Frankly, I am a bit puzzled by this instrument.
It is a pro keyboard (high price, high weight/size, xlr outputs...) yet it has only 4 sliders.
So... what is it? A synth? With only 4 sliders for realtime control? Ok, it has Supernatural: do you really think that people will control the organ drawbars on the touchscreen?
There's a lot of space on the chassis, I really can't understand why Roland did not put a comprehensive set of programmable realtime controls (at least 9 sliders, some knobs, maybe some pads).
Instead, there are all those category buttons named with old-fashioned names like "trumpet", "violin" and so on that no professional will ever care about.
If I were a professional, I'd have some doubt, especially considering the price of the instrument and the fact that, with only 4 layers, no controls, no master functions it is not powerful enough to control other instruments or make complex midi setups.
If I were an amateur (which I am... ;-) ), I would never buy a 17 kg keyboard (17 kg without weighted keybed!) that only makes the synth and so it probably cannot be the only instrument in your setup. You need roadies to fit the JP80 in your setup.
So... who will buy it?
I must admit that it sounds very good, though.
Official Roland Jupiter 80 Info Up
Re: Official Roland Jupiter 80 Info Up
@tompabels:
"Professional" who are you referring to?
Most professional musicians are dreaming of a board that has great sounds and is easy to use live and in a studio. Professional sound designers, they look at very different gear.
"Professional" who are you referring to?
Most professional musicians are dreaming of a board that has great sounds and is easy to use live and in a studio. Professional sound designers, they look at very different gear.
Re: Official Roland Jupiter 80 Info Up
i think it's a neat synth for the older folks (me) who've actually played with the original Jupitors back in the days. and im glad the price is high so that it's for the niche' market...not intended for some newb wannabie a musican types (as in, serious users only).
after looking at the colors i suppose i can get myself to accept it. not as eye popping with WTF-moment as when i first saw the picts a few days ago. hahaha. :D
i wish they released it a 88 key version for studio users though. i'll have to check one out. :)
after looking at the colors i suppose i can get myself to accept it. not as eye popping with WTF-moment as when i first saw the picts a few days ago. hahaha. :D
i wish they released it a 88 key version for studio users though. i'll have to check one out. :)
Re: Official Roland Jupiter 80 Info Up
Right, I've been a bit generic... :)Artemiy wrote:@tompabels:
"Professional" who are you referring to?
Most professional musicians are dreaming of a board that has great sounds and is easy to use live and in a studio. Professional sound designers, they look at very different gear.
It is a board designed for live performance, I think you'll agree with this. It is not for music production. So, let's restrict our target to people who play live.
Is this board for the gigging musician? I don't think so. It is basically a synth, so it does not have enough functions, and it's too heavy and bulky to carry around for people who play in clubs with bands, at weddings and so on. I'm not saying that these people don't need a synth. I'm saying that these people must get something that is both powerful and portable, because it must fit in their car's trunk, possibly together with other gear. And my opinion is that the JP80 does not have these features. What's more, I don't think that someone will be willing to carry such a heavy instrument without the advantage of a weighted keybed.
The same can be said for amateurs or young musicians. For these categories there's also one more reason: being usually on a budget (but the same can be said for many professionals!), if you spend $4000 for an instrument you will probably buy something that can do many things, I mean... with lots of layers, performances, controls, master keyboard functions, sequencer, sampling, pads and so on. Something that can fit every kind of need, because you cannot afford to buy a new instrument every time.
So there's only one category left: professionals who play live in really big stages, can afford to spend much to add an instrument to their setup and have roadies and trucks to carry their equipment. But this is a small niche.
I'm not saying that the other categories of musicians that I mentioned would not like the JP80... I'd like it very much! Simply, there are too many reasons to choose something else when you ponder the pros and cons.
The problem is that the JP80 seems to have been conceived as a high-end performance keyboard, somehow a high-end Juno Stage (that's the only reason to put 76 keys). But it is not easy to justify the price tag if the functions and realtime controls are the same of an entry level synth, even if the sounds are marvelous.
Re: Official Roland Jupiter 80 Info Up
Which ribbons at the sex shop you're familiar with or like?Artemiy wrote:Korg monotron has a ribbon controller. They also sell various ribbons at sex shops, you could use those as well...
Re: Official Roland Jupiter 80 Info Up
I'm not sure who Roland is actually marketing this thing to. Yes, it has synth and acoustic sounds but so does the Fantom G and the FG is a lot less expensive and in addition the FG has a Sequencer and a Sampler and expansion capability which the Jupiter-80 has none of those. That's three strikes against the Jupiter-80 right there if you ask me. ;) Many of Roland's synth customers have already gobbled up the V-Synth/GT, in droves, and will probably be apprehensive to spend an additional $4,000-plus on the Jupiter-80 because their synth needs are basically already met with the V-Synth/GT, no doubt, and therefore sales of the Jupiter-80 will likely suffer because of it.
On the acoustic side of things, I'm pretty sure the Jupiter-80 will have many excellent acoustic sounds, although that has yet to be determined as of today. The only acoustic sound I've heard so far on the Jupiter-80 is the ac Grand Piano which sounded great by the way. Only time will tell if the clone-wheel B3 organs and other acoustic sounds are as good or better than those on the Fantom G. But even if the Jupiter-80 exceeds the acoustic sound quality of the Fantom G, would it exceed them to such a degree that people would be willing to fork over $4,000-plus dollars when their Fantom G most likely has a greater multitude of unique acoustic sounds on it and that perhaps won't be available on the Jupiter-80, such as accordion or flute or tuba? What is the exact full palette of acoustic sounds on the Jupiter-80 anyway? Will there be "thousands" of them like there are on the Fantom G? If the Jupiter-80 lacks a certain acoustic instrument e.g. accordion, mandolin, oboe, clarinet, harmonica etc., etc., etc... there won't be a way to import or add those excluded instruments to the Jupiter-80, correct? NO expansion capability, correct? NO Sampling capability, correct? That will diminish the Jupiter-80 as a live performance instrument, needless to say, because if a keyboardist requires a certain acoustic sound e.g. accordion, harmonica, oboe, or whatever, and the Jupiter-80 doesn't already have it (or them) on it... you're out of luck... right? So in reality, if there isn't a full and substantial pallet of acoustic sounds contained within the Jupiter-80 a "two-tiered" keyboard set-up will likely be a performer's only option if indeed it holds true that the Jupiter-80's acoustic prowess and/or sound palette are less than stellar and/or less than abundant. If a keyboardist's only option is lugging two keyboards to a gig he would most likely skip buying a Jupiter-80 because of those limitations, in my opinion, and would instead choose a keyboard = that does it all in "one" package... like the Kronos or Motif XF, or indeed, like the Fantom G. :) Now if the Jupiter-80 actually has a "full" palette of acoustic sounds on it then a "two-tiered" keyboard scenario perhaps wouldn't be required. But like I said, if the Jupiter-80 doesn't run the "full" gamut of acoustic sounds people will probably hesitate forking over $4,000-plus dollars so they can lug 'two' keyboards around to their gigs... instead of one. Maybe it's just me I dunno...
So I think Roland has possibly painted themselves into a corner regarding the Jupiter-80 if you ask me. If people already own the quite competent V-Synth/GT, etc.. why would they fork over $4,000-plus in additional dollars on a Jupiter-80? What does the Jupiter-80 bring to the table (in the way of synth sounds) that the V-Snyth/GT doesn't already have? Besides the Jupiter-80 having a touchscreen that is? ;) Hmmm?? On the other end of the spectrum why would traditional keyboardists fork over $4,000-plus bucks on the Jupiter-80 when they already have the quite competent Fantom G, etc. - which also have expansion capabilities, a Sequencer and a Sampler - when the Jupiter-80 lacks all three? Hmmm???? A pretty "iffy" proposition if you ask me. ;) Sorry for being so negative but I'm just trying to look at it objectively.
I think Roland will probably sell quite a few Jupiter-80's though. To people who don't need or want a Sequencer, a Sampler, or Expansion capability... and who don't already own a V-Synth/GT etc., and/or a capable Workstation that is.
I do think the Jupiter-80's synth sounds (those I've heard so far) are very phat and superb to my ears. If it turns out that the acoustic sounds are also the bee's knees then a lot of people will perhaps spring for a Jupiter-80 for the excellent bread n' butter sounds on it too. If the B3's are extraordinarily good then organists might take the plunge as well. I think Roland has also improved the arpeggiator/arpeggiations too. 256 note polyphony is also a bonus. :) Ultimately, the market for this beast will be limited though in my opinion. Which Roland could have ultimately averted if they had actually given the Jupiter-80 a Sequencer, a Sampler, and expansion capability... then it would have sold like hot-cakes in my opinion. As it stands now, Roland has inadvertently narrowed the market down to a restricted and 'niched few' if you ask me. And as such, I can't fully comprehend why they did it that way. Unless they actually want people to "lug" two keyboards around to gigs perhaps?? :D
Definitely not a win/win for them in my opinion. But I think they'll sell enough of them to make a tidy sum and will add a reasonable profit to their bottom line no doubt. Time will tell though. In the meantime, when will Roland release their next "Workstation?" Or will they release any more Workstations at all?? Apparently the Jupiter-80 is Roland's... *new* Flagship. New flagship Synth??... or new Flagship keyboard?? Which is it?? Uh... oh! :O The demise of the workstation may be already upon us folks. :( Pity if true.
On the acoustic side of things, I'm pretty sure the Jupiter-80 will have many excellent acoustic sounds, although that has yet to be determined as of today. The only acoustic sound I've heard so far on the Jupiter-80 is the ac Grand Piano which sounded great by the way. Only time will tell if the clone-wheel B3 organs and other acoustic sounds are as good or better than those on the Fantom G. But even if the Jupiter-80 exceeds the acoustic sound quality of the Fantom G, would it exceed them to such a degree that people would be willing to fork over $4,000-plus dollars when their Fantom G most likely has a greater multitude of unique acoustic sounds on it and that perhaps won't be available on the Jupiter-80, such as accordion or flute or tuba? What is the exact full palette of acoustic sounds on the Jupiter-80 anyway? Will there be "thousands" of them like there are on the Fantom G? If the Jupiter-80 lacks a certain acoustic instrument e.g. accordion, mandolin, oboe, clarinet, harmonica etc., etc., etc... there won't be a way to import or add those excluded instruments to the Jupiter-80, correct? NO expansion capability, correct? NO Sampling capability, correct? That will diminish the Jupiter-80 as a live performance instrument, needless to say, because if a keyboardist requires a certain acoustic sound e.g. accordion, harmonica, oboe, or whatever, and the Jupiter-80 doesn't already have it (or them) on it... you're out of luck... right? So in reality, if there isn't a full and substantial pallet of acoustic sounds contained within the Jupiter-80 a "two-tiered" keyboard set-up will likely be a performer's only option if indeed it holds true that the Jupiter-80's acoustic prowess and/or sound palette are less than stellar and/or less than abundant. If a keyboardist's only option is lugging two keyboards to a gig he would most likely skip buying a Jupiter-80 because of those limitations, in my opinion, and would instead choose a keyboard = that does it all in "one" package... like the Kronos or Motif XF, or indeed, like the Fantom G. :) Now if the Jupiter-80 actually has a "full" palette of acoustic sounds on it then a "two-tiered" keyboard scenario perhaps wouldn't be required. But like I said, if the Jupiter-80 doesn't run the "full" gamut of acoustic sounds people will probably hesitate forking over $4,000-plus dollars so they can lug 'two' keyboards around to their gigs... instead of one. Maybe it's just me I dunno...
So I think Roland has possibly painted themselves into a corner regarding the Jupiter-80 if you ask me. If people already own the quite competent V-Synth/GT, etc.. why would they fork over $4,000-plus in additional dollars on a Jupiter-80? What does the Jupiter-80 bring to the table (in the way of synth sounds) that the V-Snyth/GT doesn't already have? Besides the Jupiter-80 having a touchscreen that is? ;) Hmmm?? On the other end of the spectrum why would traditional keyboardists fork over $4,000-plus bucks on the Jupiter-80 when they already have the quite competent Fantom G, etc. - which also have expansion capabilities, a Sequencer and a Sampler - when the Jupiter-80 lacks all three? Hmmm???? A pretty "iffy" proposition if you ask me. ;) Sorry for being so negative but I'm just trying to look at it objectively.
I think Roland will probably sell quite a few Jupiter-80's though. To people who don't need or want a Sequencer, a Sampler, or Expansion capability... and who don't already own a V-Synth/GT etc., and/or a capable Workstation that is.
I do think the Jupiter-80's synth sounds (those I've heard so far) are very phat and superb to my ears. If it turns out that the acoustic sounds are also the bee's knees then a lot of people will perhaps spring for a Jupiter-80 for the excellent bread n' butter sounds on it too. If the B3's are extraordinarily good then organists might take the plunge as well. I think Roland has also improved the arpeggiator/arpeggiations too. 256 note polyphony is also a bonus. :) Ultimately, the market for this beast will be limited though in my opinion. Which Roland could have ultimately averted if they had actually given the Jupiter-80 a Sequencer, a Sampler, and expansion capability... then it would have sold like hot-cakes in my opinion. As it stands now, Roland has inadvertently narrowed the market down to a restricted and 'niched few' if you ask me. And as such, I can't fully comprehend why they did it that way. Unless they actually want people to "lug" two keyboards around to gigs perhaps?? :D
Definitely not a win/win for them in my opinion. But I think they'll sell enough of them to make a tidy sum and will add a reasonable profit to their bottom line no doubt. Time will tell though. In the meantime, when will Roland release their next "Workstation?" Or will they release any more Workstations at all?? Apparently the Jupiter-80 is Roland's... *new* Flagship. New flagship Synth??... or new Flagship keyboard?? Which is it?? Uh... oh! :O The demise of the workstation may be already upon us folks. :( Pity if true.
-
IgorCristo
- Posts: 256
- Joined: 18:43, 26 May 2008
Re: Official Roland Jupiter 80 Info Up
A new video...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TlTvhjsc--0
I kind of think it is very cool. It isn't for me, but it's certainly better than Fantom-G in terms of sound.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TlTvhjsc--0
I kind of think it is very cool. It isn't for me, but it's certainly better than Fantom-G in terms of sound.
Re: Official Roland Jupiter 80 Info Up
keys- your posts are too long... just highlight wat you want to say and make a few sentenses. audience will thank you (probably musically too). ;)
i think the J80 is aimed at those that wanted the original but couldn't afford one back then, but now they can.
i think the J80 is aimed at those that wanted the original but couldn't afford one back then, but now they can.
-
Undercoverman
- Posts: 69
- Joined: 01:06, 17 August 2008
Re: Official Roland Jupiter 80 Info Up
I think Korg have genuinely changed the game (to borrow their phrase...) to a certain extent because with the Kronos, they've essentially trampled all over their other keyboards in an effort to provide those who are willing to pay with everything they can offer. Each of the 9 engines in the Kronos can be found across the various other keyboards in their range - those keyboards are available to those who want to specialise in a certain area, but they haven't deliberately shot themselves in the foot by gimping the Kronos in order to make it fit within their product line. They made it everything it can be, which is what any manufacturer should be doing with their flagship brand.
So here comes my point - what is Roland's flagship keyboard? Is it the V-Synth? Is it the Fantom? Is it the Jupiter? The V-Synth is still the most complicated (but rewarding) keyboard in their range for the dedicated synthesist, and it's almost 4 years old. Nothing in the Fantom or the Jupiter matches the GT for the depth of sound design. The Fantom was Roland's flagship, but its acoustic sounds have now been superceded by the Jupiter, which boasts (according to the copy) far more realistic, modelled (rather than sampled) sounds. So the Fantom, if we're to believe the hype, won't sound as good as the Jupiter when it comes to acoustic sounds. While the Fantom is no slouch, the flagship keyboard in Roland's range for, say, tonewheel organ modelling in a keyboard which can also produce EP sounds is the Jupiter 80. The Jupiter 80, though, contains no sampling capability and no sequencer (not a big deal as far as I'm concerned). Building on this, it doesn't appear to contain a phrasing system like the G outside of some switchable arps, the complexity of which remains to be seen, or any of the other features that now make the G unique. So the Jupiter effectively steps on the Fantom's toes for sounds but lacks some features that make it unique. It is also marginally less powerful when it comes to producing 'pure synth' sounds, the two designs being similar. For a synth that costs as much as it does, is it unreasonable to expect the Jupiter 80 to include some features that the Fantom or V-Synth have?
It seems like Roland would like to sell some of a variety of differnet keyboards, rather than a truckload of one that can do everything. We know that Roland discontinued the G7 to make room for the Jupiter as a 76 key synth action solution for same reasons that they won't sell, say, an 88 key hammer action MIDI controller any more - they want you to have to buy something considerably more expensive to get access to a unique feature set in their keyboard catalogue. Rather than think 'what's the best keyboard we can make', it seems as though they've designed the Jupiter 80 to sit awkwardly within their product line. Not quite the best, but enough uniqueness to get buyers of their other equipment interested. I just can't see how, in a market that includes the Kronos, doing anything other than going for broke could benefit them. There's absolutely no reason whatsoever to go for this over the Kronos in my opinion.
In a world where, increasingly, musicians are bringing their laptops on stage with them, manufacturers are going to have to try harder and harder to compete with software solutions. Software can do way more, for way less. For the live performer, the only thing hardware can offer is convenience. Everything already loaded. No worries about RAM or processor load. Minimal set up. Seamless switching of sounds. The Jupiter 80 can provide that - so too can the Kronos, and more besides, for around the same price.
So here comes my point - what is Roland's flagship keyboard? Is it the V-Synth? Is it the Fantom? Is it the Jupiter? The V-Synth is still the most complicated (but rewarding) keyboard in their range for the dedicated synthesist, and it's almost 4 years old. Nothing in the Fantom or the Jupiter matches the GT for the depth of sound design. The Fantom was Roland's flagship, but its acoustic sounds have now been superceded by the Jupiter, which boasts (according to the copy) far more realistic, modelled (rather than sampled) sounds. So the Fantom, if we're to believe the hype, won't sound as good as the Jupiter when it comes to acoustic sounds. While the Fantom is no slouch, the flagship keyboard in Roland's range for, say, tonewheel organ modelling in a keyboard which can also produce EP sounds is the Jupiter 80. The Jupiter 80, though, contains no sampling capability and no sequencer (not a big deal as far as I'm concerned). Building on this, it doesn't appear to contain a phrasing system like the G outside of some switchable arps, the complexity of which remains to be seen, or any of the other features that now make the G unique. So the Jupiter effectively steps on the Fantom's toes for sounds but lacks some features that make it unique. It is also marginally less powerful when it comes to producing 'pure synth' sounds, the two designs being similar. For a synth that costs as much as it does, is it unreasonable to expect the Jupiter 80 to include some features that the Fantom or V-Synth have?
It seems like Roland would like to sell some of a variety of differnet keyboards, rather than a truckload of one that can do everything. We know that Roland discontinued the G7 to make room for the Jupiter as a 76 key synth action solution for same reasons that they won't sell, say, an 88 key hammer action MIDI controller any more - they want you to have to buy something considerably more expensive to get access to a unique feature set in their keyboard catalogue. Rather than think 'what's the best keyboard we can make', it seems as though they've designed the Jupiter 80 to sit awkwardly within their product line. Not quite the best, but enough uniqueness to get buyers of their other equipment interested. I just can't see how, in a market that includes the Kronos, doing anything other than going for broke could benefit them. There's absolutely no reason whatsoever to go for this over the Kronos in my opinion.
In a world where, increasingly, musicians are bringing their laptops on stage with them, manufacturers are going to have to try harder and harder to compete with software solutions. Software can do way more, for way less. For the live performer, the only thing hardware can offer is convenience. Everything already loaded. No worries about RAM or processor load. Minimal set up. Seamless switching of sounds. The Jupiter 80 can provide that - so too can the Kronos, and more besides, for around the same price.
-
Igglethorpe
- Posts: 592
- Joined: 09:27, 23 January 2005
- Location: Arizona, USA
Re: Official Roland Jupiter 80 Info Up
Little confused here. The Motif XF has a sequencer...On the other end of the spectrum why would traditional keyboardists fork over $4,000-plus bucks on the Jupiter-80 when they already have the quite competent Fantom G, etc. - which also have expansion capabilities, a Sequencer (except the Motif XF) and a Sampler - when the Jupiter-80 lacks all three?
At any rate, if I was in the market for a new keyboard and had to compare with everything out there (besides the Motif XF which I already own) I would pick the Kronos hands down. I don't see what the Jupiter offers over the Korg...
Maybe I'm missing the point.
Re: Official Roland Jupiter 80 Info Up
back in the days there were only synths, no workstations...sequencers and drum machines were 2 different entities so one would need a synth + sequencer + drum machine.
so with that said, the traditional keyboard folks like me do not feel werd about just a synth with no sequencer or drum machine built-in.... honestly i get more excited about cool digital pianos these days than workstations because they are built more authentically as an instrument (cool factor) rather than a composer's tool.
so with that said, the traditional keyboard folks like me do not feel werd about just a synth with no sequencer or drum machine built-in.... honestly i get more excited about cool digital pianos these days than workstations because they are built more authentically as an instrument (cool factor) rather than a composer's tool.
Re: Official Roland Jupiter 80 Info Up
<So here comes my point - what is Roland's flagship keyboard?>
Roland never had a "ring to rule them all". It's been their long-lasting policy. Back then they had Jupiters and Junos. And they kept coming in pairs. D-50 and W-30. D-70 and JD-800. They even did not have sequencers included. (excepting the W-30 and D-20) You needed to buy a separate MC-300 / MC-500 (and later MC-50 Mk II) to be able to sequence. Heck, they even had separate drum-machines like the R-8 / R-8M!
You should be thankful they kinda forgot about their policy for a while otherwise workstations were the opposite of "rolandish" products. The workstation is the product of a Korg mindset...
Roland never had a "ring to rule them all". It's been their long-lasting policy. Back then they had Jupiters and Junos. And they kept coming in pairs. D-50 and W-30. D-70 and JD-800. They even did not have sequencers included. (excepting the W-30 and D-20) You needed to buy a separate MC-300 / MC-500 (and later MC-50 Mk II) to be able to sequence. Heck, they even had separate drum-machines like the R-8 / R-8M!
You should be thankful they kinda forgot about their policy for a while otherwise workstations were the opposite of "rolandish" products. The workstation is the product of a Korg mindset...
-
hoodedclaw
- Posts: 116
- Joined: 22:00, 1 November 2004
- Location: penelope pitstops bed
Re: Official Roland Jupiter 80 Info Up
A lot of musicians out there still prefer to use a seperate synth, sequencer and drum machine. Workstations are for ones who like to do everything under one roof as in ITB on a DAW/PC.
The JP-80 should have been called Fantom V or the V80-GT.
The JP-80 should have been called Fantom V or the V80-GT.
Re: Official Roland Jupiter 80 Info Up
absolutely agree! M1 started it all off. no reason Roland needs to imitate this.Parsifal wrote: The workstation is the product of a Korg mindset...
nord hasn't and appears to be doing quite well. it's good to be different... well, not sure about so much colors but at least as an instrument the J80 gets a (^^)b thumbs up from me.
-
Igglethorpe
- Posts: 592
- Joined: 09:27, 23 January 2005
- Location: Arizona, USA
Re: Official Roland Jupiter 80 Info Up
Indeed. I suppose that is true.
I guess what throws me off is it has a bunch of bread and butter sounds with some synthesis. In my mind, those types of boards should have sequencers. When I see products like this (missing workstation components) I expect something very unique and specific. Boutique type instruments that perform a certain function extremely well.
Keyboards like this that come to mind:
V-Synths
Moogs
Virus's
SH-201
Gaia
David Smith's
I guess what throws me off is it has a bunch of bread and butter sounds with some synthesis. In my mind, those types of boards should have sequencers. When I see products like this (missing workstation components) I expect something very unique and specific. Boutique type instruments that perform a certain function extremely well.
Keyboards like this that come to mind:
V-Synths
Moogs
Virus's
SH-201
Gaia
David Smith's