JD990 vs JV1080

[Dave B]

LdashD asked :

I was intending to post a query as to why the JD 990 holds its price over the 'improved' JV 1080?

It depends on your interpretation of 'improved'. A little history.

1. JD800 is the first of the 'JD/JV' engined machines. Personally, I adore it - it has a full bottom end when needed but the brightness and sparkle at the top. It sounds like a digital synth which puts people off. Also, the 'yoof' announce that, despite demanding a synth like the old analogues, the front panel is 'too complicated'. JD800 is a commercial failure.

2. JV80 and 880 (and the JV30 in a scaled down form) is the response - 8 sliders only so you can tweak away at the filters, etc (JV30 hard wires it's 3 sliders to the filters). This also uses the new JV engine and has the first expansion slot. It has strings, dance piano, etc. It sells. Roland happy.

3. JD990 comes out. It also has the expansion slot and can read the patches (indirectly - you have to load them into memory) from the Vintage board. The JD engine is tweaked to add a couple of bells/whistles (sync,etc). Basically, it's a programmers machine which sounds even more wonderful. Guess what ... it doesn't sell ...

4. JV1080 comes out. Plus other JV keyboards. Now Roland are messing with the system to try and make it more appealing. One 'improvement' is to add a bundle of expansion slots and allow direct access to patches. Another 'improvement' is to tweak the output to give it a slightly hyped bass end. And it finally has a decent amount of polyphony. It's not as shiny and bright / full as the JD engine, but kids love em and buy bucketloads. Roland back port the JD990 display onto it and call it the JV2080. Kids now buy that. Roland Happy.

The important thing here is that the JD engine was full 44.1kHz sample rate waveforms and the JV was 32kHz which accounted for some of the clarity. Interestingly, the JV80/880 sound quite a bit better than the later machines - more like the JD series to my ears. But the 1080 had a ton of usable patches and could have a load of cards. Couple this with the generous polyphony and it was a great work horse. My only problem was that I never really got on with the sound.

It's worth noting that the XV series uses both sample rates and sound a lot better IMHO.

So why do people rate the 990 over the 1080? One answer is scarcity. The 1080 is ten a penny - there's loads of units out there, but less of the 990s. Another is that the 990 is bought by people who know just how great it sounds and want _that_ sound rather than just 'some sounds'. And one more answer might be that it's a direct replacement for the JD800 - and people are getting nervous about lugging one around these days - much better to get the (thoroughly excellent) rack equivalent..

[Dave B]

Interestingly, a little googling shows this blog post on the Roland J/X series synths : http://www.donsolaris.com/?p=404

[BillB]

Wow, precision answer Dave, thank you!

I was just about to add a similar link to further useful info for those interested here:
http://www.donsolaris.com/?tag=roland-jd-990
See also the many articles on the JV/XV series on the same site, listed on the right of the page.

[ManFromGlass]

JV-1080 sitting in the corner here waiting to be rediscovered and put into service for the right project. I'll never sell it. The few patches I like it does really well. And then there are those that I forgot about. It will be a fun journey down memory lane one day.

[Tomás Mulcahy]

Ya I agree, the 1080 is still a cool sounding synth. The various routing and filter options, and the booster, are very cool. Nice onboard chorus as well. Even though it uses 32kHz samples that are compressed with Roland's version of MP3.

Anyone know how many JD800s were sold, compared to JV1080? Seems to be the one thing missing from Don Solaris's excellent and informative site.

[BillB]

Anyone know how many JD800s were sold, compared to JV1080?

Chances are the information doesn't exist, except in Roland's sales figures. But as per Dave's original and informative post, and taking into account the size and cost difference, could be a factor of <wild guess> 20:1 </wild guess> in favour of the JV-1080. Maybe much more.

I have a fully-loaded JV-2080 (eight expansion cards - ouch!) and it's going nowhere in my lifetime. Still trying to sort out patch name ini files and Remote SL editor templates to get the most out of it, but it sounds lovely in so many ways.

[muzines]

Yeah, I expect they sold way more 1080's than 800s, the 1080 was a very strong seller in its time...

I have a stuffed XV-5080 filled with sample ram and SD cards with loads of banks, it has a great sounding engine and all the JD800/990 waves as well as all the XV stuff, and loads all the Roland sampler CD-ROMS and Akai stuff. The only really problem is that I really want to unlock it's potential and one of my side projects I want to do is develop something to make programming much more hands on... I'll get to that after I've got a few other things done and out first....

I also have planned to do a JD800/990 -> XV convertor at some point too, so the XV can load the JD patches directly...

[Dave B]

Like most people, I used to have a 1080. Meh. It went. I've always been much happier with the XV5050 that I picked up eons ago as it sounds great and has usb midi on it. And I really like usb midi. Saying that, if I were going for any JV/XV machine now, it would be the 5080. But the problem that I have is that I'm just not sure I'd use it - the 5050 has been out of the studio for a couple of years now and, other than a quick spin live, hasn't been used. I was contemplating selling it tbh.

It's like the Korg Trinity - exactly the same issue : they build a stonking machine with excellent specs (48k samples / signal path) but the 'yoof' just moan that it's too expensive, can't you make it cheaper? So they hack and slash at a great machine and produce the inferior sounding - but cheaper - Triton. And it takes off. I had to be parted from my Trinity with a crowbar and part of me still wants another one, but would I really use it? It took 20 years, but the Kronos is (finally) back to how Korg synths should sound so I suppose I'll stick with that for the time being. Painful... but sensible..

In other news, Jack was raving about the new Roland Integra thingy. Apparently it sounds quite good - and iirc, he's had various JV/XV units over the years

[Guest]

Thanks Dave, wicked stuff, sod the cat, curiosity’s killed me inkling then.

I’ve got over a hundred Atari Cubase midi files all relating to the 1080 (or 81Z) all 32 Performance patches are full, plus I had to buy a card so that’s full as well, 64 of ‘em, and some have two songs attached to them.

Weird thing, pos true of a lot of synths/modules though, I purchased a bank from some guy dirt cheap, 10 years or so ago, ad in SOS or similar, he said at the time you won’t need the Techno board now, his bank was always my first port of call, as good as, or better than any of the provided presets or boards. A synth’s capability is very much dependant on the owner, I’m very much a user, a tweaker not a programmer, too time consuming innit.

Often also need to combine several patches to get something really useable, but anyway, can’t really cut it in today’s market, but could still be useful in a busy track, I’d never rule that or anything out. Mine’s still switched on when I er, switch-on.

Nice pianos, organs are ok too.

Biggest disappointment for me was the drums, but only the BD & Snares none of them could really cut-it, bloody Roland for cripes sake.

Every dog ‘as it’s day, par for the course, wot goes round can come round though.

Great writing tool, a real workhorse for any newbie of any age just starting out, got cool creative easy to use delays too, the original ITB mix I reckon.

Anyone who’s interested in song writing and is on an extremely tight budget should consider one cos it gets the job done with the minimum of fuss, you can always swap your midi parts to other synths when you’ve got the money &/or acquired the skills.

Keep ‘em peeled Sir, got another query about synths in the pipeline.

[Dave B]

It's funny you like the piano - I just don't get on with it on any JV or XV either. All taste I know, but I do find it ironic that the D70 had a lovely, unique piano sound on it that I spent years enjoying. But everything after was just a bit bright and one-dimensional sounding to me. Obviously, YMMV

The organs are ok too. But I do love the Roland 'rock organ' sound. It's nothing like a Hammond, but it does do a certain thing very well and, from the D50 onwards, has been sprayed liberally over a load of music over the years. In the end, I managed to recreate it on my Kuzweils

[Guest]

Maybe I mean sit, I think when you use mainly one multi-unit it’s easier to get stuff to sit, I did search a fair while ago for a piano sound and none of the JV’s could cut-it, dunno, not enough ‘weight’ or a lightweight sound compared to today.

I wasn’t releasing or mastering anything with it though, it was a thoroughbred workhorse writing-tool really, like most things, like most of us, ‘We’re of Our Time’, tempus fugit.

Time appears to be running-out like the clappers at the mo’, better get me skates on, time ‘n’ tide ‘n’ all that.

It would be good for incidental film music, especially Indie.

I’ve catalogued/recorded a few of my magnum opuses down the years and today they don’t really sound of any particular, ‘time,’ or era.

Getting on ten years ago, the track I mentioned Mzungu, a DJ couldn’t believe it was recorded 10 years prior, so that kinda confirmed my feelings.

[muzines]

It's funny you like the piano - I just don't get on with it on any JV or XV either.
But everything after was just a bit bright and one-dimensional sounding to me.

Same here, it's a bit artificially bright sounding really, for my tastes, and "feels" weird...

It's not like I'm averse to "cheap" piano sounds either - I liked the chunky Wavestation piano on the Piano PCM card (different to the EX one) and I like my old little Kurzweil Micropiano. I've even been known to use the EMT10 a long time ago.

But the XV pianos don't really do much for me - I don't know what the SRX piano cards are like, those SRX boards are (still) priced way too expensive for what they are...

[ManFromGlass]

One of the things I liked about the 1080 and Roland patches in general is their "thin-ness". Not like the current rage of 1 patch fills the entire frequency range (omnisphere, for example is great but you need to thin out the patches so they sit in the mix). Roland patches seemed to fit better combined with other tracks.
I mention omnisphere as an example because it's creator also programmed for Roland. So here is someone who went from sit-in-the-track well patches to the current state of hugeness. I wonder if he programmed any 1080 patches?

[muzines]

One of the things I liked about the 1080 and Roland patches in general is their "thin-ness".

Yes, me too.

I have a kind of mental classification of synths/drums of this era's character as (generalisations, I know) of:

Roland: Crisp, clean, clear, airy
Korg: Thick, grungy, chunky
Yamaha: Dry, Studio, not much "personality"

I remember when I picked my XV up, I demo'd the Korg Triton first (which has the character I mention above), and when I went to demo the XV it had an immediately more attractive character to me, that fit what I wanted to do better.

I mention omnisphere as an example because it's creator also programmed for Roland. So here is someone who went from sit-in-the-track well patches to the current state of hugeness. I wonder if he programmed any 1080 patches?

Yep, he was working on Roland stuff right through the XV series.

The thing is, one of the things that made him want to make his own instruments is his experiences making all these synth/rompler patches - struggling with limited resources, tiny and compressed samples, poor multisample resolution and so on.

I agree that Omnisphere, while staggeringly inspiring for certain types of material, can be a little bit too much "good" to work with, unless you want all your tracks to sound like, well Omnisphere demos. It's an amazing tool and contains an amazing amount of material, but if you gravitate to the standout patches, rather than use less obvious or more subtle ones, it kinda (to me) can feel a little like "cheating"..!

But it's not really a fault of OS, or their library, it's more related to the user's choice of sounds and arrangements - knocking a product for having too much good stuff is a little..., er, off, if I as a user can't make good sound and arrangement choices with what's at my disposal!

[Martin Walker]

I mention omnisphere as an example because it's creator also programmed for Roland. So here is someone who went from sit-in-the-track well patches to the current state of hugeness. I wonder if he programmed any 1080 patches?

I agree that Omnisphere, while staggeringly inspiring for certain types of material, can be a little bit too much "good" to work with, unless you want all your tracks to sound like, well Omnisphere demos. It's an amazing tool and contains an amazing amount of material, but if you gravitate to the standout patches, rather than use less obvious or more subtle ones, it kinda (to me) can feel a little like "cheating"..!

I've experienced this with Omnisphere as well as its stablemate Trilogy, particularly with the bass presets, which generally sound 'awesomely HUGE, DEEP, & POWERFUL'. Gorgeous sounds one and all, but so easy to dominate a track if you're not careful

Oh, and I'm afraid my JV1080 is languishing in my 19-inch rack but hasn't been switched on for years. If they weren't only worth tuppence halfpenny I'd have sold it long ago

Martin

[BillB]

Martin, you made me think, so slight tangent alert!

If anyone in the Yorkshire (better still East Yorkshire) area has a JV-1080 which also hasn't been switched on for years, I would love to borrow it to do a comparison with my JV-2080. I have read a few things, and even listened some inconclusive recordings, suggesting that the 1080 sounds better than the 2080. So I would like to set up some distinctive 'identical' sounds on both of them, record , compare and publish. I wouldn't be in a position to do this until at least summer (studio in bits) but if anyone feels they could help with the loan of a 1080, please PM me for forward planning.

It might prove the online opinions correct, it might kill an internet synth myth. Who knows?

Thanks, Bill

[Kevin Nolan]

The JD990 is different to the JV1080 in several important ways:

1. The filters are very different. In particular, the ultra smooth pads the the Jd800 and JD990 are famous for cannot be achieved on any of the JV series - their filters are far harsher.

2. THE 100+ waveforms on the JD990 (and JD800) are VERY different to the PCM waveforms provided on any other Rompler ever. In particular, standard Romplers are set up to sound like the instruments they sampled. Not so with the JD series. Rather, they provided 100 or so 'sound types' in PCM format derived from a range of sound sources. However Roland did it, the made a quite unique sound set in that each of the waveforms is very usable over a wide range of (exciting) applications. Think of how flexible and adaptable a sawtooth waveform is on a subtractive synth - well - the 100+ waveforms are similarly adaptable. They do not relate to obvious instruments, but offer the sonic character of a huge range of instruments and sound sources - with each not far off the same flexibility of the sawtooth.

What it means is that the JD990 (but more impressively the JD800 because of the realtime controllers) acts as a generic / flexible and adaptable sound design engine of quite unfathomable depth and breadth. A JD800 + a JD990 combination will give Omnisphere a run for its money, while its digital harps, bells and chimes, and the endless swirling pads, are legendary and used everywhere. None of this is achievable with the JV1080 or 2080.

Even the XV5080 - as gargantuan as it is - is still harsher and doesn't provide the same ultra smooth pads of the JD800 (I use multiple JD800s and JD990s, as well as a JV2080 and XV5080) - and I've tried tirelessly to recreate JD800 and JD990 pads on the JV2080 and XV5080 because of their added polyphony - and it's just not achievable.

When you then combine in factors such as the JD990's fabulous LFO's with their smoothed S&H, the particular effects on board and the fact that many JD990 presets were likely programmed on a JD800 so respond to aftertouch very well - then you begin to realise that the JD990 is a world apart from the JV1080.

Don't get me wrong - it works the other way too - my JV2080 and XV5080 offer bags of features not achievable on the JD990 and JD800 - neither is inferior to the other - but the JD990 is much more of a 'synth' and the JV1080 a Rompler. they are very different beasts.

I recommend a JD800 + a JD990 - through a top notch reverb. There isn't a better sound design environment available in hardware or software!!

[Dave B]

Roland: Crisp, clean, clear, airy
Korg: Thick, grungy, chunky
Yamaha: Dry, Studio, not much "personality"

To me, Roland are always a little 'shiney' - very pronounced upper mids which makes them stand out a little more

Korg (romplers) were a little thick and washy for the M/T/0/Wavey, divine for the Trinity, then match your above for the Triton and M. Thankfully, the Kronos and Krome are back to clear and sharp

Yamaha : you, nail, head

[muzines]

Yes, sounds like we're basically hearing the same things, Dave...

[Zukan]

There is a lot to be said for the earlier Roland sound and the people responsible for it.

Personally, I have had the 1080, 2080 and 5080 and loved them. Sure, the 2080 wasn't the bees knees but it was still good.

Comparing the 990 to the 1080 is not really like for like. I have to say, I liked the audio input on the 990.

The JV and ensuing products in the series were, as Dave rightly said, bright and clean. This is why they were used on countless hit records. The design of both the matrix and soundsets was geared simply to cut through a mix, thus the lack of heavy low end and the boosts in the mid to upper ranges.

I always knew I could switch on the 5080 and load a piano sound that was 'ready', a string sound that would fit into any mix, an array of organs and so on, ready-made plug n' play sounds and I never had a problem dialing in some funky effects.

[Ben Asaro]

I have a JV1080 which I got for an amazing price a couple of years ago, and I don't regret having it. I bought the Orchestra I and II expansion cards for it and I love the Performance mode (though I wish there were more drum sounds). It definitely has an immediately recognizable sound.

Because of space limitations my 4U gig rack has a JV880 (which I also found at a great price), E-Mu Proteus/1 and two Lexicon Alex reverbs. Very nostalgic sounds to be sure!