Maybe a dumb question. Fantom Synthesis

[jgore]

Hi.

It is actually surprising that I have a Fantom Xa and don't still know what's the name of its syntesis.

Korg features AI, AI2, Access, Hyper Integrated, but what about Fantom series ?. I know the FA-76 still would use XV's synthesis if I'm not mistaken. What are the Fantom S X and Xa Synthesis ?

Thanks

Jgore

Roland Fantom-Xa

[sambasevam]

XV Synthesis i beleieve.



---------------------------------------------------------------
If at first you dont suceed, then skydiving is definitively not for you.

[dkpcola]

Just digital PCM based synthesis. Korg synthesis names are just marketing hype. They just changed a system synthesis parameters and called a fancy name and sell it.

[Hawkens]

Yes, it's exactly like Dpkcola said: basicly it's PCM synthesis, which means you have XX MB of samples in ROM and the sound is combination of them with layers, ENV, CUTOF, FX etc.

Roland calls it XV engine, it's same principle in XV2xxx, XV5xxx, MC-307, MC-909, Fantoms, just ammount of samples are different and sometimes they add new ones.

[Artemiy]

Yes, it's PCM-based digital synthesis, however, since you can route the envelopes and LFOs to COSM MFX, I cannot say it's plain digital, as it adds physical/analogue modeling.

jgore:

I'd suggest you check out the Fantom-S/X TweakBook too see what the Fantoms can do: http://artemiolabs.com/pub/books/fantom-tweakbook/.

[ricok987]

correct me if I am wrong-but aren't all digital syths-subtractive sythesis-constructed using 1,2,3 or 4 sounds mixed together with effects? I would think even modelling syths do this to some extent. The only syth that I remember was a little different was the Kawai K5000 that used subtractive sythesis. I had one of those, but never quite understood how to create patches from scratch-so I sold it. I think the correct term to use for Roland sythesis would be "Sample Playback" am I right?

[Artemiy]

There is much more than "sample playback" happening when a really cool patch is created, so...

[jcthemc]

yes and with structures/tmt/fxm and all that its pretty robust!!!

the analog feel really fills in most of the gaps besides real sonic interaction.

artemio.. in your opinion how much difference does it make using a generated waveform versus a sampled waveform?

i am curious if my sinewave based patch would sound different if the waveform was from a generated wave?

would the harmonics and resonance be more authentic?


JC THE MC...

[Artemiy]

JC:

Yes, analogue feel is a really great feature.

As of sampled v.s. VA, you can judge yourself. When you play a multi-sampled synth wave on keys, you can hear that it has a new partial sample on each 5-7 semitones, and in the very most of cases this is more than enough to give you the "real thing". I am really happy with the basic waves supplied with the Fantoms, I think Roland really did their best job with them.

However, when you make a pitch sweep, only one partial is used of course, and you can hear that at the end of the sweep it looses it's character. E.g. if you sweep the pitch down 1 or 2 octaves, you will hear the lack of upper harmonics. In a real analogue synth or VA, there will always be upper harmonics because they are produced on the fly by the generator which is not sample-based.

[nsheldon]

Hi all.

In response to the question regarding what synthesis engine is used in the Fantom-S and Fantom-X, I thought I'd post a brief (and probably incomplete) history of Roland's digital synthesis as it relates to the Fantoms.

L/A

Most of Roland's sample playback synths (excluding the VP-9000, V-Synth, and VariOS, for example) are based on the original synth architecture found in the D-50, which used the L/A synth architecture (Linear/Arithmetic). That architecture used 4 Tones just like the Fantom. Of course, it was much more limited than the Fantom in many way, but it did basically the same thing... played back samples and filtered the sound with filters and LFOs.

Super-JV

The L/A synth architecture was greatly improved upon with the Super-JV synth engine (preceded by the JV synth engine which was also based heavily on the L/A synth engine). The JV and Super JV engines added, among other things, resonant filters that could be adjusted in real-time. I have no hands-on experience (yet) with the L/A, or JV engines, only the Super JV engine so I'm not highly familiar with the exact differences.

XV

In 2000 Roland released the JV-5080 which improved on the Super JV synth engine by adding 64 notes of polyphony, stereo Tones, more extensive Matrix Control and additional filters. The Fantom FA-76 was released about the same time with the same engine, but limited to 64 notes of polyphony rather than the 128 of the XV-5080. The Fantom-S added the ability to use user samples and multi-samples just like internal waveforms, a step LFO, and a different effects unit (MFX rather than the EFX unit found in the XV-5080). I've owned an XP-80 (Super JV engine), XV-5080, and now the Fantom-X8.

Regards,

Nathan Sheldon
http://www.nathansheldon.com/

[Artemiy]

Nathan, shame on you, you made so many mistakes in this post!

1. LA Synthesis had analogue-like waveforms on par with PCM waves. No, LA didn't allow you to filter PCM waves yet. And yes, it did allow realtime filter tweaks.

2. After D synths there were JD synths, they were a step between D and JV engines.

3. JV synths basically had two "levels" - early 32-voice synths like JV-80/880 and then more advanced 64-voice JV-1010/1080/2080 (there was no JV-5080!) as well as XP-30/50/60/80.

4. Yes, XV series were another major leap beyond, they added 128 voice poly, more advanced Matrix Control and greater effects.

5. Fantoms so far are the most advanced engines with seamless samples integration into synthesis, great Matrix Control options, super-cool COSM/RSS effects, new step LFO.


Anyway, there's more to read in my earlier post:
http://forum.fantomized.info/index.php? ... ge=1#51677


A.