Turn users away

I'm kinda upset about the ravings (mostly based on truth, but they're put on auto-repeat) about the half-baked FG... I'm having some difficulties with my X too but it's not its fault... it's always mine (not knowing something / lack of experience etc.) I simply cannot understand why there are SO MANY PEOPLE ( well, at least 6 on this forum) self-deluding that their new workstation will be more than it is, based mostly on their own assumptions, not Roland's. I KNOW their view might be common sense, but no company is going to create a product entirely based on buyers' feedback. Your best bet to force a company to learn from their errors is not to buy their flawed product! If you buy it, it means you liked it, then it's not flawed... as simple as that.

That's not true...
The Fantom X and Fantom G are 2 great workstations. They only have some problems.
Based on your assumption we shouldn't buy ANY synthesizer.
Any machine has got its flaws, but try and read a little bit more here and you'll see we could overcome some of these problems with proper programming or alterations to the Fantom.
I don't own a G but I know that Roland have fixed some of these problems (I can only guess that they did it based on reviews about the X and user complains) and I'm sure they did created new problems as well.

Every once in a while you can see a person that is not satisfied with his FX and starts a new thread here. But most of us are pleased with it and are happy to have this machine with us. Many of the former X users are now the proud owners of the G and will be proud to buy the Fantom "?" (if there will be one).

Freifeld Royi

Why are you worried so much? I have only seen one person out of around 50 that doesn't like his Fantom. And that is 98% customer satisfaction

Some people only see the complaint posts, for some reason. But set your mind diferrently and you will see how much capable these instruments are, and how happy all their users are, and what great music they make.

I agree Art.
2 thoughts ...

1.To quote George Bernard Shaw...
“Beauty is all very well at first sight; but who ever looks at it when it has been in the house three days?”

2. The person who ses a beautifully painted wall and just says...
"You missed that bit".

So thanks legend69, for reminding me to remain appreciative of what I have.

Well I have had the x8 for almost 4 years now (i liked it then) and I like it more now than I did 4 years ago. Find me another piece of gear that I can say that about. lol

If everyone decided not to buy anything that had any flaws, then no one would buy anything, and we'd all still be living in caves with only a torch to light the way.
And then, someone would find fault with the torch so we'd be sitting in the dark.

Does my X have problems? Yes it does.
Would I like to have them fixed? Yes I would.
If I had the money right now to trade my X for a G, (or anything else for that matter)? NO

I love my X even with its flaws. It is very easy to use, and it has a rather low learning curve for new users. Between the online videos, owners manual and tutorial DVDs, I practically knew how to use it before I bought it.
And this forum was a great help to.

Keep up the good work Art!!!

Carl

p.s.
Can't wait for the Tweakbook videos.

I think most forums you will see alot of negative about anything because most ask about a problem they are having and need help.
I mean no one is going to say I sequenced a song and the sequencer worked great what do I do to fix it. I think you get my drift On forums we usually ask about something we have a problem with or don't understand.Ithink any time a new product comes out people buy it find the bugs and let support know and they try and fix them. That is why alot of times I wait when a new product comes out before I buy it. I let them get some of the bugs out.
Hope this makes sense.

Art wrote:

**"Why are you worried so much? I have only seen one person out of around 50 that doesn't like his Fantom. And that is 98% customer satisfaction

Some people only see the complaint posts, for some reason. But set your mind diferrently and you will see how much capable these instruments are, and how happy all their users are, and what great music they make."**

Artemiy,
I couldn't agree more, but I was almost "shot to death" and accused of offending others in the G's Musikmesse Frankfurt Thread for having that kind of thoughts and by trying to have a brainstorming discussion about this...
There are people only seeing the negative part of things. They need to go to Musikmesse to calm down and see the nice views. Nice views are always good for your health

Cheers
PauloF

P.S: To the guys going to Musikmesse2009. Go there and Enjoy !!!

Human progress is wrought by those that are dissatisfied, never by those that are happy to remain static.

Good companies deliver on promises. Roland sales leterature advised the Fantom is capable of near professional results, but this is misleading.
I thought I'd be able for example make top pumping base lines, but even though I'm an obsessive that will work on a project for 20 days straight every nigh till 1am, it just cannot be done.

The major flaw that puts professional results out of reach is in the fact you cant apply enough FX to each strip. On a bass strip I need, EQ, compression, Limiter and often a mild short delay, howver this then leaves too little for my other 15 strips. Pads and leads often need 3 FX minimum including compression.

Also you might want 5 or 6 different reverbs in one song - say a big dark tunnel for the now and again boom kick, a long broght one for pads, 2 revered ones frof the 2 claps (one in each ear) etc etc

So I'm annoyed Roland told me Id get near professional results.

Now I'm going to upgrade to CUBASE 5 + Oxford compressors and dynamics and a few soft synths. I'll use the Roland for pads maybe, in patch mode only to extract max quality.

And as for the kicks - they really suck when played back on a small hifi or TV. I SOMETIMES THINK THE DEVELOPERS ARE ALWAYS 10 YEARS BEHIND WHEN THEY MAKE THE SOUND SOURCES.

Roland sales leterature advised the Fantom is capable of near professional results, but this is misleading.

So I'm annoyed Roland told me Id get near professional results.

I do not even know where to start.

First and foremost, "professional" is what you can use in your profession and earn income, according to the dictionary. So it can be a $2 shaker, but even then you need to learn how to play it. If you can't, is this a problem of the manufacturer of this shaker? No.

As I see, you were not able to get satisfying results with the Fantom-X and blame Roland. However, it's up to you that you could not create anything that would sound great - when hundreds of other musicians can, and use Fantom-X on very "professional" recordings that become platinum. You could use resampling, learn the sound engine a bit deeper, and the X has much more than you can see floating on the surface.

Maybe you were searching for a piece of gear that will give you what you want out of the box, but if so, you would sound just like everyone else.

Trancehak, I think the many various functions of today's workstation has made some of us to believe it's the only piece of gear you need to achieve something previously seen only in a major recording studio. While improvements have been made into this direction (there may be small bands whose recordings sound competitive enough), I don't think you can put the blame on a keyboard for not being your dream studio. First and foremost a hardware manufacturer need to think at reliability and only next to versatility and raw power (and still keep prices low to sell). While your-average-pc might do better jobs, it won't run through endless gigs, which usually require hardware synths and stuff. For a studio job I've also been told that software route might be cheaper / more rewarding (not sure, because I still dig my X and not willing to get other piece of equipment until I can safely assume I've learnt enough to move on).

Artemey, I belong to another forum (anjunabeats) populated mainly by an intrepid band of individuals that are at the forefront of the euphoric trance scene. Many of these get signed to labels. These are guys that really know thier stuff - real kit geeks.

Roland NEVER features in any discussions. And as for knowing the machine deep - I can go no deeper. Of course I know about resampling and such like - thats very basic stuff. But how about I want to tweak the kick drum and layer it then resample. When I play back the resample the sound is fairly different to that I sampled. No accurate effective EQ to rid myself of unwanted rumble. Far too clumsy filters to get rid of some of the knock simultaneously. No way to side chain the compressor property.

You do know dont you that you can buy a single compressor for £11500, and thats but one tiny part of the music making process.

I suppose if I was making rock or something it would be a lot easier.

I had hoped for better results. I programe all my own sounds as those on the Fantom are very out of date and cheesy even those on the expansions. They sound like 1990's sounds.

The bass especially is poor - the sound sources just aren't doing it. Its a great thing to play with to make a basic idea on but thats it.

Check out the sylenth1 by Lennar digital or the T1 on thier websites to see what I'm on about.

To be clear, I make music that needs to pump and shake with max volume in the chorus but is quieter and building in the drops which is not everyones cuppa tea. But when you take a pice of kit to the absolute limit is where you really hear the shortcommings - like high pitch's and a mtetallic transient quality to the overall mix, no matter how you set the complressor and filters to warm it.

Trance uses at least 3 bass sounds at once, each playing slightly differently and hear you really notice it cant reach that professional level.

Trancehak, maybe a SRX card of your choice can help? dunno, SRX-05 (dance) or SRX-08 (platinum tracks) or even SRX-07 (although you might not be interested in electric and acoustic basses). The average X sound may not satisfy each and every one and that's why the SRX exist in the first place.

P.S. I've heard sylenth and I don't think it's a fair comparison... there are definitely not many (actually there might be none) sounding like sylenth... it's like saying "I want my keyboard sound like Omnisphere"... of course there are shortcomings and stuff...

P.S.2

Have you tried normalize?