ive finally put in v2 wow i love the new features, a small point though.
even though the new patches really show off what the v synth is capable of as a VA i dont think i would have bought it on the strength of these. ie. they dont show what the V is REALLY capable of.
maybe roland is trying to compete in the virus etc. stakes while not making the most of what its uniqueness?
does anybody buy a V to play eps etc. ?
surely the point is to bring something new?
just a thought
ps is does seem to be the disk clean function that wipes stuff
be careful
trigger my beams baby
v2?
-
tarquin pedals
- Posts: 171
- Joined: 22:25, 23 May 2004
- Location: Scotland
- Contact:
Re: v2?
As far as I can tell, I really heard that many people got the V for bread-and-butter synth sounds. The % relation of the ones that did so and the ones that got the V for it's unique sound mangling features was probably high enough to persuade the Roland marketing guys to accent on more playable sounds for V 2. Though only Roland can really tell.
Anyway, I see that most of the V 2 patches are using all of the V's possibilities. Indeed, most of the sounds are "playable" like they say but that doesn't mean these sounds do not use the V's unique features. There are many sounds that use SBFs, interesting VariPhrase-based patches, there are also nice examples in the rhythm kits - like combining VariPhrase, VA and FM synthesis etc.
A.
Anyway, I see that most of the V 2 patches are using all of the V's possibilities. Indeed, most of the sounds are "playable" like they say but that doesn't mean these sounds do not use the V's unique features. There are many sounds that use SBFs, interesting VariPhrase-based patches, there are also nice examples in the rhythm kits - like combining VariPhrase, VA and FM synthesis etc.
A.
Re: v2?
In another post (which I can no longer find here) I mentioned that the v2.0 upgrade has moved the V-Synth towards the mainstream - more like a ROMpler - with standard patches that don't seem to show off the uniqueness of the machine. Gone are the 1.51 waves along with the patches that illustrate the power of VariPhrase (like Mad Orchestra - 'the sound within the sound') and the Time Trip pad.
Fortunately, it was reported that RolandUS is working on a V2.0 replacement upgrade that will restore the v1.51 waveset by appending it to the v2.0 waveset, and changing the v1.51 patches to point to the new wave locations. This should restore the backward compatibility that is currently lacking.
G
Fortunately, it was reported that RolandUS is working on a V2.0 replacement upgrade that will restore the v1.51 waveset by appending it to the v2.0 waveset, and changing the v1.51 patches to point to the new wave locations. This should restore the backward compatibility that is currently lacking.
G
Re: v2?
part of the problem i had with 1.5 was the fact that unless you are writing dark ambient the factory patches are useless to a great extent. version 2.0 gives a broader scope of features with great VA examples and the patches actually use features like the dbeams and timetrip pad. honestly mad orchestra..?? it was an interesting object lesson and maybe a good patch for a horror soundtrack.
version 2.0 actually uses some of the unique features more brilliantly i found patches that the ttpad was set for filter sweeps and panning that gave great control over the sound.
the use of samples was quite a bit better than 1.51 I felt like the 1.51 patches somone sampled a cool sound and just screwed with the knobs a little and said .... that sounds cool. and left it... some of them the controllers didnt even do anything.
anyways... i use the v-synth for VA and for sound mangling the key is getting your own samples and mangling them ...
version 2.0 is valuble just for the supersaw wave.... that baby is fat.
ahh to tame this amazing beast of a synth!!!
version 2.0 actually uses some of the unique features more brilliantly i found patches that the ttpad was set for filter sweeps and panning that gave great control over the sound.
the use of samples was quite a bit better than 1.51 I felt like the 1.51 patches somone sampled a cool sound and just screwed with the knobs a little and said .... that sounds cool. and left it... some of them the controllers didnt even do anything.
anyways... i use the v-synth for VA and for sound mangling the key is getting your own samples and mangling them ...
version 2.0 is valuble just for the supersaw wave.... that baby is fat.
ahh to tame this amazing beast of a synth!!!
Re: v2?
jc -
Your points are well taken.
My take is that the factory patches in 2.0 are probably better because the V-Synth technology has been around for a while, and its' potential is much better understood by the programmers. Not to take away from the new waveset (it is pretty cool!), but the programmers now have much better familiarity with what the V-Synth is capable of. Also, there may have been more programmers involved this time, and/or more time was allotted to create new sounds. We'll probably never know, but whatever happened, the results are the better for it.
The biggest issue with the 2.0 upgrade is that by getting rid of the 1.51 waveset, most of the patches that were created up to that point are unusable. This is a serious issue for those of us who have spent many happy hours exploring and programming the V-Synth. If Roland adds those waves back in, there will be a way (with some effort on our part) to get our sounds back.
For me, the object lesson of the Mad Orchestra patch was that the V-Synth could create unique and amazing evolving pads out of fairly standard sounds. The last synth to provide that capability for me was the Korg Wavestation. The cool thing is that I can now take an evolving Wavestation patch and 'turn it on it's head' using the V-Synth. Truely amazing technology, and the reason why I bought the V-Synth in the first place.
Your points are well taken.
My take is that the factory patches in 2.0 are probably better because the V-Synth technology has been around for a while, and its' potential is much better understood by the programmers. Not to take away from the new waveset (it is pretty cool!), but the programmers now have much better familiarity with what the V-Synth is capable of. Also, there may have been more programmers involved this time, and/or more time was allotted to create new sounds. We'll probably never know, but whatever happened, the results are the better for it.
The biggest issue with the 2.0 upgrade is that by getting rid of the 1.51 waveset, most of the patches that were created up to that point are unusable. This is a serious issue for those of us who have spent many happy hours exploring and programming the V-Synth. If Roland adds those waves back in, there will be a way (with some effort on our part) to get our sounds back.
For me, the object lesson of the Mad Orchestra patch was that the V-Synth could create unique and amazing evolving pads out of fairly standard sounds. The last synth to provide that capability for me was the Korg Wavestation. The cool thing is that I can now take an evolving Wavestation patch and 'turn it on it's head' using the V-Synth. Truely amazing technology, and the reason why I bought the V-Synth in the first place.
-
realtrance
- Posts: 128
- Joined: 16:39, 8 April 2005
Re: v2?
It's really ultimately a question of taste. What v2.0 proves is that the V-Synth can sound _very_ different, depending on the way it's used and programmed. Its entire identity can be changed (the VC-1 card with the D-50 capability was already substantial proof of that).
I'd seriously want to be able to have a VC-card (or home-made one) where I could swap between v1.5 and v2.0 default waves and patches. It's easy enough to swap the OS via update procedures, but I just don't know whether that's "good" or "bad" for the V-Synth to do frequently.
For me, V2.0 is a step backwards towards more familiar, conventional, commercial music. It goes deeper on that front than v1.5, but there are a number of patches on 1.5 that I find far more useful as exploratory starting points for working out V-Synth-specific ideas. For the most immediate and simplest example, take "Mad Orchestra" right out from the gate and simply swap waveforms on OSC1 -- it gives you a great feel for how the time function affects various kinds of samples, whether looped, natural, vocal or synthetic.
I exaggerate for effect, but I could literally spend months just with that one patch working out from it into new territory musically.... and then there are hundreds past that one to go!
With v2.0 it's a lot more "playable out of the box at tonight's concert/jam session," which I'm sure will be more successful for selling the instrument.
The reality is, the level of involvement with patch development the V-Synth's capabilities imply appeals to a very small, core audience, the same kind of audience that likes things like the Nord Modular series, Reaktor, MAX/MSP, FS1/R, etc. So it's a good move for Roland to try to break out of that market into a broader one with V-Synth 2.0, and bring attention to its power in a less intimidating and alien style.
I'd seriously want to be able to have a VC-card (or home-made one) where I could swap between v1.5 and v2.0 default waves and patches. It's easy enough to swap the OS via update procedures, but I just don't know whether that's "good" or "bad" for the V-Synth to do frequently.
For me, V2.0 is a step backwards towards more familiar, conventional, commercial music. It goes deeper on that front than v1.5, but there are a number of patches on 1.5 that I find far more useful as exploratory starting points for working out V-Synth-specific ideas. For the most immediate and simplest example, take "Mad Orchestra" right out from the gate and simply swap waveforms on OSC1 -- it gives you a great feel for how the time function affects various kinds of samples, whether looped, natural, vocal or synthetic.
I exaggerate for effect, but I could literally spend months just with that one patch working out from it into new territory musically.... and then there are hundreds past that one to go!
With v2.0 it's a lot more "playable out of the box at tonight's concert/jam session," which I'm sure will be more successful for selling the instrument.
The reality is, the level of involvement with patch development the V-Synth's capabilities imply appeals to a very small, core audience, the same kind of audience that likes things like the Nord Modular series, Reaktor, MAX/MSP, FS1/R, etc. So it's a good move for Roland to try to break out of that market into a broader one with V-Synth 2.0, and bring attention to its power in a less intimidating and alien style.
-
tarquin pedals
- Posts: 171
- Joined: 22:25, 23 May 2004
- Location: Scotland
- Contact:
Re: v2?
let them pray
thats what sold it to me
i am still trying to get back that patch with resampled waveforms
i hope we are using it for different things lol
trigger my beams baby
thats what sold it to me
i am still trying to get back that patch with resampled waveforms
i hope we are using it for different things lol
trigger my beams baby
-
DodgingRain
- Posts: 81
- Joined: 22:00, 2 September 2004
Re: v2?
What amazes me is that everyone complains about losing the old waves. Who cares about the old waves the point is to use your own, most of the people complaining the version 2 doesn't show what the v is capable of were using presets on the old OS!
Personally I think the sounds in v2 are a huge improvement over the old ones which were simply awful. Either way I use my own waves anyway.
Personally I think the sounds in v2 are a huge improvement over the old ones which were simply awful. Either way I use my own waves anyway.
Re: v2?
while the the new PATCHES are a lot more ANALOGIC, the old 1.51 patches sounded crazier because they used real sounds (sounds we can relate to)
I've gone back to 1.51 to check on my old patches and to check the ROM samples
what I think is that V.2 has lost a LOT of very good SAMPLES, not that we don't use our own, but if there is a space that is going to be used anyway I rather have it with sounds that I want to use
so...
I'm happy with all the new capabilities of V.2
but I would prefer to have the old ROM samples
that's why I'm going to undertake the task of copying all 342 samples to recover the old sounds and patches
I've gone back to 1.51 to check on my old patches and to check the ROM samples
what I think is that V.2 has lost a LOT of very good SAMPLES, not that we don't use our own, but if there is a space that is going to be used anyway I rather have it with sounds that I want to use
so...
I'm happy with all the new capabilities of V.2
but I would prefer to have the old ROM samples
that's why I'm going to undertake the task of copying all 342 samples to recover the old sounds and patches
Re: V2?
Hello,
I would seem that whether one likes the v2.0 patches or the
1.51 patches better is not only a bit subjective, but beside the point.
The point is whether upgrading any software product should
render any work done on previous versions unuseable.
If you have a business with a network that utilizes a given type of software for your bookkeeping and the manufacturer informs you that if you upgrade to the new version, you get
specific new features, but you no longer can open your previous spreadsheets, would you find that acceptable?
In addition, the V-Synth was originally positioned nearest to the Hartmann Neuron as a synth that specialized in more esoteric types of textures. Some who purchased it for that reason (myself included) did so because they already use analog synths to cover analog types of patches and chose the
V-Synth for a more specialized texture (ala Wavestation, etc).
As a niche instrument, the V-Synth didn't fly off the shelves
like Triton, Fantom, Motif, etc.
It would seem that with the introduction of the V-XT, Roland wishes to mainstream the V-Synth as well as target a younger market segment for the synth, which is why the 2.0
sounds are more dance/techno oriented.
Again, as previously stated, Roland has every right to protect the waves as their intellectual property and I give them a great deal of props for the work they've done in upgrading the features however, I'm not of the opinion that those earlier
users of the V-Synth who purchased it back when it was $500
higher in price and yet unproven, in addition to having done
the work of creating their own patches, should have to take
the hit that comes with not being able to use their previous work. Sorry for the long post; usually keep it brief.
Best Regards,
LWG
I would seem that whether one likes the v2.0 patches or the
1.51 patches better is not only a bit subjective, but beside the point.
The point is whether upgrading any software product should
render any work done on previous versions unuseable.
If you have a business with a network that utilizes a given type of software for your bookkeeping and the manufacturer informs you that if you upgrade to the new version, you get
specific new features, but you no longer can open your previous spreadsheets, would you find that acceptable?
In addition, the V-Synth was originally positioned nearest to the Hartmann Neuron as a synth that specialized in more esoteric types of textures. Some who purchased it for that reason (myself included) did so because they already use analog synths to cover analog types of patches and chose the
V-Synth for a more specialized texture (ala Wavestation, etc).
As a niche instrument, the V-Synth didn't fly off the shelves
like Triton, Fantom, Motif, etc.
It would seem that with the introduction of the V-XT, Roland wishes to mainstream the V-Synth as well as target a younger market segment for the synth, which is why the 2.0
sounds are more dance/techno oriented.
Again, as previously stated, Roland has every right to protect the waves as their intellectual property and I give them a great deal of props for the work they've done in upgrading the features however, I'm not of the opinion that those earlier
users of the V-Synth who purchased it back when it was $500
higher in price and yet unproven, in addition to having done
the work of creating their own patches, should have to take
the hit that comes with not being able to use their previous work. Sorry for the long post; usually keep it brief.
Best Regards,
LWG
back to 1.5x
Hugo - can a V Synth XT actually load any o/s pre- V2.0???
Re: v2?
using the preview of the waves in the preset memory
I will record them into the computer,then I'll trim them, and save them back into the V-Synth, I'll exchenge the reference of the internal waves into the newly made waves, and there you go.
For other projects I intend to use V-Synth Librarian.
Problems:
- I think that some of the presets don't play the all sound (i.e. menus)
- the new files tend to be litle bigger than the originals (???), also the size will increase if you encode them (being the biggest one ensemble)
any ideas?
I will record them into the computer,then I'll trim them, and save them back into the V-Synth, I'll exchenge the reference of the internal waves into the newly made waves, and there you go.
For other projects I intend to use V-Synth Librarian.
Problems:
- I think that some of the presets don't play the all sound (i.e. menus)
- the new files tend to be litle bigger than the originals (???), also the size will increase if you encode them (being the biggest one ensemble)
any ideas?