Fantom-G

Why scrap SRX?

Log in Register
Advanced
Log in to reply

Re: Why scrap SRX?

12 Jun 2008, 11:21
My point appears to be being missed...

They did not include ANY of the SRX-10 and maybe some others.

It is FAR from the best of the best of all the Cards.

That is all there is to it.

They should not have used that as a sales pitch, except that it would decieve those of us to buy thinking we would not be loosing any of the "best" sounds...

Whatever...I had to buy and XR just to have decent brass from SRX-3, 9 and 10.

So, the G was really falsley advertised...that is a fact.
I still like it, but I am not going to paint a pretty picture over a lie.
www.songsforthemaster.com

Re: Why scrap SRX?

12 Jun 2008, 11:32
Okay, if there are indeed no waveforms from SRX-10, then I will absolutely concede that there was some false advertising going on.

The "ALL" word would be wrong.

But again, "BEST" means absolutely nothing. Because what you think are the "best" patches on an SRX board—I might find unusable. What I think are the "best" patches on an SRX board—you might find unusable.

It's like if M-Audio advertises their digital piano as "great" sounding, and because someone doesn't like the way it sounds, that must mean the "great" is false advertising?

Re: Why scrap SRX?

12 Jun 2008, 11:42
So what that means is that most SRX sounds are not so good, otherwise they would have used more than a few, correct? :)

It's clear as a day that the message from Roland was - quality comes as an OPTION.

Re: Why scrap SRX?

12 Jun 2008, 11:45
So what that means is that most SRX sounds are not so good, otherwise they would have used more than a few, correct?
Well, that's subjective too, but Roland had to make a decision on what to include and what to ignore. I'm willing to bet there were quite a few arguments within the ranks.

Personally, I never liked SRX-10 anyway. I thought the horns on the Orchestral board sounded better.

But—highly subjective.

Re: Why scrap SRX?

12 Jun 2008, 11:45
6 pages of something you cannot change.. lol
Whine whine everywhere and not a drop to drink ;)

Re: Why scrap SRX?

12 Jun 2008, 11:48
They will use either the SRX or better waves for each category of sounds.
But "better" doesn't mean anything either. You love SRX-10, I think it sounds kinda cheesy. Of course, I've never heard convincing MIDI brass—Vienna's Giga library comes closest.

So if it were up to me, I'd say scrap all of SRX-10 and add more drum kits.

But I don't get to make that decision.

Re: Why scrap SRX?

12 Jun 2008, 11:52
I have NEVER seen any advertising about the G having waveforms from ALL SRX boards. But they do say it's a "best of", whatever that means. The new product catalog and at the Roland site we can read :
With twice the wave-ROM capacity of its predecessor, it contains a treasure trove of Roland’s world-famous SRX-quality sounds,...
.

Re: Why scrap SRX?

12 Jun 2008, 11:54
but what really sets this instrument apart is its new ARX expansion, which allows additional SuperNATURAL sound-sets and fully dedicated synth and effects engines to be added
This is what is making me wonder ;-)
...fully dedicated synth and effects engines...
...
...fully dedicated synth and effects engines...
...

mmm

Re: Why scrap SRX?

12 Jun 2008, 11:55
The "Quality" of sounds can be measured...

The SRX-10 has the cleanest most realistic Brass from Rolands collection. It takes very little programming to make them very musical. They also have brass FX not included on any other SRX or Fantom X.
When you stack the percussive with the smooth patches, it is great...

But, they did not even include the good brass from SRX-3 or 9.

Again, for those of us who use brass sounds, we have to use SRX in an XR or X to keep basic good brass sounds.
www.songsforthemaster.com

Re: Why scrap SRX?

12 Jun 2008, 12:03
The "Quality" of sounds can be measured...
No, it absolutely cannot, unless you're talking signal-to-noise ratio or bit depth or sample rate, in which case many people like noisy, bitcrunched ROMpler sounds.

I mean again, you think SRX-10 is the best of the bunch. I think it's the least usable and most superfluous of the bunch. Does that mean I'm not measuring its quality accurately enough? Do I need a better ruler or perhaps a pair of medical calipers?

← Back to Fantom-G