From: Randomizer@cup.portal.com (Aron Fingers Nelson) Subject: Re: Roland JD-800 -- BEAUTIFUL! Date: Thu, 21 Jan 93 02:24:56 PST Inspiring instrument. It is one of the last of the ANALOG machines that incorporates the best of the DIGITAL DOMAIN. Hmmm. Actually the JD-800 is purely Digital and not at all analog. There are _sampled_ analog waveforms in there. >It's an incredibly rich synth with full, fat bass, yet also truly sparkling highs. This is true. The sound is good. >Although it does have sampled acoustic sounds in ROM, it is WAY MORE than any of the "sample players" (such as the D70, JV80, Proteus, etc). It's a completely different animal! Actually it is very much like a D-70 or JV-80, it is a sample playback machine more than anything else. It does not have the ability to generate new waveform s by using any process like waveshaping. The big plus of the JD-800 is the effects. It has true multi-effects where the D-70, JV-80 or Proteus do not. The best the D-70 or JV-80 can do is reverb/de lay or chorus/flanger. Now the JD-990 is something else..... Aron_Nelson@cup.portal.com From: cubase@cs.tut.fi (Pekka Martikainen) Subject: Re: Roland JD-800 -- BEAUTIFUL! Date: 21 Jan 93 13:47:28 In article <74062@cup.portal.com> Randomizer@cup.portal.com (Aron Fingers Nelson) writes: > >It's an incredibly rich synth with full, fat bass, yet also truly > sparkling highs. > This is true. The sound is good. Or is it? If JD-800 has "an incredibly rich" sound, how do you describe the sound of Oberheim OB-X? or Minimoog? JD-800 sounds dull and digital compared to the real things. The richness of the sound comes from an exciter, not >from filters or oscillators, as in true analog synths. I like JD more than other usual digital stuff, but it can't compete with analog synths or K2000. > Aron_Nelson@cup.portal.com Pekka Martikainen From: ross-c@scs.leeds.ac.uk Subject: Re: Roland JD-800 -- BEAUTIFUL! Date: Fri, 22 Jan 93 14:53:47 GMT >This machine is truly beautiful. It is basically the D50 of the 1990's. >I can touch a single note, and begin composing from there. It is an extremely >inspiring instrument. It is one of the last of the ANALOG machines that >incorporates the best of the DIGITAL DOMAIN. It is 5-way multi-timbral plus While I agree the JD800 sounds fantastic in single patch mode; (1) I think the voice architecture is 100% digital. (2) When you change to multi-timbral mode, you lose most of the effects and it doesn't sound nearly as good. Cheers, Ross-c From: skt@dcs.glasgow.ac.uk (Simon K Train) Subject: FTP sites for JD-800 ??! Date: 25 Jan 93 16:02:15 GMT Are there ANY FTP sites for JD-800 sounds/patches/PCM samples. Now that the JV-80 and JV-880 can use the same patch/wave format it seems that it's (JD-800) popularity may increase?! Simon T. From: billy@irvine.com (*** Bouncer **) Subject: Re: Roland JD-800 -- BEAUTIFUL! Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 02:04:05 GMT >I was at a music store the other day, going through the endless streams >of long release, reverby atmospheric sounds that all the new synths >seem to love, then I came across the JD-800, which *blew me away* with >great, *useable* synth sounds - that actually sound like a synth. > >Anyway, could anyone give me a brief idea of the method of synthesis >on this machine, as well as polyphony, and multi-channel support? >Also some first-hand (i.e. owners') opinions of the machine itself >would be great. > >Thanks in advance, >Charles This machine is truly beautiful. It is basically the D50 of the 1990's. I can touch a single note, and begin composing from there. It is an extremely inspiring instrument. It is one of the last of the ANALOG machines that incorporates the best of the DIGITAL DOMAIN. It is 5-way multi-timbral plus a Rhythm part. It supports importing new ROM samples through JD800/JV80/JV880 sound cards. It's an incredibly rich synth with full, fat bass, yet also truly sparkling highs. I've done sequencing on it, and recorded the output directly to DAT (bypassing a mixer completely), and the results were STUNNING! I think its 24 voice polyphonic (maybe 28?), and all of its sliders can generate MIDI data/sysex so you can actually "sequence" an edit for "organic" and changing improvised performances. Although it does have sampled acoustic sounds in ROM, it is WAY MORE than any of the "sample players" (such as the D70, JV80, Proteus, etc). It's a completely different animal! I've seen it for sale brand new at stores for about $1800. I'm not sure what mail order places are selling it for. If you don't have much analog gear, or just want an incredible and original sounding synth, then I wouldn't hesitate at all. Billy@irvine.com From: scharf@lrs.e-technik.uni-erlangen.de (Ron Scharf) Subject: Re: Roland JD-800 Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 10:02:57 GMT chuckies@cs.mcgill.ca (Charles J Savoie) writes: >I was at a music store the other day, going through the endless streams >of long release, reverby atmospheric sounds that all the new synths >seem to love, then I came across the JD-800, which *blew me away* with >great, *useable* synth sounds - that actually sound like a synth. >Anyway, could anyone give me a brief idea of the method of synthesis >on this machine, as well as polyphony, and multi-channel support? >Also some first-hand (i.e. owners') opinions of the machine itself >would be great. >Thanks in advance, >Charles Hi Charles! The JD800 uses a synthesis similar to the Roland D50, i.e. there is a bunch (>100) sampled waveforms in ROM, which serve as input to an analog-like VCO-VCF-VCA chain (I think the correct terms are WG-TVF-TVA (Waveform Generator, Time Variant Filter, Time Variant Amplifier)). The ROM PCM waves include raw synth waves (like sawtooth, sine, rectangular, pink and white noise...) and also sampled "natural" sounds (like pianos, strings, brass etc.). Note that the JD800 is *NOT* a sample player, as the samples are rather poor (IMHO). What makes the JD800 sound so great is the combination of the sampled waves *and* the TVF-TVA processing. If you ever have been using an "old" Roland synth (like Jupiter-?, Juno-* or JX-?P), you will find the synthesis principle and also the editing (from the users point of view) very similar to them. (I said "from the users point of view" --- I know that the synthesis principle is different, but that's not obvious to the user. No flames please!!!) At least I had no problem to understand what's going on in the machine (other than with my DX7 ;-). Each patch of the JD800 consists of up to four layers (don't blame me if I use the wrong terms, may also be "sounds" which consist of "voices"). The number of layers used for a patch influences the polyphony of the instrument. The JD800 is 24-voice polyphonic, but only if you use one layer of a patch. If you use all four (and many sounds do this), the polyphony is reduced to six voices at a time. There is a sort of multi mode, where you can play 4 patches simultaneously via MIDI and have also a so-called "Special"-Setup. In the special setup, you can assign a patch (or was it a layer?) to every key (which is mostly used for drum setups). Disadvantage: You can only store ONE multi setup. The JD800 also includes some masterkeyboard features. For each patch, you can set up a keyboard mode (single, split, double), split point, MIDI channels for upper and lower zone, and program change numbers (also for upper and lower zone). Hope this helps. I don't sit here with the manuals at hand, but have been recalling this from mind. If some minor details may be wrong, please excuse. Bye Ron From: cubase@cs.tut.fi (Pekka Martikainen) Subject: Re: Roland JD-800 -- BEAUTIFUL! Date: 27 Jan 93 14:25:14 The better sound of K2000 overrides the handy front panel of JD-800. You may disagree, people like different things. The panel of JD-800 is not so good as in old analog synths. You can't "see" the sound if you look the sliders. That is, of course, the problem of every synth that have memory. K2000 can produce wider range of digital/analog hybrid sounds, in my opinion. If I need only pure analog sounds, I use real stuff. Pekka Martikainen