FG - THE NEW KILLER-MACHINE?

Sorry, what was the question?

Doubtful and more doubtful ...

jur451c wrote:

Sorry, what was the question?

I think that if Roland fixes some more ARX card (Strings, Hammond B3,
Piano, etc.) then FG should be the ultimate live synth .... And on FX
routing, then it should be possible to fix in the next OS update! Has just begun
use synth out there again for the third time and only now I have gone in for
to fix the sounds to make it great!

No, Roland lost their chance. If they kept on with the X, I bet it would be still selling, with system updates.
The making of the G is Roland's way to say that they don't care about their existing users. Because they didn't do anything for the X users after the G came out.

Kronos has 9 engines, each of them is like an ARX expansion. The difference is - Kronos is about the FG's price, and to get the 9 ARXs on FG you need alot of extra money. The Kronos is better in many other ways too. And what you suggested (more ARXs) won't work because each ARX is about 500$.

Even more obvious is the fact you can only istall 2 at a time...come on, give up on adding things to the G! ;-)

I would not have high hopes for a major update or the appearance of several new ARX boards, simply because it does not make sense from a financial point of view.
Will a new update of the FG OS suddenly cause an increase in sales of the FG? I think not.
Besides that, the ARX expansions simply are too expensive to be a commercial success, and I doubt very much that Roland will continue developing more ARX cards.
Take the FG for what it is, and don't expect anything more.

Like any other company Roland needs to create revenue and make a profit, and so it makes more sense that they have been working on a successor of the FG, leaving ARX for what it is.
Both Y&K have new workstations out now, and Roland simply cannot afford to stay behind.
When we will see this successor is anybody's guess. Maybe Frankfurt, maybe Summer NAMM, maybe in the year when the Mayan calendar ends.

A bit pointless having a successor when you've lost your core userbase. (that's us btw) ;)

Roland tried to make a live-oriented workstation with Fan-G (live switching being its biggest "innovation") but either kept too much "studio" stuff in there -- big screen, pads, audio interface -- or didn't put enough in (limited-value in big screen, substandard "pads," audio interface you really wouldn't want to record with anyway if you've already got something quality, etc.)

But what really killed it (aside from the still-clunky file system and "power sequencer" that only powered mostly unrealized feature requests ... ) was the lackluster soundset with very little recourse for expansion, which isn't even better than a fully-expanded Fan-X ...

When I demo it, I'm going to be very realistic about what it offers over my trusty Fan-X, but the Kronos looks like a contender for my $$$ ...

Flumpster wrote:

A bit pointless having a successor when you've lost your core userbase. (that's us btw) ;)

That's true, but, how many users Roland REALLY is going to lose?

Both Y&K also have disappointed customers, Y. with mLan, K. with OASYS, yet how many of their customers did they end up losing?
I don't think K's decision to abandon the OASYS will affect the sales of the KRONOS much, if at all.

How many of the people here who have bought an FG will not buy the next Roland workstation if Roland will not come up with a V2.0 for the FG?
Imagine if that new workstation would be the best Roland has made thusfar, with V-tech, sample streaming, SSD and the whole caboodle and some nifty new features, how many will let it pass out of principle because Roland did not come up with V2.0 for the FG?
I think it's going to be negligable.

The Fantom G was supposed to be the "best Roland has made thusfar". I made that mistake and not again.

I know of the history with the Oasys with korg but it has not happened to me from them yet so they will probably be getting my money next. If they treat me the same then I'll be very limited on choices for my purchase after that ;)

Jan_nl wrote:

Flumpster wrote:

A bit pointless having a successor when you've lost your core userbase. (that's us btw) ;)

That's true, but, how many users Roland REALLY is going to lose?

Both Y&K also have disappointed customers, Y. with mLan, K. with OASYS, yet how many of their customers did they end up losing?
I don't think K's decision to abandon the OASYS will affect the sales of the KRONOS much, if at all.

How many of the people here who have bought an FG will not buy the next Roland workstation if Roland will not come up with a V2.0 for the FG?
Imagine if that new workstation would be the best Roland has made thusfar, with V-tech, sample streaming, SSD and the whole caboodle and some nifty new features, how many will let it pass out of principle because Roland did not come up with V2.0 for the FG?
I think it's going to be negligable.

i think you are exactly right.

I will surely not buy any new synths from Roland. Can't understand that customers are still trusting this company. How can you be sure that the next workstation will be supported (I'm not talking about new features, just bugs fixing and maybe I expected a organ/piano ARX in the end.... anyhow NOTHING HAPPEND. It was like -> thanks for the money and bye!)

If you are still into Roland?? / It's probably best to wait a bit (a year or two) after the release date to have the childish bugs out (if they wil get out). And then test the equipment in depth in the stores. As their aftercare is equal to '0'.

Same people who would return to an unfaithful spouse.. ;)

Flumpster wrote:

Same people who would return to an unfaithful spouse.. ;)

No no no, that comparison is of a different order. :D

I fully understand the gripes against Roland, especially when it comes to unfulfilled expectations and their absent interaction with the customers. Especially if you compare the customer interaction of Roland with the customer interaction of Yamaha or KORG, then R. sticks out like a sore thumb.

Some strange engineering and management decisions have been taken for the FG, and of course the release of the FG in the year when banks went bankrupt and the stockmarket plummeted did not much good either.

But I'm also aware that time has its own way of changing people's minds.
Things you feel very strongly about at this moment will look a lot different in a year or a few years time.

Maybe some will initially not buy a new Roland workstation and instead switch to K. or Y.
But likewise there will be disappointed users from Y/K who will turn to Roland, so from a statistical point of view it probably balances itself out.

In the end giving the green light for any decision in a big company is based on finances, and if it simply doesn't make any commercial sense for a company to develop an aging product like the FG when they could be using the resources for developing a new product, then neither the customers or any of the Roland engineers can do anything about it.
Also, to turn the FG into the ideal workstation would require so much programming effort that it's just not worth it, especially with a (near?)-dead ARX platform.
Perhaps a maintenance update with some minor changes will follow, but a major update which will make the workarounds on the FG obsolete? I don't think so.

However, needless to say that leaving a product with many unfilled wishes and expectations, and combining this with an absent customer interaction does not create any brand loyalty whatsoever.

If Roland has been working on a new workstation I just hope that they have been more foresighted than their colleagues of Yamaha.