Roland Boutique?! [new synths]

It depends on the kind of distortion. Anything will generally lose low end when distortion is added, even a bass guitar with a good quality distortion. I don't see it as much of a problem if the low end drops out on a distorted 303, personally.

Having said that though, I'd say it'd be better to not use the onboard distortion, and instead use a mix of the clean signal with a distorted signal.. unless that's possible on the device itself, in which case that'd be awesome.

Also, re: the tr-09, this is a good overview:

I think it sounds pretty fkn nice tbh. Especially the kick with that compressor.

Seems that Roland is going the inverse direction that other companies are doing with building newer synths with analog parts. Looks like instead they're trying to tinker with advancing analog circuit board synthesis with digital synths, and using their hardware counterparts as benchmarks. Interesting direction and it would bring the price down significantly.

It'd be interesting if they start making new designs with the ACB tech. Obviously they'll never make it open-source or customisable in any way, but some new stuff could be potentially cool..

Yamaha did the same thing with their reface synth. Personally I think it's the least interesting path. Why not make a truly good digital synth instead of making lesser sounding clones of analog gear? It's not like Roland's digital clones are cheaper than the stuff Korg and Behringer are bringing. Might as well sell them as VSTs.

I don't really get that "just a VST in a box" attitude, tbh. There's merit in having a standalone device (yes! even *gasp* a digital one) capable of generating the audio in realtime without having to fuck around with the various issues that come up from using a laptop onstage (I hate doing this, my laptop sucks for anything more than just playing backing tracks in Reaper).

  On 9/12/2016 at 8:48 AM, modey said:

I don't really get that "just a VST in a box" attitude, tbh. There's merit in having a standalone device (yes! even *gasp* a digital one) capable of generating the audio in realtime without having to fuck around with the various issues that come up from using a laptop onstage (I hate doing this, my laptop sucks for anything more than just playing backing tracks in Reaper).

agreed!

i also feel like.. with an officially branded Roland 303 clone in a box, worth $xxx (you said ~$600 aud ???), being nitpicky and critical is totally warranted. 

why spend $xxx on a slightly incorrect approximation when you can spend far less on a VST without the box ( AudioRealism Bass Line 2 for $154.64 is a pretty rad slightly incorrect approximation VST) .. or spend a little bit more for a more correct and expanded on approximation ( avalon bassline for $1,499.00 aud )...

maybe i'm just stressing over nothing but it seems like the 303 .. there's so much demand for the real sound and so much super solid competition. for roland to come out with an official reproduction and it be a virtual replication that doesn't even replicate the sound 100% ... it seems ... ??? it's so weird. 

  On 9/12/2016 at 1:12 AM, paranerd said:

While people are still waiting for perfect sounding 303s and 909s for a tenth of the price of real TB-303s and TR-909s, some 15 year old kid is going to work a part-time job in between school to buy this cheap gear and make a hundred really awesome tracks!

Totally, man.  In the photo/video world, drawing/painting world, guitar world, electronic music world, music listening world- all the fucking creative worlds- there's always a huge minority of outspoken people with too much disposable income; just short of being able to buy talent.  So they all form together like a massive cult ala Foot Soldiers in TMNT- pretty cool but totally incompetent- and then storm the internet and spread negative vibez to try and compensate for their lack of actually creating anything heartfelt.  It turns out that their creative efforts are actually directed towards making shitty internet threads and having wannabe cool elitist conversations about technical issues that have nothing to do with actual creative potential or soul, so even if they try to create, their juices get wasted on some 147 page dissertation on inferior analog circuit design with regards to sonic aesthetics; as if they know jack shit about mojo.  Then fucking One Eyed Jenkins comes along from the 1930's with his $5 guitar that only has 4 strings, and he hits it with a spoon and makes meth dealers cry from the heavenly awesome beauty of his playing, making them change their ways and start up basketball leagues for underprivileged children.

Granted, the knowing of this truth is somewhat painful in a sense that one has to cope with the fact that 99% of limitations are within the self, so when gear can't be blamed for lack of creative skill, it all comes down to personal responsibility and discipline.  It's easy to understand why most people would rather spend a few thousand pounds and not have to think about how much actual effort goes into crafting oneself into a beautiful human being.

*seppukus out of thread*

I don't care whether these are accurate duplicates as I am not after these sounds and I wouldn't care anyway. But it is another fail for Roland because the stupid customer base ARE after true replications for no reason that they can actually explain other than they think they need it. So Roland are trying to change the brainwashed consumer to realise that it does not matter to be analogue or exact but the people won't listen.

Things just need to sound good to the ear and if you have something to live up to, then it's not going to cut it.

Bad luck Roland, you can't win.

  On 9/12/2016 at 8:27 AM, Gocab said:

Yamaha did the same thing with their reface synth. Personally I think it's the least interesting path. Why not make a truly good digital synth instead of making lesser sounding clones of analog gear? It's not like Roland's digital clones are cheaper than the stuff Korg and Behringer are bringing. Might as well sell them as VSTs.

I agree with you. They way they are marketing it is not winning any of the hardliners over. It would be better if they were working on ACB tech and making it sound better than the real thing.

  On 9/12/2016 at 2:17 PM, Chesney said:

I don't care whether these are accurate duplicates as I am not after these sounds and I wouldn't care anyway. But it is another fail for Roland because the stupid customer base ARE after true replications for no reason that they can actually explain other than they thing they need it. So Roland are trying to change the brainwashed consumer to realise that it does not matter to be analogue or exact but the people won't listen.

Things just need to sound good to the ear and if you have something to live up to, then it's not going to cut it.

 

Bad luck Roland, you can't win.

i mean. that's exactly it though isn't it. 

why re-iterate on the tr-9 and tb-3 with more accurate replications, if it's not even gonna be an accurate replication. 

glad you knew what I meant even with spelling mistakes ;)

Woo, I can edit posts now.

it's not like there's a shortage of 303 clones out there  

if you're gonna go with the roland one, you'd assume it would be accuracy included .. beyond just brand/name recognition with the logo. 

sorry. i know this is banging on about a ~couple day old announcement now .. but .. it's just getting more and more confusing the more i think about it lol 

  On 9/12/2016 at 1:53 PM, peace 7 said:

One Eyed Jenkins comes along from the 1930's with his $5 guitar that only has 4 strings, and he hits it with a spoon and makes meth dealers cry from the heavenly awesome beauty of his playing

I love that guy!

amazing

lol

Lol either you mean a human who has KK's body with Costanza's head, or you mean forcing Costanza's head up into KK's vagina

There is always shame after the cum.

are they analog? 

well they produce an analog signal.. does that count?

  On 9/12/2016 at 10:48 PM, marf said:

are they analog?

George Costanza is, Kim Kardashian is well digital.

  On 9/12/2016 at 8:48 AM, modey said:

I don't really get that "just a VST in a box" attitude, tbh.

I don't think the VST comparison is far fetched at all. They're now selling the same modelling software in different hardware boxes, for instance. This portability definitely strengthens the software/VST connotations. On the System 1/8 they even use the term "plugout", you can load in new software models like in your DAW. And the physical part is almost an arbitrary controller, an exchangeable interface (like the TB-3 vs TB-03).

Anyhow, I'm perfectly happy with my x0xb0x. Will make a Roland decal for it someday, hehe.

BTW, how much are x0xb0xes on the second hand market nowadays? Probably quite a bit cheaper than the new Boutique TB-03?

lol well there is a TT-303 on australian ebay currently going for less than the TB-03, 12 hours left.. so yeah, the omg realz analogz replicas probably aren't that much more expensive than the boohoo vst in a box it's digital so why can't I do that in software never mind the fact that it's got a specialised interface version

  On 9/13/2016 at 1:11 AM, xxx said:

 

  On 9/12/2016 at 8:21 PM, auxien said:

Lol either you mean a human who has KK's body with Costanza's head, or you mean forcing Costanza's head up into KK's vagina

Fair--that sentence was not clear. Despite how much fun your scenarios became, I meant a chimeric fusion of KK's body with George's head instead of hers.

 

Yah, that would be conundrum... 

I'm going to buy more vintage analog synths to keep from having to fuck Kim Georgstanza. Thank you WATMM

I'd hit it.