Roland V-Combo VR-09

[Craig MacDonald]

Thanks, I expect that given the emphasis on this being a live instrument they concluded that the dedicated drawbar volume control was adequate for the organ, making it very easy to adjust he organ volume relative to the layered sounds. Which is true. Again some players just want the organ sound and the don't "ride" the expression pedal like us folks who grew up playing hammond.

 

Lets hope they fix this in a quick update.. If not I expect that the midi solutions pedal controller will probably fix the expression deal issue for about $150.

 

 

[Sam Mullins]

Nord is similarly guilty of some fairly basic omissions. For example, on the Stage 2 ( which costs 4 x the vr -09), you can't change the pitch bend range or pan voices.

Nord does sometimes do some quirky things of their own, but you can pan voices on the Stage 2. Take the sound you want to pan, assign it to the auto-pan effect, set the rate to zero (makes it static), and use the amount knob to place the sound where you want. At least that's what the manual says. Also, you can assign instruments to different outputs (and the inability to do that on the Roland is what makes the absence of pan more notable).

 

Thanks for the pointer. Good hack! I asked this question about 6 months ago on the nord forum and no one gave this approach. As you say, it's in the manual so that's on me.

 

Of course, this isn't really a generic pan solution. You can do it on one voice per slot and you sacrifice the ability to use Effect 1 for something else. Out of the many multi-timbral synths I've owned over the last 20 years, this is the only one that doesn't let you pan each voice individually.

 

The seperate outputs solves the problem for some situations but not for the particular application I was after (which I won't derail the thread by explaining.) My point was merely that Roland isn't alone in these types of omissions. In my experience, I find Yamaha to be the least guilty of these things (but at the expense of ease of use.)

 

(FYI, I love my Nord, quirks and all).

 

 

[BigJPatton]

This board is a great concept that I think other makers will follow with, Nord has always kind of been alone in this niche but too expensive, because a lightweight, Swiss Army Knife board like this is generally only needed IMO for practice or to accompany a bigger board that will cover the bulk of the work, so that need does not justify a $2K price, but again, I really like the performance board concept without the menus and touchscreens and having dedicated buttons right there for everything.

 

For me I use organ 90% so I have a good clone but would also like some decent acoustic/electric pianos in a small, light package to go up top, so something like this would be perfect.... but it just misses IMO.

 

I don't care about the issues in this thread, seems nitpicky to me for a board like this, if you need that kind of stuff just get something else, to me this board misses because of the 61 keys, too little for pianos, I also hate the joystick, move the USB to the back, get rid of the D-Beam, add another octave of keys and put a standard pitch/mod wheel up where the USB slot is, then you have a winner that I would probably buy, but I'll pass because of this issue.

 

[AnotherScott]

Of course, this isn't really a generic pan solution. You can do it on one voice per slot and you sacrifice the ability to use Effect 1 for something else. Out of the many multi-timbral synths I've owned over the last 20 years, this is the only one that doesn't let you pan each voice individually.

In all fairness to Nord, it's not designed to be a workstation, it's designed to be a performance board. Nord's approach is never to maximize functionality, but rather to provide easy and direct access to the most widely used functions for live performance. That said, I would still argue about some of their choices. ;-)

 

My point was merely that Roland isn't alone in these types of omissions. In my experience, I find Yamaha to be the least guilty of these things (but at the expense of ease of use.)

I would rate Kurzweil first in terms of maximum flexibility. Then probably Korg still a bit ahead of Yamaha.

[Dana.]

There's also still the issue of the keys themselves. They're not full-sized, making them unsuitable for at least two of the three main things this board is supposed cover (organ and AP/EP). I don't know why any self-respecting, serious organ player would even consider this board when for not much more money they could get a clone with better sound and keys. And the complaints about weight are laughable.

[Dana.]

Compromising with these boards blows. Why do you think there's so much gear turnover on the forum?

[AnotherScott]

There's also still the issue of the keys themselves. They're not full-sized, making them unsuitable for at least two of the three main things this board is supposed cover (organ and AP/EP). I don't know why any self-respecting, serious organ player would even consider this board when for not much more money they could get a clone with better sound and keys. And the complaints about weight are laughable.

Are the keys smaller than other organ-centric boards like the SK1 and unweighted Electros? I didn't realize that. In what dimension(s)?

 

That said, personally, I have a lot of leeway there. The Yamaha S30 keys were only about 90% of the size of full size piano keys, I had no issue with that at all (apart from the fact that you couldn't fully align it with an 88 below). it was an easy board to play organ on. Then again, I sometimes play organ on a Korg Microstation, so maybe you shouldn't go by me. ;-)

 

I don't buy the "not much more money" part of your premise, though. At typical selling price, the VR-09 is about half the price of the next cheapest true clonewheels. The difference between $1k and $2k is not insignificant. Even if you shop for a deal on an SK1 or whatever, it's still a pretty hefty price difference. (And it probably won't be long before you can shop for better-than-MAP deals on the VR as well.)

[Sam Mullins]

In my experience, I find Yamaha to be the least guilty of these things (but at the expense of ease of use.)

I would rate Kurzweil first in terms of maximum flexibility.

 

I've never owned a Kurzweil, but based on second-hand information this doesn't surprise me.

[AnotherScott]

Compromising with these boards blows.

 

Every board has its compromises. People complain that the SK1 doesn't have pitch and mod wheels. The Electro is monotimbral. There's always something. Clonewheel + piano + VA synth for anywhere near a grand, the VR-09 doesn't really have competition. Lots of people can probably live within its own limitations. If they can't, what single board can arguably do those three things as well or better? I think the choices are Kronos, Kurzweil PC3 series, Nord Stage 2. All a lot more expensive, some notably heavier, or harder to use, or with limitations of their own... there's no perfect choice here.

 

Of course, I always say to get two boards, but that's a different conversation.

[Dana.]

Are the keys smaller than other organ-centric boards like the SK1 and unweighted Electros? I didn't realize that. In what dimension(s)?

Not interested in having a measuring contest here.

 

I don't buy the "not much more money" part of your premise, though.

You get what you pay for, etc. etc.

[Dana.]

Every board has its compromises.

I don't agree, but then I have no need for a do-it-all board.

[Craig MacDonald]

There's also still the issue of the keys themselves. They're not full-sized, making them unsuitable for at least two of the three main things this board is supposed cover (organ and AP/EP). I don't know why any self-respecting, serious organ player would even consider this board when for not much more money they could get a clone with better sound and keys. And the complaints about weight are laughable.

D-Bon, I am a serious self-respecting keyboard player and I was one of the first to buy one..

 

I suppose you may have a different definition of "serious organ player" then I have.. I bought my first B3/122 at the age of 18 back in 1973.. I've bought and sold numerous hammonds/leslies over the years.. performed 2 complete organ transplants, I currently have a frankenB a BV a 122/44W/147 leslies, and I've been through almost every clone our there except for the KeyB.. I'm a serious self-respecting organist who recognizes that you can use different rigs for different sitations.. the VR-09 will satisfy my needs for certain gigs!

 

I also have spent more than the price of a good clone on chiropractic care ever year for the last 5 years.. so weight is not a laughing matter.. someday you may understand this. The sound of the VR-09 is pretty good (and I'm pretty fussy) and the keys feel just fine.. I've had quite a few hours of fun playing with this thing..

[Dana.]

No need to justify your credentials. But why not buy, say, an SK-1 that is nearly as light, sounds better, and provides a more authentic organ-playing experience?

[Adan]

A "compromise" is a balancing of two competing values, such as cost v. functionality, or weighted v. unweighted keys. Is the VR-09 expression pedal thing is not a compromise? I doubt it would have cost them much if anything to add this bit of functionality.

 

This is just my way of thinking about it, but I expect any keyboard that claims to be a clone to have a well-working expression pedal, so I can ride it like I would a real Hammond. To me, that might be even more important that having waterfall keys. These things are particular to a player's style, but I'm hardly alone in feeling like the expression pedal is vital.

 

Not only that, but it's got to be a reasonable facsimile of a Hammond swell. If it works like a typical budget keyboard volume pedal, that's not nearly good enough.

 

I can certainly see Craig's perspective that this will nevertheless still work in certain situations. And for some people, adding an extra pedal is not a big deal.

I just happen to slice my bologna a little differently.

[Adan]

No need to justify your credentials. But why not buy, say, an SK-1 that is nearly as light, sounds better, and provides a more authentic organ-playing experience?

 

Much more complete and useful palate of sounds in the Roland.

 

Also, I do not like playing piano on the SK-1. Very difficult to find a dynamic range.

[Craig MacDonald]

No need to justify your credentials. But why not buy, say, an SK-1 that is nearly as light, sounds better, and provides a more authentic organ-playing experience?

D-Bon, I purchased an SK1 at the beginning of the year for basically the same reason as I purchased this one.. (a small all-in-one to use as back up if either my drawbar organ or my synth blewup, and something to use for small gigs or rehearsals), unfortunately the SK1 was defective and I had to return it. However, I didn't like the EV's and I didn't like the fact that you could layer two sounds, but one layer had to be organ.

 

So the MUCH cheaper VR-09 works fine for me.. out of the box it works (unlike the SK1) it's half the price I paid for the SK1 (at the time $1999) it has significantly better EV's (in almost all categories) a built in VA synth, iPad editor, AND perhaps most importantly, I can layer any two instruments there is no limitation that the organ has to be one of the parts.

 

That said, I have always hated Rolands VK engine.. and my expectations was that I could NEVER get this VR-09 to sound good.. but contrary to my expectations, it didn't take long before I had it sounding great.

 

The SK1 probably has a slightly more authentic hammond sound, and it does have waterfall keys but that's the only advantage that I can see.. the VR-09 is superb value.. it's a great backup keyboard for me(if either my Mojo or my Kronos craps out the VR-09 can handle either role in a pinch) AND it means that I don't have to have rehearsals at my place anymore.. I can take a K10 an X-stand and my VR-09 to someone elses place.. Hell at $999 I could leave it there!

 

Hope this explains things for you.

[AnotherScott]

The SK1 probably has a slightly more authentic hammond sound, and it does have waterfall keys but that's the only advantage that I can see..

And its pedals work the way you want. ;-) Also, it can function as a three zone MIDI controller, storing three MIDI Program Changes (plus additional parameters) per "registration" instead of just one simple PC parameter. (Though its use as a MIDI controller is also somewhat compromised for some purposes by lack of pitch and mod wheels.)

 

But it gets back to every option having its pros and cons. D-Bon says he'd go for the SK1 over the VR-09. I'd probably go for the Numa Organ over the SK1. I think I can get a reasonable facsimile of the SK's "extra voices" out of my iPad (it's not exactly the highest bar to meet), and I think the Numa is probably the better organ.

 

But I do see the appeal of the VR-09, more built-in functionality, lighter, and half the price. Everyone has their own "good enough" threshold for organ, and if it meets yours, especially as a backup/rehearsal board, I can see it being a great choice.

[Dana.]

Ah, so this is a back-up/rehearsal board. In that context, it makes much more sense. Thanks for clarifying.

[Ken Beaumont]

For me this the VR-09 is a nice addition. I rarely layer other sounds with organ and when I do its with a sonic cell, so there are 2 distinctly different sound paths. What I wanted was something small and light as a second tier to my SV1 to get better organ sounds and other sounds the SV1 lacks. My main worry was the organ would sound bad. Mine is supposed to ship next week.

[Craig MacDonald]

Ah, so this is a back-up/rehearsal board. In that context, it makes much more sense. Thanks for clarifying.

D-Bon, also for some small gigs.. We play in some pretty tight spaces and sometimes I don't have room for my mojo/Kronos rig.. I can use my Kronos (+ventilator) or this type of gig or maybe just the vr-09

 

[Ekewaka]

I didn't know there was a standard for keyboard key sizes... Maybe it's good I'm still ignorant so I could play anything placed in front of me.

[Charleston]

Keyboardists are actually just bringing one keyboard to gigs with no backup? If it goes down, then what?

 

What does a tight space have to do with whether a rig is 1 or 2 or 3 tiers? Is it 5 ft ceilings or something?

[Ekewaka]

Most of size issues -- at least for my gigs -- is not height, rather width. 88 keys are nice but there are places, especially with bigger bands, where it's tough to put such keyboards on-stage and I don't like playing on the dance floor.

 

For some ad hoc gigs, like jams, I sometimes bring just one keyboard. There are times for bringing one keyboard or multiple ones.

[Charleston]

I am talking about paid gigs, not jams or rehearsals.

 

 

[AnotherScott]

What does a tight space have to do with whether a rig is 1 or 2 or 3 tiers? Is it 5 ft ceilings or something?

Sometimes depth is an issue. Basically, total footprint.

[To B3]

thing is, with 2000 dollars, the price of the next cheaper clonewheel-all-in-one keyboard new, you can buy two VR-09 and stack them and still be under 30 lbs of weight.

[Craig MacDonald]

What does a tight space have to do with whether a rig is 1 or 2 or 3 tiers? Is it 5 ft ceilings or something?

Sometimes depth is an issue. Basically, total footprint.

 

Absolutely, depth is an issue!!! The VR-09 sitting beside me is 12 inches deep.. my Mojo is about 20 inches deep and when I add a second tier you have to add another 6-8 inches in depth I (assuming you want access to the Mojo keys and controls).. it's the difference between 1 foot and 2.5 feet in depth.. as AnotherScott says it's about total footprint. My Mojo/Kronos rig takes 6 square feet more than this VR-09 will take.

[AnotherScott]

thing is, with 2000 dollars, the price of the next cheaper clonewheel-all-in-one keyboard new, you can buy two VR-09 and stack them and still be under 30 lbs of weight.

Yeah, but why would you want to? ;-)

 

Really, if my goal was a superlight 2-tier setup under $2k, rather than a second VR-09, I would choose something that complements the VR in some way. Casio PX-5S, Yamaha MX/MOX, Korg Kross/Krome, NumaCompact, Waldorf Blofeld.

[Josh Paxton]

Following up on my earlier comment...

 

I'm starting to think my needs might be better served by an MX61, which has comparable sounds in every area except organ.

 

I just auditioned one, and wow was I wrong. Even through a Vent, the organs on that thing were just unplayably horrible. If you ever want a stunning reminder of exactly how spoiled we've become in the clonewheel era, just try going back to rompler organs.

 

So I now have a VR09 on order. Craig, would you mind sharing your organ tweaks for it at some point?

[To B3]

I know, of course it was an exageration. As I'd like the same thing as you, but one tier, I keep hoping that Roland at one point listens and show that they care about us. Hoping like Tom Hanks on that cast away movie, but still hoping.

 

he got home in the end, didn't he?

 

thing is, with 2000 dollars, the price of the next cheaper clonewheel-all-in-one keyboard new, you can buy two VR-09 and stack them and still be under 30 lbs of weight.

Yeah, but why would you want to? ;-)

 

Really, if my goal was a superlight 2-tier setup under $2k, rather than a second VR-09, I would choose something that complements the VR in some way. Casio PX-5S, Yamaha MX/MOX, Korg Kross/Krome, NumaCompact, Waldorf Blofeld.