I'm just making music.
Am I doing something utterly wrong?
Where was the bridge??
New Fantom For NAMM?
Re: New Fantom For NAMM?
right after the "chorus"...Where was the bridge??
-
The Audacity Works
- Posts: 1012
- Joined: 19:02, 15 November 2007
- Location: Hollywood, CA
Re: New Fantom For NAMM?
I think you miss a few things;
1. Get a sound engineer to mix the samples so they are very close or spot on to how it would sound on a pro record. I know aleast 1 person who's going to say "i mix differently each song, thats what its about, my artistic develope, me me me me" My reponse to the person in question Yamaha MOTIF!!! nuff said.
It's still subjective. I'd say the Motif sounds less like a record. If anything, the Fantom allows one to layer sixteen sounds without sounding like cacophonic ass.
2. Add a proper cpu like; AMD Athlon 64-bit 3700+ Socket 939 Processor CPU.
£30 if that, The boost in MFX Effects EQ per part would, be most welcome
The music industry use crappy CPU'S yet charge us the earth for it.
Imagine your Fantom, with its own basic operating system with a dual core cpu.
This was the point of my post. In general, end users have absolutely no idea what goes into developing music hardware. No idea whatsoever. You can't just toss an embedded OS onto just any CPU. Korg spent years trying to do just that, and the result was a workstation that costs $8000 and still isn't anywhere close to a computer-based DAW... and still doesn't have an MFX processor per part/track.
Now admittedly, I don't exactly know what goes into developing music hardware either—But I'm not gonna pretend I do.
3. A LOT MORE RAM, AND NO SHORT CUTS, FORCING YOU TO BUY EXPANSION CARDS
Why would Roland (or anyone else for that matter) remove the ability to sell expansion cards? No manufacturer is in business to save you money.
As I understand it (may be wrong), both Yamaha and Nemesys (now Tascam) hold patents on streaming samples from hard disk. They may license elements of the technology to softsynth companies for a tiny fee, but there's no way they'll just give it to Roland, Kurzweil, and Korg. Unless something radical happens, we're still looking at loading samples into RAM (long load times) or dealing with ROM cards.
Instead of loading all the samples at once, the Alesis Fusion loads them as you need them. This can result in extremely slow and awkward sound navigation. Is this preferable?
When all is said and done, if people want their workstation to be a DAW or Receptor, they should probably just buy a DAW or Receptor (I switched to software long ago). And for God's sake, everyone stop comparing a piece of hardware with a computer, which collectively, is the result of nearly unlimited man hours and resources! Yes, there are plenty of ways the Fantom can be improved (especially considering it was most likely designed five, six years ago). Many people have legitimate concerns. And ridiculous complaints and feature requests are fine... as long as they're not coupled with ignorant comments like "Don't the engineers know what they're doing?"
1. Get a sound engineer to mix the samples so they are very close or spot on to how it would sound on a pro record. I know aleast 1 person who's going to say "i mix differently each song, thats what its about, my artistic develope, me me me me" My reponse to the person in question Yamaha MOTIF!!! nuff said.
It's still subjective. I'd say the Motif sounds less like a record. If anything, the Fantom allows one to layer sixteen sounds without sounding like cacophonic ass.
2. Add a proper cpu like; AMD Athlon 64-bit 3700+ Socket 939 Processor CPU.
£30 if that, The boost in MFX Effects EQ per part would, be most welcome
The music industry use crappy CPU'S yet charge us the earth for it.
Imagine your Fantom, with its own basic operating system with a dual core cpu.
This was the point of my post. In general, end users have absolutely no idea what goes into developing music hardware. No idea whatsoever. You can't just toss an embedded OS onto just any CPU. Korg spent years trying to do just that, and the result was a workstation that costs $8000 and still isn't anywhere close to a computer-based DAW... and still doesn't have an MFX processor per part/track.
Now admittedly, I don't exactly know what goes into developing music hardware either—But I'm not gonna pretend I do.
3. A LOT MORE RAM, AND NO SHORT CUTS, FORCING YOU TO BUY EXPANSION CARDS
Why would Roland (or anyone else for that matter) remove the ability to sell expansion cards? No manufacturer is in business to save you money.
As I understand it (may be wrong), both Yamaha and Nemesys (now Tascam) hold patents on streaming samples from hard disk. They may license elements of the technology to softsynth companies for a tiny fee, but there's no way they'll just give it to Roland, Kurzweil, and Korg. Unless something radical happens, we're still looking at loading samples into RAM (long load times) or dealing with ROM cards.
Instead of loading all the samples at once, the Alesis Fusion loads them as you need them. This can result in extremely slow and awkward sound navigation. Is this preferable?
When all is said and done, if people want their workstation to be a DAW or Receptor, they should probably just buy a DAW or Receptor (I switched to software long ago). And for God's sake, everyone stop comparing a piece of hardware with a computer, which collectively, is the result of nearly unlimited man hours and resources! Yes, there are plenty of ways the Fantom can be improved (especially considering it was most likely designed five, six years ago). Many people have legitimate concerns. And ridiculous complaints and feature requests are fine... as long as they're not coupled with ignorant comments like "Don't the engineers know what they're doing?"
Re: New Fantom For NAMM?
Ah, well said mr audacious.
just a point on point 1 - for the majority of rompler voices which try to emulate the real thing, why the hell do you want to sound like a record? I want it sound as close to the real thing as possible - isn't that the objective? I get real fed up with everyone wanting to sound like someone else and then just look for the magical board which has the 'press this button for a no. 1 record' on it - anyway, most 'modern' records are poorly mixed and mastered in my view - they're just interested in loudness.
just a point on point 1 - for the majority of rompler voices which try to emulate the real thing, why the hell do you want to sound like a record? I want it sound as close to the real thing as possible - isn't that the objective? I get real fed up with everyone wanting to sound like someone else and then just look for the magical board which has the 'press this button for a no. 1 record' on it - anyway, most 'modern' records are poorly mixed and mastered in my view - they're just interested in loudness.
Re: New Fantom For NAMM?
@The Audacity Works
You wrote
"Unless something radical happens, we're still looking at loading samples into RAM (long load times) or dealing with ROM cards."
I am no engineer, but as far as I know disk streaming and sample loading time are two different problems.
Even if I'm sad that I can't load a Scarbee Rhodes into the Fantom and play a 12-layer Rhodes at rehearsals and gigs ( feels just like the real thing), I certainly don't expect a workstation to be able to do disk streaming of several hundred Mb all the time. I also don't expect a whole modern PC OS to be the core of a workstation (copyright problems, advanced hardware, problems of OS assimilation).
But loading samples into RAM still should no way last as long as it does on a FantomX, doing it
- from a flash card
- on an outdated, *too* slow OS/hardware
- and still (as far as I heard) losing additional time for converting samples into a proprietary format the Fantom needs.
Today you can load
- from faster media (e.g. via usb2 from a 2.5'' drive)
- via a faster bus (on proper hardware/OS)
- without changing format during loading
In short: there is *a* *lot* of *not* too expensive, *not* too sophisticated, *not* copyright protected creative space not only for this problem, but for the whole Fantom performance and layout, allowing Roland developers to use faster hardware and a more powerful OS together with the already fine Fantom display to provide real usability progress. And this progress still would not make the Fantom too expensive, even if it would cost one or two hundred dollars more. The developers profit from cheaper and still better hardware just like any of us.
From my view demanding a significant progress in this way is not demanded too much at all. It is rather simply the job that has to be done!!
And I think people have every right to ask why Roland developers have not shown any impressive FantomX development results for a while, after implementing the very welcome audio recording and the (not convincingly implemented) sample features.
If you add how much recycling and little progress has happenend in the sound/samples/wavs area, there's more to complain: Roland is notorious for recycling loads of old (and in part outdated low quality) sound material which at least would need some more efforts in quality refinement over the last years. You can't keep on offering old 90s low quality mini samples in 2007!
If you further add, that I even can't correct bad SRX board sound design, by simply remapping e.g. the tone material in the SRX 12, where they sampled a whole bunch of faulty Rhodes tones (bad enough they did a very superficial job in maintaining the Rhodes before sampling it), and save the result as user patch, then the OS dosn't even support me in correcting sloppy work of Roland sound designers on quite expensive boards!
Add that users had to find a tricky way with a lot of time consuming tweaking to get proper live sound switching, instead of the developers doing the job, and that the developers from then up to now didn't even manage to implement this as a normal, easily accessible feature of FantomX live sound switching. Of course you ask yourself what these designers might do all day long instead of providing OS updates with such *basic* everyday features???
I could add more which overall leads to the impression that the Roland management has become quite slow and uninspired lately, to say it as politely as possible. The complaint is not that they don't work miracles, but that they should do a better job!
You wrote
"Unless something radical happens, we're still looking at loading samples into RAM (long load times) or dealing with ROM cards."
I am no engineer, but as far as I know disk streaming and sample loading time are two different problems.
Even if I'm sad that I can't load a Scarbee Rhodes into the Fantom and play a 12-layer Rhodes at rehearsals and gigs ( feels just like the real thing), I certainly don't expect a workstation to be able to do disk streaming of several hundred Mb all the time. I also don't expect a whole modern PC OS to be the core of a workstation (copyright problems, advanced hardware, problems of OS assimilation).
But loading samples into RAM still should no way last as long as it does on a FantomX, doing it
- from a flash card
- on an outdated, *too* slow OS/hardware
- and still (as far as I heard) losing additional time for converting samples into a proprietary format the Fantom needs.
Today you can load
- from faster media (e.g. via usb2 from a 2.5'' drive)
- via a faster bus (on proper hardware/OS)
- without changing format during loading
In short: there is *a* *lot* of *not* too expensive, *not* too sophisticated, *not* copyright protected creative space not only for this problem, but for the whole Fantom performance and layout, allowing Roland developers to use faster hardware and a more powerful OS together with the already fine Fantom display to provide real usability progress. And this progress still would not make the Fantom too expensive, even if it would cost one or two hundred dollars more. The developers profit from cheaper and still better hardware just like any of us.
From my view demanding a significant progress in this way is not demanded too much at all. It is rather simply the job that has to be done!!
And I think people have every right to ask why Roland developers have not shown any impressive FantomX development results for a while, after implementing the very welcome audio recording and the (not convincingly implemented) sample features.
If you add how much recycling and little progress has happenend in the sound/samples/wavs area, there's more to complain: Roland is notorious for recycling loads of old (and in part outdated low quality) sound material which at least would need some more efforts in quality refinement over the last years. You can't keep on offering old 90s low quality mini samples in 2007!
If you further add, that I even can't correct bad SRX board sound design, by simply remapping e.g. the tone material in the SRX 12, where they sampled a whole bunch of faulty Rhodes tones (bad enough they did a very superficial job in maintaining the Rhodes before sampling it), and save the result as user patch, then the OS dosn't even support me in correcting sloppy work of Roland sound designers on quite expensive boards!
Add that users had to find a tricky way with a lot of time consuming tweaking to get proper live sound switching, instead of the developers doing the job, and that the developers from then up to now didn't even manage to implement this as a normal, easily accessible feature of FantomX live sound switching. Of course you ask yourself what these designers might do all day long instead of providing OS updates with such *basic* everyday features???
I could add more which overall leads to the impression that the Roland management has become quite slow and uninspired lately, to say it as politely as possible. The complaint is not that they don't work miracles, but that they should do a better job!
-
The Audacity Works
- Posts: 1012
- Joined: 19:02, 15 November 2007
- Location: Hollywood, CA
Re: New Fantom For NAMM?
Last year, Apple (a company many, MANY times larger than Roland) had to delay their flagship OS release by nearly five months because their engineers were tied up getting the iPhone ready for launch. A company with nearly bottomless resources couldn't figure out how to get a single product working right in the allotted time. Logic users waited two YEARS for an f-ing mention of the desperately needed 8.0 update (which is still a mess, if you ask me).
It's not like the engineers/managers who designed the original Fantom X are sitting around twiddling their thumbs. Roland's made 1000+ products over the years. Neither you nor I have any idea what they're doing. They could be working on a new disk-streaming, 20" touchscreen, 45-terrabyte ROM behemoth as we speak. Or they may be designing a completely new type of synthesis. Or they could be fixing issues with other products because another forum is filled with louder, whinier people.
Or you could be right—They quite possibly could be exercising the antithesis of the Japanese work ethic: Sitting around doing nothing, downing mass quantities of sake, and laughing at the foolish Westerners.
It's not like the engineers/managers who designed the original Fantom X are sitting around twiddling their thumbs. Roland's made 1000+ products over the years. Neither you nor I have any idea what they're doing. They could be working on a new disk-streaming, 20" touchscreen, 45-terrabyte ROM behemoth as we speak. Or they may be designing a completely new type of synthesis. Or they could be fixing issues with other products because another forum is filled with louder, whinier people.
Or you could be right—They quite possibly could be exercising the antithesis of the Japanese work ethic: Sitting around doing nothing, downing mass quantities of sake, and laughing at the foolish Westerners.
Re: New Fantom For NAMM?
Ok, I surpisingly clarified that users don't wait for miracles, just for a good job keeping the Fantom-X up to date.
Now I surpisingly clarify that I don't think the ethical problem of the Japanese management has to do with sake or whatsoever they might eat or drink.
But if you name something like"Japanese work ethics" what comes immediately to my mind are things I often hear from people who are in direct contact with Japanese management persons or companies and their offices. What they complain about (besides much respect) are things like people
- being centered around own ideas with a lack of openness and communicative flexibility, in some cases to the degree of narcistic and childish behaviour
Problem: partner or customer feedback does not lead to results as fast and as directly as it would in the US or Europe. It has to run through company structures too long to be effective.
- worrying much too much about "loosing ones face", much too often being anxious to guard ones role (or that of a department) in the company hierarchy.
Problem: Hints at problems or wrong managment decisions are too easily mistaken as personal attacks at role and status. But blocking such feedback does not solve problems.
- being much too anxious in claiming new ideas as own ones or - if not possible - rather resist them.
Problem: in a modern, open information exchange wolrd you are missing a lot of support and ideas if you don't give feedback and massive support to your user base. You cut yourself off of the best resources you have and then end up with the feeling of a lonely job in a small company having too many tasks to do
- missing eye for proportions and priorities
You hint at the multitude of projects a company like Roland is working at. That's certainly true, but sometimes everbody wonders how they set their priorities.
Problem: They have exactly two keyboard flagships, the V-Synth and the Fantom-X. While their selling statistics may be connected to cheaper mass market devices, their reputation certainly doesn't: everyboday measures their innovative power and their customer behaviour looking at these flagships.
If they fail to set these priorities right, they - not we customers with lots of alternatives - have a problem.
Any of these weaknesses are quite general common human ones. But I don't think it is accendtial that those are mentioned especially often in connection with Japanese company structures.
Just one last example:
if I open the Roland US pages for the Fantom X. there is a nice support column where I find everything useful at one glance: not only manuals, but other support documents, fine tutorials, patchlists etc.
And in "downloads" US I find not only actual drivers and software, but also sequencer patch scripts, XV-Patches etc.
Compare the Japanese (main!) site and its poorer offer and you will know who has a stronger user connection and who has a weaker one...
Now I surpisingly clarify that I don't think the ethical problem of the Japanese management has to do with sake or whatsoever they might eat or drink.
But if you name something like"Japanese work ethics" what comes immediately to my mind are things I often hear from people who are in direct contact with Japanese management persons or companies and their offices. What they complain about (besides much respect) are things like people
- being centered around own ideas with a lack of openness and communicative flexibility, in some cases to the degree of narcistic and childish behaviour
Problem: partner or customer feedback does not lead to results as fast and as directly as it would in the US or Europe. It has to run through company structures too long to be effective.
- worrying much too much about "loosing ones face", much too often being anxious to guard ones role (or that of a department) in the company hierarchy.
Problem: Hints at problems or wrong managment decisions are too easily mistaken as personal attacks at role and status. But blocking such feedback does not solve problems.
- being much too anxious in claiming new ideas as own ones or - if not possible - rather resist them.
Problem: in a modern, open information exchange wolrd you are missing a lot of support and ideas if you don't give feedback and massive support to your user base. You cut yourself off of the best resources you have and then end up with the feeling of a lonely job in a small company having too many tasks to do
- missing eye for proportions and priorities
You hint at the multitude of projects a company like Roland is working at. That's certainly true, but sometimes everbody wonders how they set their priorities.
Problem: They have exactly two keyboard flagships, the V-Synth and the Fantom-X. While their selling statistics may be connected to cheaper mass market devices, their reputation certainly doesn't: everyboday measures their innovative power and their customer behaviour looking at these flagships.
If they fail to set these priorities right, they - not we customers with lots of alternatives - have a problem.
Any of these weaknesses are quite general common human ones. But I don't think it is accendtial that those are mentioned especially often in connection with Japanese company structures.
Just one last example:
if I open the Roland US pages for the Fantom X. there is a nice support column where I find everything useful at one glance: not only manuals, but other support documents, fine tutorials, patchlists etc.
And in "downloads" US I find not only actual drivers and software, but also sequencer patch scripts, XV-Patches etc.
Compare the Japanese (main!) site and its poorer offer and you will know who has a stronger user connection and who has a weaker one...
-
The Audacity Works
- Posts: 1012
- Joined: 19:02, 15 November 2007
- Location: Hollywood, CA
Re: New Fantom For NAMM?
That's certainly an interesting take. Wouldn't Yamaha and Korg suffer the same issues? And the last time I checked, the Alesis (US) Fusion forums are filled with people complaining about these very same things. And unless this needs to remain synth-centric, Mackie, Digidesign, and MOTU forums are all laced with similar vitriol.
Akai MPC forums are chock full of people whining that the 2500 doesn't have 80 specific features that the Roland MV-8x00 has, and the MV forums are full of people whining that the MV doesn't have 3 specific features from the 2500.
If you're convinced that Japanese company structures are so inefficient regarding user input, why buy a Japanese keyboard at all?
"They have exactly two keyboard flagships, the V-Synth and the Fantom-X."
Checked the website—current Roland flagships include: Fantom X8 (simply because there isn't a successor), V-Synth GT, RD-700sx, E-80, G-70, KR-107, RG-7M, and AT-90SL. Just because they're not all in Guitar Center doesn't mean they aren't garnering major engineering resources. If Roland's anything like Korg, there isn't a Fantom or flagship Guitar Centeresque workstation "team"—Engineers may get pulled to work on anything. Maybe even a new V-Drums brain or the VG-99. Or V-400 mixer. I don't know. You don't know.
"Compare the Japanese (main!) site and its poorer offer and you will know who has a stronger user connection and who has a weaker one..."
I may be wrong, but I don't think Roland US does any product development or design at all. Like Korg USA, or Harman, they're just a distributor/sales/service/support network. Considering the US is most likely the largest single market for musical gear (unless the collective EU is a market), of course their support's gonna be stronger—they don't have to create gear! I also wouldn't expect Japanglish manuals to be as easy for me to understand as ones written by a native English speaker.
Speaking of which, if you want to voice concerns, the best way is to probably speak with Roland US. But I don't know what I'd say. "Hi, I know the Fantom X is four years old, but I think the Japanese managers and engineers are all but idiots for not catering specifically to the requests and concerns of Jimknopf."
Akai MPC forums are chock full of people whining that the 2500 doesn't have 80 specific features that the Roland MV-8x00 has, and the MV forums are full of people whining that the MV doesn't have 3 specific features from the 2500.
If you're convinced that Japanese company structures are so inefficient regarding user input, why buy a Japanese keyboard at all?
"They have exactly two keyboard flagships, the V-Synth and the Fantom-X."
Checked the website—current Roland flagships include: Fantom X8 (simply because there isn't a successor), V-Synth GT, RD-700sx, E-80, G-70, KR-107, RG-7M, and AT-90SL. Just because they're not all in Guitar Center doesn't mean they aren't garnering major engineering resources. If Roland's anything like Korg, there isn't a Fantom or flagship Guitar Centeresque workstation "team"—Engineers may get pulled to work on anything. Maybe even a new V-Drums brain or the VG-99. Or V-400 mixer. I don't know. You don't know.
"Compare the Japanese (main!) site and its poorer offer and you will know who has a stronger user connection and who has a weaker one..."
I may be wrong, but I don't think Roland US does any product development or design at all. Like Korg USA, or Harman, they're just a distributor/sales/service/support network. Considering the US is most likely the largest single market for musical gear (unless the collective EU is a market), of course their support's gonna be stronger—they don't have to create gear! I also wouldn't expect Japanglish manuals to be as easy for me to understand as ones written by a native English speaker.
Speaking of which, if you want to voice concerns, the best way is to probably speak with Roland US. But I don't know what I'd say. "Hi, I know the Fantom X is four years old, but I think the Japanese managers and engineers are all but idiots for not catering specifically to the requests and concerns of Jimknopf."
Re: New Fantom For NAMM?
But I don't know what I'd say. "Hi, I know the Fantom X is four years old, but I think the Japanese managers and engineers are all but idiots for not catering specifically to the requests and concerns of Jimknopf."
Yes, maybe that would be a start if you omit the offenses.
Seriously, do you think trying to play it down to "the requests and concerns of Jimknopf" helps?
Isn't that the old lame company excuse I met quite often: trying to individualize an obviously not individual problem?
Or the picture of a seemingly irritating mass of strange users requesting randomly anything and all the time: do you think that helps to keep clearly definable product development failures of a main product line (I still regard it as one of the two most important Roland keyboard lines not only for guitar shops) in the big nebula bank?
What I miss in your posts in this thread is the same I miss from Roland Japan: communicating in an open way about things that have not developed too well lately - which doesn't take anything from things being fine - , and then discuss possible solutions which have a chance to reach even Japanese management ears ...
Yes, maybe that would be a start if you omit the offenses.
Seriously, do you think trying to play it down to "the requests and concerns of Jimknopf" helps?
Isn't that the old lame company excuse I met quite often: trying to individualize an obviously not individual problem?
Or the picture of a seemingly irritating mass of strange users requesting randomly anything and all the time: do you think that helps to keep clearly definable product development failures of a main product line (I still regard it as one of the two most important Roland keyboard lines not only for guitar shops) in the big nebula bank?
What I miss in your posts in this thread is the same I miss from Roland Japan: communicating in an open way about things that have not developed too well lately - which doesn't take anything from things being fine - , and then discuss possible solutions which have a chance to reach even Japanese management ears ...
-
The Audacity Works
- Posts: 1012
- Joined: 19:02, 15 November 2007
- Location: Hollywood, CA
Re: New Fantom For NAMM?
I sure don't think complaining on an internet forum's going to help, as this isn't the type of place managers and engineers spend their time. Are you suggesting they do?
What Might Help:
A civil, organized feature request list that includes legitimate, realistic, usable ideas that make the recipient think "Hmm, these guys seem to know a bit about what they're talking about"—emailed to whomever at Roland US receives such correspondence. Not tech support, not sales, not accounting... If you have to call Roland US to get the right email address, do it.
What Wont Help:
"Roland doesn't listen to us!" posted to an internet forum.
"The sounds suck compared to the Motif!" posted to an internet forum.
"The samples are all screwed up!" posted to an internet forum.
"Add way more sounds, make it faster and better and more like a computer!" posted to an internet forum.
Because none of that means anything. It's all unfocused and doesn't provide any solutions. I might as well run up to the guys fixing my street and shout "Hey! Work harder!" In the end, all I accomplished was annoying them for five seconds.
If I ran an MI company that specialized in computer-based products (interfaces, DAW software, softsynths, etc.), I'd absolutely pay close attention to online blathering—It's a great connection to my user base. I don't, however, think the people on this particular forum represent the majority of the Fantom's market. We all tend to be better educated and computer literate, but we're also in our own little world, convinced that yelling loudly enough or typing in all caps is suddenly and magically going to cause Japanese managers (who in all likelihood have never once visited rolandclan.info) to sit up and take notice.
What Might Help:
A civil, organized feature request list that includes legitimate, realistic, usable ideas that make the recipient think "Hmm, these guys seem to know a bit about what they're talking about"—emailed to whomever at Roland US receives such correspondence. Not tech support, not sales, not accounting... If you have to call Roland US to get the right email address, do it.
What Wont Help:
"Roland doesn't listen to us!" posted to an internet forum.
"The sounds suck compared to the Motif!" posted to an internet forum.
"The samples are all screwed up!" posted to an internet forum.
"Add way more sounds, make it faster and better and more like a computer!" posted to an internet forum.
Because none of that means anything. It's all unfocused and doesn't provide any solutions. I might as well run up to the guys fixing my street and shout "Hey! Work harder!" In the end, all I accomplished was annoying them for five seconds.
If I ran an MI company that specialized in computer-based products (interfaces, DAW software, softsynths, etc.), I'd absolutely pay close attention to online blathering—It's a great connection to my user base. I don't, however, think the people on this particular forum represent the majority of the Fantom's market. We all tend to be better educated and computer literate, but we're also in our own little world, convinced that yelling loudly enough or typing in all caps is suddenly and magically going to cause Japanese managers (who in all likelihood have never once visited rolandclan.info) to sit up and take notice.
-
manishkurup
- Posts: 418
- Joined: 00:19, 23 August 2006
:) some good reading here ...
... Back from one of those "falling-asleep" meetings ... This thread really woke me up !!
But seriously, I agree with Audacity's (Audacious) point of view !!
I use the Fantom X's extensive sound capabilities for Indian music (And believe me the soundscape is huge). It's the vast world of tuned percussion, and strange scales and many other such artifacts. I like to think that my performances give the Fantom's sound engine a run for it's money.
I used the Fantom XR before, and I was really happy that it could do everything I ever wanted to do in terms of a sound module and arranging pieces of music together (One might argue that I set the bar really low). But then I got this great deal on a slightly used Fantom X6, and man ... This thing really rocks my world (Apart from my 6-month old, who's quite the little monster, and wants to play all these weird harmonies on it).
While I crave for things such as more MFX units and EQ for different tracks, or making the PRESETs ***writeable/changeable*** rather than carved in ROM (stone), I realize that each of these things that I crave for could be worked around or compensated in some way or the other.
I have to really thank all the guys that make this forum a roaring success, with specific reference to the dude (Cant remember who) who had this clever hack to EQ each track in the performance separately. I would never have thought of it that way, I use it often now, and it has cleared up most of the muddiness in my mixes (From frequency rich instruments competing in the same bands).
IMO, the Fantom (along with some other roland gear that I have) is some of the most advanced stuff out there. Very visionary company. With that and the knowledge in this forum, Im pretty much set to have some fun without worrying about when the next version is going to be released.
You must wonder where Im going with this, but moral of story:
Make the most of the Fantom, and Enjoy it while it lasts.
Over and Out ...
Manish
!!But seriously, I agree with Audacity's (Audacious) point of view
!!I use the Fantom X's extensive sound capabilities for Indian music (And believe me the soundscape is huge). It's the vast world of tuned percussion, and strange scales and many other such artifacts. I like to think that my performances give the Fantom's sound engine a run for it's money.
I used the Fantom XR before, and I was really happy that it could do everything I ever wanted to do in terms of a sound module and arranging pieces of music together (One might argue that I set the bar really low). But then I got this great deal on a slightly used Fantom X6, and man ... This thing really rocks my world (Apart from my 6-month old, who's quite the little monster, and wants to play all these weird harmonies on it
).While I crave for things such as more MFX units and EQ for different tracks, or making the PRESETs ***writeable/changeable*** rather than carved in ROM (stone), I realize that each of these things that I crave for could be worked around or compensated in some way or the other.
I have to really thank all the guys that make this forum a roaring success, with specific reference to the dude (Cant remember who) who had this clever hack to EQ each track in the performance separately. I would never have thought of it that way, I use it often now, and it has cleared up most of the muddiness in my mixes (From frequency rich instruments competing in the same bands).
IMO, the Fantom (along with some other roland gear that I have) is some of the most advanced stuff out there. Very visionary company. With that and the knowledge in this forum, Im pretty much set to have some fun without worrying about when the next version is going to be released.
You must wonder where Im going with this, but moral of story:
Make the most of the Fantom, and Enjoy it while it lasts.
Over and Out ...
ManishRe: New Fantom For NAMM?
I sure don't think complaining on an internet forum's going to help, as this isn't the type of place managers and engineers spend their time. Are you suggesting they do?
No manager will do that like a user does it (doing it in free time to find support and exchange experieces). But each manager who does it in a smart way, doing it effectively from time to time, is much smarter from my view than the bunch who is living in the past or on company islands.
I'm not suggesting anything to managers, which I think they could easily grasp themselves if they spent one thought or two on it. But yes, I am much more impressed by managers who do. Perhaps you are surprised to hear that some of them *do* make smart(!) use of user forums.
One example I know of quite well is Marc Schlaile, product chief manager at Access Germany. He reads and posts(!) in an unofficial Access forum from time to time. He's one of the smarter new management guys using *all* helpful resources in an effecient way for his small company (much smaller than Roland), even though they have very limited time to spend on that.
Of course he is not dealing much with general whining (which he has to face like anybody else), but profits from or provokes very concrete user obeservations and propositions. His company's behaviour is one of the reasons why many from the Access user base even in times of trouble (first year with Access Virus TI), and despite all user anger, showed an exceptional high degree of loyality and trust in the company's ability to react well to critical scenarios and user feedback.
My experience with your "what might help" would also count in a way for the small German Roland team: they *do* something with constructive feedback, as I heard from others and experienced myself.
But:
After all I heard from a whole bunch of people from various countries, Roland Japan does not halfway act on this level of communicative management. The critics may all be wrong. But I for sure will not spend a single minute on an email (or better snail mail?) which has extremely high chances of finding a fast way into the bin unread, after it is clear from the adress that the writer neither belongs to Roland Japan nor to a small list of prominent endorsers. So I doubt very much that "what might help" might help in this case.
Of course unspecific complaints won't help either. But what is worse, is if the impression spreads, that the more specific user complaints are, the less welcome they seem to be.
I'm quite happy with using my FX7 and quite unhappy with some of its weak and outdated sides. But my life does not in *any* way depend on what Roland Japan managers think they should do or not do about it. If they keep the device on an adequate level (which they missed since at least a year) or develop useful successors, fine. If not, soon as something better is available anywhere, I sell my device on Ebay within a few days and get the alternative. No big deal.
Now here comes the difference to my Access Virus: I would never sell it that fast. Because I have a lot of trust in the technical *and* communicative abilities of their managers, which I don't have in Roland Japan. It's simple as that.
So it's up to them to do the FantomX job good or bad, not to me.
I'm only one of many helpful users giving feedback for free and completely in vain.
No manager will do that like a user does it (doing it in free time to find support and exchange experieces). But each manager who does it in a smart way, doing it effectively from time to time, is much smarter from my view than the bunch who is living in the past or on company islands.
I'm not suggesting anything to managers, which I think they could easily grasp themselves if they spent one thought or two on it. But yes, I am much more impressed by managers who do. Perhaps you are surprised to hear that some of them *do* make smart(!) use of user forums.
One example I know of quite well is Marc Schlaile, product chief manager at Access Germany. He reads and posts(!) in an unofficial Access forum from time to time. He's one of the smarter new management guys using *all* helpful resources in an effecient way for his small company (much smaller than Roland), even though they have very limited time to spend on that.
Of course he is not dealing much with general whining (which he has to face like anybody else), but profits from or provokes very concrete user obeservations and propositions. His company's behaviour is one of the reasons why many from the Access user base even in times of trouble (first year with Access Virus TI), and despite all user anger, showed an exceptional high degree of loyality and trust in the company's ability to react well to critical scenarios and user feedback.
My experience with your "what might help" would also count in a way for the small German Roland team: they *do* something with constructive feedback, as I heard from others and experienced myself.
But:
After all I heard from a whole bunch of people from various countries, Roland Japan does not halfway act on this level of communicative management. The critics may all be wrong. But I for sure will not spend a single minute on an email (or better snail mail?) which has extremely high chances of finding a fast way into the bin unread, after it is clear from the adress that the writer neither belongs to Roland Japan nor to a small list of prominent endorsers. So I doubt very much that "what might help" might help in this case.
Of course unspecific complaints won't help either. But what is worse, is if the impression spreads, that the more specific user complaints are, the less welcome they seem to be.
I'm quite happy with using my FX7 and quite unhappy with some of its weak and outdated sides. But my life does not in *any* way depend on what Roland Japan managers think they should do or not do about it. If they keep the device on an adequate level (which they missed since at least a year) or develop useful successors, fine. If not, soon as something better is available anywhere, I sell my device on Ebay within a few days and get the alternative. No big deal.
Now here comes the difference to my Access Virus: I would never sell it that fast. Because I have a lot of trust in the technical *and* communicative abilities of their managers, which I don't have in Roland Japan. It's simple as that.
So it's up to them to do the FantomX job good or bad, not to me.
I'm only one of many helpful users giving feedback for free and completely in vain.
Re: New Fantom For NAMM?
One post longer than another... The longest post' thread!
No meaning at all, but who cares! Just linger your posts!
Roland is doing and we (or YOU) are posting - what's the difference?
No meaning at all, but who cares! Just linger your posts!
Roland is doing and we (or YOU) are posting - what's the difference?
Re: New Fantom For NAMM?
Yes Oleg, I know it's a waste of time.
You can be sure I don't have that time too often.
But sometimes people talk, and some even listen/read
You can be sure I don't have that time too often.
But sometimes people talk, and some even listen/read
Re: New Fantom For NAMM?
The beginning of this thread I read.
The Audacity's post was, to my mind, for fun. But then the serious answers appeared, and I finished with this thread.
As Quinx V2.0 said, let's make music, not words )
The Audacity's post was, to my mind, for fun. But then the serious answers appeared, and I finished with this thread.
As Quinx V2.0 said, let's make music, not words )