Just played a Roland Gaia at the store

The Moog Forum Moog Music General Topics Forum
21

Nor would it be something anyone other than Bill Gates or Steve Jobs could afford. But it would be amazing! :open_mouth:

In my case, only when it comes to Roland. I have yet to see them make something even the slightest bit interesting. Not only that, but their customer service is deplorable, they’ve discontinued support for most of their best products, and the only thing they seem to be good at is digital drum sets. :unamused: I’m sure a lot of people here feel the same way I do about Roland. Korg has some interesting gadgets out, as does Yamaha…all Roland has is the D-Beam. :laughing:

22

Oh come now… I gather you are talking about the last ten or fifteen years ? Up untill and including 1983 Roland put out some of the best synthesizers in the world. Ever. You can confirm this yourself by spending as little as $150 on an old SH1000 (or you can check it out in my video here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oeW05WmIQaE ).

The crap of today may be the gems of tomorrow. (TB-303 comes to mind…)

23

I don’t think Voltor07 would be saying that everything Roland ever produced was crap. I certainly love Roland, from my first synth SH-09 gradually I have acquired MC-202, RE-501, RE-3, DC-50, Jupiter-4, CR-78, PB-330, R-8M, CR-80, JD-800, JD-990 (possibly their last great synth). Much after the 990 wasn’t very exciting, perhaps the V-Synth. But mostly repackaging and some awful branding choices (JP-8000, SH-201, Juno-G) which ape their classic names but come nowhere near the class of the originals.

Either this is a company who have lost their way and will just carry on down this road or they are about to pull an amazing cat out of the bag that will stun us all. Sadly I don’t think it will be the latter.

24

Mr Arkadin, you are correct. If I was to buy anything with the Roland name it would be a Juno 60 or something. I’d never invest in a new Roland product. The Jupiter 4 was an amazing synth, but the new stuff is absolute garbage. The V-synth was possibly the best in the “new” Roland lineup, but they no longer support those. Bastards. :laughing:

25

Do you do any research at all before you type stuff?

Or do you type only for the purpose of making yourself “laugh out loud”?

http://www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/VSynthGT

http://www.rolandus.com/products/productdetails.php?ProductId=847&ParentId=83

26

I don’t think its accurate to say that new Roland stuff is garbage. In fact that I think that is totally off base. I think its more accurate to say that ROland might not make anything that appeals to you, but too much of their stuff is great to just dismiss it.

Examples: They revolutionized electronic drums. Noone will diss on their 909. THeir amps are great (the JC, KC, their cube 30 bass amps are fantastic), their Fantom G8 is a fantastic digital workstation. You mess around with a Fantom and then go watch some commercials and you will see that your doodlings with their samples are on the same calibre as in world class studios. The Ivory Feel keys feel exactly like my pop’s brand new Hamilton grand.

I don’t particularly like the infinite juno series synths, and the D Beam just does not respond to your hand and affect pitches like it’s inventor wants us to believe that it does. Im dissapointed that they discontinued their VS studio line.

But to say they make garbage is not necessarily called for.


Getting back to the topic, I think that some people here have a problem when products are represented to be something they arent:

Now I want to be clear that I think that the demos that Dan provided us with were great. He covered about every classic synth sound from every classic rock song and then some. TO a producer, the GAIA may just be the answer that he is looking for for great synth sounds and more. I haen’t seen a GAIA in person so I can’t attest to the build quality and I haven’t heard one in person, but I can easily say that when we compare it to out $3k Moogs then yeah it may seem increadibly lacking. I just don’t think that total dismissal of any type of tool is appropriate.

My philosophy is “If it works, it works”.

Dan,
Im not trying to disrespect you by posting that pic either, this is just for the sake of legit discussion.

Eric

27

Hi Eric,

One of the problems with “sound bites” is that they’re trimmed
and isolated by multiple people to fit a specific word count or
picture size.

Although I no longer have the original text that this was gleaned
from, the point I was making is that the Phrase Recorder lets you
record pass-after-pass of realtime knob turns. (There may be an
ultimate limit of how many knob and slider motions you can
overdub, but I have yet to overload it; and I’ve pushed it hard!)

The resulting sonic complexity of many, many parameters all moving
in different amounts, at different rates, and in different directions,
is something you typically can only do if you can manually connect
any desired number of modulation sources to any arbitrary parameters.
This is my understanding of the word “modular”.

I suspect that you may be interpreting “modular” to necessarily imply
that something is “analog”, but there are plenty of digital synthesis
tools that are also “modular”. (The Nord Modular series was exquisite
in its modularity.)

Does that clear it up at all?

28

OK I’ve done a little Roland hating myself, but perhaps the thing I hate is that the new Roland products could be so much better with just a bit more attention to detail. The Virus filter is fantastic, come on Roland make yours more musical. It could be done but they never care. As long as the keyboard does the sounds which are commercially successful, Roland call it a marketing success. Its the limited vision of the new plastic synths which annoy me. There’s no room for experimentation and freedom of sound like an analog (especially modular) can do. Would it kill sales if they also did a wide range of great filters, fast envelopes and designed them to do quality audio range FM, RM and AM? The CPU power is there, the vision is not.

29

The CPU power is there in the 50-note, 3-octave Virus
because it’s $2,995.00. That’s exactly 500% of the price
of a 64-note, 3-octave GAIA.

You HAVE to figure that in when making comparisons.
I get that you’re not someone who would ever be satisfied
with a $599 polyphonic synth.

But all these negative comments are poison to people
who want to get into polyphonic synthesis with lots of
knobs and sliders. They trust your opinions.

If you need to make helpful comments, how about
something like:

“If I needed to buy a polyphonic synth with controls
for every parameter and it had to be in the price range
of $500 - $700, I’d go with the XXXXXX instead because…”

And then they can weigh the importance of your needs
against theirs to make a decision.

But, in a sense, all these comments tell newcomers:

“Don’t even bother trying to enjoy polyphonic synthesis
unless you can pony up three grand or more. If you want
to play synth chords live on stage you should just buy a
mono synth and arpeggiate quickly into reverb to get
your polyphony.”

It also tells companies, "Don’t even try to make affordable
versions. If you do, we’ll make sure that the world knows
how much better the expensive equipment is. Only the well
off should have access.

When the owners of more affordable equipment start
learning what’s important to them, they’ll move upwards
into the gear that you love when it’s feasible for them.

30

That is a really good point Dan. In the context of a moog forum for people who spend thousands to play a single note, perhaps advice on here isn’t appropriate for most people :smiley: Pricepoint is one issue but then where is the Roland high end synth which does offer Virus like sound quality? Hint: no the Vsynth family is not near to that quality.

I can’t help but think that the extra quality is in the code. I’m not sure that 1/5 of the price of a Virus means you can only have 1/5 of the quality. It’s code not chips which makes the difference.

Thanks for your beautifully worded post.

31

You are probably right. The whole thing has become a bit quixotic.

The funny thing is that the flak is nearly the same when I’m defending
the value of Moog gear in other forums. It’s probably a good time to bail.

32

Dan,
I am fortunate that I come from a musical family. I didn’t really have a choice as to what would become of me. I also worked in retail for several years (some of that time was selling musical instruments, some of that time was also selling bongs and sextoys in a cd shop but I digress) most of that time was corporate retail grocery stores, so you are talking to someone who has a passion for music AND a strong desire to help people find the tools they need to make the best music. I can tell that you love what you do by the way that you present yourself and I have a lot of respect for that and the knowledge that you can bring to this forum. I hope you don’t feel pressured to leave us because of petty internet BS.

I guess you are finding yourself in between both extremes (forums) where no matter what you get shat upon.


As far as your response to me….

Im actually glad that you described modular in that context. That sheds some light on the unit. It would have been great for that to be communicated in the catalog. Im fully aware of digital modules. My understanding of the word modular is referring to a customizable and interchangeable components that together function as a system. (Modular stereos from the 80s and 90s, modular homes modular furniture, etc) When i posted that quote from you, I was speaking to the points of some of the other members, not necessarily the ones that I hold myself.

For that matter though, anything can sound like a modular synth, for if the system is big enough it can replicate all sounds, right? The freqbox sounds like a modular synth [with a simple patch] and some people here HATE the freqbox because of the way it sounds. :sunglasses:

The only company that is listening to us here is Moog (i suspect doepfer too heh), and thank BOB they aren’t corporate like other companies. Roland makes stuff that sells to the broadest market they can, while Moog’s is more esoteric. So I can see why you are getting flack from people on other forums about how Moog is all overrated and getting flack here about how crappy digital filters and $600 polyphony. Some of us here expect the Moog poly to cost thousands and be as big as a house, and some are saving for that very synth.


You seem like a very strong minded person, very firm in your beliefs. I respect that. I appreciate your devotion to products that you really think can benefit people, from one salesman to another.

Again, I hope that you stick around cause you have a lot of valuable knowledge that is highly appreciated, though at times may seem like it isn’t.

You and I have argued about the D-Beam before, and while we disagree, I still look forward to your posts here.

I did think you were a little harsh on Voltor though lol.

Respectfully
Eric

33

Don’t go Dan, this is one of the best threads. No one is bashing you. We’ve all gone out on a limb and defended a position then wished we hadn’t :sunglasses:

Its OK to dislike an instrument (bagpipes anyone) as long as there is a reason why you feel that way. Its easy to own a Moog and feel superior, although I personally feel glad I can have something I wanted as teenager. The fact that I could have bought a new car back then or a second hand one now isn’t part of it. The fact that a bunch of cold circuits is arranged in a musical way is why I like the Voyager. If I did get my hands on a Gaia I am sure I would have fun finding out how it works, although it is so similar to all the other digital gear I have that I don’t really need it. I guess the question really should be: if you didn’t have any digital synths, how bad would you want a Gaia?

34

Well I wasn’t really bashing Roland as such, but I justed wanted to make the point that they have changed direction as a company, otherwise given my long list of Roland kit I own I would naturally still be buying Roland kit. Obviously they have a bigger target than people like me as they shift units, but that seems to be the problem. OK every company wants to sell their products, but a company with such a huge range of products cannot produce one piece of kit that I’m really interested in buying? Just one piece?

And no, I wouldn’t say Roland kit is garbage, it’s still usually made well, but musically the just miss the mark for me where they once used to hit the bullseye.

35

Dan, please don’t go. You are a great resource for all things synth! I think we can all agree to disagree on certain products put out by various companies, but it all comes down to synthesizers in the end. Everyone here shares one thing in common: a love for synthesizers. Mostly analog, but numerous people here also own digital synths or (dare I say it) software synths. That is the one thing we all have in common. We all like creating sounds. We all have our opinions on the best way to do that, affordably or expensively…but it all comes down to synthesis in the end. :slight_smile:

36

On the notion of Roland aiming at bigger targets than you or me, I was surprised to find out about

this

  • which while not a synth, would seem to appeal to a very limited market. I bet it’s not cheap either!
37

Re Howard Jones’ post above -

There’s a niche market for period instruments - harpsichord, some kinds of organ, etc, with A=415 tuning and so forth.

Roland instruments are well regarded in that area.

38

Yeah, if you look at their old catalogues they always had digital harpsichords very early on - 1989-ish? onwards. They also have that weird German/Austrian market of V-Accordions.

39

While digging the depths here, I thought I’d put in a few words.

As a music listener, I’ve always had an active interest in electronic music, but only recently has it truly affected me enough to want to create my own music. Unfortunately, this ‘recession’ has quite left me in the dumps, and to afford a polyphonic analog synth is far beyond my budget. At least one with the kind of expandable options that I’d need, like more than 3 arpeggiators, and MIDI. I’ve been bouncing back and forth about what to get, a Juno 6/60/106 to the GAIA, to everything in between the prices of $300 and $800. To make this absolutely clear, if I could afford something polyphonic, truly analog with excellent filters and 3 LFOs, as well as dedicated controls for each, I would get it. There is no question in my mind that anything the GAIA can output will pale in comparison to a truly analog setup.

What the GAIA does offer me, as a ‘thrifty’ consumer, is essentially something to start with, then perhaps toss $800 somewhere down the line and get a Slim Phatty, and the GAIA becomes basically a gigantic MIDI controller with dedicated knobs and sliders. A MIDI controller that expansive already costs about 1/3rd or more of a GAIA. Add in the really steppy and comparatively dull oscillators, a ‘passable’ filter, and the ability to stack 3 separate tones for actually quite good sounding pad sounds, and it seems worth it.

If I had a choice, or didn’t want to start making music until 2012, Voyager or Jupiter 8, no doubt. I kind of don’t have a choice. And hey, if it really just sucks, I’ll use what I sell it for towards something better :wink:

40

An interesting point of view. There are some excellent points here, especially since it can be used as a reasonably priced MIDI controller with a sound engine…hmm…and, yes, it is polyphonic…but it will depreciate faster than a Moog, as digital synths grow obsolete by the minute. The Gaia is not something I would buy, but I do now appreciate that there is a market for it. :slight_smile: