Sound on Sound review Aug 2011

[RKfan]

Sound on Sound magazine will be publishing a review of the Jupiter 80 in their August edition (saw it in the shop this afternoon).

This is due to hit the shops about the 20th July - the article should also be purchasable from their website about the same time (usually cost 99p).

They did a review of the Korg Kronos a couple of months ago and I guess Grodon Reid will be doing the jupiter 80 review as well.

Hopefully we'll be getting a bit more information about what this Synth can do

[RKfan]

Review by Gordon Reid is in Sound on Sound on sale today.
Key comments

Pros:
(1) Its a solid, robust performance synthe with a good keyboard and reassringly large, freindly controls
(2) It's a surprisingly powerful and capable VA synth
(3) It offers some excellent acoustic sounds
(4) It incorporates a useful audio player/recorder
(5) It's compatable with V-link and MIDI visual control
(6) It offers some unusual, performance-oriented features not found elsewhere

Cons:
(1) The programming architecture is not well explained
(2) The effects structure is not as flexible as one might hope
(3) There is no memory for saving edited Supernatureal Acoustic sounds
(4) Its name. I fear that this will prove to be a handicap rather than a benefit
(5) Its price, which puts it at the top end of the stage keyboard market


Summary
I wish that Roland named this synthesizer the "Stage 80" or something similar, because it's a very capable performance keyboard offering some unusual features and some great sounds. But the 'Jupiter' name could be a millstone, creating all manner of preconceptions that have to be eliminated before potential users begin to appreciate it for what it is. In short; very interesting synthesizer, very poorly chosen name. If you're after a stage synth, check it out for the first reason, don't ignore it for the second.

[mojkarma]

My opinion:
A magazine review is the last place where I would seek for some valuable information. These days, a youtube clip, a forum and a manual which you can download will give you ten thousand times more valid answers than a magazine review which will never point out the real negative sides of a product for various reasons.

However, the cons that are mentioned, I would interpret them in a way that the review is not really positive. And still, it won't and shouldn't prevent somebody to buy the jp80.

[Chrisk-K]

I trust a Keyboard Mag review. SoS reviews hardly provide insights. They are more like glorified product brochures.

[PauloF]

Review by Gordon Reid is in Sound on Sound on sale today.

...Summary
I wish that Roland named this synthesizer the "Stage 80" or something similar, because it's a very capable performance keyboard offering some unusual features and some great sounds. But the 'Jupiter' name could be a millstone, creating all manner of preconceptions that have to be eliminated before potential users begin to appreciate it for what it is. In short; very interesting synthesizer, very poorly chosen name. If you're after a stage synth, check it out for the first reason, don't ignore it for the second.

"don't ignore it for the second"

???

I guess that a musician buying the JUP-80 for its features is not looking for the name just because its a Jupiter...

[Bruce Lychee]

I read the article. It isn't all just marketing. He does provide some useful details about the synth section, limits on the ways you can use effects, his confusion over some of the terms and where edits were being saved and discusses some of the articulations. I think he is a little confused about the SN label and what it means.

It isn't a robust article but it doesn't come off as a marketing piece to me. His observations and conclusions also seem pretty consistent with my experience thus far.

[Chrisk-K]

Yamaha introduced a CS1x, an affordable digital synth, about 10 years ago. Did musicians think it was a successor to the CS-80?

Korg even used the CX-3 name on two different organs; one introduced in the 70's and the other in the 90's.

[Devnor]

(3) There is no memory for saving edited Supernatureal Acoustic sounds

This is not entirely correct as the edited acoustic sounds are saved as part of the live set however there is no way to copy data between sets.

[Bruce Lychee]

(3) There is no memory for saving edited Supernatureal Acoustic sounds

This is not entirely correct as the edited acoustic sounds are saved as part of the live set however there is no way to copy data between sets.

Correct. I think that bullet point is misleading many people.

[ozy]

I trust a Keyboard Mag review. SoS reviews hardly provide insights. They are more like glorified product brochures.

amen.

SOS often publishes AMAZING technical insight [I'll praise again and again the "synth secrets" column, and similar columns],

it is extremely precise in its technical details when quoting specifics, etc...

but when it comes to new product reviews... it's BrownNoseVille.

It sounds like they feel free when NOT discussing specific products but general themes [read a column about string machines, and they will exactly tell you which synth car replicate them, and which can't],

but they get embarassed in saying anything less than enthusiastic when the Boss [advertising client] is around.

Keyboard Mag is good, albeit it was more reliable when it hadn't been reduced to a 4-page paper summary of their website. Its longest discussion of a product currently amounts to maybe 50 or 80 lines...

They have "visualized" the magazine. too little text and too many photos, for a MUSICAL magazine.

[Chrisk-K]

The problem is SoS rushes its new product reviews. They must be compelled to be the first one. Their Kronos review was out 3 months ago. I don't know how long the reviewer spent his time with the Kronos or the JP-80. How can you review the JP-80 without a parameter manual? I wasted $1.49.

Jim Aiken wrote many incredible reviews back in the 90's. His reviews of the Wavestation, the K2000, etc. should have won the Pulitzer award :-) Those days are gone.

[keysme]

What I got from the SOS Jupiter-80 review is that the reviewer knows firsthand how the original Jupiter 8 sounded, and unfortunately, the Jupiter-80 is NO Jupiter 8, not even close apparently. In fact, it is obvious the Jupiter-80 'lacks' in Jupiter 8 appeal to such a large degree that Roland should have named the Jupiter-80 something else, like the Stage-80, etc. In other words, to even associate the Jupiter-80 with the legendary Jupiter 8 is stretching the truth and evidently the boundaries of reality too it seems. And the "embarrassment" from such a bad decision could actually hurt Roland's public image because Roland is saying the Jupiter-80 is a metamorphosis of the legendary Jupiter-8 when apparently it doesn't even come close to achieving such a feat. In other words, 30 year old technology trumps new technology rolling off the conveyor belts at Roland Japan. :( At least in this case anyhow. If that's not an embarrassment for Roland I don't know what is.

Now, if Roland had named the keyboard the Stage-80 etc. then no comparison would have been made to equate a Stage-80 with the legendary Jupiter 8. The Sound on Sound reviewer (an expert in his field by the way) is saying, in a round about way, that the Jupiter-80 has failed in that regard apparently. Although he said it in such a way so as to tip-toe through the land mines of personal vindictiveness. In other words, he was trying to be nice but it is quite obvious he was also being glaringly honest at the same time. And the reader only needs to read between the lines to understand the conundrum contained in the words that he was trying to convey to his readers. Which Artemiy is incapable of deciphering by the way. :D Just kidding Art!

So what we apparently have in the Jupiter-80 is a capable "synth" (but NO Jupiter 8 by any stretch of the imagination) which has some really good acoustic sounds on it for $3,499 + tax. NO sequencer, NO sampler, NO expansion capability it should be noted also. On the other hand, it does have 256 note polyphony which is a breakthrough for Roland and company and highly commendable on their part.

I can't wait until Roland comes out with the workstation version. Although with this less than stellar review of the Jupiter-80 by Sound on Sound, Roland may decide to return to the drawing board for new ideas and new answers. Which will hopefully result in the Workstation version i.e. - an all-in-one solution that most people want anyway and which will hopefully blow the Jupiter-80, er, Stage-80, er, whatever you want to call it, out of the water. :) One thing Roland needs to be aware of is this: "If you claim an upcoming product is the "metamorphosis" of a prior legendary product... you better make darn sure the product you give such a high distinction of honor to actually meets that high standard. From what I've gathered after reading the SOS review is the Jupiter-80 doesn't meet that standard unfortunately. In other words, nice try but no cigar. Which is kind of funny because I don't even smoke. :) Who came up with that saying anyway? Okay, how about: "Nice try... maybe next time?" :D That's more like it. ;)

[Bruce Lychee]

I think you are reading way too much into what he said. He basically said it shouldn't be called the Jupiter because people such as yourself will bemoan how it isn't the original Jupiter. Apart from that, he basically states that it easily handles the chores of the original Jupiter and that it has a very powerful VA that people probably won't understand because of the way it is being marketed.

Nevertheless, I too am looking forward to a workstation incorporating the new SN sounds and VA.

[Rocness]

I see some people just don't get it .

If you name your child after your self , does that mean that child will be just like you ?

Or

Will that child continue the legacy of you but in their own way ?

The lead designer of the jupiter 80 has said it over and over agin. He said , when he talked to the original designers of the Jupiter 8 they said , The original Jupiter 8 was trying to bring real natural acoustic sounds to a synthesizer . In reality it failed miserably at doing this but became a true legend classic at the same time , just like the TR 808 and 909 and TB-303 (all cult classics with huge ebay asking prices !) .

The Jupiter 80 is continuing a proud legacy of bringing real natural acoustic sounds to a synthesizer ( hence the name Jupiter) .
This time around it's digital .
The Jupiter 80 may have lost some analog mojo but has gained a world of functionality and sound that would make it's father proud .

I for one think that Roland did a helava job , BRAVO !

[Bruce Lychee]

When I talked to to Scott Tibbs at the time I bought my Jupiter, he told me the Jupiter is the product most personal to the founder. He said his vision has always been to recreate natural sounds through synthesis and that is why the new Jupiter is being marketed as such. He said the new a Jupiter is certainly conistent with the intent of the original Jupiter even if people don't remember the Jupiter that way.

Despite that fact, Scott was also very clear that the VA in the Jupiter is Roland's most advanced synth ever.

Personally, I think it is a great board and the most enjoyable instrument to play in my room next to the Shigeru Kawai SK5. I think programmer types might not appreciate it because it is clearly made to be played. but if you like playing keyboards, it is a very different and more expressive experience than I have had on any other synth.