Members Bernard Posted September 1, 2012 Members Share Posted September 1, 2012 Originally Posted by AnotherScott Look at the picture of the back panel, top right. It is clearly indicated on the unit itself that they are TRS. And that does not contradict 1/4" phone. That's exactly what's on standard 1/4" headphones, which is why these connectors are called phone in the first place. (Now, if they said 1/4" guitar type, that would indicate a 2-conductor mono 1/4" jack.) Agree with you on the picture. Not so with Roland specs as here is a non TRS example from the same Roland site: OUTPUT jacks (L/MONO, R) (1/4 inch phone type) So you see Roland it seems (IF THESE ARE ALL TRS) are not sticking to their normal wording... As I say one to check if it matters to you.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members AnotherScott Posted September 1, 2012 Members Share Posted September 1, 2012 Originally Posted by Bernard Agree with you on the picture. Not so with Roland specs as here is a non TRS example from the same Roland site: OUTPUT jacks (L/MONO, R) (1/4 inch phone type) So you see Roland it seems (IF THESE ARE ALL TRS) are not sticking to their normal wording... As I say one to check if it matters to you.. Ah, I see... you're saying that, in another context, Roland uses the same "(1/4 inch phone type)" verbiage to describe a 2-conductor 1/4" connection as well. That doesn't bother me, that description is used pretty generically, even though actual 1/4" phones, being stereo, were always wired TRS. At any rate, while the printed text may be ambiguous in that it could conceivably also refer to a 2-conductor connection, I can't imagine they would actually silkscreen the TRS diagram onto the back of the unit by accident. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Bernard Posted September 1, 2012 Members Share Posted September 1, 2012 Originally Posted by AnotherScott Ah, I see... you're saying that, in another context, Roland uses the same "(1/4 inch phone type)" verbiage to describe a 2-conductor 1/4" connection as well. That doesn't bother me, that description is used pretty generically, even though actual 1/4" phones, being stereo, were always wired TRS. At any rate, while the printed text may be ambiguous in that it could conceivably also refer to a 2-conductor connection, I can't imagine they would actually silkscreen the TRS diagram onto the back of the unit by accident. Well when I read the specs I went straight back to those pics and have been scratching my head ever since. The minute I saw the sweetwater all TRS specs I posted.. I have been reading Roland Specs for years and one thing they are very good on is making TRS very clear on both machine and those specs. So I am still not convinced one way or other for that reason... When the manual comes out all will be revealed. Unbalanced phones would have been useful for inputs as some users may have a smaller synth. However it is a flagship product so it would not surprise me if the inputs were really balanced TRS... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Bernard Posted September 1, 2012 Members Share Posted September 1, 2012 On my MV and VS100s Roland uses RCA connectors for unbalanced to avoid confusion Here are the VS100 Specs: Mic Input Jacks 1-2: XLR type (balanced/phantom power +48 V) Input Jacks 1-4: 1/4 inch TRS phone type (balanced) * Input Jack 1: Lo-Z/Hi-Z Input Jacks 5-6: RCA pin type Output Jacks 1-4: 1/4 inch TRS phone type (balanced) Output Jacks 5-6: RCA pin type MIDI Connectors (Input/Output) Digital Input Connector: Coaxial type USB Connector (B type) Headphones Jack (Stereo 1/4 inch phone type) Always very clear. Given they tend to use physical RCA Unbalanced when mixing in with TRS Balanced on such units, it would not surprise me if it turns out all are balanced TRS on this new Module... Lets see Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members zoink Posted September 1, 2012 Members Share Posted September 1, 2012 Originally Posted by mildbill http://www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/Integra7 $2,000. Just enough to be too much. I'll pick one up when they blow them out at $999. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members keybdwizrd Posted September 1, 2012 Members Share Posted September 1, 2012 Originally Posted by zoink $2,000. Just enough to be too much. Yeah. Sorry if this has been mentioned already, but - I watched the video, and one thing that really impressed me is the fact that the Integra-7 offers complete multi-effects and EQ for each of the 16 parts when operating in multi mode. The only other synth that I know can do this is the Access TI. This is such a hugely important feature when doing 16-part sequencing. With the Virus TI, it simply means that every patch sounds identical whether in single or multi mode. When working in multi mode, you simply call up a program and is sounds EXACTLY like it does in single mode. If the Integra-7 works the same way I will be very impressed, and the $1,999 price tag becomes more justifiable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members sani Posted September 1, 2012 Members Share Posted September 1, 2012 Originally Posted by keybdwizrd I watched the video, and one thing that really impressed me is the fact that the Integra-7 offers complete multi-effects and EQ for each of the 16 parts when operating in multi mode. The only other synth that I know can do this is the Access TI. This is such a hugely important feature when doing 16-part sequencing. Well, that's the theory. On the other side, you just have one insert per part. And that can be quite a limitation. It could bring us back to the good old and well known problem on quite a lot of Roland devices that you can't for example put a rotary, chorus and overdrive as inserts on a hammond organ. Roland unfortunately has one of the most limited effect structure compared to the competition (yamaha, korg, kurzweil). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members zzzxtreme Posted September 1, 2012 Members Share Posted September 1, 2012 $2000 is just right. Then there will be sale for $1800.Plenty balanced outs, ins, spdif, 12 srx, not too bigcheaper than buying 5080 with 12 cardsSomething that is needed by many producers who depends on roland fantoms and xv modules Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members cresshead Posted September 1, 2012 Members Share Posted September 1, 2012 Dear Roland, I see you have a new rack mounted synth with super natural sounds that comes with a ipad editor. Please...seeing as you have this editor to program the sounds for the synth side...can we have a section in the ipad app that could cater for the natural sounding patches regarding playing them in a "natural way" rather than just limited to a 49 synth action leyboard. for example. guitar: where you can plick and strum strings: where you can pluck and bow the sounds in a more natural manner then pressing a key down. marimba, xylophone etc http://a2.mzstatic.com/us/r1000/077/...480x480-75.jpg koto accordian hand drums such as bongo, congas tablas many thanks oh, if you need some 3d graphics to help you out creating these...drop me a line steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Bernard Posted September 1, 2012 Members Share Posted September 1, 2012 Originally Posted by keybdwizrd ...I watched the video, and one thing that really impressed me is the fact that the Integra-7 offers complete multi-effects and EQ for each of the 16 parts when operating in multi mode. The only other synth that I know can do this is the Access TI. This is such a hugely important feature when doing 16-part sequencing.... Fantom G is one example. At launch, One MFX per part. This is why this module feels like the sound engine of the next Fantom... If, as one good source rumors, Roland don't do another Fantom, then that would explain the sudden appearance of this Sound Module... I am hoping they will still develop a Fantom, not so much for me, just that it seems their user base would see such a SuperNatural Sound engined synth as something worth owning... It would probably sell better than the G, although with this module out now I am not so sure now. It is possible the effort needed to build yet more SuperNatural sounds is delaying a full synth, so this module is like an update on progress More SuperNatural sound modules in a new Fantom would then make this sound module less of an alternative for upgraders of G and X... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members cresshead Posted September 1, 2012 Members Share Posted September 1, 2012 i wonder if anyone knows if on either the 5080 cards or supernatural section they have this sound/instrument?love the sound of this Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Bernard Posted September 1, 2012 Members Share Posted September 1, 2012 I did not notice it (Hang Drum) on the SuperNatural stuff... Possible on a similar sound on the SRX World card or some of the additional EX SuperNatural... You may have to wait for the very long patch/sound list ;-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Bernard Posted September 1, 2012 Members Share Posted September 1, 2012 2 mins in: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Pilotwings Posted September 1, 2012 Members Share Posted September 1, 2012 Originally Posted by playstation Same price as a Jupiter 50 at Sweetwater. Seriously? This price seems in line/justifiable with former high end Roland modules. I still use two JD-990's for live performance and still love their sound (over 20 years later). BTW - If I can remember correctly the JD-990 was also $1,999 when new in '93 (and only 24 notes of polyphony) This is the first Roland module I'm excited about in a long time! My reservations are #1 the sound (I'll wait & judge for myself), #2 the polyphony (this tends to get eaten up fast using layered sounds), #3 How fast will it switch between performances for live use? (don't know about "loading in" SRX boards etc.) Kudos to Roland for making a RACKMOUT MODULE!!! PS - IMO Roland probably didn't name this Jupiter xyz 'cause of all the bashing taken on this & other forums... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members cresshead Posted September 1, 2012 Members Share Posted September 1, 2012 thanks...so if the spd30 has hang drums they might be in!...well we'll have to wait for the 6000 listing! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members AnotherScott Posted September 1, 2012 Members Share Posted September 1, 2012 IMO Roland probably didn't name this Jupiter xyz 'cause of all the bashing taken on this & other forums... Nah, I think they're just being consistent. Jupiter has always been a moniker restricted to actual keyboards. Even the modules that were based on the old Jupiter keyboards weren't called Jupiters... see MKS-80. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members piaknowguy Posted September 1, 2012 Members Share Posted September 1, 2012 Fantom G is one example. At launch, One MFX per part. This is why this module feels like the sound engine of the next Fantom... If, as one good source rumors, Roland don't do another Fantom, then that would explain the sudden appearance of this Sound Module... I am hoping they will still develop a Fantom, not so much for me, just that it seems their user base would see such a SuperNatural Sound engined synth as something worth owning... It would probably sell better than the G, although with this module out now I am not so sure now. It is possible the effort needed to build yet more SuperNatural sounds is delaying a full synth, so this module is like an update on progress More SuperNatural sound modules in a new Fantom would then make this sound module less of an alternative for upgraders of G and X... Just to clarify - At launch, one PFX per part (a dedicated FX) plus 2 additional global MFX plus a global reverb plus a global chorus/delay plus a mastering section plus dedicated input FX (equalizer,enhancer,compressor,limiter,noise suppressor,center canceler). Each ARX expansion board contains it's own dedicated FX identical to the 'G' as well as card-specific FX like individual Comp. settings for each of the 24 drum parts on the ARX-01, for example. It is a very simple matter to convert any MIDI track to audio on this keyboard, giving one the ability to continue to process any track with additional MFX if needed, making it insanely powerful!! Sorry. "One MFX per part" just didn't seem to do the 'G' justice. =) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Pilotwings Posted September 1, 2012 Members Share Posted September 1, 2012 see MKS-80.I miss my MKS-80 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members gregwar Posted September 1, 2012 Members Share Posted September 1, 2012 this thing is pretty much perfect I really can't see how they can easily improve it good job roland ! can't wait to test one at the store Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members k2500x Posted September 1, 2012 Members Share Posted September 1, 2012 Based on the retail and sell price the vendor listed while the page was up, if you compared it to their listed price for a Jupiter 50, it looked like the Integra-7 sells for between 25 and 30% less than a Jupiter 50. While prices of these things vary from one country to another, the relative prices of different models within a given company's line is usually pretty stable. So that implies that the U.S. street price should be in the $1400-$1500 range. But I guess we'll know for sure tomorrow. I knew it. Everyone was was way to optimistic on price for this thing. No way Roland releases a flagship sound module and prices it at $1499. This module is way more powerful than the Jupiter-50. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members k2500x Posted September 1, 2012 Members Share Posted September 1, 2012 This will help with the understand as it looks like a tone block per part This looks better than I expected. So from what I'm seeing, you can only have 4 SRX cards on one particular PART. But you could load 4 other cards into a different PART, etc, essentially giving you access to all 12 cards at the same time within a STUDIO SET. Are others reading this the same way? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Bernard Posted September 1, 2012 Members Share Posted September 1, 2012 Interesting to here the effect on sound. My MV has this tech in its MFX.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Gaul Posted September 1, 2012 Members Share Posted September 1, 2012 The video mostly shows the impressive motional surround in L-R (left-right) directions. I wonder, what will it look like to go from far F(ront) to far B(ack) and back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members MuzikB Posted September 2, 2012 Members Share Posted September 2, 2012 Looks like a total winner. About time for Roland. A new production powerhouse and they're the only company still making full quality racks. I've been mad at you guys (Roland) for several years now, but well done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members evildragon Posted September 2, 2012 Members Share Posted September 2, 2012 Not a winner if you like to edit a lot of patches, I mean only 59 user slots. Idiots. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.