Triton R & Motif R and 5080s OH MY!!!

[schmoron13]

I just heard that the motif rack is on sale for $999, so I beg y'all the question: How do the 3 racks synths -the korg triton R, the Yamaha Motif Rack, and the Roland XV-5080- compare? Since there's about a $500 difference between each ($999, $1499, and $1999), is the price difference warranted?

 

My main concern is for sounds. I only use a PC (sonar 2xl) so sequencing and such is not a huge concern, but the initial sound quality and expandability is expremely important. I should note that I borrowed a Triton R from Guitar Center in Aug and loved it, but didn't have the justification to shell out $1600 for it...

[lrossmusic]

I'm not too up on the latest gear but aren't these sounds available for computer as 'soft synths' or samples so why would someone using a computer want a rack module? Am I way off base or do the rack versions just sound better? Or maybe these newer sounds aren't out as soft sythn's or samples yet?

 

Still a bit confused especially about sampled sounds vs modules vs soft synths.

[sirgant]

While soft synths are making great progress, there still remains a strong place and need for these modules. I think the Motif Rack is going to be pretty big for Yamaha, but it's a different market out there now. I am definately going to pick up a Motif Rack, and I already have a Triton Rack. Each manufacturer has a different sound, strengths and weaknesses, so it really becomes a personal preference as to which one works for you.

[SoundMeister]

Originally posted by lrossmusic:

Still a bit confused especially about sampled sounds vs modules vs soft synths.

I think it would be fair to say that most soft synths are modeling analog type sounds. The units that Roland, Kurzweil, and Yamaha make available also include acoustic sounds and may have high quality effects engines (an area where software continues to lag behind).

 

The costs of a computer with a Pro sound card and decent controller keyboard is such that racks are still quite competitive, especially when they feature unique sounds that are not limited to analog stylings. Also, sample libraries for hardware samplers are much further along than those available in native format for some of the soft samplers.

 

~Peter Schouten

[progfusion74]

IMO, in raw sample quality, sample-based soft synths are far superior to most hardware. Hardware has an advantage gigging of course, and in areas such as, for example, the combi mode in a korg triton.

 

What you get of course is what you feel comfortable with.

 

prog

[JonnyClueless]

Show me a soft synth that can replace any of the three modules mentioned. I will be happy to try it out, but until I find one... :-)

[lrossmusic]

While soft synths are making great progress, there still remains a strong place and need for these modules. I think the Motif Rack is going to be pretty big for Yamaha,

Won't the Motif and Trirton racks eventually be out as a soft synths?

[RABid]

I have the XV5080 and started to get a Triton Rack bup opted for the Karma instead. If I had it to do over I would have stuck with the Triton Rack. I just don't use the Karma features but I do like the joystick. The Korg and Roland match up very well because their strong points don't really overlap. If you need to do orchestration I would suggest the 5080 because of the excellent expantion board in that line, plus the ability to load 128 meg of samples. The Roland orchestra sample CD's are decent. I'm not sure where the Motif will fall but if I had it to do over I would be tempted to get the Roland XV5050 and Yahama Motif as a combo but IMHO they combination does not give you the diversity of the Roland/Korg combination. Maybe the XV5050 and Triton Rack as a combo.

 

Robert

[Mark Zeger]

If you like the sounds in the XV-5080 or 5050, I'd suggest finding a used, demo or "new old stock" XV-3080. I recently bought online a demo unit for $675. You won't get the sample loading feature of the 5080. You will get double the polyphony of the 5050 which is critical with some Roland programs. It's a great value.

[SoundMeister]

Originally posted by lrossmusic:

While soft synths are making great progress, there still remains a strong place and need for these modules. I think the Motif Rack is going to be pretty big for Yamaha,

Won't the Motif and Trirton racks eventually be out as a soft synths?

The Motif and Triton and others are highly dependent on FX processing for their signature sound. Therefore, it would be important for any soft synth version of a hardware synth to include their respective FX engines.

 

Soft synths are a far cry from real analog synths, which is not surprising given the fact that the method of tone generation is completely different. Although it's theoretically possible for software to simulate a good analog filter, many soft synths can't do it or the do a less than adequate job. If filter action is important to what you want to do, it may help to research soft synths in order to sort out which has better filters. Some will be better approximations than others. However, although great strides have been made, the sonic character of software synths and real analog synths is very different and most people can tell them apart.

 

The overall performance of soft synths and samplers is influences by hardware considerations like CPU, sound card, and midi interface. It's a good idea to decide on what software you're going to be running before building a computer.

 

Softsynths do crash. If you're a gigging musician, it may be helpful to have a hardware backup on stage with you.

 

~Peter Schouten

_..//\_.~_..//\_.~_..//\_

Pyramid Sound Productions

Speciality Sounds/SCSI Expansions

[synthetic]

Originally posted by JonnyClueless:

Show me a soft synth that can replace any of the three modules mentioned. I will be happy to try it out, but until I find one... :-)

Gigasampler? Check out those 1,024MB piano samples, as opposed to the 8MB piano samples...

[lrossmusic]

. . It's a good idea to decide on what software you're going to be running before building a computer.

Suppose I just wanted a computer for for sequencing, would it therefore be better to use sound modules for my sound sources rather than soft synths sounds that you load into your computer.

 

Also the Triton and Motif are not analog synths are they? Won't they eventually be available on sampled disks that you can load into your computer. No one seems to address this question. Maybe it's just a dumb question. Like I mentioned earlier, I'm not quite clear on all this yet.

 

Thanks for the info though eventually I'll get it.

[SoundMeister]

Originally posted by synthetic:

Originally posted by JonnyClueless:

Show me a soft synth that can replace any of the three modules mentioned. I will be happy to try it out, but until I find one... :-)

Gigasampler? Check out those 1,024MB piano samples, as opposed to the 8MB piano samples...

The available sample libraries for Giga feature mostly pianos and orchestral instruments. Triton, Motif, and the 5080 have much larger sound palettes AND they have effects engines that are an important part of their signature sound.

 

A better piano sample would not make Giga a substitute for the three modules. In fact, I doubt whether anyone buys these modules if all they were only interested in a convincing piano sample.

 

Regarding 1,024MB versus 8MB piano samples-- Yes, size matters, but it is quite possible to have a poorly recorded giga piano sample.

 

Rather than view it as a either/or (software versus hardware) issue I prefer to see is as more of a both/and type thing. Software and hardware each have their advantages. Try them and see how they fit in with what you're trying to do musically. Practically speaking, though, I don't think it's a good idea for someone to get rid of their hardware synths and samplers until they have a computer with all their desired software up and running!

 

" Won't they eventually be available on sampled disks that you can load into your computer."

 

I don't know.

 

~Peter Schouten

_..//\_.~_..//\_.~_..//\_

Pyramid Sound Productions

Speciality Sounds/SCSI Expansions

[schmoron13]

two comments:

 

First off, let's remember that this is not a soft synth vs hardware debate. Rather, it's a comparison of the big 3 modules right now (though you can prob add the kurzweil 2600 rack to the list, though it's much, much MUCH more expensive)

 

Second, in response to the giga sampler option, there is a couple of big concerns: the initial investment price, the price of samples, the hardware requirements, resale value, sound quality, and ease of use. I looked at the Giga approach, but it is very expensive when you start adding sample libraries of decent quality and the price skyrockets, not to mention that your computer boggs down from the strain. On top of that, when you invest in soft synth, you can't sell the libraries (legally at least) and thus aren't "investing." ON the other hand, you can plug a module in, and within minutes, compose, either through midi or audio (my personal pref)...

[DLN]

Originally posted by schmoron13:

(hough you can prob add the kurzweil 2600 rack to the list, though it's much, much MUCH more expensive

Check out the announced Kurzweil K2661. It is a keyboard model, but at $2999 MSRP its street price may be not so far out of scope - at least relative to the XV5080. And you get a keyboard, incredible KDFX (you won't believe yoru ears) also usable as a separate effects unit, ADAT interfacing etc etc along with it: standard. Will take some time though before it ships.

 

If you ask me - go for the K2661.

[JonnyClueless]

I havent heard the new Kurzweil, but I did own a 2500. My feeling that it was twice the price of everything else but with only half the sound. I wanna check the new one out, but until I get a chance I have to remain a bit skeptical. Not to say it was bad, just not worth the price they charge for their stuff.

 

The motif either doesn't do the syncronization things I need, or the interface to do them is very bad. Sounded decent though, but nothing sound wise I don't already have in the triton and 5080.

 

Sorry if this sounds very negative, I don't mean it that way.

[RABid]

GigaSampler, Kontakt, Reaktor, SonocStation and a few good GS libraries blows away a rack of hardware ROMplers. While GS outdoes anythiing when replicating real instruments, Reaktor covers the synths and Kontakt functions much like a true ROMpler, allowing you to either play normal sampler, or use the waves as a basis for synthisis.

 

But still, for me it is much easier to throw something together with hardware.

 

Robert

[SoundMeister]

Originally posted by Rabid:

GigaSampler, Kontakt, Reaktor, SonocStation and a few good GS libraries blows away a rack of hardware ROMplers.

Robert, how would your computer perform if you were running GigaSampler, Kontakt, Reaktor, and SonicStation at the same time (not a problem for a rack of hardware ROMPlers).

 

Latency, CPU overload, freezes, and software crashes are common problems with soft samplers and soft synths. These problems are compounded by multi-tasking. Yes, you CAN run all of these software applications at the same time - but it will cost you $$ because you'll need more than one computer to make it happen.

 

Furthermore, it's important to note that different platforms, processors and versions of an operating system handle multi-tasking differently. These variables make generalizations about how software will perform rather hazardous. In fact, this is why software companies usually provide very little detail as to what kind of performance end users can expect from their software. It all depends on factors these companies have no control over. For example, there is currently no operating system that offers 100% reliable real-time performance for any one software application, let alone multiple applications running at the same time. A software manufacturer would be foolish to tell end users that they can expect the software to be completely free of computer errors at all times.

 

Also, GigaSampler, Kontakt, Reaktor, SonicStation do not feature the unique sounds and FX processors of hardware ROMplers made by Roland, Korg, Yamaha, etc. I think maybe we're comparing apples and oranges here.

 

Don't get me wrong. I like soft synths and soft samplers, but I wouldn't ditch my hardware for them. A combination of software and hardware is probably the best way to go.

 

~Peter Schouten

-_..//\_.~_..//\_.~_..//\_-

Pyramid Sound Productions

Speciality Sounds/SCSI Expansions

http://www.pyramid-sound.com

[schmoron13]

ONCE AGAIN: THIS IS NOT A HARDWARE VS SOFTWARE DEBATE!!!!!!!

 

I just wanted to know how people compared these MODULES; not keyboards, software packages or other!!!

 

Sorry to seem agitated, but I see this thread following the patterns of the mac vs pc debate whenever someone asks about a soundcard or DAW

[RABid]

Originally posted by SoundMeister:

Robert, how would your computer perform if you were running GigaSampler, Kontakt, Reaktor, and SonicStation at the same time (not a problem for a rack of hardware ROMPlers)...

I use a separate computer for GigaStudio 160. That computer occupies channel 8 on my MOTU MTP/AV and I treat it like I would a rack mount ROMpler. The primary computer runs Sonar II XL and has no problem running Kontakt, SonicSynth, Reaktor and other software synths. Sonar XL, Acid Pro and SoundForge came with a collection of effects plug-ins. Added to those are things like BBE Sonic Max, Revalver, various OhmForce devices, and a load of strange and wonderful effects that have no equal in hardware. Running SonicStation samples though Kontakt dry sounds as good as a ROMpler that depends on effects to sound good. But, I can string all the effects I want to Kontakt. It just does not seem as necessary. And if I start overloading the computer I just stream a channel to HD and mute the MIDI channel that created that track. Thus, I have an easy option to go back and edit that same track and stream it once again.

 

Don't get me wrong. I still love my hardware. My computers are surrounded by a collection of Roland, Korg, Yamaha and Emu gear. My Nord Modular is still my favorite synth. But more and more I find that this stuff is not even turned on. I can put a song together with my Fantom. For me the days of needing or using more than one good ROMpler is gone. Once the song is together it moves to software and possibilities open up. Sure, Kontakt does not have the modulation capabilities of the Roland but if I want something that complicated I use Reaktor or one of my many soft synths. If you already have a decent computer running your sequencer then for the price of the Motu Rack you can buy Kontakt, SonicStation, z3ta+, and Reaktor. For the price of an XV-5080 you can add GigaStudio, FM7 and Battery to that. If you want more samples that you get with SonicStation buy them. Think of it as adding expansion ROM's to your hardware. For the $300 it cost me to buy a Roland SRX expansion I can buy some very good samples.

 

I guess I'm saying, all these ROMplers are good. Roland XV, Korg Triton or Yamaha Motif would be a solid bass for any system. But unless you are doing a lot of live gigs and need more sound sources one ROMpler is enough. Extra money may be better spent on software.

 

Robert

[Dan South]

Originally posted by lrossmusic:

Suppose I just wanted a computer for for sequencing, would it therefore be better to use sound modules for my sound sources rather than soft synths sounds that you load into your computer.

That depends on two things - how powerful your computer is, and what sort of sounds you need. If you have an older computer that doesn't have a lot of memory, soft synths may load the processor too heavily to make them practical. In that case, hardware synths connected via MIDI make more sense. With a fast computer and a lot of RAM (256 MB and up), you should be able to do an arrangement or reasonable complexity with soft synths.

 

Keep in mind that each synth, software or hardware, has it's own sound and personality. In the end, you have to choose the tools you use by the way that they appeal to your ears rather than making decisions based upon the underlying technology.

 

Also the Triton and Motif are not analog synths are they?

No, they're sample-playback synths, as are most of the hardware synths available today.

 

Won't they eventually be available on sampled disks that you can load into your computer. No one seems to address this question. Maybe it's just a dumb question. Like I mentioned earlier, I'm not quite clear on all this yet.

There's no such thing as a dumb question on the pathway to understanding. In a perfect world, the samples from a Triton, etc. could be ported to a computer version, but I doubt that this will happen. Korg, Yamaha, etc. are in the business of selling hardware synthesizers, and they've spent a lot of money engineering hardware that can play these sounds back as intended, and also they've invested a lot of money and time developing sample sets that work well with their hardware. Never say never, but the eventual existence of a Virtual Motif would surprise me.

 

Hope this helps.

[Dan South]

Originally posted by Rabid:

I have the XV5080 and started to get a Triton Rack bup opted for the Karma instead. If I had it to do over I would have stuck with the Triton Rack. I just don't use the Karma features but I do like the joystick. The Korg and Roland match up very well because their strong points don't really overlap. If you need to do orchestration I would suggest the 5080 because of the excellent expantion board in that line, plus the ability to load 128 meg of samples. The Roland orchestra sample CD's are decent.

 

Robert

Rabid sums up my thoughts on the subject. The Triton and the XV have complimentary sounds. They sound very cool layered together. The Triton is more beefy and punchy. The XV is more detailed and airy. The XV is excellent for orchestral emulations, especially when you add the appropriate expansion cards.

 

I haven't tried the Motif yet.

[RABid]

Has Korg put out an editor for the Triton/Karma series? I could really use one to edit some nice lead patches. If not, that is one area where Roland and Yamaha leads Korg.

 

Robert

[Dan South]

I've heard of a Karma editor. It lets you edit the generated functions in addition to the sounds. Tritons are easy enough to edit from the front panel. How about something like Sound Diver?

 

P.S. I hate computer editors for synths, but that's probably because I used to use Galaxy, a horrifying product.

[RABid]

I never picked up the Karma editor because I don't use the generated functions. If it does edit patches I may have to check it out though I hate to pay $75 for an editor for a single keyboard. The only other thing I could use a general editor for is my Emu P2K and XL7.

 

Robert

[mildbill]

schmoron:

 

the xv and the motif have 128 voices, the triton rack 62.

 

the TR is a sampler (up to 96 Mb), the xv can load samples into ram (up to 128 Mb), and the mo is a rompler.

 

for expansions - the tr can take 7 boards and the moss (va) board, the xv can take 4jv and 4 srx, and the mo can take plug-in synth/fx expansion boards.

 

the xv has scsi, digital outs, a smart media card slot and an r-bus connector. the scsi and dig outs are extra on the tr (but it has spdif). i think the motif has some kind of digital out and scsi is superfluous for it. these kinds of things go into some of the cost differences.

 

i have the xv and the tr, but not the mo. for yamaha stuff, i have the ex5r and the s80.

 

my opinions are this, the xv and yam stuff sound darker/heavier, the tr lighter.

i rate the fx like this: #1 - yam; #2 - korg; #3 - xv.

for orchestral sounds - xv is better, tr is second up and yamaha is a little light on that stuff (don't know about the motif, tho).

 

for 'clarity' of sound, yam comes in first.

the xv and tr are 'veiled' in different manners. as i stated in the beginning.

 

of course, these are really subjective opinions and anyone is free to differ.

 

i think all 3 are great in different ways.

[SoundMeister]

Originally posted by mildbill:

the TR is a sampler (up to 96 Mb), the xv can load samples into ram (up to 128 Mb), and the mo is a rompler.

Motif can read Akai samples. It also reads Yamaha A3000/A4000/A5000. I believe the Motif's sample playback aspects are based on the A series.

 

~Peter Schouten

Pyramid Sound Productions

http://www.pyramid-sound.com

[mildbill]

i need to look at the motif specs - you say it can read samples? how much ram can you put in it?

 

http://www.yamahasynth.com/pro/motifrack/index.html

 

i think you may be mistaken.

[Mike Martin]

The Motif keyboards can read samples, not the new Motif Rack. The keyboard models can hold up to 64MB of sample RAM.

[burningbusch]

The Motif Rack is clearly mis-labled. No sequencer, no sampler. It should be called the S90-R sans Triple Strike.

 

Busch.