Madahorn, I know you'll be there...but don't save, see if you can get a refund on this one before it ships....
I'm glad I've been able to help you open your eyes. That's what the purpose of this forum is. People helping people. I'm just doing my tiny 0.8% part.
FANTOM G USB MEMORY BACK-UP POSSIBLE!
-
Solitary man
- Posts: 743
- Joined: 15:44, 24 October 2006
- Location: England
Re: FANTOM G USB MEMORY BACK-UP POSSIBLE!
you'd be wise to save your hard earned cash and buy the next generation Fantom V,
As you see no display screen, arh old hat stuff. You now use the special telepathy software that comes with the synth.
1024 note poly as well.
and 3 E.S.P slots.
As you see no display screen, arh old hat stuff. You now use the special telepathy software that comes with the synth.
1024 note poly as well.
and 3 E.S.P slots.
Re: FANTOM G USB MEMORY BACK-UP POSSIBLE!
Wow...that's hilarious!:D What the hell is that??
-
Solitary man
- Posts: 743
- Joined: 15:44, 24 October 2006
- Location: England
Re: FANTOM G USB MEMORY BACK-UP POSSIBLE!
What do you mean, What the hell is that?
Its what you've always wanted.
T H E D R E A M I N G I S O V E R.
Its what you've always wanted.
T H E D R E A M I N G I S O V E R.
Re: FANTOM G USB MEMORY BACK-UP POSSIBLE!
Oh yeah...I remember now..those were the first concepts of the new model...since then they've add a lot to it...
Re: FANTOM G USB MEMORY BACK-UP POSSIBLE!
This one is subject to change also...so nothing is concrete yet...be open minded, folks....think of what could be next....
T H E D R E A M I N G I S S T I L L A L I V E.
T H E D R E A M I N G I S S T I L L A L I V E.
-
The Audacity Works
- Posts: 1012
- Joined: 19:02, 15 November 2007
- Location: Hollywood, CA
Re: FANTOM G USB MEMORY BACK-UP POSSIBLE!
Septimo:
–adjective, superl. of much or many with more as compar.
1. in the greatest quantity, amount, measure, degree, or number: to win the most votes.
The Fantom X and Fantom G share almost no specs, aside from max RAM (which is still up in the air) and polyphony. Well, and number of keys, if you call that a spec.
Probably, because by then, 4 (or 6 or 8) will meet the price point. Right now, it doesn't.they'll have 4 arx slots...
Possibly, for the same reason.256 of polyphony...
At least.a gig or more of ram
HELL no! A touch screen is completely retarded in a product with so many tracks. Navigation would be next to impossible.touch screen...
To top the 70+ bells and whistles they did add to the Fantom-G, no doubt.and a bunch of other bells and whistles they didn't add here...
most [mohst] Pronunciation KeyI think that's why most of these hardware specs stayed the same...
–adjective, superl. of much or many with more as compar.
1. in the greatest quantity, amount, measure, degree, or number: to win the most votes.
The Fantom X and Fantom G share almost no specs, aside from max RAM (which is still up in the air) and polyphony. Well, and number of keys, if you call that a spec.
Re: FANTOM G USB MEMORY BACK-UP POSSIBLE!
That DJ Jazz and Jam is what I need...
It has a microphone built in, a record scratcher thingy and an easy to read record button.
Wow!
It has a microphone built in, a record scratcher thingy and an easy to read record button.
Wow!
Re: FANTOM G USB MEMORY BACK-UP POSSIBLE!
You say hell no now to touch screen..when they add that and still mouse capable, you'll flip your oppinion. Flipah please!
You say by then it will meet the price point....of course! so it make sense to wait a while and see what Roland does with this for a couple of years...Those of you who will get the G now, thanks for being the Guinea pigs...
The specs you mention that are different are in software...The three 'most' importaint specs remain untouched...There's too much software for this hardware...You'll see that once it arrives. The excuse? "Well,,,it's not a DAW...." they shouldn't try to make it like one then...that's like saying that the S isn't a sampler because it isn't that great at it....The fact that they didn't add more to the heart of the machine suspiciously reminds me of Fantom S. where the specs of the macine remained the same, but now, with a sampler! everybody JUMPED at the S...a year later everyone is pissed...okay now we'll double the poly, double the ram, and double , the double, the double....and lets not forget that there were a lot of software additions to the X also...You never mention those of the X but you'll type a school report on the G...Cut your sh1t...you''re only seeing the G from an S point of view..when you do that....that's a HUGE difference. I need to be here to yang all over your yinging....
128 poly---and 128 traks....Hmm...hopefully your right about being more than 512 megs or you'll be in trouble going over 8 tracks. unless you record small parts...but then, you won't need 24 will you...24 bit converters? who cares? You wont hear past 22 of those bits. If you have a mixer with those converters you're in the same boat. Sounds.....the most imprtaint thing on a workstation is second or third on your list of importance. nothing new in that department...and actually downgrading if you have SRXs on your X..
You say by then it will meet the price point....of course! so it make sense to wait a while and see what Roland does with this for a couple of years...Those of you who will get the G now, thanks for being the Guinea pigs...
The specs you mention that are different are in software...The three 'most' importaint specs remain untouched...There's too much software for this hardware...You'll see that once it arrives. The excuse? "Well,,,it's not a DAW...." they shouldn't try to make it like one then...that's like saying that the S isn't a sampler because it isn't that great at it....The fact that they didn't add more to the heart of the machine suspiciously reminds me of Fantom S. where the specs of the macine remained the same, but now, with a sampler! everybody JUMPED at the S...a year later everyone is pissed...okay now we'll double the poly, double the ram, and double , the double, the double....and lets not forget that there were a lot of software additions to the X also...You never mention those of the X but you'll type a school report on the G...Cut your sh1t...you''re only seeing the G from an S point of view..when you do that....that's a HUGE difference. I need to be here to yang all over your yinging....
128 poly---and 128 traks....Hmm...hopefully your right about being more than 512 megs or you'll be in trouble going over 8 tracks. unless you record small parts...but then, you won't need 24 will you...24 bit converters? who cares? You wont hear past 22 of those bits. If you have a mixer with those converters you're in the same boat. Sounds.....the most imprtaint thing on a workstation is second or third on your list of importance. nothing new in that department...and actually downgrading if you have SRXs on your X..
-
The Audacity Works
- Posts: 1012
- Joined: 19:02, 15 November 2007
- Location: Hollywood, CA
Re: FANTOM G USB MEMORY BACK-UP POSSIBLE!
Septimo:
The Korg Tritons are WAAAAYY slower to get around than the Fantom because of their touchscreen. You can't see enough parameters on the screen at the same time because they have to be big enough to touch with fat fingers.
And the max RAM "spec" doesn't even apply anymore because of said file system. The only people who won't benefit from increased max RAM are those who will only make one song ever or those who must always have all songs available instantly.
For example, if I make an album of 12 songs, and I don't mind waiting a minute or so for each to load, my album can utilize 6.5 GB of audio—if made on the G (544 MB x 12 songs/projects). In the Fantom X, my entire album was limited to 544 MB. The file system itself improves the spec depending on how one uses it.
What does the Fantom G offer over the Fantom X?
•Eight to ONE HUNDRED TIMES the max storage (don't know yet; all evidence points to the latter)
•Possibly twice the max RAM
•Notable loading/saving speed increase (at least twice as fast)
•Notably faster boot time
•Project-based file system with project number limited only by storage
•Loading songs only loads samples for that song (if saved to dedicated project) instead of samples for all songs
•Number of user patches = 256 x number of projects
•Number of user performances = 128 x number of projects
•Number of songs = 64 x number of projects
•10-20 x the number of arpeggiator patterns
•8 x the MIDI tracks (128)
•3 x the audio tracks (24)
•2.12 x the number of simultaneous parts (34)
•4.4 x the number of simultaneous effects processors (22)
•Twice the number of Favorites (Live Setting Play) registrations
•ONE HUNDRED TIMES the tempo resolution
•Dedicated tempo/fader value display, regardless of screen mode
•WAY larger and higher resolution screen
•More visible parameters means less screen navigation
•Way more visual feedback, such as fader and knob levels
•Addition of 8 assignable faders
•Mic preamp with phantom power
•Impedance switch for optimizing input level
•USB audio interface with real-time streaming to/from computer
•No need to bounce internally, freeing up both time and precious RAM
•Relatively future-proof storage mechanism (USB key)
•All-new DSP processor chip, the first in almost ten years
•New optimized sound engine to run on said chip
•24-bit/96k converters
•New analog I/O (op amps, etc.)
•Overall, audible sound quality improvements
•Improved sample management
•Input FX processor is now dedicated, and doesn't royally screw up the sound of your parts
•Many new all new raw samples instead of only reprogramming existing ones
•Includes best-of SRX samples/patches
•All-new expansion card protocol, with the potential for new synthesis methods
•Expansion cards add both polyphony and multitimbrality, and don't eat into the existing engine at all
•First machine in almost two decades to eschew the confusing "patch vs. performance" dogma for the much simpler and more obvious Single/Live/Studio layout
•External parts are now independent with own mixer and settings
•Near-instant screen redraws on audio tracks
•Higher resolution on waveforms
•MIDI track regions display note data from main Song Edit screen
•Ten-key keypad with dedicated NUMERICS button
•Part select buttons
•Effects bypass switches
•Dedicated transpose button
•Dedicated LOOP and JUMP buttons
•Extra control pedal input
•Assignable buttons moved to above the joystick where they belong
•DAW-style graphical editing via mouse
•Scroll wheel on mouse scrolls up and down tracklist and adjusts other various parameters
•Combined CURSOR/VALUE layout more efficient
•Bend modes for choosing how the bender affects chords
•Instant switching of arp styles via pads
•Instant selection and muting of tones per patch via pads
•Dedicated track mutes via pads
•Patches sound exactly the same in Performance mode across all parts
•Perfectly seamless transitions between single patches and 8-part Layer/Split performances including effects
•Incremental keybed improvement on G6/G7 and Progressive Hammer Action II with Ivory feel keys on G8
•Dedicated FAVORITES button
•QWERTY-style patch/performance/song/sample/project naming
•OSX Spotlight-style search function
•Improved zoom and navigation functionality in sequencer
•Remembers last visited menu and submenus
•Removes superfluous buttons and streamlines workflow in numerous ways
•Fourth knob and eighth slider used for ultra-fast patch and menu scrolling
•Bookmarking screens now remembers submenus
•And last but not least, all the stuff we haven't even discovered yet, since the G isn't shipping
As a comparison, what were the differences between the Fantom-S and Fantom X?
•64 vs. 128 polyphony
•Monochrome vs. color screen, but pretty much the same interface
•8 audio tracks (2.0 or above)
•512MB Smart Media storage vs. 1GB CF card + PC adapter storage
•256MB max RAM vs. 512MB max RAM
•No proper multisampling vs. marginally usable multisampling (2.0 or above)
•Some new retooled patches
•A dedicated PIANO MODE button on the X6 and X7
•Clipboard function switched from copying/pasting pad settings to bookmarking pages
•Can delete songs without having to go into the File Utility Menu (2.0 or above)
•Can apply FX to input while sampling/recording audio (2.1 or above)
You're more than welcome to add stuff to the Fantom S —> X list. If I'm missing anything, let me know.
I have a 30" Cinema Display for Logic. If Apple created a touchscreen for Logic, it'd piss me off, because it'd mean more page navigation and less music making. Workflow is a HUGE thing for professional producers/musicians. I have a V-Synth, and because its interface isn't that deep and there are so many duplicate hardware controls, the touchscreen isn't too obtrusive. The V-Synth GT has fewer controls and a deeper interface, so it's much slower to get around. Therefore, I didn't upgrade.You say hell no now to touch screen...when they add that and still mouse capable, you'll flip your oppinion. Flipah please!
The Korg Tritons are WAAAAYY slower to get around than the Fantom because of their touchscreen. You can't see enough parameters on the screen at the same time because they have to be big enough to touch with fat fingers.
Fantom FA-76, S, and X guys were guinea pigs too. Gear is always getting better. You will never have "the best" for longer than a year or so. Way less if you're computer-based.You say by then it will meet the price point....of course! so it make sense to wait a while and see what Roland does with this for a couple of years...Those of you who will get the G now, thanks for being the Guinea pigs...
Polyphony? Some people couldn't care less. Obviously, polyphony is more important to SEPTIMO than the G's 70+ other improvements, most of which are as or more important to a lot of other people. If you were to take an informal poll, the BIGGEST problem with the X by FAR was its file management system, which is now no longer an issue.The three 'most' importaint specs remain untouched...
And the max RAM "spec" doesn't even apply anymore because of said file system. The only people who won't benefit from increased max RAM are those who will only make one song ever or those who must always have all songs available instantly.
For example, if I make an album of 12 songs, and I don't mind waiting a minute or so for each to load, my album can utilize 6.5 GB of audio—if made on the G (544 MB x 12 songs/projects). In the Fantom X, my entire album was limited to 544 MB. The file system itself improves the spec depending on how one uses it.
Hmm... Septimo, you seem reaaaallly obsessed with polyphony. By that token, you might as well insist the Fantom X is closer to the Yamaha Motif than the Fantom-S because they have the same polyphony. C'mon. The jump from the FA-76 to the S was HUGE. The FA-76 was incredibly slow to get around. Its interface and usability were atrocious. And sampling was a big deal.The fact that they didn't add more to the heart of the machine suspiciously reminds me of Fantom S. where the specs of the macine remained the same, but now, with a sampler!
True, there were a few—but to be fair, you have to compare the FINAL OS version of the X with the FINAL OS version of the G... which isn't even out yet. But I'll give you a leg up and compare the Fantom-X 2.1 vs. the Fantom-G 1.0 in our awesome list from hell:and lets not forget that there were a lot of software additions to the X also...
What does the Fantom G offer over the Fantom X?
•Eight to ONE HUNDRED TIMES the max storage (don't know yet; all evidence points to the latter)
•Possibly twice the max RAM
•Notable loading/saving speed increase (at least twice as fast)
•Notably faster boot time
•Project-based file system with project number limited only by storage
•Loading songs only loads samples for that song (if saved to dedicated project) instead of samples for all songs
•Number of user patches = 256 x number of projects
•Number of user performances = 128 x number of projects
•Number of songs = 64 x number of projects
•10-20 x the number of arpeggiator patterns
•8 x the MIDI tracks (128)
•3 x the audio tracks (24)
•2.12 x the number of simultaneous parts (34)
•4.4 x the number of simultaneous effects processors (22)
•Twice the number of Favorites (Live Setting Play) registrations
•ONE HUNDRED TIMES the tempo resolution
•Dedicated tempo/fader value display, regardless of screen mode
•WAY larger and higher resolution screen
•More visible parameters means less screen navigation
•Way more visual feedback, such as fader and knob levels
•Addition of 8 assignable faders
•Mic preamp with phantom power
•Impedance switch for optimizing input level
•USB audio interface with real-time streaming to/from computer
•No need to bounce internally, freeing up both time and precious RAM
•Relatively future-proof storage mechanism (USB key)
•All-new DSP processor chip, the first in almost ten years
•New optimized sound engine to run on said chip
•24-bit/96k converters
•New analog I/O (op amps, etc.)
•Overall, audible sound quality improvements
•Improved sample management
•Input FX processor is now dedicated, and doesn't royally screw up the sound of your parts
•Many new all new raw samples instead of only reprogramming existing ones
•Includes best-of SRX samples/patches
•All-new expansion card protocol, with the potential for new synthesis methods
•Expansion cards add both polyphony and multitimbrality, and don't eat into the existing engine at all
•First machine in almost two decades to eschew the confusing "patch vs. performance" dogma for the much simpler and more obvious Single/Live/Studio layout
•External parts are now independent with own mixer and settings
•Near-instant screen redraws on audio tracks
•Higher resolution on waveforms
•MIDI track regions display note data from main Song Edit screen
•Ten-key keypad with dedicated NUMERICS button
•Part select buttons
•Effects bypass switches
•Dedicated transpose button
•Dedicated LOOP and JUMP buttons
•Extra control pedal input
•Assignable buttons moved to above the joystick where they belong
•DAW-style graphical editing via mouse
•Scroll wheel on mouse scrolls up and down tracklist and adjusts other various parameters
•Combined CURSOR/VALUE layout more efficient
•Bend modes for choosing how the bender affects chords
•Instant switching of arp styles via pads
•Instant selection and muting of tones per patch via pads
•Dedicated track mutes via pads
•Patches sound exactly the same in Performance mode across all parts
•Perfectly seamless transitions between single patches and 8-part Layer/Split performances including effects
•Incremental keybed improvement on G6/G7 and Progressive Hammer Action II with Ivory feel keys on G8
•Dedicated FAVORITES button
•QWERTY-style patch/performance/song/sample/project naming
•OSX Spotlight-style search function
•Improved zoom and navigation functionality in sequencer
•Remembers last visited menu and submenus
•Removes superfluous buttons and streamlines workflow in numerous ways
•Fourth knob and eighth slider used for ultra-fast patch and menu scrolling
•Bookmarking screens now remembers submenus
•And last but not least, all the stuff we haven't even discovered yet, since the G isn't shipping
As a comparison, what were the differences between the Fantom-S and Fantom X?
•64 vs. 128 polyphony
•Monochrome vs. color screen, but pretty much the same interface
•8 audio tracks (2.0 or above)
•512MB Smart Media storage vs. 1GB CF card + PC adapter storage
•256MB max RAM vs. 512MB max RAM
•No proper multisampling vs. marginally usable multisampling (2.0 or above)
•Some new retooled patches
•A dedicated PIANO MODE button on the X6 and X7
•Clipboard function switched from copying/pasting pad settings to bookmarking pages
•Can delete songs without having to go into the File Utility Menu (2.0 or above)
•Can apply FX to input while sampling/recording audio (2.1 or above)
You're more than welcome to add stuff to the Fantom S —> X list. If I'm missing anything, let me know.
As a comparison, what were the differences between the Fanto
•64 vs. 128 polyphony
•Monochrome vs. color screen, but "pretty much" (yeah comming from an S user) the same interface
•8 audio tracks (2.0 or above)
•512MB Smart Media storage vs. 1GB CF card + PC adapter storage
•256MB max RAM vs. 512MB max RAM
•No proper multisampling vs. marginally usable multisampling (2.0 or above) (had to be an S user)
•Some new retooled patches (S user BS)
•A dedicated PIANO MODE button on the X6 and X7
•Clipboard function switched from copying/pasting pad settings to bookmarking pages
•Can delete songs without having to go into the File Utility Menu (2.0 or above)
•Can apply FX to input while sampling/recording audio (2.1 or above)
Is that all?
You didn't say..that the X also had these over the S...
•Dedicated track mutes via pads
•Instant switching of arp styles via pads
•Instant switching of ryth styles via pads
•Instant switching of chord mem via pads
•Rolled chord
•New waves and wave bank not present in S including the famous Piano.
•was able to upgrade full 4 SRX while still being able to fully upgrade ram
•transmit midi via usb
•being able to type names via pads over scrolling
•being able to punch in exact parameter numbers(any parameter) via pads over scrolling
•being able to punch in exact waveform numbers via pads over scrolling.
•being able to choose what track edit you want via pads
•I think zoom edit mode wasn't in the S...this one could be yours...
•two or three new patch banks --don't remember what S went to was it E or F? X went to I...
•Sample Gain, fine tune.[ is that two? we'll keep it one..
•BPM Calculator
And this part is just me being an A$$h07e...
•Changeable color scheme
•Help menu
•Glossary
•and better "new" screensavers! ;D lol!
and probably somethings I missed.
Now you look like an a$$......thanks for the leg up...That's 20 more..Um yeah...you're missing 20 more "somethings".... either your being biased or you don't know better...I'ma go with the latter to be on your side and be a homie. You don't own one to know...I don't care what you built, you don't work with it, you only plug it in....
Yeah I know...You're gonna say that G has 71 or more new additions over X's 31 or so over S...well it should and it better....Thats obvious....this is four years after the fact, son.....the X was only one year after.... the X for it's time had it's fair share of enhancements that you didn't know about over the S....and over the S it was enough, as is the G over the X. except that in the G, the lungs, belly, and heart remained the same...we can only hope that the brain will be enough to cover the job...... what was the FA-76 over the S differences? was the list smaller? yeah. [lol,,,the sampler was bigger deal than X's 31 or so list from hell](I sounded like you there, didn't I?
) was the X over the S list smaller than the G over X list? yeah...do you see the pattern...I slowed that down that even you can get it. And face it...the S was a stepping stone to the X... thats why the poly didn't change from FA to FS....
Now you tell me...did any of this matter to an S owner? Hell no...not to one who was busy making music and not worring what they could not do with it or what they could if they had an X. If anything made a differnce to them, it was the polyphony, it was the higher ram, it was the gig storage on Cf Pc card, and more importaintly it was the sounds...Did any of the software additions sway them? nope!
Lets be real...The G is Nice! Do I like it? hell yes, I love my X, then I gotta love the G! I cannot and won't argue that... Is it worth the money for the enhancements over an X? hell no....not yet it aint. (from an X point of view) Would I get one? Yes! If I didn't already own a fully expanded X.......It looks like by the specs, since those main three didn't go nowhere, that they wont stay here too long, before they move on...a stepping stone..You're a smart guy but you choose to be kinda knucklehead sometimes...You have intelligence, I'll give you that, but you lack wisdom. I'm not as educated as you or a lot of ppl here, I know this..but reading your posts lets me know I'm wiser... I also know a lot smart-dumb guys, and now I know you....
I guess there's a lot more to say about this,,, but why? If it's deliberate refusal to see any point other than...."My list is bigger than yours"
Who Friggin' Cares?
•Monochrome vs. color screen, but "pretty much" (yeah comming from an S user) the same interface
•8 audio tracks (2.0 or above)
•512MB Smart Media storage vs. 1GB CF card + PC adapter storage
•256MB max RAM vs. 512MB max RAM
•No proper multisampling vs. marginally usable multisampling (2.0 or above) (had to be an S user)
•Some new retooled patches (S user BS)
•A dedicated PIANO MODE button on the X6 and X7
•Clipboard function switched from copying/pasting pad settings to bookmarking pages
•Can delete songs without having to go into the File Utility Menu (2.0 or above)
•Can apply FX to input while sampling/recording audio (2.1 or above)
Is that all?
You didn't say..that the X also had these over the S...
•Dedicated track mutes via pads
•Instant switching of arp styles via pads
•Instant switching of ryth styles via pads
•Instant switching of chord mem via pads
•Rolled chord
•New waves and wave bank not present in S including the famous Piano.
•was able to upgrade full 4 SRX while still being able to fully upgrade ram
•transmit midi via usb
•being able to type names via pads over scrolling
•being able to punch in exact parameter numbers(any parameter) via pads over scrolling
•being able to punch in exact waveform numbers via pads over scrolling.
•being able to choose what track edit you want via pads
•I think zoom edit mode wasn't in the S...this one could be yours...
•two or three new patch banks --don't remember what S went to was it E or F? X went to I...
•Sample Gain, fine tune.[ is that two? we'll keep it one..
•BPM Calculator
And this part is just me being an A$$h07e...
•Changeable color scheme
•Help menu
•Glossary
•and better "new" screensavers! ;D lol!
and probably somethings I missed.
Now you look like an a$$......thanks for the leg up...That's 20 more..Um yeah...you're missing 20 more "somethings".... either your being biased or you don't know better...I'ma go with the latter to be on your side and be a homie. You don't own one to know...I don't care what you built, you don't work with it, you only plug it in....
Yeah I know...You're gonna say that G has 71 or more new additions over X's 31 or so over S...well it should and it better....Thats obvious....this is four years after the fact, son.....the X was only one year after.... the X for it's time had it's fair share of enhancements that you didn't know about over the S....and over the S it was enough, as is the G over the X. except that in the G, the lungs, belly, and heart remained the same...we can only hope that the brain will be enough to cover the job...... what was the FA-76 over the S differences? was the list smaller? yeah. [lol,,,the sampler was bigger deal than X's 31 or so list from hell](I sounded like you there, didn't I?
) was the X over the S list smaller than the G over X list? yeah...do you see the pattern...I slowed that down that even you can get it. And face it...the S was a stepping stone to the X... thats why the poly didn't change from FA to FS....Now you tell me...did any of this matter to an S owner? Hell no...not to one who was busy making music and not worring what they could not do with it or what they could if they had an X. If anything made a differnce to them, it was the polyphony, it was the higher ram, it was the gig storage on Cf Pc card, and more importaintly it was the sounds...Did any of the software additions sway them? nope!
Lets be real...The G is Nice! Do I like it? hell yes, I love my X, then I gotta love the G! I cannot and won't argue that... Is it worth the money for the enhancements over an X? hell no....not yet it aint. (from an X point of view) Would I get one? Yes! If I didn't already own a fully expanded X.......It looks like by the specs, since those main three didn't go nowhere, that they wont stay here too long, before they move on...a stepping stone..You're a smart guy but you choose to be kinda knucklehead sometimes...You have intelligence, I'll give you that, but you lack wisdom. I'm not as educated as you or a lot of ppl here, I know this..but reading your posts lets me know I'm wiser... I also know a lot smart-dumb guys, and now I know you....
I guess there's a lot more to say about this,,, but why? If it's deliberate refusal to see any point other than...."My list is bigger than yours"
Who Friggin' Cares?
Re: FANTOM G USB MEMORY BACK-UP POSSIBLE!
Septimo,
the only problem I see with the G is being bound to the 256Mb choice of waveforms of the Roland sound engineers.
Else I don't understand your doubts about the G. To me it's no question of counting the number of new specs - though you should admit that it is not really unimpressive - but the quality of some killer features concerning usability. 4-5 of these features alone would be a reason to consider buying the G for me. I like my X very much, but it's exactly these usability points where I was missing essential festures since I use it.
To me, concerning live usability and studio workflow, the X will look like a Beetle compared to a Porsche besides the G. The Beetle sure has its charm, and you will get from point A to point B with both of them. But *maybe* you will enjoy the ride a bit more with the Porsche, and *maybe* you will reach your destination a bit more comfortable and earlier...
I have no idea why the 'feel' value of the huge usability improvements differs across such a wide range among many of us here. Maybe because our wives or girlfriends would say: "So what's the difference??" after we spent a lot of money on it, and we could hardly say: "I just like looking at this bigger screen, plus they gave me 8 more sliders to play with while my next song idea is refusing to come to mind!"
)
I'm convinced that the G will constantly prove its huge usability advantages in everyday life - *if* they haven't spoiled the "quality-instead-of-quantity-sounds" requirement while filling their ROM. I don't see much sense in offering 85 or what Pianos and would rather like to see 2-3 single sampled, first class multi velocity ones plus some minor variations, just like with EPs and much other stuff.
the only problem I see with the G is being bound to the 256Mb choice of waveforms of the Roland sound engineers.
Else I don't understand your doubts about the G. To me it's no question of counting the number of new specs - though you should admit that it is not really unimpressive - but the quality of some killer features concerning usability. 4-5 of these features alone would be a reason to consider buying the G for me. I like my X very much, but it's exactly these usability points where I was missing essential festures since I use it.
To me, concerning live usability and studio workflow, the X will look like a Beetle compared to a Porsche besides the G. The Beetle sure has its charm, and you will get from point A to point B with both of them. But *maybe* you will enjoy the ride a bit more with the Porsche, and *maybe* you will reach your destination a bit more comfortable and earlier...
I have no idea why the 'feel' value of the huge usability improvements differs across such a wide range among many of us here. Maybe because our wives or girlfriends would say: "So what's the difference??" after we spent a lot of money on it, and we could hardly say: "I just like looking at this bigger screen, plus they gave me 8 more sliders to play with while my next song idea is refusing to come to mind!"
)I'm convinced that the G will constantly prove its huge usability advantages in everyday life - *if* they haven't spoiled the "quality-instead-of-quantity-sounds" requirement while filling their ROM. I don't see much sense in offering 85 or what Pianos and would rather like to see 2-3 single sampled, first class multi velocity ones plus some minor variations, just like with EPs and much other stuff.
Re: FANTOM G USB MEMORY BACK-UP POSSIBLE!
So... there is an another complaints thread in the theme "not enough"?
Sure anything could be better, improved, could cost less etc. but the reality is we can get only so much. Considering all Fantom-G's good and bad points it's looking way more practical, enjoyable and workable than even Korg Oasys is.
To reiterate:
- there is finally full grade convenient and powerful sequencer on board (you may don't want to use a software one for midi tracking anymore)
- there will be a pretty good soundset available immediately without any compromises effect wise (a PFX per every part)
- there is decent audio capability with easy resampling plus realtime timestretching
- superb control surface (4 knobs, 8 faders, 16 pads - all programmable)
- seamless performances switching (try something like that elsewhere)
- multisynthesis capability via ARX boards
- many other smaller but important improvements everywhere
Which workstations would you like to have if it has to be only one?
Sure anything could be better, improved, could cost less etc. but the reality is we can get only so much. Considering all Fantom-G's good and bad points it's looking way more practical, enjoyable and workable than even Korg Oasys is.
To reiterate:
- there is finally full grade convenient and powerful sequencer on board (you may don't want to use a software one for midi tracking anymore)
- there will be a pretty good soundset available immediately without any compromises effect wise (a PFX per every part)
- there is decent audio capability with easy resampling plus realtime timestretching
- superb control surface (4 knobs, 8 faders, 16 pads - all programmable)
- seamless performances switching (try something like that elsewhere)
- multisynthesis capability via ARX boards
- many other smaller but important improvements everywhere
Which workstations would you like to have if it has to be only one?
Re: FANTOM G USB MEMORY BACK-UP POSSIBLE!
Septimo, The Audacity Works
Guys, by now I believe you both have done a great job on "No, the G is not worth against a fully expanded X" and "The G made a HUGE step forward over the X and is the best workstation on the market at its price range" arguments. I think you made your positions clear. Although I must say that I agree to 100% with T.A.W. (thank you for the great posts you've done so far) and have difficulty to understand Septimo's refusal to see whats obvious, I would kindly ask you both to stop adressing at each other about this matter. Your last posts end up with exactly the same result - flamable statments and a diversion on the thread subject that is good to nothing.
I hope you guys understand
Guys, by now I believe you both have done a great job on "No, the G is not worth against a fully expanded X" and "The G made a HUGE step forward over the X and is the best workstation on the market at its price range" arguments. I think you made your positions clear. Although I must say that I agree to 100% with T.A.W. (thank you for the great posts you've done so far) and have difficulty to understand Septimo's refusal to see whats obvious, I would kindly ask you both to stop adressing at each other about this matter. Your last posts end up with exactly the same result - flamable statments and a diversion on the thread subject that is good to nothing.
I hope you guys understand
Re: FANTOM G USB MEMORY BACK-UP POSSIBLE!
Are you guys serious? or is there a joke that I'm out of the loop on?
I Do see the obvious....You guys don't...I see the great things this machine can do over the X...I see the wrongs as well...I do see more Good than bad... what am I not seeing?? Is it unimpressive? by no means....Is it something to brag about? not quite yet..lets hear it first, cus so far all I hear is a FantomX. How does that traslate into me not understanding what not. You guys just reading the name Septimo and saying things?[oh,,snap,,,,too long.....but I can see he's disagrees with specs...mmm,,,, someting about polyphonyyyyyy....okay let me reply] this is what must be happening......I totally see your obvious side...And I agree with you 97%....
I'm saying what can possibly be a Fantom S scenerio according to the specs.(things that stayed the same) Does that mean the Fantom S was no good? C'mon where am I saying these things..that don't mean the G will be bad cus i think that, does it???.you guys even see whats a limitation on here ...and when you see someone pointing those out , since your getting one, you bust out the list and say "yeah, uh...well look at what else it can do...so,,,,mmm... shut-up.. " The question here is what can it really do that makes the X obsolete...those 71 points in the list don't come up with that answer. when they stop using drums/ pianos/ strings/ guitars/ synthpads etc...then we'll see...How much better can a piano sound? I guess 80 something times in a G. huh? Okay I get it....
Jim...You got your cars wrong...the S is the beetle, the X is the Porsche...and the G is a Porsche GT...difference? hell yeah...but not enough to migrate.
This machine is Awesome because it is a turbo Fantom X...sort of like the motif XS is great cus it's a turbo motif ES...(but no expansion, all added in I guess)
Someone is gonna come on here who just bought an X as his first board reading only how much better the G is and might start to beleive the falsehoods and think his X is no good....and so i think it's fair to let them see what is still good about the X and how staying on their X will outlive the G's lifespan into the next model....someone has to yang on your yings. and so the purpose of my list is to show how insignificant either of those lists are to sounding better. and that to those that think that those are make a difference in the final sound, doesn't have a clue of what they are doing...
Okay okay okay...I dig it...I wont piss you guys's boots no more....unless they happen to be in the way. Pick them mugs up before Ive to go again..;D.and pay attention to what your reading... all of you.
I Do see the obvious....You guys don't...I see the great things this machine can do over the X...I see the wrongs as well...I do see more Good than bad... what am I not seeing?? Is it unimpressive? by no means....Is it something to brag about? not quite yet..lets hear it first, cus so far all I hear is a FantomX. How does that traslate into me not understanding what not. You guys just reading the name Septimo and saying things?[oh,,snap,,,,too long.....but I can see he's disagrees with specs...mmm,,,, someting about polyphonyyyyyy....okay let me reply] this is what must be happening......I totally see your obvious side...And I agree with you 97%....
I'm saying what can possibly be a Fantom S scenerio according to the specs.(things that stayed the same) Does that mean the Fantom S was no good? C'mon where am I saying these things..that don't mean the G will be bad cus i think that, does it???.you guys even see whats a limitation on here ...and when you see someone pointing those out , since your getting one, you bust out the list and say "yeah, uh...well look at what else it can do...so,,,,mmm... shut-up.. " The question here is what can it really do that makes the X obsolete...those 71 points in the list don't come up with that answer. when they stop using drums/ pianos/ strings/ guitars/ synthpads etc...then we'll see...How much better can a piano sound? I guess 80 something times in a G. huh? Okay I get it....
Jim...You got your cars wrong...the S is the beetle, the X is the Porsche...and the G is a Porsche GT...difference? hell yeah...but not enough to migrate.
This machine is Awesome because it is a turbo Fantom X...sort of like the motif XS is great cus it's a turbo motif ES...(but no expansion, all added in I guess)
Someone is gonna come on here who just bought an X as his first board reading only how much better the G is and might start to beleive the falsehoods and think his X is no good....and so i think it's fair to let them see what is still good about the X and how staying on their X will outlive the G's lifespan into the next model....someone has to yang on your yings. and so the purpose of my list is to show how insignificant either of those lists are to sounding better. and that to those that think that those are make a difference in the final sound, doesn't have a clue of what they are doing...
Okay okay okay...I dig it...I wont piss you guys's boots no more....unless they happen to be in the way. Pick them mugs up before Ive to go again..;D.and pay attention to what your reading... all of you.