Roland should reissue the

[Stab Frenzy]

Stab, I'm amazed that you of all people are actively promulgating this completely beaten-to-death topic.

I take the blame for the deceptive thread title; it seems that people are reading it, expecting the thread to be another one of those threads and then replying without reading anything.

If I'd called it "Why do people want Roland to reissue the synths that are already easy to find examples/equivalents of and not the stuff that's actually rare/more interesting?" maybe there would be less people going 'hurrrrr Juno with midi it's so phat'.

From what I've seen of these "clones" they don't use the same voice chips as the originals...

I doubt very much that the thousands of people aren't buying the System X stuff is because they look into it all, love the sound and are just about to pull the trigger when they realise the differential pair in the oscillator has been replaced by two sides of a CA3046. I think it's more to do with the fact that the people who've heard of it are into Euro, and doing an all System 100m system in Euro would be a little dull when there's so much else out there to add to it. Or maybe people just want it to say Roland on it like people do with the x0xb0x.

[Automatic Gainsay]

I may have answered this differently a long time ago.

A long time ago, I would have been shouting SH-1000! Jupiter 4! Etc.

But I have to say: The point of reissue is when you have something that is truly distinctive, incomparable, and historically iconic. I know a lot of people would dive for the Junos in response to this... but those people don't remember that the Junos were really cheap budget synths, and there were much better non-DCO polysynths when they came out. If your favorite band was using a Juno back in the day... well, they must not have had very good sales at that point. Yes, I know the bands that used Junos. Still. The Junos are horribly simple, and while they do have a distinctive sound, it is a very limited sound.

And I'm realizing I kind of feel that way about most Rolands. Which is weird, because Roland used to be... ::ahem:: my favorite brand of synth.

If they reissued the Jupiters... I mean, come on... who could afford them? They'd have to cut corners, and then it wouldn't be a reissue.

All of that being said, I really think the SH-5 or SH-7 would be the most interesting choices. They have a few neat things going on in them. But still, since there isn't some band from the 70s, 80s, or now that makes the people who buy synths to sound like the band they like that used these synths, it'll probably never happen.

[synthroom]

It's really some Apple computer style hubris that they do not exploit that.

My gawd, you're right! Apple should reissue some vintage computers. There's a huge amount of interest in vintage computing. The should make them with modern CPUs, but have a mode where you can strip all those gigs of ram and hertz away and force it into 8-bit, 1 MHz, 8k ram mode - for the purists, you know.

But which one, the Apple I, the Apple II, or the IIe? I know, the GS. Wait, no, the original Mac. No, pick the one that no one has ever even used - the Lisa! That's it, The Lisa II is what they could call it. (I saw a Lisa demoed when I was at Reed College in the spring of 1983. And i had the chance to buy one for something like $8000 at that time.)

Anyway, I do think Roland could make a killing with a true recreation of the Jupiter 8, with more memory, more voices (how about 16 for splits of 8 one each side), full sized, and all the modern midi niceties missing from the original.

[muhammed]

why do roland,korg and moog have their synths manufactured in china ? İf chinese can manufacure xbox 360 ,they can manufacture analog synths rgiht ?

[volumetrik]

you would think he would learn his lesson about being a douche by now lol

Whatever helps you sleep at night c**t

[phesago]

you would think he would learn his lesson about being a douche by now lol

Whatever helps you sleep at night c**t

Aw you cant take being teased? It's not like you werent the one who was being an asshole to someone else for no reason. I mean, if you really want me to, I can dig through a lot fo your posts where you're being a prick. So please, excuse me if I want to back up someone else saying something about the quality of your posts.

[Hybrid88]

^ Well that's constructive, lets not have a playfight folks.

..If they reissued the Jupiters... I mean, come on... who could afford them? They'd have to cut corners, and then it wouldn't be a reissue.

But is that more because us synth guys are tight buggers that are used to getting stuff as cheap as possible? I mean think about it, if the industry has been used to cutting corners and selling well as a result (I'm thinking MicroKorg) then perhaps we're just really lucky to have what we have at the price we can get it.

From all reports the originals (like the JP8, CS-80) relative to other things like cars at the time were really quite insanely expensive even then. Well they were the flagships, the top of the line, the best the company made.

Put simply without cost cutting measures I really don't think a synth of the quality of the JP8 could be made cheaply. Now or then.

That said I think the advancement of new technology such as SMD and vastly cheaper digital solutions would be a great move that wouldn't lose much from the original whilst bringing many positive advantages to the table - including being more cost effective.

[Sir Ruff]

whatever c**t helps you sleep at night

It sure helps me!

[Kenneth]

you would think he would learn his lesson about being a douche by now lol

Whatever helps you sleep at night c**t

Well that escalated quickly

[gslug]

whatever c**t helps you sleep at night

Ouch.

[analoglsd]

My favorite Roland is the SH-2000, but I don't want to see a reissue of it.
There's no f**k way that they could reproduce what I love about it.
They could approximate it, but it wouldn't even be close. (and it would be a waste of their time and money)
I also love the SH-101/MC-202, Juno-6/60, and System 100, but there again, if they reissued them, you know that there would be a modern rigidness there that would negate the whole point of why you would want it in the first place.
As far as the Jupiter's go, they have to be the most over-rated synths in existence, IMO.
There has not been one Jupiter, 4, 6, or 8, that I wasn't completely underwhelmed by.
Partially because of their reputation as being end-all, be-all synths.
Same goes for the SH-5 and 7. (they just don't sound as good as the SH-1/2, System 100, IMO)
Honestly, if they were to reissue something, I would think that they would have the best luck approximating the sound of the Jupiter 6 or 8 since they're both relatively 'modern' sounding.
I'm not saying that they're bad synths, I don't think that. It's just that in a polysynth, I prefer something more robust like the CS-50/60.
That being said, some musical pieces just call for a tighter sound, and that's when I'd go for the JP8.

As far as 808-909-303's go, that's been done by so many other manufacturers, that there's no point, but that's already been covered in this discussion.

Roland, please don't reissue anything.
Make a new, killer analog poly that rivals the Jupiter 6 for 2K or under, and you'll be on my radar again. (not that you should give a s**t about my radar)
If Dave Smith can do it for 3K with his limited resources, you can do it for 2K.
Love,
-LSD

[Swayze]

I don't think they should reissue anything because I've already been dissapointed enough by their current Juno and Jupiter lines. With the exception of the V-synth, they don't seem to be putting much thought into designing truly groundbreaking gear in the synthesis department. They've developed some novel features like D-beam, definitely usable and fun to mess around with i guess, but nothing really exciting. They aren't catering at all to vintage analog purists, for the very obvious reason that they can't turn a large enough profit that way.

It's sad but to me Roland pretty much sold out some time ago. They did well designing the V-synth. Besides that, they seem perfectly content selling boring/overpriced digital synths with familiar names to inexperienced/uneducated patrons that frequent guitar center. What I'd like to see from Roland is something new. Perhaps an analog/digital hybrid with a dual vco mono section and a digital poly section with analog filters. They could save a little on cost that way without sacrificing tone. Throw in a ton of digital fx and modulation routings. Is that to much to ask? Apparently not cause Dave Smith is already doing it or at least something very similar, and I would imagine that his budget is considerabley less.

[meatballfulton]

to me Roland pretty much sold out some time ago

An international corporation is "selling out" by definition, making gobs of money is their whole purpose

[Swayze]

to me Roland pretty much sold out some time ago

An international corporation is "selling out" by definition, making gobs of money is their whole purpose

Of course, everyone knows that. But at least the size of their corporation actually contributed to a lot of great gear in the past. Something small synth manufacturers have a tough time doing with much smaller budgets and fewer resources. Can you build a Jupiter 8 out of your basement? My point is, Roland definitely lost sight of what's important. They have been a major player in the synth game for years yet look how little they have to show for it these days.

[meatballfulton]

My point is, Roland definitely lost sight of what's important.

You left out the "in my humble opinion"

So what is important?

I never thought of Roland as an innovator. Let's see: The first arpeggiator built into a synthesizer. Creating MIDI with Dave Smith. The D50 merged sample playback with digital synthesis in a single engine. Guitar synthesizers that actually worked That's really about it.

The highly prized (today) Roland analogs simply followed in the footsteps of Moog, ARP, Oberheim and Sequential. The reason Roland, Korg and Yamaha survived when the others tanked is aggressive pricing and embracing digital technology.