converting from 2.0 to GT

Well I converted 3 V-Synth 2.0 projects to GT and everything is perfect, as GT includes all waveforms and all features of OS 2.0. As for how the converted patches are organized, all 2.0 patches are converted into GT tones, but also you get a GT patch created for each tone as well.

Alright, thanks Artemio.

So, I assume the FX settings are converted as well?..

I played the GT today again, and I'm having a hard time convincing myself that I need to keep the XT. I would trade in the V-Synth, but I thought I would keep the XT for the D-50 stuff. But then I realised I rarely use that function! Sure, it's fun to re-create some eighties stuff, but other than that...

I asked about the conversion because I really like the 512 patches with 2.0

Now, if they can be converted perfectly, well it's GT time for me!

Actually we already have the OS 2.0 converted for GT here:
http://www.rolandclan.info/en/materials/v-synth-gt/

Well, I have the "classic" V-Synth, and although I too use the VC-1 rarely, I think it's worth keeping. It sounds amazing and I doubt there will be something like this in future. I'd keep it until you know whether Roland will offer VC-1 for the GT.

Actually I'm more afraid of loosing my 1.51 patches with the V-Synth than loosing the D-50 with the XT...

Hmm, we'll see, maybe I'll end up with just getting rid of the V-Synth and keep the XT. Why can't I have a bigger room to put my stuff in?!!!!

Guys, I've held on to the D-50 I got in 1988 - and I'm glad I did; there were a few times when I wasn't using it and nearly sold it.

Why don't you guys buy one off ebay? I see they are available for not ridiculous prices. Is it more a question of space?

It's always a question of space when you don't have a dedicated studio! I'm sorry to say...

I wanted a d-50 baaaaad when it was released, and I love the idea of incorporating it into the V-Synth. I think it's a great IDEA. But, I almost never use it..

The only sonic difference between the XT and the GT is the D-50 stuff. So, if I have to trade it in to be able to afford the GT, I guess I will. (Plus the original V-Synth.)

I mean really, for acoustic instruments, the D-50 isn't really a contender, is it? And as far as the synth sounds go, well, I guess there's isn't much there that the V-Synth can't do.

Of course in a perfect world, I would have loved to keep them all!!! But, space and money is an issue..

The only sonic difference between the XT and the GT is the D-50 stuff.

No, no and no

GT includes:

1. Vocal designer which integrates into the main engine, now the carrier signal is formed by the V-Synth patch itself.

2. AP synthesis which is quite useful. You can process it with COSM blocks and use in the vocoder as well.

3. There is almost 2x more polyphony, two patches, 2x MFX units, 3 more great reverb algorithms... and a few other goodies

Artemio!

I didn't make myself clear.

I meant "difference" in the sense of "that is why I'm getting the GT!"

Like: I'm only loosing the D-50 if I trade in the XT, because the GT has everything the XT has, PLUS MORE!

Pfeuuh..

2 x times the polyphony?..

I thought the GT had 28 voices?..

Or is it PER tone?!!!!

Artemio,

Is there a definite answer about the GT:s capabilty of converting 2.0 sounds 100 %, including FX settings?..

Thanks,

Kokocalamar.