Roland finally releasing evolution to TR-808

*strokes two 808s lovingly*

because analogue, duh. it's better. everybody knows that.

 

who don't you prefer analogue? ...in 2014.

 

i'm just fucking with ya, i just do really - always have. not that i don't like, and own digital synths and drum machines, i just personally prefer the sound of analogue gear and the more organic and random nature of it.

  On 1/15/2014 at 11:29 PM, xox said:

 

  On 1/15/2014 at 11:23 PM, 2WV said:

i'm telling you...it won't be analogue. roland hate analogue. roland literally have like 1 DSP chip they use for everything. they just put it into different shaped boxes.

 

so what if it's not analog? why do you prefer analog? ...in 2014

 

Proper analogue sounds much better than digital stuff trying to emulate analogue, which it would appear Roland are trying to do in this situation. Digital stuff doing its own thing sounds great also, but not when its trying to re-create analogue stuff.

how many tb-303's would they sell if they made those again with usb? is roland even awake? someone poke them with a stick.

  On 1/15/2014 at 11:35 PM, 2WV said:

because analogue, duh. it's better. everybody knows that.

 

who don't you prefer analogue? ...in 2014.

 

i'm just fucking with ya, i just do really - always have. not that i don't like, and own digital synths and drum machines, i just personally prefer the sound of analogue gear and the more organic and random nature of it.

 

ah ok i guess it's love

  On 1/15/2014 at 11:38 PM, xox said:

 

  On 1/15/2014 at 11:35 PM, 2WV said:

because analogue, duh. it's better. everybody knows that.

 

who don't you prefer analogue? ...in 2014.

 

i'm just fucking with ya, i just do really - always have. not that i don't like, and own digital synths and drum machines, i just personally prefer the sound of analogue gear and the more organic and random nature of it.

 

ah ok i guess it's love

 

For me it's not even about just having analog. I don't really get why someone would want a physical digital synthesizer (especially these "workstations" Roland likes so much) when you can just use a laptop and a midi controller and have many many more options available to you. I mean, I understand the argument that maybe you want less CPU load or something, but that's not really enough to justify it for me. So in my mind, if it's a piece of hardware, it better justify being a piece of hardware by not sounding like something you can make on a computer, for example, analog.

  On 1/16/2014 at 12:39 AM, danke said:

I don't really get why someone would want a physical digital synthesizer

 

there are many good reasons why, a lot of the top tier digital synth stuff like the Nord G2, the Kawai k5000, the Yamaha fs1r and even digital roland synths like the JD-990 still sound better than any soft synth equivalent, most of the soft synths don't come close to touching these except maybe FM8. Just because something is digital doesn't mean it can be easily replicated in a computer, a lot of that stuff is secret code and DSP development.

 

besides my small eurorack setup an xbase and a vermona drm1, all of the synths in my studio setup are digital.

Edited January 16, 2014 by John Ehrlichman

its comical to see roland playing with the pcb of the 808 in front of genelecs wearing lab coats, as if they found it under a glacier...

  On 1/16/2014 at 12:47 AM, John Ehrlichman said:

 

  On 1/16/2014 at 12:39 AM, danke said:

I don't really get why someone would want a physical digital synthesizer

 

there are many good reasons why, a lot of the top tier digital synth stuff like the Nord G2, the Kawai k5000, the Yamaha fs1r and even digital roland synths like the JD-990 still sound better than any soft synth equivalent, most of the soft synths don't come close to touching these except maybe FM8. Just because something is digital doesn't mean it can be easily replicated in a computer, a lot of that stuff is secret code and DSP development.

 

besides my small eurorack setup an xbase and a vermona drm1, all of the synths in my studio setup are digital.

 

Ok, ok, you're absolutely right. Maybe my experience with digital has just been particularly unlucky. I got some stuff when I was relatively new to the game (talkin 12-ish years ago) and it was really terrible and disappointing in many ways.

 

But at the same time, that's kind of where I'm at right now. I have some soft synths that satisfy me digitally, so I'm looking for analog. Maybe after I'm done satisfying my gluttony and lust for analog, I'll pick up some nice digital hardware masterpiece. :)

i understand what ur saying John and ur right regarding better quality software in hardware synths but i'm also for the macbook pro + software combo. when someone really knows software only sky is the limit (max, supercollider, ...i'm still a n00b there btw)

 

another thing is no matter how something good can sound i love to 'degrade' it to 'sit' better in a mix. something can sound fantastic on its own but it uses to much of 'space' in a track so i find myself constantly degrading sounds, if u know what i mean, so why bother with the nasa level sound sources anyway...

maybe my mixing techniques are not good enough or maybe my tracks are just too clouded with too many sounds in them... probably both

 

one more thing... polished sound = non-indie = pro ...but, aren't you part of the underground?! :p

  On 1/16/2014 at 1:27 AM, xox said:

i understand what ur saying John and ur right regarding better quality software in hardware synths but i'm also for the macbook pro + software combo. when someone really knows software only sky is the limit (max, supercollider, ...i'm still a n00b there btw)

 

another thing is no matter how something good can sound i love to 'degrade' it to 'sit' better in a mix. something can sound fantastic on its own but it uses to much of 'space' in a track so i find myself constantly degrading sounds, if u know what i mean, so why bother with the nasa level sound sources anyway...

maybe my mixing techniques are not good enough or maybe my tracks are just too clouded with too many sounds in them... probably both

 

one more thing... polished sound = non-indie = pro ...but, aren't you part of the underground?! :p

yes, but the argument might be that the analog signal path can influence/degrade the sound as well.. at least that's what it's like with my ghetto setup. I run digital synths through cheap guitar pedals and they sound awesome.

 

 

 

Not really excited about an 808 reissue, tbh.. if they follow it up with a decent SH101 reissue (a mini like the new MS20, perhaps), then I'd probably lose my shit.

Edited January 16, 2014 by modey

how much higher do prices on the vintage stuff have to go before roland & korg realize that there is a demand for analog machines? you would think they could make this gear cheaper now then they could then...

 

For me, a polysynth really doesn't get much bettery than a Polysix - everything since then has been disappointing.

I'm sure most of our fears about this new piece of gear will be true judging by Roland's track record. Let's see what the Elektron boys have up their sleeve for NAMM or Messe.

  On 1/16/2014 at 1:27 AM, xox said:

xox, on 15 Jan 2014 - 4:27 PM, said:

 

i understand what ur saying John and ur right regarding better quality software in hardware synths but i'm also for the macbook pro + software combo. when someone really knows software only sky is the limit (max, supercollider, ...i'm still a n00b there btw)

 

another thing is no matter how something good can sound i love to 'degrade' it to 'sit' better in a mix. something can sound fantastic on its own but it uses to much of 'space' in a track so i find myself constantly degrading sounds, if u know what i mean, so why bother with the nasa level sound sources anyway...

maybe my mixing techniques are not good enough or maybe my tracks are just too clouded with too many sounds in them... probably both

 

one more thing... polished sound = non-indie = pro ...but, aren't you part of the underground?! :p

i didn't say anything about polished sound or higher fidelity. I'm just talking about unique character and pleasure to the human ear, and as far as i'm concerned a lot of digital hardware released in the 90s surpasses every soft-synth plugin ive ever used. Of course this is my opinion, but it's not based on some kind of fundamental rule of them sounding necessarily higher quality to any normal standard. Edited January 16, 2014 by John Ehrlichman

At this point I'd rather invest in instruments that are made and designed by people within my own generation (or younger!). Roland's problem is that it seems the company is being run by soon to be retirees who for obvious reasons do not know what is going on in contemporary music making. Designing stage pianos and auto accompaniment instruments seems logical to them at this point in life. There's also a bit of "saving face," in not rehashing the past. We might have to wait till all the elder engineers and company heads retire to get the classics properly reissued.

 

​I don't see why they couldn't do a "Roland Classic" line that is not trying to reinvent the wheel and were 100% recreations of those classic instruments (guitar manus do this all the time). While "pushing ahead" with all these new technologies they are so enamored by (most of which will end up in the landfill or non compatible within due time).

Willing to bet 100$ that this is not analog

 

In addition to that I'll put 25$ on it being something used with a USB and computer software

 

 

Just kidding. I would bet less than that because I'm broke. But still

I keep on thinking about this guitar company analogy and why these mammoth synth companies don't follow along those lines of making high end, vintage accurate, small run premium instruments to get the high end buyer. People keep on talking about bottom line and R+D but they could make the toys and consumer stuff to satisfy that and then do stuff more in line with Moog/Macbeth, etc...

 

Fender seems to be doing fine with selling Squires and Mexican made guitars by the boatload while also making vintage accurate custom shop stuff for the serious buyers. This also helps preserve the brand in the long run.

 

They could price reissues of 808/909s along the lines of DSI's price points and still sell fuckloads.

it's a virtual analogue anyway, which as rbrmyofr said are generally disappointing. as it's a roland virtual analogue it'll undoubtedly have "huge sound" and all the rest of the usual crap they spout. it'll be an over expensive toy. again.

 

Edited January 16, 2014 by 2WV

  On 1/16/2014 at 8:18 AM, 2WV said:

it's a virtual analogue anyway, which as rbrmyofr said are generally disappointing. as it's a roland virtual analogue it'll undoubtedly have "huge sound" and all the rest of the usual crap they spout. it'll be an over expensive toy. again.

Although u're probably right, please dont state it as fact that it is virtual analogue unless u have a reliable source (e.g. Roland themselves). Everything is pure speculation at the moment

  On 1/16/2014 at 2:44 AM, igloos unlmtd said:

how much higher do prices on the vintage stuff have to go before roland & korg realize that there is a demand for analog machines? you would think they could make this gear cheaper now then they could then...

 

For me, a polysynth really doesn't get much bettery than a Polysix - everything since then has been disappointing.

 

Korg are doing just that, their prices are silly low. I hope they bring out a nice poly eventually, the ms-20 mini (and the volcas) seem to be selling well, so a polysix reissue isn't unthinkable.

Edited January 16, 2014 by Gocab

It's such a crazy thing..... Like people who are making shit are not in the scene, and people in the scene cannot make shit. Such a rare and beautiful occurrence when people in the scene make something and it actually applies. -Then again, if you recall... All of Roland's hit old school hardware was made with other intentions than how usage eventually turned out. Sooooo..... Even in the scene, it's hard to really create something ultra classic like the old school Roland line.

Soft buttons already, are a shit proposal for longevity reasons. Too many lights, kind of shit, but might look cool in person. Being able to sync to computer, defeats the purpose of dedicated hardware, so that would be shit. MIDI in, though, necessary.

 

The way ze scene has felt for years: People want some analog, kiiind of clunky retro-phuture design, SOLID, tight-lined, simplistic yet expansive piece of hardware. But it could basically do anything. There are some small companies out there who've made good innards, but their industrial design is shit. And there are some cool looking hardwarez, but price is astronomical and design possibly not clunky enough.

 

IDM LAZER UNDERGROUND ACID ULTRA HARDWARE PRIORITIES (for me...):

-must be analog (or good virtual analog, which does exist)

-retro-phuture design

-gotta have clunk to have funk

-sound good (i.e. good samples or good sound modeling)

-be easy and intuitive to use, fast interface w/ high RAM to prevent crashes

-gotta feel good in the hands and on lap

-built better than a tank

-dim LEDs

-hi-res backlit e-ink main display (smaller than a credit card), or low-res LCD

-rust proof

-comes with custom travel case, so your knobs don't get bent/pressed when traveling

-Whoopi Goldberg

  On 1/15/2014 at 10:31 PM, delet... said:

It should have a touch screen for more flexible user input possibilities.

 

Totally.

 

If your speculations are true (and I believe my watmm folk) then Roland is suprisingly good at failing to simply bring back already perfect machines. Weird. Edit: I mean, their sounds are around the world in every second electronic track and in 3 of 4 trap tracks, so...

 

All these "virtual analogue" crap make me sick. I'm not even the biggest fan of analogue stuff but I really don't get the concept why to mix these two up. Like someone already said, a laptop with a decent controller and software is the way better solution.

Edited January 16, 2014 by tokn

Honestly at this point people just need to stop looking to the past. Just use reaktor for everything.

yes, reaktor is the final solution to everything

  On 1/16/2014 at 6:02 PM, vamos scorcho said:

Honestly at this point people just need to stop looking to the past. Just use reaktor for everything.

 

Setting Reaktor on fire à la Hendrix just isn't the same as setting fire to an 808 though. 808s flock the pussy.