All about the Roland Jupiter-series

-----Original Message-----
From: Royce Lee [mailto:rlee@...]
Sent: Friday, March 31, 2000 7:13 PM
To: analogue@...
Subject: [AH] MKS-80, Jupiter8, Virus: Are they apples and oranges?



I know this may seem like a tired issue, and it was to me until I came up
with around 800$ and started to think about which synths to buy. Does
anybody own both an MKS-80 and a Virus? What are there relative strengths
and weaknesses? If you only had the money for one, which would you go
for. . .or rather, which would you go for first?

I've heard some people complain about slow envelopes on the MKS-80 and
sloppy sequencing. If that was that, I wouldn't even consider it further,
but I know these kinds of complaints are often related to computer,
interface timing problems.

Any input would be appreciated.

-royce

-----Original Message-----
From: OWEN DEVIVO [mailto:ODeVivo@...]
Sent: Friday, March 31, 2000 8:47 PM
To: 'analogue@...'
Subject: RE: [AH] MKS-80, Jupiter8, Virus: Are they apples and oranges?


MKS-80 vs. Virus..........

heh, somewhat apples and oranges, unless you'll use the Virus for ONLY a
synth (never using the fx, multiouts or inputs...)

The Virus hands down. Not too mention the wide scope of capabilities the
Virus has.
The Virus is a more modern tool as well....

yup, that's my thought,
Owen the soyboy

-----Original Message-----
From: Royce Lee [SMTP:rlee@...]
Sent: Friday, March 31, 2000 12:13 PM
To: analogue@...
Subject: [AH] MKS-80, Jupiter8, Virus: Are they apples
and oranges?


I know this may seem like a tired issue, and it was to me until
I came up
with around 800$ and started to think about which synths to buy.
Does
anybody own both an MKS-80 and a Virus? What are there relative
strengths
and weaknesses? If you only had the money for one, which would
you go
for. . .or rather, which would you go for first?

I've heard some people complain about slow envelopes on the
MKS-80 and
sloppy sequencing. If that was that, I wouldn't even consider
it further,
but I know these kinds of complaints are often related to
computer,
interface timing problems.

Any input would be appreciated.

-royce

-----Original Message-----
From: Mike Peake [mailto:peake@...]
Sent: Saturday, April 01, 2000 12:23 AM
To: analogue@...
Subject: Re: [AH] MKS-80, Jupiter8, Virus: Are they apples and oranges?


At 5:13 PM -0000 3/31/00, Royce Lee wrote:

>I know this may seem like a tired issue, and it was to me until I came up
>with around 800$ and started to think about which synths to buy. Does
>anybody own both an MKS-80 and a Virus? What are there relative strengths
>and weaknesses? If you only had the money for one, which would you go
>for. . .or rather, which would you go for first?

Depends upon a few things. If you're only looking to use sound generation:
-The Virus is multitimbral and has multimode filters.
-The MKS80 is bitimbral and has self-oscillating lowpass filters.
-The Virus sounds digital.
-The MKS is analog with very good MIDI. Program change, volume, etc.
-The Virus has nice on-board effects.
-The MKS80 is analog. Sounds great. Excellent foundation for tracks.

If you need a module to complement an existing setup, I'd say the MKS
hands down. If you're just starting, the Virus would be more versatile.
The MKS can sound like the SH101 if you're into that sort of thing, and
it can also do huge, furry unison-detuned basses (I'm into that sort of
thing).

If you want to process external sounds, the Virus wins.

>I've heard some people complain about slow envelopes on the MKS-80 and
>sloppy sequencing. If that was that, I wouldn't even consider it further,
>but I know these kinds of complaints are often related to computer,
>interface timing problems.

I've used MKS80s for years and they've got good envelopes (much
faster than the Xpander or Chroma) and the MIDI is fine. Don't overlook
the importance of MIDI program change commands. You can use
the MKS for several sounds in one track this way, with individual volume
settings. One favorite: working on some rap a few years ago, I needed
a wormy glide lead that -started- from the same point in every chorus.
A MIDId analog without volume control wouldn't have been able to do
this-- I placed the note I wanted the lead to glide from before the actual
phrase, and simply set that note's velocity to 0 so it didn't sound. Nice
and hands free. (Yeah, yeah, yeah, you can do this easily on VAs but
-why-?)

Feeling a bit purist today,

Mike Peake, Your Psychic Friend

___________________
Specifications:

"It's the way gone that matters, as much, or more, than the destination."
-Ian McDonald- Terminal Cafe

-----Original Message-----
From: Gabe G [mailto:gfg202@...]
Sent: Saturday, April 01, 2000 1:26 AM
To: Mike Peake
Cc: analogue@...
Subject: Re: [AH] MKS-80, Jupiter8, Virus: Are they apples and oranges?

> -The Virus sounds digital.

I think the above statement should read, "The Virus can sound digital if
it wants to, as it has digital waveforms available if you want to use
them, but it can also sound amazingly analogue."

-----Original Message-----
From: Mike Peake [mailto:peake@...]
Sent: Saturday, April 01, 2000 2:43 AM
To: Gabe G
Cc: analogue@...
Subject: Re: [AH] MKS-80, Jupiter8, Virus: Are they apples and oranges?


At 11:26 PM -0000 3/31/00, Gabe G wrote:

>> -The Virus sounds digital.
>
>I think the above statement should read, "The Virus can sound digital if
>it wants to, as it has digital waveforms available if you want to use
>them, but it can also sound amazingly analogue."

(Can of worms =open=)

No, I stand by my statement. You say "can sound amazingly
analog". Depends upon what. All of the digitals I've heard, all
of them, lack the obvious depth of the large analogs (modular
Moog, Buchla, etc.) The digitals sound less full tonally and
have less dynamic range in their beating than the real thing.
They have less 'whoomf' in their filters in the bass region.
Ever used filter feedback on a Mini or a Moog modular?
No digital can come close at all to what that does in the bass
region (Michael Caloroso has an excellent patch he might
be convinced to post to the list.) I'm talking about sounds
that can mask a kick drum, not 'oh this single-oscillator CEM
synth is sooo phat'. I guess my reference and aesthetic are
anachronistic nowaday. The Virus is a great-sounding synth,
but it's not going to replace the progenitors, or even come
close to these aspects of their character.

...I'm turning into the new Mr. 808.

Mike Peake, Your Psychic Friend

___________________
Specifications:

"It's the way gone that matters, as much, or more, than the destination."
-Ian McDonald- Terminal Cafe

-----Original Message-----
From: Gabe G [mailto:gfg202@...]
Sent: Saturday, April 01, 2000 3:45 AM
To: Mike Peake
Cc: analogue@...
Subject: Re: [AH] MKS-80, Jupiter8, Virus: Are they apples and oranges?


Mike, I agree with what you are saying, if you are talking about the virus
a... but the virus b is a different story. I do know what real analogue
sounds like, and the virus b does an absolutely amazing job of emulating
that sound, I have even programmed similar patches (2 OSC patch, 1 saw
and 1 pulse w. PWM) in my virus b, and in my ATC-1, and then A/B compared
them. Now obviously it is a subjective matter, but I personally was
stunned at the results I got. I've tested (and even owned at some
point) almost all the other virtual analogues
on the market and none of them have impressed me in this way, I used to
own a virus a, and I would NOT have made the same statements about that
synthesizer, as it just didn't quite have 'that' sound. But the virus b,
with the new "analogue boost" algorithm is just amazing sounding.

Now, as to whether or not the virus can
make a booming 808 or 909 kick, I can't really comment because I
don't use the virus as a drum machine, but even if the
virus can't do it, that doesn't mean that it can't do an amazing job of
sounding like a real analogue synth.

-----Original Message-----
From: Mike Peake [mailto:peake@...]
Sent: Saturday, April 01, 2000 4:08 AM
To: analogue@...
Subject: Re: [AH] MKS-80, Jupiter8, Virus: Are they apples and oranges?


At 1:45 AM -0000 4/1/00, Gabe G wrote:

>Mike, I agree with what you are saying, if you are talking about the virus
>a... but the virus b is a different story. I do know what real analogue
>sounds like, and the virus b does an absolutely amazing job of emulating
>that sound, I have even programmed similar patches (2 OSC patch, 1 saw
>and 1 pulse w. PWM) in my virus b, and in my ATC-1, and then A/B compared
>them. Now obviously it is a subjective matter, but I personally was
>stunned at the results I got. I've tested (and even owned at some
>point) almost all the other virtual analogues
>on the market and none of them have impressed me in this way, I used to
>own a virus a, and I would NOT have made the same statements about that
>synthesizer, as it just didn't quite have 'that' sound. But the virus b,
>with the new "analogue boost" algorithm is just amazing sounding.

Okay, I haven't heard the B and obviously need to.

>Now, as to whether or not the virus can
>make a booming 808 or 909 kick, I can't really comment because I
>don't use the virus as a drum machine, but even if the
>virus can't do it, that doesn't mean that it can't do an amazing job of
>sounding like a real analogue synth.

This is where personal preference comes in. I like to -start- with synths
that can snap woofers like twigs. (My favorite WEAPON...)


Mike Peake, Your Psychic Friend

___________________
Specifications:

"It's the way gone that matters, as much, or more, than the destination."
-Ian McDonald- Terminal Cafe

-----Original Message-----
From: Synthworld@... [mailto:Synthworld@...]
Sent: Saturday, April 01, 2000 5:20 AM
To: analogue@...
Subject: Re: [AH] MKS-80, Jupiter8, Virus: Are they apples and oranges?


In a message dated 3/31/00 5:44:19 PM US Mountain Standard Time,
peake@... writes:

<< All of the digitals I've heard, all
of them, lack the obvious depth of the large analogs (modular
Moog, Buchla, etc.) The digitals sound less full tonally and
have less dynamic range in their beating than the real thing.
They have less 'whoomf' in their filters in the bass region. >>

I am in complete and total agreement with Mike here.
One of the primary differences in sound between VAs and true analog is the
beating effect you get with two or more detuned oscillators. Mike hit the
nail on the head.
Slightly detune two oscillators on a VA and do the same on an analog synth.
The lovely, rolling effect produced by this (that we are all familiar with)
is so much more pronounced and apparent with true analog oscillators. So
much
so, that you are normally compelled to lower the relative volume of one of
your oscillators because this animation is so obvious -- it can be
distracting at times -- like amplitude modulation; especially if you've
detuned them for a chorusing effect, rather than just a slow animation.
Your meters are jumping up and down so much you can use them as a tuner.
On a VA you can hear the slow beating of two detuned oscillators, but -- in
direct comparison -- it simply sounds detuned rather than adding as much in
the way of an animated resultant waveform (or as much amplitude modulation
at
the beat frequency).
Now, why this difference occurs is something that the DSP programmers will
have to eventually figure out and compensate for if they want to come closer

to simulating not just how analog synthesizers sound, but how they behave.

Instrument behavior is just as important -- and married to -- the sound of a

given instrument such as the caffeinated glide of the Minimoog vs. the
elephant-turning portamento of the modular Moog 951 keyboard. Set up the
same
patch on both, but the behavior-while-playing end result is completely
different.

My personal appreciation for the new VAs lies in their ability to produce
stable, complex, theoretical patches and polyphony rather than in their
mimicry of the sound of previous synths.
New sounds, places our ears have never been before -- isn't that the whole
idea?

I'm gonna go get another beer now :-)

Zon

-----Original Message-----
From: Vampeiyre@... [mailto:Vampeiyre@...]
Sent: Saturday, April 01, 2000 5:24 AM
To: Synthworld@...; analogue@...
Subject: Re: [AH] MKS-80, Jupiter8, Virus: Are they apples and oranges?


In a message dated 00-03-31 22:20:43 EST, you write:

<< My personal appreciation for the new VAs lies in their ability to produce

stable, complex, theoretical patches and polyphony rather than in their
mimicry of the sound of previous synths.
New sounds, places our ears have never been before -- isn't that the whole
idea?

I'm gonna go get another beer now :-)

Zon >>

Well go have anpther Bud Light, but do watch for those penguins Zon.
Will I see you staggering with hangover at Audio Playground tomorrow?

Best Wishes,
Fast

-----Original Message-----
From: Brigman, Corley [mailto:corley.brigman@...]
Sent: Saturday, April 01, 2000 6:20 AM
To: Mike Peake; analogue@...
Subject: RE: [AH] MKS-80, Jupiter8, Virus: Are they apples and oranges?

>A MIDId analog without volume control wouldn't have been able to do
>this-- I placed the note I wanted the lead to glide from before the

actual

>phrase, and simply set that note's velocity to 0 so it didn't

sound. Nice

>and hands free.

just a small plug...you CAN do this with the JKJ CV-5, as it has a
built-in
stereo VCA that responds to CC 7 and 10 (volume and pan) just for
purposes like this...:)

no, i don't work for them...but i like my cv5 a lot...and i've only
had it 2 days...

corley brigman
intel corp.
corley.brigman@...

speaking for me, not for intel.

-----Original Message-----
From: N. Kent [mailto:ndkent@...]
Sent: Saturday, April 01, 2000 11:50 AM
To: analogue@...
Subject: re:[AH] MKS-80, Jupiter8, Virus: Are they apples and oranges?

> I know this may seem like a tired issue, and it was to me until I came up
> with around 800$ and started to think about which synths to buy. Does
> anybody own both an MKS-80 and a Virus? What are there relative strengths
> and weaknesses? If you only had the money for one, which would you go
> for. . .or rather, which would you go for first?
>
> I've heard some people complain about slow envelopes on the MKS-80 and
> sloppy sequencing. If that was that, I wouldn't even consider it further,
> but I know these kinds of complaints are often related to computer,
> interface timing problems.
>
> Any input would be appreciated.
>
> - -royce

Probably beaten to death, but some things didn't come up. (for what its
worth I only own an MKS-80, but have played the others)

Firstly the Jupiter 8, dropped from later discussion, will outpower both
in the big classic synth sound department. Obviously not all will have
MIDI and a MIDI one will certainly be more expensive. Also (unless
someone has a heavily modded one) its not going to have much
articulation-- no velocity, aftertouch.

As to the MKS-80, no one brought up that the Curtis chip and Roland chip
ones sound different.

Computer interface timing problems are realative, it certainly isn't
bad, neither are the envalopes.

Someone mentioned it self oscillates. I think thats in error, it just
has resonant filters.

I think a lot of people will agree that it just doesn't get too
extreme... Reviews of the MKS-80 are very relative, its way more
powerful than most analog polys but doesn't wind up at the very top of
the peak either. In general some might be dissapointed that its not that
extreme a synth, but in the vintage synth department it does take the
prize IMHO for remote manipulation of parameters, its easy via sysex to
play the parameters live, thats the reason why I hold on to mine (I have
a bunch of analog polys, so the sounds it can do are covered). I wound
up buying a Memorymoog soon afterwords because after a certain point the
MKS sound just doesn't go further, sure, it has great sync/crossmod and
a solid feature set, but won't do those fizzy all over the place sounds,
or the kind of cutting sounds I was after (it does nice cutting sounds,
just not the ones I was going for)

okay, as for the virus-- its got the most features hands down. The MKS
will do a more classic analog synth sound IMHO while the Virus will do a
wider range of sounds. The stuff I don't like are the oscs aren't quite
robust and solid sounding to me. The coolness of 2 filters is partly
negated by having only one set of knobs shared by both.

nick kent