Roland SH-4d Synthesizer Demo
Vložit
- čas přidán 13. 03. 2023
- New “desert island” synth?!? 😮 A short demo of the new Roland SH-4d synthesizer. I created the sequenced tracks 2-5 (including drums) and left Part 1 open to play the lead. Good progress in a week, and I’m really enjoying it as much as I’d hoped. Great sounds, and very good navigation packed into a solid UI. I need to dig more into the EQ and effects, but I definitely rate it 👍 👍
- Hudba
Sounds great Robert! Can't wait to get one soon.
Sounds really good, well done.
Finally a Band in Box that could live up to expectations at a reasonable price.
Very cool 😎 ! Thanks for your wonderful music Robert. Super well done 👏✔. I hope all is well in Your world 🌎.. Mark Bensette Aux Bois 🇨🇦.
Technical note/inevitable feature request 😄 : The video demonstrates why I’d really like to see (in a future update) either:
- a key shift transpose, or;
- a note offset param at the pattern level
This is two side-by-side patterns. I cue up the second pattern at 00:25, execute at 01:01. They are identical, but I had to go into the second pattern and change the tuning of each oscillator of each part (2-4 each). That means I had to write each of those as new tones. So I ate up two user patterns, and four user tone slots, just to add the simplest of variations.
(EDIT, ADDED: Thanks to Acid Alex who suggested that I could have just transposed each note in the step sequencer to save having to create new tones. Not ideal, but storage-friendly at least)
Otherwise, I genuinely can’t think of other features that I feel I *must* have for SH-4d. There are an infinite number of things that could be added, but I’d hate to see it get more complex.
Yeah⚡️⚡️⚡️⚡️
Nice to see a new video from you Robert !
The SH-4D is intriguing. Sounds good.
Do you find it simpler than the Jupiter XD or is it the same kind of workflow ? Some things look similar such as the Scene/Parts/Model architecture.
Also, can you confirm whether it has a generic/Class Compliant mode ? At least for MIDI + stereo audio outs ? I don't see it in the manual, but some say it has that basic generic mode like the MC line-up.
Hi Alexandros! It is certainly simpler than the JUPITER-Xm, both in sound and pattern design. But only because the synth "oscillator models" are not so deep, as to nearly eliminate menu diving. Definitely a similar architecture ("Patterns with Parts" instead of "Scenes with Parts") but easier to navigate. And it's better designed for live switching between Patterns than X/Xm is for switching between Scenes. In terms of workflow, I think of X/Xm as a synthesizer with some pattern functions, but SH-4d puts a lot more into the sequencer than X/Xm does.
As for class compliance, I'm fairly certain that the MIDI is, but I'm not sure about the audio over USB. I never tried it before I installed the Roland drivers and, unlike much Roland gear, there is no menu setting for USB Vendor or Generic in the menu of the device. It took me a while to set up my aggregate, so I don't want to experiment with removing the driver. But it does appear that it can send the main stereo mix out over USB.
Hi Robert - I'm editing this, as I'd asked how the sound quality compares the the J-Xm, and I see that's already been asked & answered below.
The SH-4d is on my radar if it sounds as good the JXM, and it seems that's so! Do you feel this combination of oscillator algorithms and new digital filter design included in SH-4d vs. the other Zenology based instruments justifies having both the JXM and SH4d? In other words, how are the wavetables into that filter! :)
(Don from Synphaera / Ascendant)
Don! Nice to see a post from you (I'm a fan and customer, lol). So, here I am now with this, a JUPITER-X, an Xm, and a FANTOM 6. And Zenology. I need help, obviously. The SH-4d and 3d oscillator models are great in the context of this UI and control surface (usability, accessibility). But are they anything extraordinarily new? Is this an extraordinary new filter? Nothing yet has struck me that way.
BUT, you ask the important question, and that's about the SH Wavetable and Drawing Osc Models (not on Xm) into that filter. How new is that, and how does it compare to, say, n/zyme? And I don't yet have the answer to that. I'm a week into the SH-4d now and have focused mostly on the pattern and sequencing aspects, which are far superior to those on the X/Xm. I spent six of those days in the living room getting to know it, but brought it down to the studio last night so that I could dig into the synthesis side and compare it to the big(ger) boys. I have listened to every preset on the SH and designed a few of my own, and my gut tells me that SH is too much of a walled garden (if that makes sense) to go as deep into the same places those others can go. OTOH, how often did I really touch 70% of those parameters in Zen-Core? Not often.
At the moment, I don't see this replacing the Jupiter-X (studio) or Xm (anywhere). But I can see the possibility that one of these could go because there's so much sonic and functional overlap. What I like most about the SH at the moment is that it makes it very easy for me to do things that I was always trying to do with the Xm (pattern building, parts switching and muting, performance stuff) with more effort. And the SH UI and Osc Model approach is really great for sound design. Between all of them (including wavetable and Cross FM), it's possible that the breadth is more important to me than the depth (since I have plenty of that elsewhere) in return for such portability.
I'll follow up with a video or touch base with you soon about what I think. At the moment, I would definitely not encourage anyone with the Xm to buy the SH-4d unless the groovebox aspects alone were very appealing. Honestly, I feel a bit silly having this much overlap, but I'm having too much fun with the SH to feel guilty.
tl;dr: "don't know, more later" 😄
@@RobertSaintJohn Thanks so much for the insights and thoughtful reply. Very helpful, and I'll be watching this space for more - cheers!
Hi Robert. How do you compare the sound quality of the 4D to the Jupiter Xm?
Similar, if not the same. While missing the Model Expansions of the X/Xm and the massive Jupiter-X native synth, the SH-4d and 3d oscillator models are still Zen-Core deep down. X/Xm can go places this cannot because it exposes everything in Zen-Core, but SH is deep enough 90% of the time IMO. And SH come with a few of its own exclusive tricks, though its PCM-based oscillator model is extremely minimal. I would say that SH-4d excels at pattern building, much faster and more accessible than on X/Xm. As much groovebox as synth, where the JUPITERs are deeper and broader at sound design.
I could do this same track on the Xm and perform it the same with some effort. Despite appearances, SH is not the same as the Jupiter-Xm. But there are similarities, especially with its 4 part/track + drums structure. In short, they have as much in common as they are different, and SH-4d is not just an Xm without keys. As for the quality of the sound output specifically, I don’t think anyone could tell them apart.
@@RobertSaintJohn Thanks for the detailed response. Totally agree, re the differences in the UI and the synth engines.
Does this have an auto midi channel or do you need to switch midi channels on your controller to control individual tracks? Thx
The default MIDI channels are 1-4 and 10, but you can customize them in System Settings. Very flexible
@@RobertSaintJohn Thx. Yes, I am aware of that but I wasnt sure if it had an autochannel - so that I can just set one chanel on the keyboard controler and thrn simply switch tracks to change the channel - like on most grooveboxes.
@@GrootsieTheDog I switch the channel on my controller. I have no idea if it has auto. No indication of that in the doc or MIDI implementation