Roland V-Combo VR-09

[voxpops]

For me, I wanted a lightweight board that married a good clone engine with a usable synth for a second tier - at a sensible price. If the NE4 had anything beyond a basic sample player it would have been the obvious candidate. If the PC361 was a little lighter and more readily available, it could also have been in the running. If the XW-P1 had a clonewheel engine, rather than a kind of wannabe organ, then I would have kept that and used it. All of those boards fall short in some respect, except, apparently, for the VR-09, and so I have it on order.

 

Do I expect compromises? Yes. Do I expect it to have the best organ, synth and piano engines from dedicated boards? No. But I trust Roland to give me good quality sounds, and a sensible interface that's easy to use in a live situation. And for the $850 I'm paying, I'm unlikely to be disappointed in those respects.

 

At the moment, for top board I use either the Numa Organ coupled with a Plugiator or a Micron (the only synth with full-size keys that will fit on top of the Numa without having to use a 3-tier stand), or VB3 played from an Axiom, and teamed with the Plugiator. It's OK, but I would prefer a simplified setup that doesn't involve either MIDI (with the need to also add external filtering), or the risk of collapse: my K&M 18880/81 starts to wobble with a weighted board on the bottom, and then the Numa and Micron up above (I love that stand, as it's so incredibly light and easy to setup).

 

Before committing to buy the Roland, I really didn't expect to get more than basic software functionality, and so I'm not disappointed now the manual and hands-on testing has confirmed that. Dedicated clonewheels with waterfall keys and separate rotary speaker outputs, etc. start at closing on $2k. The VR-09 was never going to change that. VA synths can be had relatively inexpensively - even analogues, too, in some cases - but you need real estate for those. The piano engine is not vital to me, but it's nice to have alternatives/backups available. But put all that together WITH DRAWBARS, and it's a helluva deal, IMO.

[kanker.]

I don't get it. Why would Anyone compromise when it comes to the performanc interface (keyboard, switches, etc)?

So Craig, what does a gig have to pay, or be, to compromise not bringing the sound and playability of the Mojo? Are we really getting this lazy?

 

+10000000

Agreed.

 

When I had a roadcase made for my XK-3c, I had them make it to accommodate the XK-3c AND the lower manual. I'd come to a point where I realized I was basically never going to use the XK-3c as a single manual. regardless of the gig. Sure, a lighter two manual clone would be great, but honestly, 60 or 70 lbs for the two compared to a few hundred or so lbs for the "real thing"? It's a no brainer.

[Adan]

I don't get it. Why would Anyone compromise when it comes to the performanc interface (keyboard, switches, etc)?

So Craig, what does a gig have to pay, or be, to compromise not bringing the sound and playability of the Mojo? Are we really getting this lazy?

 

Before judging someone as lazy, walk a mile in their shoes. Craig can speak for himself, but for me, if I have to work a 9-hour day, come home for a couple hours to cook dinner, change diapers, walk the dog, before going off to play a gig, then come home and start the whole cycle again, who knows, it might just make sense for me to do it with one lightweight keyboard that gets the job done. On a day like that, every minute and every bit of energy I have counts. If only I had the luxury of being lazy! I'm in a situation either I have super easy logistics, or I give up playing in bands for the next few years.

 

The VR-09 seemed like it might be a good solution, but issues with the OS may or may not be deal breakers. If I can't switch the sustain pedal from upper to lower on a registration basis, that's a big PITA.

 

Of course I'll still give it an audition when it comes out.

[Craig MacDonald]

For me, I wanted a lightweight board that married a good clone engine with a usable synth for a second tier - at a sensible price. If the NE4 had anything beyond a basic sample player it would have been the obvious candidate. If the PC361 was a little lighter and more readily available, it could also have been in the running. If the XW-P1 had a clonewheel engine, rather than a kind of wannabe organ, then I would have kept that and used it. All of those boards fall short in some respect, except, apparently, for the VR-09, and so I have it on order.

 

Do I expect compromises? Yes. Do I expect it to have the best organ, synth and piano engines from dedicated boards? No. But I trust Roland to give me good quality sounds, and a sensible interface that's easy to use in a live situation. And for the $850 I'm paying, I'm unlikely to be disappointed in those respects.

 

At the moment, for top board I use either the Numa Organ coupled with a Plugiator or a Micron (the only synth with full-size keys that will fit on top of the Numa without having to use a 3-tier stand), or VB3 played from an Axiom, and teamed with the Plugiator. It's OK, but I would prefer a simplified setup that doesn't involve either MIDI (with the need to also add external filtering), or the risk of collapse: my K&M 18880/81 starts to wobble with a weighted board on the bottom, and then the Numa and Micron up above (I love that stand, as it's so incredibly light and easy to setup).

 

Before committing to buy the Roland, I really didn't expect to get more than basic software functionality, and so I'm not disappointed now the manual and hands-on testing has confirmed that. Dedicated clonewheels with waterfall keys and separate rotary speaker outputs, etc. start at closing on $2k. The VR-09 was never going to change that. VA synths can be had relatively inexpensively - even analogues, too, in some cases - but you need real estate for those. The piano engine is not vital to me, but it's nice to have alternatives/backups available. But put all that together WITH DRAWBARS, and it's a helluva deal, IMO.

 

+1 to that!!

[Craig MacDonald]

I don't get it. Why would Anyone compromise when it comes to the performanc interface (keyboard, switches, etc)?

So Craig, what does a gig have to pay, or be, to compromise not bringing the sound and playability of the Mojo? Are we really getting this lazy?

 

Before judging someone as lazy, walk a mile in their shoes. Craig can speak for himself, but for me, if I have to work a 9-hour day, come home for a couple hours to cook dinner, change diapers, walk the dog, before going off to play a gig, then come home and start the whole cycle again, who knows, it might just make sense for me to do it with one lightweight keyboard that gets the job done. On a day like that, every minute and every bit of energy I have counts. If only I had the luxury of being lazy! I'm in a situation either I have super easy logistics, or I give up playing in bands for the next few years.

 

The VR-09 seemed like it might be a good solution, but issues with the OS may or may not be deal breakers. If I can't switch the sustain pedal from upper to lower on a registration basis, that's a big PITA.

 

Of course I'll still give it an audition when it comes out.

 

Adan, I agree.. I'm looking at it as an inexpensive keyboard to handle rehearsals (it might be really nice to rehearse at someone elses place once in a while!), and really small gigs.. I expect it will work fine.. will it be perfect.. absolutely not, it doesn't have a set list feature, so you either build your sound on the fly using the live interface (which is excellent) or you use the sound banks (and I'm not sure how easy it is to call up a particular program).. However it's not the keyboard I'm going to use for important gigs.. so if I take an extra second or two between songs, who cares.. everything in this world is a compromise, and as you point out it has nothing to do with lazy.. (maybe something to do with the $2000+ I spend every year at the Chiropractor!!) and I didn't take Dave's comments personally, I do get the point he's making.

[AnotherScott]

After reading the manual, I can think of 4 or 5 things I'd want them to change before they even think of addressing the output panning.

Like...?

 

Again, recognizing the $999 price point, I've been talking about things that likely would not have required additional hardware that would have raised the manufacturing cost, that's why I've been talking about things like panning, the ability to use the sustain pedal as a rotary toggle on organ patches, having the drawbars send and receive standard CC instead of sysex as they probably do... as opposed to aftertouch, 73 keys, or percussion controls that don't require an iPad or menu editing, for example. Sometimes there are workarounds... I'm thinking that you could leave the pedal set for sustain, and if you really must have a pedal for rotary toggle, a MIDI Solutions box should let you do it. It seems like a silly and unfortunate design oversight, but at least there's a fix. But a bi-timbral board is significantly more useful if you can access the two sounds separately, and there's no way to address that after the fact.

[eric]

The main issue I would like to point out to anyone that has already invested in a gear footprint that approaches nirvana...why expend another $999 in lower gig quality gear that won't reasonably pay for itself in short order? Because you can? Ok, more power to ya.

[voxpops]

The main issue I would like to point out to anyone that has already invested in a gear footprint that approaches nirvana...why expend another $999 in lower gig quality gear that won't reasonably pay for itself in short order? Because you can? Ok, more power to ya.

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...

[eric]

The main issue I would like to point out to anyone that has already invested in a gear footprint that approaches nirvana...why expend another $999 in lower gig quality gear that won't reasonably pay for itself in short order? Because you can? Ok, more power to ya.

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...

 

I can see that angle and have mixed it up a bit in my rig, usually adding an extra piece from time to time. But the notion of learning an entirely new interface as the primary gig board seems counterintuitive, even if money is no object. Why not invest that time practicing and perfecting the show on one's main rig vs. the time required to integrate an occasional "convenience" board?

 

All that said, if I find $999 burning a hole in my pocket, I would consider picking up a VR-09 just to have it.

[HammondDave]

When I had a roadcase made for my XK-3c, I had them make it to accommodate the XK-3c AND the lower manual. I'd come to a point where I realized I was basically never going to use the XK-3c as a single manual. regardless of the gig. Sure, a lighter two manual clone would be great, but honestly, 60 or 70 lbs for the two compared to a few hundred or so lbs for the "real thing"? It's a no brainer.

+10000000

 

Exactly my point.... And Craig... Never meant to insinuate that you were lazy, and thanks for not taking it personally...

 

Yes, it's the player... Not the equipment... But the rig has to be inspiring to me. Just the way I am, I guess...like Kanker, after playing the complete XK3c rig, I never played without the second manual again. at 70 lbs in two peices it was worth the hassle. I just don't get the big difference between the weight of the Mojo and the VR09... Is it really that big of a deal?

 

12 pound keyboards feel and play like 12 pound keyboards... And they usually have serious compromises in their build quality and interfaces in order to reach that 12 pounds. To me, it's not worth it... The keyboard and playing surface is critical to me.

[Craig MacDonald]

No problem Dave.. I think we know each other well enough not to take anything too seriously.. ;-)

 

I fully understand the "inspiration" aspect of this, and there is no question that those gigs where I can actually play a real Hammond/Leslie (very few and far between these day).. the inspiration is significant and noticable in my performance.

 

However, I still think that you're missing the point that there are a lot of reasons why some of us might want to make compromises with respect to equipment.. previously mentioned space, cash etc.. but also the "application" of the instrument makes a big difference.. for example, IF I was playing organ in a jazz trio, or in a blues band, or playing a bunch of classic Booker T songs etc.. I would definately bring my dual manual Mojo because the sound itself is more authentic (and if the audience is coming to see this kind of music they will probably scrutinize the sound more) and also for the inspiration I get from the sound, and last but not least having the two manuals to employ more traditional organ techniques etc.

 

However, with my 11STEPS band where we play classic rock, only 1/3 of the tunes are organ, and the rest are Acoustic Piano, and EP and synth stuff, and I really don't need my 2 manual Mojo to be inspired to play these tunes (and I can play most of the songs in my sleep) where I get my inspiration is more from playing off the other musicians than I do from the sound or playability of my own instrument.

 

Last night I played a gig using just my Korg Kronos (with the CX3 engine through the Ventilator), and an X stand and one QSC K10 and it was an awsome gig.. The CX3 engine sounded great, althought it was missing the scream in the upper octave (I have to work on that). My singer looked at me at the end of the gig and complemented me on my sound and my playing, and I don't think he noticed any compromises I had made to play this gig with one keyboard! In hindsight, playing with the one keyboard, with new combis/programs/splits/layers, made me focus a lot more on WHAT I was playing (rather than playing through the songs on "autopilot").. I may have actually played better last night because of the fact that I was using a single keyboard.

 

All that said, playing last night was actually VERY liberating! I wasn't hiding behind a stand with 3 keyboards on it, and the ease of setting up and tearing down was fantastic.. 5 minutes and done! This resulted in the evening being more about my performance then my equipment, and I look forward to seeing if the VR-09 can get me through a similar gig, and if it doesn't fine, I'll simply use it for rehearsals.

 

 

[Outkaster]

Same thing with me Craig. I subbed in with some guys that I used to play with and played the Kronos with a Ventilator ( I am waiting on getting a new clone). It sounded good even though the size of the keys and faders is a little weird I was able to get by.

[HammondDave]

I understand, Craig. I too have played rehearsals and gigs with equipment that was inferior. I am just an instrument geek. Once I find something I like its really hard to go back.

 

I once played a gig at the Hard Rock Cafe and they told us that they had a B3 in their backline. I showed up to find a VK7 set up. One of the worse gigs ever.

 

On the other hand, I played a gig at a club in Pomona that a actually had a B3 and six Leslie's! That organ sounded so bad that I wished I had that VK7!

[AnotherScott]

I just don't get the big difference between the weight of the Mojo and the VR09... Is it really that big of a deal?

It can be, especially when you have to carry all your gear up and down flights of stairs, and when the organ is only one of a half dozen pieces your lugging. The same argument that justifies the added weight of the Mojo (or your 2-manual XK) also justifies the added weight of a better 88, better speaker, and it adds up, it all makes a difference. Even more so when, for whatever reason, you have very little set up time. (And as I've mentioned before, you have to allow for the fact that all gear doubles in weight after 1 am.)

 

I have considered getting a cart to make it easier to bring my heftier gear more often. But it doesn't help with the steps in my house, and I often have no idea what I'm getting into at the other end until I get there, i.e. whether or not the cart will really make the difference. (At my house, though, some things, like the heavy speakers, could be left at ground level, which would help. I rarely use those at home anyway.)

 

Still, there is a balance to be struck between low weight on one side and functionality, sound quality, and the sheer pleasure of playing on the other, and I can't say I've always gotten it right. But also like Craig says, the threshold of what will be satisfying can vary with the gig as well.

[voxpops]

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.

[voxpops]

Still, there is a balance to be struck between low weight on one side and functionality, sound quality, and the sheer pleasure of playing on the other, and I can't say I've always gotten it right. But also like Craig says, the threshold of what will be satisfying can vary with the gig as well.

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.

[Adan]

The past couple pages of discussion has been amongst players with considerable gigging experience, in my case 35 years. We're all pretty capable of figuring out what sort of rig, or rigs, might suits our needs. When someone says "why do you need that board?" they're questioning that judgment, and I take that sort of comment personally. Is that a big deal? No, of course not. But at the same time, it's not very productive. Discussing what the VR-09 can or can't do is productive.

[AnotherScott]

seems to be based on a perception that the VR is in some way substandard

...

The lack of waterfall keys was rarely cited as an issue in relation to the VK-7

The concerns about the keyboard don't seem to be based on it not being waterfall, but rather it being reportedly the same as the cheaper Junos which are underwhelming. So that is seen as, in a sense, substandard, albeit an understandable compromise to get down to a price. But by contrast, the Jupiter 50 keybed feels great for organ, and it is not waterfall either.

 

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 agree. The Hammond probably has advantages in organ sound quality and keybed; the Roland probably has advantages in the quality of at least some of the "extra voices" (and certainly plenty more of them), plus it has a full synth section built in. It also lets you do splits where one of the two sections doesn't have to be organ. As a MIDI controller, I'd give the edge to the Hammond for having three definable zones with independent MIDI Program Change and related functions; but the Roland does have the pitch and mod levers the Hammond lacks, so it's not a clear win. But add to all that that the Roland is half the price...

[AnotherScott]

None of the clones (sans Leslie) gets there IMO.

But with a Vent...?

 

The Numa is nice, but it still doesn't activate that part of my brain that says I'm playing a Hammond

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.

 

Also, out of curiosity (and sorry if I've asked this before), have you tried loading the alternate organ models into the Numa?

 

[voxpops]

None of the clones (sans Leslie) gets there IMO.

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).

 

 

The Numa is nice, but it still doesn't activate that part of my brain that says I'm playing a Hammond

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!

 

Also, out of curiosity (and sorry if I've asked this before), have you tried loading the alternate organ models into the Numa?

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.

[stoken6]

The same argument that justifies the added weight of the Mojo (or your 2-manual XK) also justifies the added weight of a better 88, better speaker, and it adds up, it all makes a difference. Even more so when, for whatever reason, you have very little set up time. (And as I've mentioned before, you have to allow for the fact that all gear doubles in weight after 1 am.)

+1

 

Festival/showcase gigs with a very rapid set-up/tear-down time can also benefit from a single board that can do almost everything adequately. I've appreciated my NS2 more times than I can count on that basis alone - but it's expensive (and no real drawbars which is important to others more than it is to me). The VR09 splits the cost and quality difference quite neatly between something like the Casio XW-P1 and the Nord.

 

Still, there is a balance to be struck between low weight on one side and functionality, sound quality, and the sheer pleasure of playing on the other

Sometimes it works the other way. The one piece of my rig that made most difference to my satisfaction is also the lightest: my IEMs. That wave of calm as you step off stage without your ears ringing is priceless.

 

Cheers, Mike.

[Craig MacDonald]

The past couple pages of discussion has been amongst players with considerable gigging experience, in my case 35 years. We're all pretty capable of figuring out what sort of rig, or rigs, might suits our needs. When someone says "why do you need that board?" they're questioning that judgment, and I take that sort of comment personally. Is that a big deal? No, of course not. But at the same time, it's not very productive. Discussing what the VR-09 can or can't do is productive.

 

+1 on this Adan. I've been gigging with for about a month and a half short of 40 years..!!! I bought my first B3/122 with I was 18 (58 years old in May).. and I've owned and/or played almost every hammond clone that's every existed... so I think I know what the right trade-offs and compromises are for me, and there are a lot of factors that come into play.. so let's get back to talking about the VR-09.

 

I really like the VR-09 at this $999 price point.. the pianos sound great, the synth is fat as hell, the editor is a great feature for creating synth tones, and adjusting the VK organ. My only reservation is the VK organ, and I've never been a fan of it (although many people are!), it just sounds a bit rinky dinky to me... That said, I'm pretty sure that I'll be able to get a decent sounding organ out of it.

 

So mine is on order, it should be arriving in April, and I'm looking forward to seeing what it can do.

[AnotherScott]

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.

The EXP-Edition seemed to be the way to go there, except that it's now been discontinued. I actually thought that, from what I'd heard about people comparing them, if you were going to spend $500 on a Vent, if you could swing it, you'd be better off spending the additional $6-700 for the EXP instead and get the whole shebang.

[Ekewaka]

Yes, I also doubt a Hammond user would suddenly switch to a sole VR-09 for gigs. However, there are so many cases where a lightweight and cheap clone with additional benefits is good. For example try to stuff in a Hammond into a small car heading for bar gig with inches of space for the keyboard and open beer bottles everywhere.

 

I was going to get an Electro but with VR-09 and Casio PX-5S announced in January I could now get two units, one with organ/synth focus and the other with piano and layering with 88-weighted keys. And each one could handle the other side as well. Means more flexibility. For one gig I could take the DP, for others the VR-09, for some both. And for other gigs I could add a MIDI controller and Mainstage. Pretty crazy configurations you could have today for a meager price. Add to it the new EV 12" self-speakers coming out in April and I could get this kind of rig for the same price as a Nord Electro 4D....

[AnotherScott]

For example try to stuff in a Hammond into a small car heading for bar gig with inches of space for the keyboard and open beer bottles everywhere.

You should probably get those open beer bottles out of your car.

[Craig MacDonald]

The other thing that's possible at this price point is using the VR-09 as a controller for a mainstage/laptop/vst rig.. I have always maintained that if/when I ever transition to a vst/controller rig, I won't use a controller, I will use a keyboard that has basic bread and butter keyboard sounds in it so I have backup in case the VST/Laptop craps out..

 

The Roland Rep says it has good controller functions built into the VR-09, and at $999 (or less) it's not much more expensive than a dedicated controller, but in a pinch it can double as the sound source if your laptop crashes.

 

BTW, for me, if I really can't get the hammond sound I like out of the VR-09, maybe I'll just hook up my laptop and use the VR-09 to control VB3.

[voxpops]

BTW, for me, if I really can't get the hammond sound I like out of the VR-09, maybe I'll just hook up my laptop and use the VR-09 to control VB3.

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.

[Adan]

However, there are so many cases where a lightweight and cheap clone with additional benefits is good.

 

You may have coined a phrase there: "clone with benefits."

[Ekewaka]

For example try to stuff in a Hammond into a small car heading for bar gig with inches of space for the keyboard and open beer bottles everywhere.

You should probably get those open beer bottles out of your car.

 

...it would indeed be interesting as I don't drink, unless someone had a party in my car.... Anyone who has done bar gigs knows what's going on 1am in tight places. Especially at jams with unsure people bringing up beer on-stage... Anyway, back to VR-09 discussions. I know more early April when my pre-ordered unit shows up.

[AnotherScott]

BTW, for me, if I really can't get the hammond sound I like out of the VR-09, maybe I'll just hook up my laptop and use the VR-09 to control VB3.

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.

One nice thing about the XW-P1 is that the sliders sent out regular MIDI CC. Rolands have generally used sysex which will complicate that. But if VB3 has a learn function that supports sysex, I guess it wouldn't be an issue. The idea of using the VR-09 as a controller with some internal sounds to fall back on makes sense, though it would be easier to use it that way with CC controls. Also, as far as controlling VB3, you don't have dedicated buttons for things like percussion 2nd/3rd, norm/soft, short/long decay, or assignable knobs for things like key click and overdrive, so it doesn't really give you all the flexibility of a low cost controller, but it may be an acceptable trade-off.