Why would you purchase an 80 over a G or Kronos?

[Leh173]

It's clear this is a high quality specialized instrument. The only thing left to do is to play one when it's out and see if it floats your boat. BTW the Aussie price I have seen so far is $4K, so at least it's in line with the US price, so that's good.

PS: Oh and scope out the manual too! Hope that gets released soon.

[PauloF]

Why would I NOT purchase an 80 over a Kronos?
Because of this!
:))))))))))))))))))

IMHO the question should be "Why would you compare an 80 to the Kronos?"


There's no comparison...to compare a performance Synth to a Workstation, doesn't seem logical to me. They are two complete different beasts!!
;-)

[Mystic38]

Personally i see no reason for any company to inform anyone that nothing has happened...

i see there being none, ZERO, chance of any substitute/inferior parts being used... and only people with no understanding of electronics manufacturing processes would think so...the thought alone makes me laugh.

Korg is not a schlock house, and any item in modern manufacture proceeds through a rigorous qualification process, with individual items and recommended substitutes being identified at an early stage in the development cycle... pretty much around the prototyping stage, and so unless you can point to a particularly unique semiconductor process and wafer foundry that Korg uses that is now underwater just relax.

LOL.

Each time I've intimated towards this fact (that Korg have been NO different to Yamaha & Roland in terms of logistics etc), I've been shot down on both Gearslutz and Korg Forums........

Basically, and soley IMHO, Korg UK (in my case) are playing a very poor game by not informing its customers as to what is going on.

Still, I think they've (Korg) captively got my money, as the JP80 doesn't do what I want and the Fantom may be an option as a used item, but not yet.

[mojkarma]

Why would I NOT purchase an 80 over a Kronos?
Because of this!
:))))))))))))))))))

IMHO the question should be "Why would you compare an 80 to the Kronos?"


There's no comparison...to compare a performance Synth to a Workstation, doesn't seem logical to me. They are two complete different beasts!!
;-)

The comparison of a performance synth and a workstation can be perfectly logical. It only depends how you do it.
It is a fact that a lot of people buy workstations to use them live as a performance synth. I do it, a lot of my friends do it, and if you watch music shows, concerts, gigs, everywhere you'll see workstations on stage: tritons, motifs, some fantoms and so on.
Take the Fantom G as an example: it has a live mode. It doesn't need to be labeled like that. Korg or Yamaha don't use the term live mode. They call it combination or performance or setup (like Kurzweil). What you do there is, you combine a couple of patches into a split or layered setup for live use. Kurzweil for example doesn't call its keyboard as workstation (the PC3 line), but as a performance controller. Regardless, the PC3 has a sequencer. So, the labels don't really matter.
You don't need to use the onboard sequencer just because the workstation has it. I have never used the sequencer on the Fantom G. I don't even know how to record one single note on it.
But so far, the Fantom G is the only product from Roland which covers a wide sound palette, has a sampler and a lot of memory locations for your needed setups.

So, the decision whether I buy a Kronos or the J80 (being the topic here) as a live performing musician depends on what are my priorities and how well they're covered by the instrument. For me, a sampler is a must. That fact renders the J80 useless for me. I wouldn't buy the J80 even for 1500 dollars because it doesn't have all what I need.
And this is where I start to wonder about Rolands decisions when they make a product, but completely neglect what happened to them with other keyboards they produced in the past.
Remember the failure of the Fantom Fa 76. It didn't had a sampler and it was sold very badly. Roland reacted quickly and released the Fantom S.
The Fantom G was released again without the sampler. You don't need the sampler for the workstation stuff (sequencing) because the FG was able to record audio. Yet, Roland provided the sampler functions thru an os update. Without that, they would have sell not even closely so many FG's as they actually did (regardless how big or small the number actually is).
Sadly, Roland learned nothing from its experience with the Fa76 or the FG!
The J80 is concept wise comparable to the Juno Stage (because they are both dedicated live performing oriented keyboards). I'm sure that the Juno Stage didn't sell extraordinarily well. And I'm afraid, even sure, that neither the J80 will sell so well that Roland could say that the J80 was a moneymaker for them.
Let's forget the sequencer as a part either in a workstation or on the J80. The fact is, the more features you put into the product, the wider the possible user base is. Whatever you take out, you make the potential buyer crowd smaller. And that exactly happens with Rolands decision.
Since the J80 costs as much as an equally sized workstation, everybody will compare it to the competition. The question will always be whether I absolutely need every single acoustic sound being supernatural, or some other functions/features which the J80 lacks.

[ScoobyDoo555]

Personally i see no reason for any company to inform anyone that nothing has happened...

i see there being none, ZERO, chance of any substitute/inferior parts being used... and only people with no understanding of electronics manufacturing processes would think so...the thought alone makes me laugh.

Korg is not a schlock house, and any item in modern manufacture proceeds through a rigorous qualification process, with individual items and recommended substitutes being identified at an early stage in the development cycle... pretty much around the prototyping stage, and so unless you can point to a particularly unique semiconductor process and wafer foundry that Korg uses that is now underwater just relax.

Again, my point seems to have be missed......(don't panic as it must be me!!!!)
All 3 of the major synth manufacturers have been hit with the SAME problems..... yet Korg are the only one seen to be dragging their heels.....

THIS is my point...... what is making Korg so different??

The OTHER point is Roland have announced a newer machine, its availability AND price before Korg have..... it does beg the question, "why?" or to be more precise, "why can't Korg do the same?"

I don't actually understand your quoting me, yet referring to electronics manufacturing - not only do I actually understand this process (to be fair, you couldn't have known this), but I have made no reference to it in my postings......

[ScoobyDoo555]

The only reason why these 2 machines are being compared (albeit apples & pears) is that there's nothing else on the horizon TO compare!!!
And it gives rise to lengthy debates and discussion on various forums.....

[Python]

Remember the failure of the Fantom Fa 76. It didn't had a sampler and it was sold very badly. Roland reacted quickly and released the Fantom S.
The Fantom G was released again without the sampler. You don't need the sampler for the workstation stuff (sequencing) because the FG was able to record audio. Yet, Roland provided the sampler functions thru an os update. Without that, they would have sell not even closely so many FG's as they actually did (regardless how big or small the number actually is).

So what you're suggesting is that we just keep complaining unfill they put the sampler and sequencer in it and make the perfect keyboard? :D
Sorry, but I don't quite buy into that. No keyboard manufacturer has ever put all their best stuff in one keyboard. Yamaha has their top sounds and articulation in the tyros while the soundsculptor is more in the motif. Kronos is a step in the right direction, but I doubt it can compare with this one when it comes to sounds, playability and articulations.
And Roland will not make their soundset as extensive in their next Fantom, cause they want the pros to buy both...

[Artemiy]

@mojkarma:

What you're saying is not completely correct, the Fantom-G had sampling from the start, you could import and record samples and then assign them to a sample set, patch or rhythm kit. What it lacked is multisampling, which was indeed added later in 1.10 or 1.20.

[mojkarma]

So what you're suggesting is that we just keep complaining unfill they put the sampler and sequencer in it and make the perfect keyboard? :D

No. Roland hardly ever reacts on complaining. And I don't consider that a sampler and a sequencer make a keyboard perfect.

Sorry, but I don't quite buy into that. No keyboard manufacturer has ever put all their best stuff in one keyboard. Yamaha has their top sounds and articulation in the tyros while the soundsculptor is more in the motif.

I get your meaning, but I think you're wrong. THE best stuff doesn't exist. Saying that the Tyros has the best sounds is simply wrong. And BTW, even the Tyros has the ability to load user samples! The PaX from Korg also has it.
I don't care what Roland thinks about the need of an integrated sampler or not in a keyboard like the J80, I know for sure that this keyboard is because of that not an option for me and I know quite a lot of people who will think exactly the same. It depends where you live and what kind of music you make, but from the company standpoint, they could sell more by implementing what they already have and make the J80 a greater option instead of what it is now. A live performing keyboarder also wants or need to use his own sounds. The ability to load multisamples these days is really not rocket science.

Kronos is a step in the right direction, but I doubt it can compare with this one when it comes to sounds, playability and articulations.

And that again is a completely wrong statement.
Let's talk about the bread and butter sounds: For the piano, e. piano and organs, the Kronos uses a similar technology like the J80. With the difference, that the organ on the Kronos is far more flexible on stage because you can control the drawbars. What sounds better? It will always be and stay a subjective opinion.
The Kronos also has a VA section. Even FM is there.
The differences start to appear when it comes to brass, strings, guitars. And there it's the personal question whether you'll choose the J80 because you need a trumpet of a critical quality or the sampled more static version on a workstation will simply do the job but you get other important features.

I wont buy neither the Kronos nor the J80. I'll stick with my FG right now. But my next keyboard certainly wouldn't be a J80. It may sound great, but for me a sampler is a must. Every single company got that lesson, with the exception of Roland. Well, time will tell if they are right or not.

What you're saying is not completely correct, the Fantom-G had sampling from the start, you could import and record samples and then assign them to a sample set, patch or rhythm kit. What it lacked is multisampling, which was indeed added later in 1.10 or 1.20.

I knew of course about the difference but I simply wasn't clear in my message. The multisampling was what I was meaning.

[Devnor]

Let's talk about the bread and butter sounds: For the piano, e. piano and organs, the Kronos uses a similar technology like the J80. With the difference, that the organ on the Kronos is far more flexible on stage because you can control the drawbars. What sounds better? It will always be and stay a subjective opinion.

The Kronos also has a VA section. Even FM is there.

Who says you can't control drawbar settings on JP80? Can tone blender interact with organ settings? I could see this as a powerful tool when going from a particular registration to all out 888888888s with overdrive effects all controlled from one knob.

Lack of sampling is a two edged sword. Certainly adding sampling would either increase the price or cause some features to be downgraded or even omitted. I love my mellotron & vocal sounds I gotta admit it would be nice to have these tones available. This is #1 reason why I have not cancelled Kronos in lieu of JP80.

I'll trade you FM for Supernatural acoustic sounds.

[Python]

Kronos is a step in the right direction, but I doubt it can compare with this one when it comes to sounds, playability and articulations.

And that again is a completely wrong statement.
Let's talk about the bread and butter sounds: For the piano, e. piano and organs, the Kronos uses a similar technology like the J80.
With the difference, that the organ on the Kronos is far more flexible on stage because you can control the drawbars.

Ehm.... You CAN control the drawbars in realtime on the J80 on the touch-screen - but I do agree it would have been nicer with sliders for it..

What sounds better? It will always be and stay a subjective opinion.
The Kronos also has a VA section. Even FM is there.
The differences start to appear when it comes to brass, strings, guitars. And there it's the personal question whether you'll choose the J80 because you need a trumpet of a critical quality or the sampled more static version on a workstation will simply do the job but you get other important features.

Of course it's a matter of taste, but to me, this is the first time I've heard acoustic sounds on a hard-synth worth paying for. I don't care about synth-technologies, VA, FM and all that stuff. I have so many synth-sounds and synth emulations all over the place back here, that I never use already.
The supernatural sounds I've had on the AX-synth and VP-770 has been way more expressive than anything I ever played (including the extensive orchestral section in Komplete 7!). And now, with the Behaviour Modeling (wich the Kronos comes nowhere near!) and some realtime controls for it (beyond sw1&2 + pitchwheel) is just plain awesome.

I wont buy neither the Kronos nor the J80. I'll stick with my FG right now. But my next keyboard certainly wouldn't be a J80. It may sound great, but for me a sampler is a must. Every single company got that lesson, with the exception of Roland. Well, time will tell if they are right or not.

I've been looking for the perfect keyboard (for me) for a LONG time, and the criteria is GREAT acoustic sounds (and the Tyros is WAY to jazzy sounding for my taste, and the motif sounds like XX IMO!), sampling and sequencing.
I've come to terms with the fact that this will NEVER happen... And as such, I've accepted that I'm going to have to use 2 keyboards. And so the JP80 along with my current FX6 will be everything I'll need for many years to come...

[en76]

That will be most likely my option too. JP-80 and FG7 to be united first then maybe the V-Synth GT.
Kronos will be great too. If I to buy a kronos, that has to be a 88-keys. No make sense 73-keys weighted. down side is simply the heavy weight on this. Module will do fine since I love the roland keys better than korg or yamaha.

[PauloF]

The comparison of a performance synth and a workstation can be perfectly logical. It only depends how you do it.
It is a fact that a lot of people buy workstations to use them live as a performance synth. I do it, a lot of my friends do it, and if you watch music shows, concerts, gigs, everywhere you'll see workstations on stage: tritons, motifs, some fantoms and so on.
Take the Fantom G as an example: it has a live mode. It doesn't need to be labeled like that. Korg or Yamaha don't use the term live mode. They call it combination or performance or setup (like Kurzweil). What you do there is, you combine a couple of patches into a split or layered setup for live use. Kurzweil for example doesn't call its keyboard as workstation (the PC3 line), but as a performance controller. Regardless, the PC3 has a sequencer. So, the labels don't really matter.

I'll give you that, but I still think that comparing Apples with Oranges on a 1-2-1 is not the best approach. You need to compare it with something similar from the other brands, not with a full blown workstation...And there's a desert there...

You don't need to use the onboard sequencer just because the workstation has it. I have never used the sequencer on the Fantom G. I don't even know how to record one single note on it.
But so far, the Fantom G is the only product from Roland which covers a wide sound palette, has a sampler and a lot of memory locations for your needed setups.

Have you seen the jupiter-80 complete specs?
Being a performance synth I'm sure Roland thought about that...let's wait and see.

So, the decision whether I buy a Kronos or the J80 (being the topic here) as a live performing musician depends on what are my priorities and how well they're covered by the instrument. For me, a sampler is a must. That fact renders the J80 useless for me. I wouldn't buy the J80 even for 1500 dollars because it doesn't have all what I need.

Well, that's why we have all the diversification in the World...to please everybody.

And this is where I start to wonder about Rolands decisions when they make a product, but completely neglect what happened to them with other keyboards they produced in the past.
Remember the failure of the Fantom Fa 76. It didn't had a sampler and it was sold very badly. Roland reacted quickly and released the Fantom S.
The Fantom G was released again without the sampler. You don't need the sampler for the workstation stuff (sequencing) because the FG was able to record audio. Yet, Roland provided the sampler functions thru an os update. Without that, they would have sell not even closely so many FG's as they actually did (regardless how big or small the number actually is).
Sadly, Roland learned nothing from its experience with the Fa76 or the FG!
The J80 is concept wise comparable to the Juno Stage (because they are both dedicated live performing oriented keyboards). I'm sure that the Juno Stage didn't sell extraordinarily well. And I'm afraid, even sure, that neither the J80 will sell so well that Roland could say that the J80 was a moneymaker for them.
Let's forget the sequencer as a part either in a workstation or on the J80. The fact is, the more features you put into the product, the wider the possible user base is. Whatever you take out, you make the potential buyer crowd smaller. And that exactly happens with Rolands decision.

FG had a Sampler since the beginning, only Multisample support was missing in the first OS versions.
I can't comment on Roland's commercial decisions being wise or not, but the Jupiter-80 is not an entry level synth, like the Junos (someone even compared this to a J-Stage...funny)

Since the J80 costs as much as an equally sized workstation, everybody will compare it to the competition. The question will always be whether I absolutely need every single acoustic sound being supernatural, or some other functions/features which the J80 lacks.

Correct, if you are trying to get the most for the same/similar amount of money, which I accept, but it's not the way I would choose my next synth (If I ever buy another one...). I would choose based on features that I need, not features that I might need someday (most probably never).


Just MHO ;-)
cheers,
Paulo