voxpops

I don't think any if us here accept things blindly. Early adopters, especially, evaluate the products and decide if the pluses outweigh the minuses. If not, the board goes back. And those evaluations and decisions are made public, and influence a lot of other potential purchasers. There is no board - no matter how expensive - that is perfect and free from flaws/irritations/bugs. If we waited for the perfect board, we'd never have anything to play! I accept, however, that the VR-09 is a borderline case. Weak samples, plus a wide range of glitches and programming oversights mean that not everyone will hang onto this one. The samples are what they are; the software issues are down to Roland: people are watching. It would be wise for potential purchasers to decide on the basis of this and similar threads whether the reported issues are a deal-breaker for them or not.

Craig, the reason I didn't mention it is that I haven't found it yet! How do you access it without an iPad?

Here's a short update on my opinions after having the VR for a couple of days. Thanks to Craig's tips, the organs are now much more workable for me. The way the tone control operates really makes a difference to the character of the organ sound. I haven't needed to set the control to either extreme, as I've found that milder settings produce the kind of tones I'm after. They may not be as accurate as what can be produced on a Numa or Nord, but I think they'll work - Friday night will be the test. One of the things I've noticed is that a number of the preset organ registrations have a rather ugly attack on the notes that doesn't sound like natural keyclick. I've avoided using those. I have nothing to add to the general consensus that the pianos - and particularly EPs - are sub-par for today, especially when compared to the Krome, which occupies the same price point. At first I was quite underwhelmed by a lot of the synth/brass/string sounds, but with some simple front panel editing and a few menu tweaks (I don't have an iPad), I was able to dial in some basic patches that will work well for me. You don't get the kind of deep editing capabilities of the Krome, but the ease of operation means more to me, and I don't make use of complex, evolving sounds on the gigs I do, so I don't miss that depth. Although I don't think most of the samples are much improved over what was available in the late '80s, the ability to control effects and envelope etc. on the fly makes these simple sounds come alive, and the machine becomes fun to play. Because I don't usually try to emulate real, non-keyboard instruments, I probably won't make much use of the "N" samples. However, these do seem to be of a higher quality than many of the other samples. A note on the bugs and anomalies. Not only does changing patches while holding down the sustain pedal produce a re-trigger, but the same occurs if you're holding notes on the keys. That's bad! It means you can't sustain any notes while pre-selecting a new patch. The inability to move down registration banks with either the front panel or an assigned footswitch is a nuisance (one must use the scroll function); there should have been a "previous" as well as a "next" button, particularly as registrations are the only place to store user configurations. If you select a registration and then move back and forth between, say, organ and synth, the original registration effects will be lost. Also, it doesn't seem possible to store a combination of organ, piano and synth in one registration. so that you can switch between them at will. Overall, I think I'm going to be happy with the VR. It's a flawed work, but offers a range of functions that few other boards can boast. It's nice to have something geared more towards live use, as there are plenty of boards that appear to be targeted more toward DAW/computer users. Sonically, it's just passable at the price. It really could have used longer samples, more velocity layers for APs/EPs, and, possibly, better DA converters. However, I think the hands-on, fun factor for live use trumps the concerns.

Guys, you need to remove the "#" from the URL:

Thanks! I remembered an earlier post where you mentioned this, and started fiddling with those controls in the store. Yes, they do make a surprising difference to the way the organ responds. I'll see what I can come up with.

Thanks, Craig! I admire your tenacity!! You've been defending the VR against some pretty stiff opposition... Actually, your posts have been very informative and, I suspect, useful to potential purchasers. I shall doubtless be tweaking away over the next few days - and trying to put thoughts of the RED devil behind me. (I was actually surprised at how much better the NE4's emulation is compared to the NE3, which I didn't really like. If you're reading this, Kawai James, go out and buy one - you'll love it!) Anyway, back to the VR...

I changed my mind and bought one. I'm not sure if I've made a stupid decision or not - time will tell - but I have 30 days to evaluate it. I had the opportunity to check it out against the NE4, and my take is this: the Electro is gourmet cuisine; the VR-09 is a ready-meal. You opt for one when you want an exquisite dining experience, and the other when you need something quick and convenient. Basically, the NE4 blows the VR out of the water in terms of Leslie, overdrive, CV, keyclick, percussion and keybed. That red thing just sounds and feels awesome. And when it comes to APs/EPs, the VR is like Shroeder's piano. Even the Nord's sound library is in another ballpark. Basically, the Electro is worth over twice the price - easily. I'd even go so far as to say that, organ aside, the Krome is a far better proposition in terms of sound quality (and I should know, I owned both the 73 and 88 for a while). BUT (there had to be one), unless you are prepared to shell out for a Kurzweil, Kronos or Nord Stage 2, there is no other board that combines a usable drawbar organ with an editable and controllable synth, and certainly not at that weight and footprint. I excluded the XW-P1 because, to me, the organ was pretty much unusable. The VR's organ is usable, but I would hesitate to describe it as a clonewheel. In fact, I think it's best not to even think of it as such, because then you get into the whole Hammond/Nord comparison game. There is no comparison - end of story. Now what CAN the VR do? The answer is that it can do a little bit of everything at a compromised quality. I have to say that the Roland RD-64 draws on some of the same base material as the VR-09, but manages to sound noticeably better. Even the RD's organ has more presence despite the underlying tonal quality being identical. I don't think this is the kind of board that will bring a big grin to your face when you play it. In fact, the opposite may be true as you wrestle with the ridiculous bugs that Roland needs to fix, but probably won't. However, it has a superbly well thought-out interface, can switch instantly from a biting lead to a gospel organ (if that floats your boat), and is kind to damaged backs. For a second-tier board that allows me to dip into synth territory occasionally, and give me passable organ when I don't want to MIDI-up the Numa and Plugiator, it should be fine. I would not select it as a main board or when needing to focus on any one genre of instrument. My suggestion would be to go into this one with eyes wide open. This board is worth what is being asked for it, IMO, but is NOT a substitute for any of the pro boards. Also, make sure you can live with the bugs, in case no fixes are forthcoming. If this sounds overly negative from a new owner, that's not my intention - I just wanted to be realistic. Most of us here have other boards that are of a much higher sonic standard, and so have choices at our disposal. Someone looking for their first board needs to be well aware of what they are getting for their money, especially if ordering online.

I was comparing the organ on the RD-64 to the Numa, and found that the Roland doesn't run out of steam in the top octave, whereas the Numa starts to sound a little weak and muffled in the highest notes. The other issue that the Numa has for me is that the drive just doesn't sound even close to an overdriven Leslie growl. Besides those two minor nitpicks, the Numa remains pretty much the perfect clone for me, and I presume that the drive issue could be solved by using an outboard tube preamp, if I wanted to go to the trouble. The VR-09 will doubtless retain Roland's top octave organ clarity and balls. However, its distortion was even worse than the Numa's on first hearing. Even so, I'm still vaguely tempted by the Roland's tight footprint and synth engine. I may go back and give it a second try, and hopefully compare it to the Electro 4. I know that I was not taken with the VR's CV in addition to the drive, so I doubt that my opinion will be different on second listening, but it would be good to hear it A/B'd against the NE4 (and possibly the SK1). If anyone has already done a comparison with the Electro, I'd love to read it. I think I'd prefer to spend the extra bucks on the Nord, but there would need to be a wide margin between them to make it worth it.

I believe that Roland, after all these years in the business, know exactly what they're doing when they design a board to have specific features and effects. They would know that a 17-year-old with a vacation job is neither going to consider a $2k board nor worry about esoteric details. They also know that a died-in-the-wool Hammond aficionado is going to be turned off by this small inconsistency, and will have to stump up more cash for a better emulation.

I wouldn't hold my breath for a fix to any of these issues. The VR-09 seems to have been designed to be a do-it-all keyboard at a lowish price. I really don't believe it was supposed to compete head-on with Roland's own VR-700 or the Nord Electro. To expect Roland to provide firmware that will turn it into a $2k board - but sold at half that price - is, to my mind, unrealistic. This really is a case of, "does it meet my needs and expectations as is?"

Good points, iluvchiclets. I would love to see a "mini-Mojo" with VB3 in a single manual configuration - and priced to compete with the Roland!

Gosh, I parted ways with the XW some time ago, so my memory may not be too accurate. I do remember that I had no problem with the XW's keys for my uses (synth/organ), so it was fine. The VR was raked at a severe angle when I played it yesterday, so I didn't get to play its action from an optimal position, but it felt good - tight, fast and responsive for (again) organ and synth. I was disappointed with the pianos, so I didn't play pianistically very much.

You're welcome, Scott. I, too am pleased with the Numa. My only real criticism of the sound is the very slightly muffled quality (I think it was Busch who brought this up - mentioning that it sounded like it had a blanket over it). I think if it had mid-EQ available on board, a more forward sound could be dialed in - but that's just my preference. The slightly screwy MIDI implementation is irritating, but not fatal, and the only other on-going mini-issue I have is that my hands sometimes adhere too strongly to the keys during smears/glissandos. Compared to the VR-09's organ, the Numa is smoother (less digital-sounding), and has far better CV and percussion. The rotary on the Numa is definitely more authentic than the default Roland sim, but there is no choice of sim or adjustment available - so on balance the Leslie emulation is pretty much a wash. I found the distortion on the Roland to be pretty much unusable with organ, but on the other hand the Roland's tone control was very useful in changing the character of the organ sound. Of course, these are just my opinions! I do think the VR-09 is great value, and should appeal to a lot of people. However, I remarked to one of the GC reps that I thought it maybe tried to do too much, resulting in too many compromises. It's not a Nord killer by any means, but the much more usable synth section gives it a boost over a number of competitors. One of those competitors is the XW-P1. For the time I owned it, I used it as a controller for VB3 (placed a netbook on that useful rubber pad), and used the onboard synth section in addition to the outboard organ. Like the VR, the XW has (IMO) barely acceptable pianos, a great solo synth (with quite a different character to the VR). Unlike the VR, it has a substandard organ/Leslie. However, at $499 vs $999 it's a tough call.

Just did a quick (220 miles!) trip to check out the VR. I have to say, it taught me to be thankful for my Numa! Seriously, I don't think the VR's bad (and having driven all that way with the intention of buying it, I wanted it to be good) but to be honest it left me a little cold. The organ's OK - perhaps a little thin and "digital" - and the No. 2 rotary sim is quite good, but overall I wondered what justified it being twice the price of the XW-P1, even though the Casio's organ/rotary is not quite in the same class. The pianos, IMO, are poor in respect of crude velocity switching, and the EPs are uninspiring. The lead synths are good, although they are slathered with effects to make them seem richer/beefier than they are. The pads/strings/brass are standard - nothing special to me. The best thing about it, to me, is the interface. It's very easy to navigate, and I didn't find its build quality substandard at all. The keys responded reasonably well - maybe a step up from the unweighted Krome. I can definitely see its appeal, but even though I love the concept of a lightweight synth/organ, I'd rather spend the money on a used PC361, and screw my back some more. (BTW, thanks to LX88 for the heads-up in respect of stock at Beaverton GC.)

To be honest, for a so-called "live" instrument, that retriggering issue is appalling. How could the software have passed QC like that? Pretty unforgivable on Roland's part, in my opinion. I have had one on order for a couple of months; I am seriously considering cancelling.

I agree, he seemed to be struggling a little. I think that is the biggest concern here.

I don't think that this is the point. Not everyone wants to aim for a perfect facsimile of a Hammond tonewheel (which one, anyway?). I have not yet found one clone that gives me that same visceral response that I used to get when playing the real deal. And sometimes a sound that is not particularly "accurate" can sit better in a particular style of playing or band mix. I actually think that it's more important that the player likes or gets inspired by the sound he's producing than whether the audience is fooled into thinking he's hiding an A100 and twin Leslies under his hat. And if accuracy of fakery is the only standard by which we judge our instruments, the Rhodes would have been out on day one! After all, the audience was never going to believe that that's a real piano. It's a reasonably priced instrument that has some fairly unique features. To me, even though I have a stable of more expensive gear, the price is still important. It allows me to experiment with an all-in-one board without dropping crazy amounts of cash. If I like it, great, it will save my arthritic spine. If I don't, then I will lose relatively little - but I expect I can find a use for it, come what may.

They seem to fall right between the XW-P1 and the Electro in quality - which is right where the price point falls, too. I agree they are not great, but they are usable, IMO. I'm content that when the gig requires minimum gear, the VR will perform adequately.

Thanks to CEB and Craig from me, too - really useful input, and a great demo. For what it's worth, my take on the VR-09 after the demo is that it fills a niche that no other board currently inhabits: i.e. a combination of totally usable sounds across organ, piano and synth coupled with a lightweight chassis and a modest price. Sure, the Electro and Stage 2 have better organ and rotary, plus interchangeable pianos etc., but the Electro lacks a usable synth, and the Stage is way out of the ballpark when it comes to cost. The XW-P1 has an equally good mono synth (maybe better), but its organ and piano sounds fall way short of the VR, in my opinion. Kurzweil products are heavier (read sturdier), and are higher priced, and the competing Yamahas lack drawbars and the user-friendly interface of the VR. I was beginning to get a little concerned that I'd been a bit hasty pre-ordering this thing, but I now feel far more comfortable. I still wonder whether, with its audibly superior organ, the NE4D isn't a better long-term investment, but then I'd be back to bringing a separate synth to some gigs; and since I can already give myself that headache with the Numa Organ plus a stacked synth, it would defeat the object. Also, the pianos sound good enough for the VR to be a lightweight, all-in-one rehearsal board. As far as build quality and action goes, I don't have too many qualms about the thing holding up to regular use - it is a Roland - but I sensed from the demo that the keys are not great and will not really allow for sensitive piano playing - but then that's a challenge on any non-weighted board, including the non-HP Electros. In the end, at the price, and with the range of functionality and good quality sounds, it makes a lot of sense. I hope the PX-5S also lives up to expectations: I would love a two-tier combination that together weighs less than one of my current bottom boards.

That sounds so jaded and miserable!

I did just that with an XW-P1 for a while, and it worked fine. The beauty of the Roland is that the drawbars are a little more like the real thing, and most of the internal sounds should be better.

But with a Vent...? Unfortunately, I've not been able to try a Vent yet. From the stuff I've heard and read, it certainly seems to be the closest representation out there. A number of people have said, however, that it's not as cut and dried when coupled with the Numa. I just wish I could manage a real Leslie, but even the Studio 12 is too much for me these days (for gigging at least). You also mentioned you've used VB3 with an Axiom. Have you tried running VB3 from the Numa? I think its action and real drawbars could get you that much closer. You know, oddly, I've never experimented with VB3 via the Numa. I suppose it seemed redundant to attach one clone to another, but it might be interesting to try. The Numa is actually thicker sounding than VB3, but VB3 is "greasier." A combination of the two might be intriguing! Yes. The differences are subtle (as you'd expect), but there nonetheless. But, good as they are, none of them can quite match that combination of electromechanical and tube-driven liveliness, that's then spun around the room. How could they? Actually, from what I've heard, if Guido ever releases VB3 2.0 for download, that's probably about as close as one can reasonably expect to get.

I couldn't agree more. After going through a succession of pianos from all manufacturers (sometimes more than once), I've recently settled on the SV-1 73 for band work. The action is not ideal, with some strange behavior when playing pp; the shorter keybed means I have to adapt some pieces; switching between sounds is clunky; it weighs quite a bit more than it should for its size. On the other side of the scale is how inspiring it can be in a band context; the degree of control/modulation over the sounds; how much easier the shorter length can be when negotiating stairs. I would not use it as a solo board, however. Organ is actually more problematic for me. In the late '70s and early '80s, I played Hammond tonewheels and Leslies almost exclusively. Having been brought up on that, I have a benchmark in my mind of how an organ should sound. None of the clones (sans Leslie) gets there IMO. The Numa is nice, but it still doesn't activate that part of my brain that says I'm playing a Hammond - neither do the newer Hammonds! So with that in mind, I might as well go for the lightest, most versatile clone that gets the job done. Hence the VR-09.

I find it a little odd that a number of people question the decision of others to purchase the VR-09 as a means to their own particular ends. It seems to be based on a perception that the VR is in some way substandard; it might be worth subjecting that to a little contextual probing. The VK engine has been around for years. It is generally regarded as an acceptable, if not outstanding, clonewheel. The VR, it seems, employs a modified version of the VK. It is missing a few external controls and routings (pity), but has some tweaks - most notably to the Leslie sim, which was an area of weakness for the VK. The lack of waterfall keys was rarely cited as an issue in relation to the VK-7, although their inclusion in the VK-8 was generally welcomed. The V-Combo has always been something of a niche market board. Any sort of do-it-all board either makes compromises in terms of control surface or becomes a menu-driven colossus. The VR series has always erred on the side of requirements for live use. The VR-760 was probably the most feature-rich of them all, but it was also big and fairly heavy. The VR-09 cuts way back on the footprint and weight, and so increases the versatility and appeal, IMO. Looking at the layout, it also seems to be a no-brainer to use. The inclusion of a basic synth engine that goes beyond the few ROMpler patches of the SK Hammonds or the essentially fixed samples of the Electro is welcome, even though it may not be as engaging as Casio's XW mono-synth. The pianos may be drawn from the pre-SN RD/FP series, and, while not in the Nord league, are still acceptable and of similar quality to Yamaha's mid-range offerings. There is also a range of effects that are tweakable on the fly. So, all in all, for a board priced at $1k, it seems to do pretty well - better in some areas than boards costing twice as much, not quite so well in others. If one were to do a direct comparison with the SK-1, even though the Hammond would probably win the clone shootout with its organ-centric features and updated VASE engine, when you consider all the features of both models, and then compare the price, I'd imagine the VR-09 would acquit itself very respectably.

I think that's a reasonable question. If you already have a Stage 2 compact, for example, I can't see the VR-09 being a worthwhile investment, but if you have a 55lbs board that you would like to move only when absolutely necessary, then maybe the VR will fill a gap. Also, sometimes it's just nice to be able to mix things up a little...