New Roland RD-700GX PIANO (pics)

[orangefunk]

 

Actually, I have had dancers change patches on me (not on an RD700) in cramped conditions so a way to lock out the surface mounted buttons would be real useful on all synths.

 

Thats a great idea... the Promega 3 has a demo button a bit too close to the keyboard... and in highly spirited playing I've managed to hit it... not fun to see those motoried sliders suddenly all snap into place and some pseudo classical piano comes out...

 

 

[burningbusch]

 

Actually, I have had dancers change patches on me (not on an RD700) in cramped conditions so a way to lock out the surface mounted buttons would be real useful on all synths.

 

Thats a great idea... the Promega 3 has a demo button a bit too close to the keyboard... and in highly spirited playing I've managed to hit it... not fun to see those motoried sliders suddenly all snap into place and some pseudo classical piano comes out...

 

 

"Once Panel Lock is engaged, all buttons (except for the VOLUME slider, [DISPLAY CONTRAST] knob, Pitch Bend/Modulation lever, Pedals, ONE TOUCH [PIANO] button, ONE TOUCH [E. PIANO] button, and [EXIT/SHIFT] button) will not function. This prevents settings from being changed inadvertently on stage or in other such situations. "

 

Page 53 RD700GX manual. I'm pretty sure the RD700SX has this same feature.

 

Busch.

 

[Mike Warren]

The 300SX has panel lock so I'd expect the 700SX to have it too.

 

[Mark Schmieder]

Between the uncertainty with GEM, the price hike on the PC3x, and the inevtable wait before an S90 XS is announced, it looks like Roland is holding the trump card this time around.

[SK]

Yeah, the 700SX does have panel lock. I thought it might be a design flaw correction, since it was too easy to accidentally change patches on that keyboard.

[Song80s]

Between the uncertainty with GEM, the price hike on the PC3x, and the inevtable wait before an S90 XS is announced, it looks like Roland is holding the trump card this time around.

 

sure.

 

from my experience, Roland has led by at least 1 year with their RD lineup, from the RD700 and likely now with the GX

 

An excellent digital stage piano is a must have for me. Yes, I like the Roland sound. I also have the XS and and Korg Extreme/M3M

 

 

 

 

[Jazz+]

The RD-700GX can host two expansion boards. It's a pity they didn't give the RD-300GX at least one slot for an SRX expansion board. It would be great to be able to add the SRX-12 Rhodes expansion to the RD-300SX.

[Mark Schmieder]

I tried an RD-300SX at Guitar Centre topday (the only Roland 88-key board they had in the store), and hated it, so that has dampened my excitement about the RD-700GX.

 

The keybed action is rubbery like M-Audio. The acoustic piano made me want to vomit (I would take Casio anyday), and the only electric keyboard that felt at all organic was the Wurlitzer.

 

The FP-series seems much more p[rofessional to me all-around.

[orangefunk]

Y'see this is strange... I loved the SX sound (I say this coming from a GEM Promega 3) and action.... I mean the action was real light, but not cheap feeling...

 

Would be a great board for gigging and its light too...

 

I would think the SX piano would probably be the same one in other similarly priced ROlands?

[delirium]

The FP-series seems much more p[rofessional to me all-around.

 

that's the feeling I got too.

[Joe Muscara]

I tried an RD-300SX at Guitar Centre topday (the only Roland 88-key board they had in the store), and hated it, so that has dampened my excitement about the RD-700GX.

 

The keybed action is rubbery like M-Audio. The acoustic piano made me want to vomit (I would take Casio anyday), and the only electric keyboard that felt at all organic was the Wurlitzer.

 

Are you kidding? Have you not been reading this thread and the Roland info about the 700GX? The 300SX action was not the same and not as good as the 700SX action, and the 700 GX is supposed to be better than the 700 SX. Same is supposed to go for the piano sounds.

 

Maybe this will help.

 

300SX < 700SX < 700GX

 

 

[Song80s]

I tried an RD-300SX at Guitar Centre topday (the only Roland 88-key board they had in the store), and hated it, so that has dampened my excitement about the RD-700GX.

 

The keybed action is rubbery like M-Audio. The acoustic piano made me want to vomit (I would take Casio anyday), and the only electric keyboard that felt at all organic was the Wurlitzer.

 

The FP-series seems much more p[rofessional to me all-around.

 

C'mon, Mark, we are not discussing the lightweight Rd300sx from 3 years ago. Plus this only had the basic Fantom X acoustic piano

http://www.rolandus.com/products/productdetails.aspx?ObjectId=655

 

Try the 700sx next time

 

 

[Superboy]

I am really excited about this piano, but I have a few general questions.

 

Why are digital keyboards so behind the times and stingy with memory? If you just look at the numbers that are listed as "features", such as 1 MB for this, 4 MB for that, 256 MB ROM...I don't see what there is to brag about in this day and age. 1 GB is super cheap these days, 4 MB for whatever is just laughable. Maybe there's something I don't understand about the electronics of digital keyboards. But if going from 1 MB to 4 MB is making a big difference, wouldn't going from 1 MB to 1 GB be amazing? And it shouldn't be that expensive. I don't get it.

[burningbusch]

I am really excited about this piano, but I have a few general questions.

 

Why are digital keyboards so behind the times and stingy with memory? If you just look at the numbers that are listed as "features", such as 1 MB for this, 4 MB for that, 256 MB ROM...I don't see what there is to brag about in this day and age. 1 GB is super cheap these days, 4 MB for whatever is just laughable. Maybe there's something I don't understand about the electronics of digital keyboards. But if going from 1 MB to 4 MB is making a big difference, wouldn't going from 1 MB to 1 GB be amazing? And it shouldn't be that expensive. I don't get it.

 

You can't always compare these things to computer equivalents. The 4MB is non-volatile RAM which is designed to store SETUP file banks. These are small files and 4MB would allow storage of dozens and dozens (maybe hundreds) of these banks with each bank holding 100 presets. I can't imagine anyone needing more. I suppose with a huge amount of internal non-volatile storage you could use it for SMF and audio files but that would certainly up the price. The alternative Roland provides is USB storage which is very cheap and practical. You get a 8GB stick and load all your songs on it. Easy to transfer to-from the computer, etc.

 

The 256MB ROM gives instant access to sounds. Yes when compare with soft sampler libraries it seems puny. But those have significant load times, hard disk for storage and all that. No one else has close to 256MB ROM in a stage piano and it's near the top of what you'll find on any digital hardware instrument.

 

Busch.

[Song80s]

I am really excited about this piano, but I have a few general questions.

 

Why are digital keyboards so behind the times and stingy with memory? Maybe there's something I don't understand about the electronics of digital keyboards. But if going from 1 MB to 4 MB is making a big difference, wouldn't going from 1 MB to 1 GB be amazing? And it shouldn't be that expensive. I don't get it.

 

feel free to write an OS, storage and file handling system to handle 1 gig for a digital piano

[cnegrad]

feel free to write an OS, storage and file handling system to handle 1 gig for a digital piano

This must be some sort of joke for computer geeks. No idea why it's funny. It's a valid question; if modern hardware keyboards are basically sound modules with computers in them, why is it so problematic to handle gigs instead of megs?

 

Totally unsubstantiated rumor has it that one of the guys who developed Ivory is working for Kurzweil and is working on getting an Ivory piano into it. If true, that will make life interesting...

[Song80s]

feel free to write an OS, storage and file handling system to handle 1 gig for a digital piano

This must be some sort of joke for computer geeks. No idea why it's funny. It's a valid question; if modern hardware keyboards are basically sound modules with computers in them, why is it so problematic to handle gigs instead of megs?

 

 

my glib post was to suggest that it's too simplistic that 1 gig of memory is the end all/be all for sound/wave rom in a keyboard

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Joe Muscara]

Totally unsubstantiated rumor has it that one of the guys who developed Ivory is working for Kurzweil and is working on getting an Ivory piano into it. If true, that will make life interesting...

 

I wonder if that's just someone getting the fact that Joe Ierardi used to work for Kurz and did all their "classic" pianos and is now doing that at Synthogy mixed up.

[MikeT156]

Great explanation about memory use Busch! Something else that I discovered when using the sample memory in my Motif ES8, you can load a heck of a lot of samples in even 256MB of sample RAM. I asked the folks on Motifator.com about the sample piano libraries they sell on their site, and they told me that each one of them could be loaded into 256MB of sample RAM and there would still be plenty of room to spare to load other things. I'm sitting on 512MB of sample RAM for my ES8 because I really don't need it. The 256MB currently installed on my ES8 has been fine for what I do, so I've been lazy about swapping out the RAM.

 

Great point about load times too Busch, you're the man.

 

Mike T.

[Superboy]

It's not that it's not enough for me or anything. Honestly, I can't really tell the difference, nor do I know enough about the computer architecture underneath. I'm just thinking out loud and comparing it to such things as flash mp3 players, and so forth.

Deep down, I feel like the developers of these hold back on implementing the most recent technology into their instruments so that they can really make small little feature improvements seem more important than they really are. For example, Rolands evolution of the RD-700 to the 700SX to the 700GX took 7-8 years, right? And besides the subtle improvements to the interface, the big change was making the horrendous piano sample in there originally much better and increasing some memory components by a few MB. So, I'm thinking, big deal, did it really need to take 8 years for this. I'm actually frustrated that I had to deal with that 700 piano sample for this long, because it's terrible. Things like this can be fixed in less than a year, unless I'm very naive about the whole thing.

And if you look at companies like Nord which seem to be better about keeping up with technology and such, it makes me wonder even more about what's the motivation for holding back for other companies. I can understand if it's better for business to tweak the model every 2-3 years to sell more keyboards, it's just frustrating that's all.

As far as I'm concerned, with the technology we have now, if it's not hardware related, a lot of this stuff should be able to be modular and firmware-updateable, even if it requires an upgrade fee. For example, I would upgrade to the GX if I really wanted that ivory feel, but not to improve the piano sample, because the original was so bad, I feel like they should have fixed it a long time ago.

ANyway, just some thoughts.

[orangefunk]

I believe there are a few 700 variations...

 

RD700, RD700SX and now RD700GX

[orangefunk]

The Promega sample set is still arguably the best piano sample there is, but is very small in comparison at around 25MB (compressed) for the piano and *all* other sounds (basses, strings, choir etc.).

 

So its definitely not a case of having lots of memory, its more about processing and triggering these samples in the most effective manner.

 

I think the GEMs raw samples (which can be heard by setting filter cutoff to max) are actually pretty terrible (like a Korg M1 piano put through an enhancer), but once put through the DRAKE algorithms they are as smooth as silk..

 

I am hoping that Rolands ARX cards (sadly not on the RD!)won't be simple sample playback boards but will process/articulate the samples in some manner.

 

 

[cnegrad]

O-Funk,

 

The Promega sample set is still arguably the best piano sample there is, but is very small in comparison at around 25MB (compressed) for the piano and *all* other sounds (basses, strings, choir etc.). So its definitely not a case of having lots of memory, its more about processing and triggering these samples in the most effective manner.

But doesn't it all depend on what standard that you're holding it to? For instance, let's say that you're playing in a recording session, and it's a solo piano/vocal piece, where no acoustic piano is available. Are you saying that the GEM's piano that comes in at less than 25megs is actually better than Ivory's giga-sized pianos? I mean sure, buried in a track most rompler pianos can get by. But completely exposed with little or no efx? No premature decays, or looped sustains? I'm using Ivory in that fashion now, and it's sounds gorgeous.

 

If you're comparing romplers to romplers, fine. But c'mon now; it can't possibly stand up naked compared to the better giga-sized libs...

[burningbusch]

I don't know. To each his own. I've done extended listening trials with the Promega 3 and came away unimpressed with the piano and other sounds in general. In a way it reminds me of the Synful Orchestral libraires which can sound remarkably good in some of the demos they provide. Very expressive with lots of natural sounding articulations. Similar to GEM they use small sample size with sophisticated processing. But I recently tried out the Synful demo again and it just flat out can't compare to the highend giga libraries from VSL and EWQL. The giga are SO beautiful and detailed in comparison. I was hoping that over the years Synful would have improved the sound significantly, but it hasn't happened.

 

Busch.

[Yoozer]

It's not that it's not enough for me or anything. Honestly, I can't really tell the difference, nor do I know enough about the computer architecture underneath. I'm just thinking out loud and comparing it to such things as flash mp3 players, and so forth.

Flash is not ROM and reading times are slow. A purely Flash-based sampler (Roland SP-series) has only a few voices of polyphony (8 or so) because it would cost too much time to search and read from the disk.

 

Harddisks aren't ROM either and reading times are faster, but you don't want that; there's a reason hardware samplers load stuff in RAM first. Loading up 1 gb of piano from a harddisk (which presents a physical reliability risk and has a 5-year lifetime) takes a while, and pianos should be playable instantly.

 

A well-programmed 64-mb grand is better than one that's 3 gb and crappy.

 

Deep down, I feel like the developers of these hold back on implementing the most recent technology into their instruments so that they can really make small little feature improvements seem more important than they really are.

Your theory overlooks the fact that development of synthesizers may cost a few years and reliable, proven technology is better than whiz-bang possibly unstable stuff. We've got too many OS updates for synths as it is already. Yes, it sucks that the Triton Extreme still uses SIMM for sample memory and maxes out at 96 megs while Roland and Yamaha moved on. As an engineer, you want to reuse tried and trusted solutions; only when the stack of hacks becomes too big you'd nuke it from orbit and start anew.

 

And if you look at companies like Nord which seem to be better about keeping up with technology and such, it makes me wonder even more about what's the motivation for holding back for other companies.

They don't even publish their memory data and their products have a smaller scope. Basically, Roland's engine has to work in several products across the range, Clavia only needs to do this with 2 (Electro and Stage).

 

it's just frustrating that's all.

But it's what we as customers ask for; we demand updates and if there's nothing new at the NAMM it's "boring". Heck, if there's something new at the NAMM it's still "boring".

 

a lot of this stuff should be able to be modular

It is. Just buy a good quality weighted MIDI controller and sell the module every few years or so .

 

Hardware modularity means keeping stuff in stock. Keeping stuff in stock is expensive. Expansion packs do not work well; the JV/XP and SRX cards being an exception mainly thanks to backwards compatibility and putting the same hardware across an entire product range; even the lowly Juno-G accepts SRX boards.

[orangefunk]

O-Funk,

 

 

If you're comparing romplers to romplers, fine. But c'mon now; it can't possibly stand up naked compared to the better giga-sized libs...

 

From what I understand, it doesn't work the same way as a sample. Those samples are simply references which are manipulated in some manner. I don't hear any loops or anything... the way the sound reacts to the key and the absence of velocity switches (there is only one piano sample on each key) makes a difference too... its all in the DRAKE processor really... I think it uses some kind of modelling to generate the initial hammerstrike then the sample+drake dsp manipulation takes over..

 

I've not heard any gigasample libraries in person to be honest.

 

[orangefunk]

I don't know. To each his own. I've done extended listening trials with the Promega 3 and came away unimpressed with the piano and other sounds in general. In a way it reminds me of the Synful Orchestral libraires which can sound remarkably good in some of the demos they provide.

 

Busch.

 

The PM3 Steinway piano grows on you over time I think... I really like it, it has that 1980s ECM piano sound to it which I really like. Just like those CDs by Azimuth (John Taylor), Bruninghaus and all.. The other sounds are pretty crud to be fair... The Fazioli sample is really odd... but might be useful in a certain context I think..

 

I just wish the piano was more customisable via some kind of model... that would be really awesome... and a natural step for the ARX boards IMHO.

 

It would be interesting to hear from GEM RPX owners to see how they compare the software gigalibraries to the hardware thats available.

[orangefunk]

Just to add, although I'm a fan of the GEM piano sound, I am not of a fan of GEM themselves... I think the company really needs to treat their customers better... the fact that my piano has been in repair for nearly 2 years just shows you how crap their setup is..

 

I will no doubt get the RD700GX when it comes out

[cnegrad]

As an aside, I've loved what little I've heard of Rainer Bruninghaus' acoustic piano playing. Can someone recommend his best work?

[Jazz+]

Your GEM has been 2 years waiting at the factory to be repaired? I would call that out of business. And didn't they recently lay of their US rep that was posting here?