Of course you get it. The D50 came during a formative time in my musical development, and to this day, only maybe the Prophet 5 is more important to the music that I loved growing up. 808 State to Prince D50 is LEGENDARY!!!
Yes I have always wondered a lot about Roland's strange philosophy of never including waveforms from older stuff as they progressed; JD-800 couldn't sound like the D-50 at all which kind of mezmerized me as they made $0 from the D-50 at that time. They would surely have sold 10 times as many JD-800's. Not even on expansion cards would they do this. Heck even the D-70 couldn't sound like the D-50. So weird. As memory size has grown exponentially we still had to wait for the Integra 7 to get a machine that provided all of the JV / JD / XV waveforms but still maybe just one or two samples / patches sounding like the D-50.
@@bitley Funny I was gonna look into acquiring a JD 08 heartbroken that they discontinued the D05 (and prices went thru the roof) for a small desktop hardware setup. The SE02 for bass, the Behringer Pro 8 (Prophet 600) for analog poly synth goodness and the JD 08 for wispy nostalgia pads and such. But I always figured the JD 800/JD 08 was the D50 on steroids…not so ???
@@ronrobins3513Both yes and no kind of - and this gets lenghty! ;-) OK because if you really want say Soundtrack which modulates Pulse width via velocity on the D-50 the JD can't do that. The D-50 is in fact a VA synth - made long before that concept was made up. So it can modulate the synthesizer (S) partials' waveforms just like a Jupiter 8, Juno etc. The dilemma was that the (P) / PCM waveforms on the D-50 couldn't be affected by the TVF filter. So therefore Roland made a compromise where all waveforms in subsequent gear were PCM waveforms that could be filtered. The downside was that PCM waves (=samples) are static waveforms. Modifying the PCM waves then? Yes some things were attempted and although quite interesting for us sound explorers those modulation techniques could not easily do convincing regular analog style pulse width and ring modulation things. 1. With the D-70 they tried DLM - dynamic loop modulation. This is very interesting in some ways; check out my Okinawa D-70 video to hear DLM in action. 2. With the JV-1080 Structure modulation was presented. Here we could attempt and sometimes successfully achieve really cool ring modulation. 3. With the JD-990 they introduced "digital oscillator sync" which also can create quite interesting stuff. But as the JV & JD engine kept being developed Roland finally came back to what the D-50 once could do in the digital realm. This took 20 years. This was lo and behold the SuperNATURAL synth oscillator. A technology they had put aside all the way since the D-50. Even here I would, if I was a Roland team member, make it a clear progression and I would focus on creating a JD-800 style synth with SuperNATURAL and it must have the following; • All of the D-50 waveforms • All of the JD-800, JD-990 and all JD expansion card waveforms • All of the JV & XV & Fantom waveforms And most importantly it must be sysex compatible to all of these previous instruments. Only then! Only then could they have a machine that could sound like all of the previous synths. Faking the D-50 sounds is quite OK as what they did with the sound library work. But those sounds are nowhere near the original classics. • Also, SuperNATURAL must have way more filter & oscillator charistics. So as you can see it is a jungle and while fun gear comes up like the new GAIA II Rolands' philosophies are such a japanese mystery. WHY did they focus on the GAIA name at all as most diehard synthesists despised the GAIA? What happened to the JP-8000? Lol. Such a mess. I think we have to wait for Roland to really think about all of this because they have for sure presented interesting machines. But the confusing thing is all of the product lines and nobody in the world could ever agree on what would be the finest technology. The original idea was that JUPITER was the top of the line technology. Then came JUNO and became extremely popular. Then came confusion number one. JX - what was it? Jupiter with DX-style sound abilities. That is my guess. Confusion number two: D series. "L/A Synthesis". Confusion number three: JV and JD introduced at the same time and somewhat compatible. JD - Jupter Digital? JV - Jupiter Versatile? Nobody knows so I can only make guesses. JP - Jupiter but without Jupiter? ¿ The 1981 monster classic JUPITER-8 is also called JP-8 even on the front panel. So was the JP-8000 / 8080 JUPITER range synths? Noone knows.... it really gets complicated. And more so with the JUPITER 80 / 50 / X and Xv. Roland has this funny way of creating competition with itself by doing all of these product lines but we who really love them have a very hard time putting our finger on which Roland synth is the best one. Ask around and some people say SH-101, some say JUNO-60, or the 106. And speaking of that; the JUNO-X and the JUPITER-X is just about the same machine in two different enclosures / product lines. I still vote for the D-50 as "D" for Definitely the most Defined digital Roland sound character. Is the JD anything less? No not really; it's awesome. But it can not sound like the D-50. I need a new Roland synthesizer that collects all the Roland synthesizers ;-)))
@@bitley thanks for taking the time to share your knowledge with me . I really appreciate it. Sincerely thanks. I will go over every detail just as I studied Keyboard Magazine back in the day. 😎
Of course you get it. The D50 came during a formative time in my musical development, and to this day, only maybe the Prophet 5 is more important to the music that I loved growing up. 808 State to Prince D50 is LEGENDARY!!!
Yes I have always wondered a lot about Roland's strange philosophy of never including waveforms from older stuff as they progressed; JD-800 couldn't sound like the D-50 at all which kind of mezmerized me as they made $0 from the D-50 at that time. They would surely have sold 10 times as many JD-800's. Not even on expansion cards would they do this. Heck even the D-70 couldn't sound like the D-50. So weird. As memory size has grown exponentially we still had to wait for the Integra 7 to get a machine that provided all of the JV / JD / XV waveforms but still maybe just one or two samples / patches sounding like the D-50.
@@bitley Funny I was gonna look into acquiring a JD 08 heartbroken that they discontinued the D05 (and prices went thru the roof) for a small desktop hardware setup. The SE02 for bass, the Behringer Pro 8 (Prophet 600) for analog poly synth goodness and the JD 08 for wispy nostalgia pads and such. But I always figured the JD 800/JD 08 was the D50 on steroids…not so ???
@@ronrobins3513Both yes and no kind of - and this gets lenghty! ;-) OK because if you really want say Soundtrack which modulates Pulse width via velocity on the D-50 the JD can't do that.
The D-50 is in fact a VA synth - made long before that concept was made up. So it can modulate the synthesizer (S) partials' waveforms just like a Jupiter 8, Juno etc.
The dilemma was that the (P) / PCM waveforms on the D-50 couldn't be affected by the TVF filter.
So therefore Roland made a compromise where all waveforms in subsequent gear were PCM waveforms that could be filtered.
The downside was that PCM waves (=samples) are static waveforms.
Modifying the PCM waves then?
Yes some things were attempted and although quite interesting for us sound explorers those modulation techniques could not easily do convincing regular analog style pulse width and ring modulation things.
1. With the D-70 they tried DLM - dynamic loop modulation. This is very interesting in some ways; check out my Okinawa D-70 video to hear DLM in action.
2. With the JV-1080 Structure modulation was presented. Here we could attempt and sometimes successfully achieve really cool ring modulation.
3. With the JD-990 they introduced "digital oscillator sync" which also can create quite interesting stuff.
But as the JV & JD engine kept being developed Roland finally came back to what the D-50 once could do in the digital realm.
This took 20 years.
This was lo and behold the SuperNATURAL synth oscillator. A technology they had put aside all the way since the D-50.
Even here I would, if I was a Roland team member, make it a clear progression and I would focus on creating a JD-800 style synth with SuperNATURAL and it must have the following;
• All of the D-50 waveforms
• All of the JD-800, JD-990 and all JD expansion card waveforms
• All of the JV & XV & Fantom waveforms
And most importantly it must be sysex compatible to all of these previous instruments.
Only then!
Only then could they have a machine that could sound like all of the previous synths. Faking the D-50 sounds is quite OK as what they did with the sound library work. But those sounds are nowhere near the original classics.
• Also, SuperNATURAL must have way more filter & oscillator charistics.
So as you can see it is a jungle and while fun gear comes up like the new GAIA II Rolands' philosophies are such a japanese mystery. WHY did they focus on the GAIA name at all as most diehard synthesists despised the GAIA? What happened to the JP-8000? Lol. Such a mess.
I think we have to wait for Roland to really think about all of this because they have for sure presented interesting machines. But the confusing thing is all of the product lines and nobody in the world could ever agree on what would be the finest technology. The original idea was that JUPITER was the top of the line technology. Then came JUNO and became extremely popular. Then came confusion number one. JX - what was it? Jupiter with DX-style sound abilities. That is my guess. Confusion number two: D series. "L/A Synthesis". Confusion number three: JV and JD introduced at the same time and somewhat compatible. JD - Jupter Digital? JV - Jupiter Versatile? Nobody knows so I can only make guesses. JP - Jupiter but without Jupiter? ¿ The 1981 monster classic JUPITER-8 is also called JP-8 even on the front panel. So was the JP-8000 / 8080 JUPITER range synths? Noone knows.... it really gets complicated.
And more so with the JUPITER 80 / 50 / X and Xv.
Roland has this funny way of creating competition with itself by doing all of these product lines but we who really love them have a very hard time putting our finger on which Roland synth is the best one. Ask around and some people say SH-101, some say JUNO-60, or the 106.
And speaking of that; the JUNO-X and the JUPITER-X is just about the same machine in two different enclosures / product lines.
I still vote for the D-50 as "D" for Definitely the most Defined digital Roland sound character.
Is the JD anything less? No not really; it's awesome. But it can not sound like the D-50.
I need a new Roland synthesizer that collects all the Roland synthesizers ;-)))
@@bitley thanks for taking the time to share your knowledge with me . I really appreciate it. Sincerely thanks. I will go over every detail just as I studied Keyboard Magazine back in the day. 😎
@@ronrobins3513 No worries, I'm just a helpless old nerd ;-)