Vintage Synth Explorer Forums

I would be really surprised if the keyboard is indeed monophonic, but ... well ... stranger things have happened ...

I'm wondering if the drum machine will have effects on it - would be odd as well if it didn't.

Automatic Gainsay wrote:
Roland has created some new products using a new technology, and they're going to be releasing them soon. Okay, that's awesome. So, why all of this hinting about them doing the thing that a lot of people wanted them to do... when they're also saying that's not what they did? Why all the talk of analog technology when analog technology... the thing that a lot of people want from them... isn't what they're doing? Why, after all of the constant begging for analog remakes of their previous products are they excitedly telling us that they're making non-analog-non-remake versions of their previous products that are BETTER? It's such a mess of mixed messages.

I suppose rather than giving us a demonstration of the sounds (which have already been emulated fairly accurately elsewhere both digitally and by analog), Roland wants us to understand that the original analog circuits of these machines is what made them special and they don't want to half-a*s anything but instead give the most accurate digital recreation rather than "moving backwards" by re-releasing classic gear.

Other than us nerdy, synth guys, no one listening to EDM knows if they're listening to a sample, a VST or the real analog gear. Even on compressed audio from YouTube videos, it's hard to tell if it's real or Memorex (young 'uns will have to look that one up). So Roland IS LISTENING (sort of) to the wants and needs of today's musicians. So instead of saying, here's our new 808 & 303 emulators, here's what they do and what they sound like, they are letting us know WHY they will sound like the original machines.

Regarding the keyboard, since they're calling it "System 1", I suppose it'll be a mono synth based on the System 100 (Human League, anyone?)

I doubt it's a System 100 modeller. The keyboard looks to have 2 oscs, mixer, modulation, filter w/ADSR, amp w/ADSR. I can't make out all the legends along the top, but that's what I *can* see.

Perhaps the "System 1" comes from that being the center of the Aira system?

Z wrote:Other than us nerdy, synth guys, no one listening to EDM knows if they're listening to a sample, a VST or the real analog gear. Even on compressed audio from YouTube videos, it's hard to tell if it's real or Memorex (young 'uns will have to look that one up). So Roland IS LISTENING (sort of) to the wants and needs of today's musicians.

It still doesn't make sense, because "nerdy synth guys" (i.e. anyone who knows and cares about the difference) are the only people who would care about a "remake" in the first place. People who don't care about the difference are just going to use samples or one of the eleven million emulations out there.

In the future, digital will probably be able to mimic analog to the point that users wouldn't be able to tell the difference. Along the way there will be a bunch of technologies that don't quite overcome the uncanny valley. I guess it would be analogous to the development of CGI, which is much better now than it was 20 years ago, but still not completely there. The new AIRA line is probably one of those attempts.

I doubt it will be a fully convincing emulation, but that's to be expected. It's all good.

Except I really don't understand why or how a digital emulation of analog is preferable. I mean, what advantage is there of modelling analog circuits right down to the individual components? Obviously the cost of mass producing a digital emulation would be far less than that of mass producing an analog synth with analog components, but surely the cost of R&D into a brand new technology which is trying to emulate an already existing technology is a daft use of money in itself. And digital technology seems to become obsolete pretty quickly, whereas analog seems to stand the test of time.

I guess I just don't understand the point of developing a technology that's only function is to emulate a currently existing, perfectly good technology. And I really don't understand the target market for these products. There's so many alternatives, be they clones, sample libraries or VSTs. And the marketing seems to be all over the place.

The appeal is that it supposedly meets the demand for reissues of classics at a lower production cost than actual reissues - only that notion has been pretty well torpedoed by the introduction of actual real analog reissues (and new gear) available at reasonable costs in the last few years, and Roland still hasn't caught on that people aren't buying into the notion that new analog must necessarily be insanely expensive anymore.

Honestly, there should be little reason for concern whether it's an emulation or analogue.

When it all comes down to it, you're making music. If you're that caught up in how the music is generated, I'd say you're likely concerned with the wrong things. It's a shame that people can't get past some supposed inferiority of a digital machine; I often struggle to see how being an analogue purist would enhance ones output. That whole argument is a complete non sequitur in my opinion.

I say instead we see what fleshes out with this new offering and judge it on reasonable metrics like "does it produce interesting sounds?" and "is the interface such that it inspires?", versus "aw, it's digital, therefore it must be shite".

I'm certainly no Roland cheerleader, but I personally prefer to audition a machine first hand irregardless of underlying architecture and judge based on metrics that actually relate to producing music.

The interesting thing would be if they were to allow these machines the capability to utilise the 'circuit modelling' technology to produce new and complex synth structures.

But yeah, if they are limited to emulating an 808/909 etc, then it's a bit boring in that respect and wouldn't really please a lot of people.

Plus, yeah, the marketing for these things seems weak and unfocused. However, its got us talking, and has caught the attention of a lot of crowds that wouldn't have cared three years ago (for better or worse).

kuroichi wrote:The interesting thing would be if they were to allow these machines the capability to utilise the 'circuit modelling' technology to produce new and complex synth structures.

But yeah, if they are limited to emulating an 808/909 etc, then it's a bit boring in that respect and wouldn't really please a lot of people.

+1. If these are "only" capable of 808/909/303, they're not for me. If you can load them with new, interesting models, perhaps being able to design your own, then I'm all in. This is what I've been hoping for, and the reason I was happy when I first learned these weren't analog.

kuroichi wrote:The interesting thing would be if they were to allow these machines the capability to utilise the 'circuit modelling' technology to produce new and complex synth structures.

Exactly! That's the impression I got from the video: it looks like when they're studying and recreating the 303 with digital technology, that they're using it as an exercise to: 1. cash in on the old stuff some more, but 2. to trickle the technology down to future products. Sort of like honing your painting skills on a still life in preparation for painting something more original? Or h**l, maybe it's just to have the best sounding work station later on! who knows. They certainly look like expanded instruments based on the classics rather than new VA remakes. I usually don't have GAS for new stuff, but if the tb-3 is anything like what I think it is, it might have to come take a seat next to its grandpa

commodorejohn wrote:The appeal is that it supposedly meets the demand for reissues of classics at a lower production cost than actual reissues - only that notion has been pretty well torpedoed by the introduction of actual real analog reissues (and new gear) available at reasonable costs in the last few years, and Roland still hasn't caught on that people aren't buying into the notion that new analog must necessarily be insanely expensive anymore.

But if the costs are REALLY low-- under 300 or so?-- and they sound good, they could be really cool. Pretend you don't know the difference of analog and digital-- if this thing fit your budget and sounded good and had a great interface, it just doesn't matter what it's "supposed to be" or taking place of.

But I'm skeptical if they can deliver such value cheap enough. If they can't, it'll look bad next to the Volcas.

The word going round is that they're going to be surprisingly cheap, this info came from Roland themselves though so it remains to be seen if we're talking 'surprisingly cheap compared to a tempest' or 'surprisingly cheap compared to an electribe'.

Kidney05 wrote:

commodorejohn wrote:The appeal is that it supposedly meets the demand for reissues of classics at a lower production cost than actual reissues - only that notion has been pretty well torpedoed by the introduction of actual real analog reissues (and new gear) available at reasonable costs in the last few years, and Roland still hasn't caught on that people aren't buying into the notion that new analog must necessarily be insanely expensive anymore.

But if the costs are REALLY low-- under 300 or so?-- and they sound good, they could be really cool. Pretend you don't know the difference of analog and digital-- if this thing fit your budget and sounded good and had a great interface, it just doesn't matter what it's "supposed to be" or taking place of.

But I'm skeptical if they can deliver such value cheap enough. If they can't, it'll look bad next to the Volcas.

I doubt of it excepting maybe the voice transformer will be under 300.

Z wrote:
Regarding the keyboard, since they're calling it "System 1", I suppose it'll be a mono synth based on the System 100 (Human League, anyone?)

Crossed my mind that it was based off the System 100 but I thought I saw a SH-101 in an early clip.