and semi-pro, it's the battery-powered amps and Junos for the "everyman".

Then again - you could argue, if attempting to do something like the GAIA SH01, why not "do it right"? The answer probably is, it's more cost effective to do it like this. And again, the SH201 was already a synth that was heavily marketed towards the beginner, with a "tired of presets? learn how to program your own sounds" angle.

And then again - for instance Korg DID do something unexpected in releasing that MonoTron gadget.

[Doooooooom]

You know what else sucks : D-beam. Not even Roland demo-ers seem to know what to do with it. It's like a glorified on/off switch. You just wave your hand over it looking like a nob. (thats d**k for americans)

Having said that, their new stereo keyboard amps are great, so they do make some good products.