no pattern sequencer WTF?

[Solitary man]

As an owner of Roland workstations for the last 26 years, starting with the D-20, I have always found song composing a breeze on these machines.
So why have Roland made the sequencer linear?! I was really getting into the FA-08 and was ready to go with it but as the sequencing of songs is very important to me I may have to go with the Yammy MOXF8.

This is a real shame as the sound demos are extremely positive. Plus all the other great things I see in this synth.

Can anyone shed a little bit of light on whether there are any workarounds?

Thanks.

[geeman]

As an owner of Roland workstations for the last 26 years, starting with the D-20, I have always found song composing a breeze on these machines.
So why have Roland made the sequencer linear?! I was really getting into the FA-08 and was ready to go with it but as the sequencing of songs is very important to me I may have to go with the Yammy MOXF8.

This is a real shame as the sound demos are extremely positive. Plus all the other great things I see in this synth.

Can anyone shed a little bit of light on whether there are any workarounds?

Thanks.

I too would appreciate any ideas of a workaround on the above. Plus clarify if you could, examples of hardware synths that have either one or the other type of sequencer? Have got the basic idea of linear versus non-linear (pattern-based), ... Fruity Loops = blocks of patterns to rearrange at will (non-Linear)? Thanks in advance.

[Quinnx.]

Can anyone shed a little bit of light on whether there are any workarounds?

if you own a fantom use its sequencer and patterns
if you own the G you already have a dedicated external mixer use it to control the FA
and the G sequencer patterns.

[PauloF]

...
So why have Roland made the sequencer linear?! I was really getting into the FA-08 and was ready to go with it but as the sequencing of songs is very important to me I may have to go with the Yammy MOXF8.
Can anyone shed a little bit of light on whether there are any workarounds?

Thanks.

No one is never happy... ;-)

There are two workarounds that I can remember of.

- To have a Fantom G too together with the FA, exactly like Quinnx suggested
- To have a proper DAW, and forget about Workstation Sequencers or use them just as scratchpads. Much more powerful than ANY workstation in the market (including the mighty Oasys, Kronos, XS, XF, FX, FG...)

[Hugo]

Is it possible to set up markers and have a section of the song loop? That would give you a sort of pattern mode...

[Quinnx.]

Most likely No
However you can use the sample pads to sample whatever loops or mark points you want to trigger.

[marczellm]

In all the videos Ed Diaz plays an EP riff, then it loops, on top he plays drums, bass etc. all looping after he plays them.

[Saxifraga]

In all the videos Ed Diaz plays an EP riff, then it loops, on top he plays drums, bass etc. all looping after he plays them.

That's just because he uses the rehearsal mode of the record function. It seems you have only global loop points. This new seq is inferior to the Fantom G. Roland FA is more like Korg Krome now.
I personaly like the Fantom seq better. But using a DAW is the best option. I think the FA is just an addition to the pallete of sounds and no replacement. jm2c

[Quinnx.]

Yeah...
People should not be looking at the FA as a fantom replacement..
thats just a mugs game.
Its an ADD-ON or a beginners choice if they dont already own a workstation.

[Leh173]

IMHO it depends on what you want to do if you can replace the G with an FA, but a number of cool "workstation" features of the G seem to be simplified or just left out. I think as a live machine an FA would replace the G OK, but overall, no way. You're going to lose a few things, while gaining a better sound engine. Adding an Integra to the G may be a better choice for some people. Me personally I think I could replace the G with an FA for what I use it for, though will reserve my judgement until I play an FA. If you're heavily into the G's sequencer and sampling, the FA doesn't compare it seems. No seamless switching either. YMMV.

[jabberwocky]

Fantom x - phrase and tracks(linear)
Fantom g - phrase based
Fa - track based , so NO RPS --- SHAME !:/

[Quinnx.]

IMHO it depends on what you want to do if you can replace the G

True..
But from what I see so far people do tend to look at the FA and immediately start thinking G replacement.
Its too lightweight for that I think..
On sound you may get away with as a replacement IF you have not invested time creating alot of sample/muli-sample based patches.
On sequencer again same thing as long as you have not created live or studio sets that rely heavily on R{S.
Then theres the controller aspect which the G is all geared up for with 8 sliders, 4 knob and an external mixer.

The Low cost of the FA justifys an addon to increase the power of the G and also to be used as a Live performer.

[Solitary man]

...
So why have Roland made the sequencer linear?! I was really getting into the FA-08 and was ready to go with it but as the sequencing of songs is very important to me I may have to go with the Yammy MOXF8.
Can anyone shed a little bit of light on whether there are any workarounds?

Thanks.

No one is never happy... ;-)

There are two workarounds that I can remember of.

- To have a Fantom G too together with the FA, exactly like Quinnx suggested
- To have a proper DAW, and forget about Workstation Sequencers or use them just as scratchpads. Much more powerful than ANY workstation in the market (including the mighty Oasys, Kronos, XS, XF, FX, FG...)

Paulo Don't you mean, No one is EVER happy? ;-)

I have sold my Fantom X in the hope the FA will replace it. I know I should have waited to read the user guide first but, well, oh dear I just go so excited and thought Roland would never drop such an integral part of their workstation ethos.

I think the only workaround for me if I finally feel I want this synth over the MOXF8 is to buy a cheap hardware sequencer like the Yamaha RMX-1. I had one of these years ago, naff sounds but awesome sequencer.

[jabberwocky]

Also on Sound ? - - MFX chaining possibilities is not really there (maybe the TFX can help but still way below todays Yamaha's for example)

While some of the MFX may have a basic 2 band EQ included , still thisd is too less for 2014).
Anyway, I stopped reading the manual when RPS was left out ;-)

[Quinnx.]

As and addon
what your realy buying into is..
Integra sound engine with to come.. SRX library and more
with built in sp404 sampler
placed inside a keybed with a more intuitive display for navigation and editing.
Its not a fantom.
We have yet to see a fantom replacement or update.
Now they could have went all fantom with this and included sample based patching
but that would have got them in trouble again with all the usual drawback and lack of whatever else
we could not do.

Have said that, the X had linear and rps so there is no real reason this could not have been done.
and no reason why RPS could not be brought back in that fashion with an update for the FA.
But for now its best to take the FA as it is now and decided if its a good choice without holding on to any hope of future Addon features.
I would give it the 30 day try out at least for the price..