So Don then Jd990 - vs Jv1080

cited from the other thread .. any major differences? just curious cause i thgouht it'd be cool to use JV cards.. if not i'd stick with the 990

I was actually talking about Roland's synthesis engine development. The Super JV is nothing but a JD-990 with some new waveforms, but without 44.1 engine (and 44.1 samples), without osc sync, and about of 50% effects processor power (of what JD has) - in many ways, crippled down version of JD-990. For all the details, see: http://acapella.harmony-central.com/forums/showpost.php?p=19130528&postcount=19

damn straight, thank you

You know, the compression on the Jv series is why I sold my Xp30.. It had such a good sound, but there was nothing you could do with it. I thought it was cruel to even put cutoff and Q controls on the front..

Edit it? why bother unoless you just wanted to swap effects on a rhodes organ or something. Not to metnion the included JV editor wasimpossible to figure out.

If you didn't take the time to figure out your XP-30, you wouldn't be editing very many paramaters on it. That's for sure.

For original sounds, it's a very capable little synth actually. There's a lot under the hood to work with.

If you are going to use a JV-1080 to play the expansion boards (all which have waveform data compression), with the exception of Vintage Synth I don't think you'll notice a real difference between it and a JD-990. The lowpass filter maybe once in a while, but most SRJV presets use pretty tame and gentle filter settings.

At the time when I got it, which is close to 10 years ago now I didn't have anything to benchmark it with, or the experience to really know what I wanted in terms of a synth.

As the years went on and I tried out things I had heard or read about, I kept coming to the conculsion that I couldn't push it as hard as I naturally seemed to want to. Edit it, I did, all from the front panel. Which was a pain in the ass.. The software is a joke really. I learned the foundation of everything I know today on that thing, It was a real learning experience.

Then I started comparing it to the MS2000, the JP8000, the N364 .... and in comparison I found that it sounded flat and lifeless. I also feel that it relys heavily on the effects to pump up the sonic range lost in the compression.

of course that's my opinion... it's not that I didnt or wouldnt try to edit it. I did.. just overall I didin't like the sound. I can hear a huge difference between the fantom and the xp30.

I just think it's not worth editing that deeply because I dont think the sound backs it up. That being said.. I do like some of the cards.. I enjoyed having it but i like what i've heard from the 990, and i agree with and appreciate most of don's input, and I like roland.. So i'm not a 'hater" I just don't like most of rolands mid 90's romplers.. :/

Yeah, the 1080 didn't sound nearly as good as the 990, and the 2080 sounded even worse. Wasn't until the 5080 when things turned around.

Sorry to necro an old thread, but it was either that or get told a million times to use the Search before asking a question...

So, what is wrong with the way a 2080 sounds? I wanted to get a JD-990 but they seem to go too high when made available and I get outbid for them. Seems if much of the lost functionality on the 1080/20809 stems from effects, and unless the effects function in some way as modulators then an outboard unit like a Quadraverb would serve fine.

So, the question remains - the JD-990 is an extremely powerful (and currently) unit for electronic music synthesis, able to create shimmering pads and textures resembling a Wavestation or a Waldorf synth but still having that Roland sound.

Does the JV-2080 stand up as a reasonable substitute for the JD-990, even without the oscillator sync and with a weaker effects engine? Too often the demos only show how you can replace a fusion band with one. I want to sound like Steve Roach.

Super JV-2080 sounds fine. But that's about it. If you want a high end rompler SOUND, then go: JD-990, or Kurzweil K-2600R.

16 years old and still one of the more powerful digitals around. It has that Roland filter sound which appears to be modeled after the JP-8 12dB filter, while 24dB slope (Juno 60) is also possible.

Only Roland's substitute would be XV-5050 and 5080. Everything before that should be ignored if we want to compare the quality of the sound.

Kill. Kill Don. Get em. Solaris to the rescue! Damn young punks with their soft synths and their nouveau riche romplers- HOOEY! A pox on you and your white washed groove boxes and psuedo soul midi controllers!

By the way I have a JV2080 and a 2 JD990s and they make the JV sound broken... But the 2080 has 8 billion sounds so it evens out in usefullness. Sonically the JV does NOT give you the magic...

I recorded a 1957 Martin acoustic guitar today. It had magic. OOODLES of magic. You cannot sample magic and stick it in a box. IMHO nothing Roland has done since (minus the V synth- Im ignorant to it mostly) comes even close to the magic they programmed into a JD990.

And the best part is its still old invincible Roland- when things were built to last forever! Its also to me one of the last true "flagship" synths before samplers took over. There was some R&D put into the 990.

To quote the guy who first introduced me to the 990 many many years ago-

" Its LUSH! "

That's why I have 2 JD-990's!!! One purchased new years ago to replace my Roland JD-800, and the other to double polyphony etc...

I keep trying to get a JD-990 but they keep slipping out of my budgetary grasp. They have become too FOTM to afford, it seems.

I had a JD-990 with the vintage synth expansion card and couldn't get into it, since I have no programming experience.

Everybody point their fingers now and laugh at me...

I recall your JD-990 had issues.

I have a JD-800 with the 80 plus knobs and sliders. There is a huge library of patches available for the JD-800 and a windows patch libriarian. I have selected a strings, pads, leads from the available patches. It is a very cool synth. The only thing I miss with the JD-800 is stereo panning on the individual tones.

I listened to Don's JD-990 and immediately recognized the stereo panning. The JD-800 can act as a midi editor for the JD-990.

Mark

No, my JD-990 was absolutely fine. It even had the memory expansion!

The owner, however, was a fine tool who couldn't program the thing properly.

And it now sits comfortably in ElectricPuppy's rack. Maybe I'll get it back from him someday, last I heard he wasn't programming it much either.

Programming through the little window can be a real chore. I bout MidiQuest XL 9 about a year ago, though, and I suspect it might make things a little easier on a box as deep as the JD-990.

No laughs from me, I am a knob twiddler at the core, as well.

BTW, I love your avatar, CR. I have a ginger cat who looks just like that one and I see her in my mind's eye and chuckle whenever I see your avatar.

Thanks I keep going back to that avatar....

Corrected.

Don is correct. Once you get used to it, programming directly on the 990 is very intuitive.

Not that I have time to program these days.

I find the interface and programming to be a piece of cake on the JD-990 compared to ANY other menu-based rack synth.

The 1080 and 2080 as others have pointed out is not nearly as nice sounding as the 990.

I have a 2080 and the filters on it are absolutely HORRID. You also lose crispness on high notes because of dithering/nyquist/aliasing/anti-aliasing/lack of magic dust.

I have tried many times to reproduce sounds I've made in the 990 using the 2080, and they just don't come out the same AT ALL. There is always something missing in the filter. Every time.

Be that as it may, I frequently find a use for my 2080 albeit with 7 expansion cards in it. I've found that the right SR-JV80 boards are a must for the 2080.

Mine are:

Orchestral

Orchestral II

Special FX

Bass & Drums

Dance

Techno

World