Roland Clan Forums

Hey,
I have a couple of questions for you G users. I'm looking at a keyboard to be used for film scoring and a bit of live performance on the side, I have a SH 201 which I love and want a keyboard to go with it. The things that makes me consider getting the older fantom X are the fact that as far as I know there is not a free B3 emulator for the G that allows you to change the drawbars. It seems that most of the comments regarding the G I find are negative as opposed to the fantom X which gets good reviews all around. If I did get the fantom X, I would be purchasing the SRX expansions; Complete Orchestra, Classic Keys, Brass and Strings. If I purchased the G I would not buy the ARX expansions because I feel that the brass is more suited to 'Big Band' sound, not traditional orchestral brass. What I basically want to know from the fantom G owners, is whether the addition of the sliders, and a touch screen interface is worth spending a considerable amount more than the fantom X?, also I want to know if the acoustic instrument sounds are better than the X, considering that I intend to install the mentioned SRX's?
Thankyou for you opinions.
Cheers
Jupiter8fan

there is no touch screen on the FG. sorry. it would be too awesome if it was. but they dont have that feature.

Hi Jupiter8fan, welcome to Roland Clan…again Joking just joking. You have more statements than questions friend….Ok, let’s see what we have here.

Live performance…check. That’s what the G was made for. And all the controllers, tracks, effects and sounds etc make it great for film scoring. As far as the B3 emulator goes, it’s really just a custom patch. You can make one as soon as you learn how. And you can even use the samples from the Fantom-X user patch. Or you can buy Arts (I do not have it so I can’t give you details on it). Also, the possibility that Roland will make an ARX organ expansion exist.

But keep this in mind…The user made organ patch you are referring to was made by one of our members. And it is no different than the patches members have made for the G which of coarse are not available on the X. As far as negative comments…I can tell you as a fact that there are way…WAY more positive comments on Roland Clan in favor of the G than negative. Also, try to keep in mind that (as I said in another thread) forums have various types of members, factions, rival company members, rival fans and they go though various stages. And everyone has their own bias opinion and or objective to carry out. You really need dig deep to find the truth. And look at who is saying what and how often.

About the ARX-03 Brass Board…You are wrong about it just being for Big Band. It is suited for many styles of music. And it is probably one of Roland’s best sealers. Also, the G comes with it’s own brass sounds for orchestral music. And as always, sound will be a complete matter of opinion. And you have to take into account that Roland is still developing for the G and not the X. Also, you mentioned in the X section that the X was more expandable than the G. This is not true at all, they have different types of expansion and the type of expansion the G has is superior to the old SRX expansion boards. They add new forms of synthesis and polyphony. So, which is more of an expansion? Adding new sounds, which can be done on the G with samples or the built in synthesizer (as Roland, Art and members have done). Or, adding a completely new synthesizer to your workstation, which can not be done on the X at all.

Oh yeah…the screen is nice and you can touch it if you want…go crazy. You can get some pretty impressive smudges …But I can’t promise anymore than that.

Oh…you missed a few things in your comparison…here is a short list for you. Just a few of the advantages the G has over the X. Courtesy of The Audacity works..(The MAN!).

HARDWARE
•WAY larger and higher resolution screen
•Dedicated tempo/fader value display, regardless of screen mode
•Addition of 8 assignable faders
•Mic preamp with phantom power (that can also be used to record straight into your computer)
•Impedance switch for optimizing input level
•Extra control pedal input
•Ivory feel keys and better weighted action (G8)
•Dedicated TRANSPOSE button
•Dedicated LOOP and JUMP buttons
•Combined CURSOR/VALUE layout more efficient
•Dedicated FAVORITES button
•Dedicated EXP1/EXP2 buttons (instant expansion board access)

PERFORMING
•Arpeggio can be based on any MIDI phrase or Standard MIDI File
•Any MIDI phrase or SMF's shuffle and accent can be adjusted in real time
•Bender modes for choosing how the bender affects chords
•Knobs and sliders can act in catch (null) mode, eliminating any obnoxious volume or parameter jumps
•Arpeggio styles can be switched on the fly via pads
•Tones within a patch can be enabled/disabled on the fly via pads
•Transmission of MIDI channel(s) can be enabled/disabled on the fly via pads, allowing ultra-fast selection of external instruments when playing live
•Dedicated volume level for each Favorites registration, allowing one to level match all sounds for a show
•Dedicated transpose setting for each Favorites registration, making it easier to ensure playing in the right key
•Twice as many favorite registrations can be accessed instantly (via pads)
•External parts are now independent with their own mixer and settings
•Multiple parts can be adjusted simultaneously with knobs, S-buttons, etc.

STORAGE / DATA MANAGEMENT
•Relatively future-proof storage mechanism (USB mass storage instead of antiquated PCMCIA or CF card with PC-card adapter)
•Max storage increased from 1GB to 16GB (and some people are successfully using USB hard drives up to 120GB)
•Max RAM increased from 512MB to 1GB
•Number of songs, samples, patches, Live Sets, Studio Sets, and other settings limited only by external storage capacity
•Removable storage now allows each song to utilize full RAM (if saved to dedicated project) instead of all songs sharing existing memory
•User patches increased from 256 to 512 (x number of projects)
•User performances (Live Sets) increased from 128 to 512 (x number of projects) plus 128 dedicated Studio Sets (x number of projects) for songwriting
•Notable loading/saving speed increase (feels about three to four times as fast)
•Notably faster boot time

SOUND ENGINE
•All-new DSP processor chip, the first in almost ten years
•New optimized sound engine to run on said chip
•Twice the sound ROM (256 MB vs. 128 MB)
•Perfectly seamless transitions between single patches and 8-part Layer/Split performances including effects, exclusive only to the Fantom-G (No, the Motif's new OS does not do this)
•22 simultaneous effects—each internal part gets its own PFX processor, largely eliminating problem where patches sound radically different in multi/combi/performance/song mode
•Reverb algorithms greatly improved
•Expansion cards add polyphony—current max 320 voices (theoretical max 384 voices)
•Expansion cards add multitimbrality—current max 18 internal parts (theoretical max 48 internal parts)
•Expansion cards add their own effects engine—ARX-01 has its own reverb and a dedicated compressor for each drum sound within a kit!
•Expansion cards add new synthesis methods—limited only by DSP
•Step LFO steps increased from 16 to 64
•24-bit/96k D/As
•New analog I/O (op amps, etc.)

SEQUENCER / MIDI ENGINE
•128 MIDI tracks allow for dedicated sequencing of individual sounds within rhythm kits, separate hands of a complex piano part, external instruments on their own tracks, MIDI automation, program changes, or SysEx data
•3 x the audio tracks (24)
•100 times the tempo resolution
•DAW-style graphical editing via mouse—what might take two minutes in the Fantom X takes mere seconds in the G
•Alias-based phrase copies—no more tracking down that errant note fifty times in the same song
•Twice as many user Rhythm Pattern sets
•MIDI track regions display note data from main Song Edit screen
•Improved zoom and navigation functionality in sequencer
•MIDI and audio regions can be viewed, edited, and arranged on the same screen
•MIDI and audio tracks can be rearranged in any order
•MIDI and audio tracks can be freely named
•Higher resolution on waveforms
•Near-instant screen redraws on audio tracks
•Any phrase can be an RPS
•Any phrase can be a rhythm pattern
•Any phrase can be an arpeggio style
•RPSes and rhythm phrases can be assigned to control only internal—or—external parts—or both
•Available song markers have doubled from 4 to 8
•Song markers can be named, and appear on the song's timeline

NAVIGATION / USER INTERFACE
•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
•More visible parameters means less screen navigation
•Confusing Save vs. Write menus merged
•Ten-key keypad makes numeric entry extremely fast
•Assignable buttons moved to above the joystick where they belong
•Scroll wheel on mouse scrolls up and down track list and adjusts other various parameters
•Menu navigation remembers last visited menu and submenus
•Book-marking screens now remembers submenus
•Writing a Live Set or Studio Set remembers the current pad mode
•Writing a Live Set or Studio Set remembers the current RPS set (and Rhythm Pattern set), allowing one to recall entirely different RPSes with each performance
•Fourth knob and eighth slider used for ultra-fast patch and menu scrolling
•OSX Spotlight-style search function
•QWERTY-style patch/performance/song/sample/project naming
•Part select buttons allows one to switch parts on the fly, even while sequencing
•Real-time effects bypass switches
•Dedicated track mutes via pads
•Knobs control a much wider variety of onscreen parameters

COMPUTER INTERFACING
•24-bit/96kHz USB audio interface—allows real-time recording straight into DAW software or sampling directly from any computer app
•Way more visual feedback, such as fader and knob levels
•No need to bounce internally, freeing up both time and precious RAM
•Editor can act as a VST, AU, or RTAS plug-in
•Librarian software doesn't require a direct connection to the Fantom
•Librarian software allows one to organize content of any project, not just the internal patches and performances
•Vista 64-bit driver available

OTHER STUFF
•Easier to update OS
•Over 900 built-in rhythm patterns and RPSes
•Play mode of all RPSes within an RPS set can be changed instantly
•RPSes can instantly be assigned to only black keys or white keys
•Multi-sample assignment has been streamlined and enhanced
•All samples in memory are instantly available as a sample patch, without having to assign them
•All 2000 samples are selectable instantly via simple MIDI bank select/PC messages
•New power switch recessed to avoid accidental shutdown
•D-Beam can play screen saver video games

•And last but not least, all the stuff from any future updates!

for the same money as a G you would get and X all of the srx boards so if you are not into editing your patches then X may be a better financial decision.

As said I think here is more how much money do you want to spend.

You can reach good performances with both workstations so look at the list above and find yourself what you need and what not.

It’s all Roland and it’s all good! And both the G and X are awesome. So everyone that has one of them should be proud!!!

if you are not into editing your patches then X may be a better financial decision.

Not that we haven't talked this topic to death...but....So we don’t confuse anyone.

Why would anyone have a need to edit the sounds if they like them? And someone will mention the whole best of the SRX collection opinion. Note, I said opinion ...What may be the best to one person may not be the best to another.

Also, the best can mean many things.

The best for live, the best quality waves, the best waves to attract the customers they were aiming for etc. The opinions from X users on this forum differ greatly concerning what SRX sounds they would like to have. And there is no one person that can say the G does not have the best of SRX for another person or a group of people. So that is not a useable argument as to say that the Fantom-X with SRX boards does in fact sound better.

It’s all about how you word it...Something like, I prefer the X over the G because the G does not have all the waves from my favorite SRX card (what ever it may be). Or even...I don’t like the G because Roland did not add all the SRX waves (though this would drive the price up considerably, I would assume). But saying that the G is flawed or that it does in fact not have the best SRX waves is untrue.

But as I said...all Roland and absolutely Awesome.

Hey,
Sorry my mistake. Thanks for all your comments, on the matter. I'm surprised that the fantom G does not have a touch screen. Must have got it mixed up with a Korg. As it was a while since I last played one. I am a person who likes tweaking sounds and playing with analog style synths, hence the Sh-201. Personally I like the fantom G, the addition of the faders is a great idea. Just out of interest, is it possible to assign the faders to control cutoff, ADSR envelopes etc. or ideally organ drawbars?
Thanks again for all your comments, and I am sorry about my mistakes in the previous post.
Cheers
Jupiter8fan

Personally I like the fantom G, the addition of the faders is a great idea.

The sliders are nice and give you more control possibilities than the X. But the X has a good number of ways to control a sound as well. Really, everything on the list above is a great and welcome addition and improvement over the awesome beast know as Fantom-X. And given the way some people act. I can honestly say that every single feature on that list is extremely important. Seriously, you would not believe the fuss some people make over the smallest most insignificant feature, it’s unbelievable. Like they would destroy everything to get it.

Since the previously stated is true those same members can not deny that all (every last one) of the G’s advancements over the X are anything less than Major. Well, they can but it would be a bit hypocritical And I say major because if the G is missing one thing, they feel it’s worth destroying everything and causing pure chaos just to get it So, very Very Major. They come on the forum, take advantage of the system and think because we are tolerant, we are weak and helpless, their arrogance offends me (Just saw the movie taken, LOL, brilliant).

Oh, where was I?...right…Personally, I feel that most (not all) of the touch screens are somewhat of an annoyance. And the G is the only workstation of it’s kind with a mouse. So having both a mouse and touch screen would be a bit redundant. And yes the Fantom-G’s controllers can adjust many of it’s synthesizer parameters, including the ones you mentioned. And as soon as you learn how it‘s done. You can use the controllers to simulate organ drawbars. If you have the skill there will not be much you can not do, almost anything is possible.

Hey Jupiter8fan? Your way of reasoning, statement format and word usage style remind me of another member. Just me I suppose….But if I find out )

I think that the amont of useable patches you can get is imense in an X fully SRX expanded. And to that extent i can't see a Fantom G being able to compete for now. Where talking of 1000 plus factory sounds (can't remember the exact number) plus 475 patches in the Ultimate Keys; 448 Complete Orchestra; 414 Ethnic; etc...
So in the end you have a really huge choice in sounds. Maybe the release of new ARX expansions can make the G as atractive.

Zephyer I can assure you that I have not been a member of this forum under any other name. Alas budget is a big issue for me, and having done some more research and discovering the HUGE!!!! import taxes my country charges for items over 1000. I might have to settle for the X, Unless I can find a second/third hand G lying around on ebay. Have you guys got any idea on when the new ARX expansions come out?.

I had a play of my friends Korg M50 and I must say. I was surprised that he wasted 3000 on it. Sorry to any Korg fans out there. But The sound quality was exactly the same as my $200 yamaha. It also lagged when I changed a setting . I really like the Fantom G's sampling capabilities which I would use; my uncle has a Jupiter 8 and I have a Kawai DX1900 organ which sounds as good as a Hammond in my opinion.
Is there much in the way of Virtual analog synthesis on the G? as in, oscillator, mixer, noise, filter, amp, etc. or is that purely the V-Synth's domain?
When I get out of hospital I plan on stopping at the first music shop on the way home. Try out the G.
Cheers To you all,
Jupiter8fan

Zephyer I can assure you that I have not been a member of this forum under any other name.

Ok...but I'm keeping my eye on you That first post of yours defies normal reasoning for someone who has never owned a Fantom-X, Fantom-G, SRX or ARX cards. Also, your post in the X and G section vary in a way that seems weird. Just forget I ever brought it up

By the way, welcome to Roland Clan, sorry about the shakedown. But take it easy with the extreme amount of misleading statements. Misinformation can spread and cause all kinds of problems. Your post is proof of that. (both eyes).

As far as ARX goes...How do you know you will even need them? The Fantom G has...

1,664 + 256 (GM2) Preset Patches
64 + 9 (GM2) Preset Rhythm Sets
512 Preset Live Sets
128 Preset Studio Sets

512 User Patches (per project)
64 User Rhythm Sets (per project)
512 User Live Sets (per project)
128 User Studio Sets (per project)

Plus you have all of Art’s amazing sounds, three ARX cards, the free user made sounds, Roland’s FG Connects Live Sounds (coming soon, AWESOME!) you said you like tweaking sounds so you have the sounds you make as well. How many sounds does one need? I can understand your desire to have a physically modeled organ (I don‘t really care for one). But such things are not present in any of Roland's competitors workstations. So it’s nothing to get to serious about. If Roland has the best than it’s up to their competitors to step up to the plate and compete.

And if Roland never makes another ARX card (I think they will) you still have a workstation that is at least technically far better than it’s competitors, and for a fair price. So either way the whole “only three” ARX argument is pretty weak and pointless. But it’s cool technology and a big advantage over the competition. But as I said, nothing they actually have to produce to be better then their inferior rivals.

In any case, summer NAMM may be the next logical potential ARX appearance.

Virtual analog Modeling technology?

No, the Yamaha motif does not have Virtual analog Modeling technology. Ooops, I meant the Korg M3 does not come with Virtual analog Modeling technology. Right, the G the G….Well…maybe if Yamaha and korg gave it away with their workstations Roland would not feel like the G is so superior in every way. Roland will just have to go on feeling like they already have the best workstation in the world without it I suppose, Oh well

Good luck with your purchase Jupiter8fan (binoculars, I see everything )

Hmm ... You don't think those two (as of now) useless ARX slots cost the user money in the form of a higher purchase price and Roland's non-development of other features as well as lack of expansion possibilities ... ???

Hi Diametro! Hey? I thought we had an understanding

I would stay out of the X version of this thread and you would stay out of this one..

I knew you couldn’t resist for long. And you gave a response that is outside the norm as well…

Seriously Diametro, as another member pointed out. I always appreciate the way you address your concerns (but take it easy with the fact like opinions ). And you don’t drive us nuts with an insane amount of post on the same matter either. And I more than welcome someone with your respect, intelligence and views.

I think we have pretty much covered this topic (an insane amount of times).

(Respectful) Your claim about the ARX slots being useless is (of coarse) 100% opinion. As proof, I will say that I can make very good use of the current ARX boards (easily) and then ask you to prove that I do not believe my own words. So the value of ARX cards argument just becomes an endless loop of opinion with no fact. And the fact that I can make use of and like the current ARX boards defeats the argument that the additional cost is unjustifiable. Also, we don’t know the future of ARX. Roland may make more or many more. But given the inferior state of their competitors workstations, there really is no need.

And of coarse, Roland is not forcing anyone to buy the G if they feel that they have no need for the current ARX boards and can not deal with the added cost of the slots.

Also, no one knows the price of the ARX slots. May be they cost 2 cent or 5 dollars. Maybe Roland threw them in for free and decided to make up the difference with ARX sales. It’s all speculation with no fact. In any case… The ARX cards offer a convenient, unique sound shaping experience that with practice can yield expressive and excellent results.

And as I said above….The Fantom-G is already technically more developed than it’s competitors workstations. So unless Roland’s rivals (Yamaha and Korg) advance their workstations above the G. Roland really has no one to compete with and no reason to develop the G any further. But I think they will anyway because they love you guys so much.

The G was never meant to be an all in one, do it all computer killer. For the price and compared to it’s rivals….

The G is simply just the best workstation (my opinion based on technical facts). Otherwise (just to be precise), it’s Roland’s best live workstation….

Nice to see your post Diametro, thanks.

Hey Zephyer,
I'm afraid you are incorrect about your statement about Roland's competitors not having organ models, The motif X series have a modeled organ, as does the Kurzweil PC3 series which I considered seriously for a while but decided against it because the Display was pitiful. I'm not sure about Korg. Anyhow that's not really a big issue. I never said that I was planning on getting an ARX/s expansion for the G and I probably won't if they don't release a new
one. I like the idea of the ARX very much, and agree totally that its a huge improvement over the SRX and if Roland releases a orchestral ARX expansion
I'll be first in line to buy one. lol. I appreciate your help on the matter. Just out of interest, I discovered East West Samples last night, and I must say that I am very impressed, if I purchased the Composers edition, would there be a way for me to load those samples onto the G?
The sound quality is just amazing if you haven't already discovered East West Samples their website is: http://www.eastwestsamples.com/
Cheers to all,
Jupiter8fan