Will There Be A Rack Version of The V-Synth GT?

[stevie]

Bless you Art! Don't take my words out of context, but I've been so tongue in cheek that I would be amazed if anyone with some knowledge felt they were being misinformed.

Just to set the record straight, 'technically' of course the XT is NOT the 'true' rack version of the GT - it can't be because it lacks AP synth and one V engine, but this is not my point.

In my view, the GT HAS been set up to operate as two effective instruments in one, this was the obvious design goal to me. Of course there is some integration between the two engines - each of the upper or lower tone can have structures 1-3, which are the normal V structures but have AP synth running in parrallel, stucture 4 having AP synth running as oscilltor 2 and structure 5 having vocal designer and AP running in parrallel. To achieve these structures for each of the lower or upper tones, there must be a shared DSP resource otherwise each engine would have it's own polyphony limit - no doubling. Structure 5 is probably the most interesting since you can have AP and vocal designer on one tone, with a 'normal' V patch on the other - note only one instance of AP synth or vocal designer can run at once.

I think everything else has been setup to operate as two effective instruments - two MFX units - one for each tone, zoned arrpegiator, shared toned pool for both engines etc.

Therefore with the above in mind, apart from the shared DSP resource, sonically and especailly if you remove AP synth, there are no new ways to combine oscillators or make new sounds from the orignal V or XT. Yes you can have more going on at once, but so what, for studio use this isn't a problem. AP synth is a step in the wrong direction for me and has no appeal. The GT should have been the behemoth of variphrase - two V engines which are truely integrated giving four oscillators to combine in different ways - now that would have been new and I think that to put the same hardware in 5 years down the road and then market it as something new whilst allienating your current V customer base is a poor business decision.

To me it says Roland has lost confidence in variphrase and are saying, yikes, we haven't sold enough V's - let's try to make it more like a rompler and then fail dismally with it's current implementation. It's even more obscure than it was before.

And I gotta say Art, if you thought it were a massive improvenet over the original, then you wouldn't be selling yours ;¬)

For all my moaning though, I would purchase a GT because with something as hands on as the V, it doesn't work for me as a rack - I want a keyboard. I will do this when the loss on my XT is within acceptable limits. I will not be a corporate sucker and pay for 'extras' which I don't consider have any real value - for me anyhow. If you still haven't sold yours in a little while, I may buy it off you - good luck with it anyhow!

Steve

[zone1]

stevie, you've suddenly become all tech'y and stuff.......

(am lost)

i prefered it more when your being cynical.

[Artemiy]

stevie, I know I always call up long discussions with simple phrases But I was clear as I could. I just want you to be careful with your statements.

If you look at it from another view, the GT is a greater package for the money. It costs merely $500 more than the original V did, but now offers twice the power. And this is really great, whether you understand it or not.

Now, as for I am selling mine and not the V, that mainly is because I am making sound libraries which can be converted from V to GT but not vice versa. And one of them has to leave due to studio space limitations.

[Deweak]

The first time I started to look at Variphrase, I found it powerful and great for original sound design. But with V and XT you have to wait when you want to use the vocal designer or D-50 engine. As I plan to use my instruments on stage, this was a big drawback of the first series. When Roland released the GT, I knew this was the right thing for me : instant access to all the sounds, two engines for real split patches (a drum sample and a pad, for instance).

AP-S is good, too. For expressive and realistic solos it's efficient, even if I don't know why Roland integrated it in a synth primally designed to create synthetic and imaginary sounds. It could be a Fantom's add-on.

People saying that GT is "only" 2 V-Synths plus a vocal designer don't realize that GT is 2 V-Synths plus a vocal designer ! Much more power for not so much more money. Where's the problem ?

[Artemiy]

"Where's the problem ? "

They are jealous

[stevie]

Yes, the GT is a good bet for those who have not bought in to variphrase at any time previously, but that is a tiny market which is why Roland is alienating it's current V user base and why I think the GT is ill-conceived - they've made it more obscure and the technology less understood. The GT should have been aimed at VP9000, V synth, XT and Varios owners to replace and push the tech further.

[zone1]

let us not forget......it's not what you've got!!!

(as in 'GT' the super synth)

but what you want to do with it......?

GT,may well be what some people need, if so, buy it......

if not,don't........!!GT,V,XT it's not a class thing,

it's a, what do i need thing?

maybe roland set up these small differences as a way to

relegate a concept,product or our V's to the bin......sad.....

[Deweak]

Or maybe Roland didn't find useful to completly re-imagine so good machines and just added some stuff to keep them in good place in the catalogs. Then the GT could be a way to say ("hey, we're still there with Variphrase synths").

[Elektrobolt]

"New" things cost money to develop. Roland is milking their cows by creating many many machines using similar hardware architecture. This way they can earn some of the money back, that they spent coming up with the base hardware and associated software modules.

Another thing is the global pressure from various parts of the world concerning the environment, and some countries or unions do not accept certain deviations from the grand master plan; nor are they forgiving when it comes to them changing policies on these issues. The vendors just have to alter the hardware and why not take the opportunity to lure a few folks into replacing their machines with a new "version"?

The way I see it is, an original V-Synth is every bit as good as the GT (or XT) for that matter. It may not have all the goodies, but the essentials are there, and that's elasticity! (Personally, I could even do without the VA in the original, it is a really really good sampler.) I would never have purchased a V-Synth had it not been an "elastic" sampler (I love that word).

[RichardHK]

>fantom x
then fantom xr
v synth
then vsynth xt
vsynt gt
?????
<<

Hi guys,

Excuse me pulling this old thread out (cannot find later one) but any news on release of a GT Rack version?

The XT price has dropped quite a lot in Hong Kong (USD1,660) and good value. But having bought the Fantom X7 not too long before the G7 appeared, I wonder how long a GT rack might be? (V-Synth XG?) Want to buy a G8 before GT.

Richard
Hong Kong

[midi]

I doubt there will be a GT rack but you never know..

[RichardHK]

Maybe an AP update for V-Synth XT somehow? If the XT gets any cheaper it is gonna be a steal for what it can do. No need to wait for a more pricey GXT really.