NEW FANTOM-G - THREAD #2

Hi Quinnx,

All of your questions were really good, but unfortunately, the only one I can answer is—

11) can you now select tempo other than whole numbers like 120.56 instead of only 120.0 or 121

Yes! Hundreths of a BPM—same as the MV-8x00. Even though the little 7-segment LCD to the left of the monitor shows 0.1 BPM, the resolution is actually 0.01 BPM.

Neither pattern mode nor RPS seemed to be fully implemented at the show, at least on the prototype I saw. Not sure if other Gs at the show had a newer OS or not. That would explain why there wasn't a hands-on station.

From what I gathered, the Fantom-G was redesigned all the way down to the DSP chip (at least that's what Roland said). I'm sure some legacy code snuck in, but there seemed to be many workflow improvements. I guess we'll find out in April.

Cheers.

Is the key action/size in G6/G7 models identical like on X6/X7?
The G6 felt a bit better, but the G8's ivory feel felt way better than the X8. The escapement is really cool, especially on slower passages. I didn't see a G7 anywhere in the booth—They may have had one in the back.

Per-track fader control "memory?"
Not sure what this means—could you elaborate?

Some patches organs in Motif XS can be modified by its 8 sliders that more or less emulate Hammond' drawbars (that are 9 in the real organ)... Does the same function happens with the 8 sliders in Fantom G?
The screen never said what the sliders control. They're certainly programmable per patch, but since the G's preset patches are sample-based, I'm not sure how drawbars could be implemented. However...

How about a dedicated Organ expansion with drawbar capability?!!! =) My guess is that it WILL be coming!!
If I were a betting man, I'd agree. Roland has the VK series, and if ARX is really as flexible as Roland claims, this could certainly be a possibility.

Then I can only hope that the internal drum sounds are good enough to allow the ARX-02 and the coming ARX-'B3' to keep the two slots

Audacity,

How are parts organized?
In the Fantom-X, if you wanted a part to, say control a Virus, you'd have to set it to either external or both. With the G, you get sixteen dedicated external parts on top of the sixteen internal parts and two ARX parts. Each external part gets its own volume, pan, and program/bank changes. So it's way easier to incorporate external modules now.

Would this new part organization allow for an easy and quick way to define the key range that a part will respond to when played from an external keyboard. With the Fantom X I actually have to edit the frickin PATCH to accomplish that as the key range only applies to what the 'keyboard' sends, not what the part receives. So does it make it easier to incorporate external MIDI keyboard too (ie allow you to create a split on an external keyboard playing the Fantoms sound engine without having to program the split on the external keyboard itself?)

Hi, new here.

Can the 16 pads on the new fantom G also trigger chords? Can you assign chords to them? I would like that very much!

I'm very curious how the keybed of the 88 will feel like compared to other workstations. I'm a pianist so more piano-like the better.

"Would this new part organization allow for an easy and quick way to define the key range that a part will respond to when played from an external keyboard. With the Fantom X I actually have to edit the frickin PATCH to accomplish that as the key range only applies to what the 'keyboard' sends, not what the part receives. So does it make it easier to incorporate external MIDI keyboard too (ie allow you to create a split on an external keyboard playing the Fantoms sound engine without having to program the split on the external keyboard itself?)"[/i]

Presumably, but as I understand it, the Fantom X and S can accomplish this as well. It all depends on how the Remote Keyboard Switch is set. Unless I'm misunderstanding the question.

"Can the 16 pads on the new fantom G also trigger chords? Can you assign chords to them? I would like that very much!"[/i]
I don't think you can assign chords themselves (not sure), but you can certainly still change chord forms on the fly, just like on the X.

Hi, Just a little curiosity, what are the assignable switches used for?

"Hi, Just a little curiosity, what are the assignable switches used for?"[/i]
I'm pretty sure they're the same as in the X; they're been moved to just above the pitch bender. What's nice is that there's now a dedicated transpose button, so you can assign other stuff to the buttons.

The X and S supported pretty much any CC command, as well as common functions such as tap tempo, hold, FX switching, scale tuning, mono switch, etc.

I reckon it wont take long for this thread to reach 20 pages...



Can I assign multiple MFX processors to single patches or single parts?
Right now, it doesn't look like it. In fact, I couldn't get parts within Live Sets (where the FX switching is seamless) to assign to the two extra MFX processors at all. Things might change, but right now, it seems to be one MFX per part, with the two extra MFX processors (plus reverb plus chorus/delay plus input MFX) for the audio tracks.

See now this is where Roland really should look at themselves.I really appreciate the fact that they provide us with 16 effx for each part but they always have to have a compromise and they never really tell it has it is.
In the specs they should state its 1 EFX per part and thats your lot.I wish they would incorporate something closer to Korg's routing structures,its far more flexible.Having said that though I'm still liking what I see,just wish they would be more open about true effx routing capabilities.Plus like was stated in the 1st thread does this mean you can't use global reverb for each part in the Live setting,if not it seems a bit daft.

My dad's Fantom-S88 doesn't have Live Setting Edit mode, and he almost upgraded to the X for that alone. Live Setting lets you assign any patch, performance, or song to an F key below the screen. But because the F keys do other stuff, there are two modes in the X: Live Setting Edit and Live Setting Play. It was kind of confusing. In the G, since the pads are now switching Single patches/Live Sets/Studio Sets/songs, there's only one mode. In fact, they finally got rid of the redundant "Favorites" mode and now Live Setting Edit/Play is known as "Favorites". There's a dedicated button for it too.


I have a question about the Live/Edit set up you talked about.On the Fantom X in this mode you can access any song,all songs stored are in a list and you can pick any to form a set list in batches of 16.Does this still apply in the G or are you limited to the 50 songs per project?If that is the case thats a pain in the arse for me.I like the way this part of the Fantom X's file structure worked,I hope they havent ditched it.Can you give any comments on this?

Thanks.

Neil.

"Can the 16 pads on the new fantom G also trigger chords? Can you assign chords to them? I would like that very much!

I'm very curious how the keybed of the 88 will feel like compared to other workstations. I'm a pianist so more piano-like the better. "

I was looking at some photos of the "G" andnoticed that The "Chord Memory" button is STILL there.....

I am ESTATIC about this as it was one of my favorite functions on the X....

If I remember correctly....you CAN assign Chords to the PADS using this function!!!!

I reckon it wont take long for this thread to reach 20 pages...

If thats the case I will lock it to and start a 3rd thread

Now seriously, I know that we are all more or less excited with the new G but I would like to ask everybody to read the posts at the page 1 before posting questions as all we know for now is pretty much covered there.

A question not covered.

Will the G be able to punch in "on the fly" while running a sequence.?

I got mad about the 24 tracks with 544 meg..but after reading that the G works in a per project way, I said it may not be that bad (unless the save/load times are still slow). But being able to punch in while recording in the audio section would be HOT. I just think it adds more power and a better workflow by not having to stop the sequencer to go into record mode.

I have a couple of questions;
1) I'm not familiar with the Fantom X, so tell me - are the patches in the X programmed using all three mfx processors? If so, wouldn't the G patches be a little lacking in comparison?
I would love to see the ability to use more than one ins effect per patch, and the information Roland gives also indicates this is possible. But we still have to wait and see for the final word here.

2) There is still a fullblown sampler onboard, yeah? I mean in addition to the audiotracks...?

Finally I have a comment about what *really* sets the G apart from Yamaha (and maybe Korg, not too familiar with the M3); SEQUENCING - Yamaha have made some bizarre statements for a long time now imo; 'yes there is a sequencer - but sequencing is probably better on a computer' and - 'yes there is a sampler, but sample editing is best done on a computer'. This is entering dangerous territory if you ask me. I want to be able to everything on a workstation (minus burning cd's), so when Yamaha dropped step sequencing in the XS, that alone is reason enough for me to rule out this workstation.

Roland are definately going the right way.

Tom T said: "Rather than share and create a huge debate like the whole audio side of the Fantom G, I would suggest you wait and listen for yourself when it comes out. Sounds are subjective and you might disagree but I seriously doubt it. In terms of sounds, I am disappointed from what I heard at NAMM over the past few days."

The Audacity Works said: I doubt you heard much at the NAMM show—It's a zoo in there. The only way I could write that earlier review was to pull some favors and hear it in the Roland theater, which is way quieter. I don't think too many other non-Roland people got to actually play it, except for maybe dealers.



I wouldn't make assumptions. It can be misleading. Let me say this; my opinion is based upon a hands on experience as well as the information from others who have had hands on experience with the Fantom G. Its true during NAMM that a very people did interact with the Fantom G, but others prior to that others have in fact worked with the Fantom G as well as before and after hours at the NAMM show.

"Would this new part organization allow for an easy and quick way to define the key range that a part will respond to when played from an external keyboard. With the Fantom X I actually have to edit the frickin PATCH to accomplish that as the key range only applies to what the 'keyboard' sends, not what the part receives. So does it make it easier to incorporate external MIDI keyboard too (ie allow you to create a split on an external keyboard playing the Fantoms sound engine without having to program the split on the external keyboard itself?)"

Presumably, but as I understand it, the Fantom X and S can accomplish this as well. It all depends on how the Remote Keyboard Switch is set. Unless I'm misunderstanding the question.

Thanks for replying. No, the Fantom X cannot do that. For internal sounds you can quickly and easily define the keyboard range with the LOWER and UPPER setting for each part. But if you want part 2 for example to respond to notes C3-C4 coming from an external keyboard there is no way to do that in the same manner. You'd need to either modify the patch so that it responds only to that range or implement a split on the external keyboard so that it only transmits note on/off for that range on channel 2.

"Will throwing a 1GB RAM chip hurt anything?
No, and there's nothing keeping one from trying it (other than wasting money). It just might not work and might not display the correct amount of memory (even though it may still be accessible). Roland said "what we officially support and what's doable aren't necessarily the same thing." Indeed, I seem to remember some people getting the MV-8000 to see 1GB of RAM as well."

It looks like we have a similar situation that Yamaha had with the Motif ES, where Yammie officially supported 512MB of RAM but people found certain memory modules up to 1 GB worked on the ES. On the Motif XS Yamaha 'officially' supports 1 GB of RAM i.e. 2 x 512MB sticks, since there are two DIMM slots on the XS. Since there is only 1 DIMM slot on the Fantom G correct??, a person would need to buy a 1 GB stick. Larger size PC133 DIMMs can be rather expensive depending on where you purchase them. I've noticed the price on a 1 GB stick of PC133 varying from around $100 to over $200 but it would be worth every penny in my opinion if a 1 GB stick would indeed work on the Fantom G thereby effectively "doubling" the Sampling RAM capacity and easing peoples sampling capacity fears in the process.

One question if I may. Does the Fantom G support both ECC and non-ECC sticks? ECC memory would be better in my opinion since it provides memory error correcting on the fly.

There are some Computer stores that give a money back guarantee on RAM if you can't get it to work, etc. Check with a stores policy before purchasing or you may be stuck with an archaic RAM spec that nobody has any use for except, in our case, the Fantom G or Motif XS etc., which are produced by these otherwise superlative keyboard manufacturing companies but yet who seem to be years behind when it comes to the rest of the computer technology industry; especially when it comes to RAM it seems. ;P Thank GOD! Roland has finally given us USB 2.0 on the Fantom G and also the new Sonic Cell. But do you realize how long USB 2.0 has been around?? Since the year 2000. Not to mention that USB 3.0 will be released in the second or third quarter of this year i.e. 2008. But I can almost guarantee you when the Fantom G2 comes out in 2011 or 2012 Roland will have not made the switch to USB 3.0. Such is life in the keyboard industry I suppose. But I am digressing... sorry.