Roland GR-55 tracking

[clevelandjazz]

Anyone "upgrade" from a GR-33 to a GR-55?

For me, using a GK-3 and a 24.75" scale instrument, the GR-55 has horrible tracking on the low strings. I've tweaked dozens of parameters and still can't get it to track as well as the GR-33 does on the default settings. This is particularly true on the Low strings. The Low strings just can't keep up on fast jazz lines of 8th notes at tempos above 250bpm.

[Gerry]

On 2015-12-28 03:28:46 +0000, clevelandjazz said:

> Anyone "upgrade" from a GR-33 to a GR-55?

I migrated from the GR30 to the GR55.

I'd recommend you browse through the info, and/or ask questions at:

http://www.vguitarforums.com/smf/index.php?board=14.0

There are a number of *invaluable* documents there that should come
with the manual. Chief among them is "GR-55 Setups & Settings Hints".
It's on there somewhere, but I have placed it here for your convenience.

http://tinyurl.com/pbsbubh

[ This link automatically downloads a zip of the file(s) in question to
your hard drive. Look in your default "download folder", wherever that
may be for your browser. ]

[rpjazzguitar]

Did the GR 55 track noticeably better?

I have a GR30 and a Godin with the built in hex pu, but the latency on the low strings was too great no matter how I did the setup.

My understanding was that it was limited by the physics -- the periodicity of the string and the theoretical minimum amount of time required to detect have fast it is going.

I have used it occasionally to do things like flute parts, by playing high up on the neck on the higher pitched string. No noticeable latency there.

Has that improved?

[Gerry]

On 2015-12-29 00:27:23 +0000, rpjazzguitar said:

> Did the GR 55 track noticeably better?

Yes, but I didn't have overwhelming issues with the GR30, while others did.

> I have a GR30 and a Godin with the built in hex pu, but the latency on
> the low strings was too great no matter how I did the setup.
>
> My understanding was that it was limited by the physics -- the
> periodicity of the string and the theoretical minimum amount of time
> required to detect have fast it is going.

That's true, by and large the higher you play on the neck the better
the tracking is. You also have to play clean. The average sounding
scratch and pick-noise can provide problems.

> I have used it occasionally to do things like flute parts, by playing
> high up on the neck on the higher pitched string. No noticeable latency
> there.
>
> Has that improved?

Where there was no noticeable latency, there has been no improvement. ;-)

[clevelandjazz]

thanks, i already went through those documents and even spent a 1/2 hour on the phone with a jazz guitar "expert" on the GR-55 tweaking it. Then today, Jeremey Popparad brought his over. His has been modified with an internal board which reduces bottom end in order to improve tracking. It was getting about 75% of the note that my GR-33 gets and lagging pretty far behind on the low strings.

[Gerry]

YMMV.

[Tom Pandel]

>>It was getting about 75% of the note that my GR-33 gets and lagging pretty far behind on the low strings.

That's disappointing to hear. I have one too and though I've hardly used it, the thinking was that it was an improvement, tracking wise, over previous generations.
Tom

[clevelandjazz]

From what I have gathered, the original units filtered out much of the bottom end which confuses the pitch to midi conversion. However, in the GR-55, the device performs amp modeling and in order to make that more realistic, they removed the filter. There were a couple companies making a plug in module that went inside the unit to restore the filtration to the pre-GR-55 state but they've since gone out of business. Jeremey Poparad's unit has one installed and it tracked considerably better than the stock GR-55 but still not adequate for me and not nearly as good as the GR-33.

It's too bad because the synthesis on the GR-55 is head and shoulders better than the GR-33 as are the programming capabilities. In addition to synthesis, the GR-55 offers sample-based playback which makes for very realistic woodwinds among other things. I really like the clarinet sounds which remind me a lot of the sounds holdsworth gets on his synth stuff.

[Didier Verna]

clevelandjazz <jackz...@gmail.com> wrote:

> From what I have gathered, the original units filtered out much of the
> bottom end which confuses the pitch to midi conversion. However, in
> the GR-55, the device performs amp modeling and in order to make that
> more realistic, they removed the filter. There were a couple companies
> making a plug in module that went inside the unit to restore the
> filtration to the pre-GR-55 state but they've since gone out of
> business.

FWIW, I have a GR-55 which I use with several Godins, including an
early LGX-SA and a Freeway-SA. For me the tracking always was decent,
but the GR-300 emulation sounds just didn't work. I installed an RMC
OPT-01 which did /not/ particularly improve things (neither tracking,
nor the GR-300 sounds), at least with the Freeway.

Since then, I also got hand of an Axon 100, and my feeling is that the
Freeway tracking is excellent (and also works out of the box, factory
settings), much better than with the GR-55[1]. It's however impossible
to track the LGX with it. The older LGX like mine are known to work
better with pickup setting instead of Piezo (which they actually
have), but even like that, it just doesn't work. The GR-55 however,
does a pretty good job with it.


The morale of the story: you cannot conclude anything out of other
people's conclusions :-D Your own results depend too much on your
personal guitar, string tension, pick, playing style etc.


Footnotes:
[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DR42lcdpudU

--
@-quartet live: Sunset/Sunside, Paris, Jan 26 2016 !
Book now: http://www.sunset-sunside.com/2016/1/artiste/2101/3453/
Jazz site: http://www.didierverna.com
Other sites: http://www.didierverna.info

[Gerry]

On 2015-12-31 13:02:46 +0000, Didier Verna said:

> Since then, I also got hand of an Axon 100, and my feeling is that the
> Freeway tracking is excellent (and also works out of the box, factory
> settings), much better than with the GR-55[1].

From a tracking standpoint the Axon *was* the best way to go. I didn't
go that route when I bought the GR30 many years ago, reasoning that
Roland's company would last and that Axon would not. Sadly, so sadly,
I was right.

[Didier Verna]

Yup. Note however that there's a new baby on the market now: the
Fishman Triple Play. Apparently, it's from the guy who worked on the
Axon's algorithms originally. There are already a couple of Godin
equipped with it right out from the factory.

[Gerry]

On 2016-01-02 15:14:08 +0000, Didier Verna said:

> Gerry <add...@domain.com> wrote:
>
>> On 2015-12-31 13:02:46 +0000, Didier Verna said:
>>
>>> Since then, I also got hand of an Axon 100, and my feeling is that the
>>> Freeway tracking is excellent (and also works out of the box, factory
>>> settings), much better than with the GR-55[1].
>>
>> From a tracking standpoint the Axon *was* the best way to go. I didn't go
>> that route when I bought the GR30 many years ago, reasoning that Roland's
>> company would last and that Axon would not. Sadly, so sadly, I was right.
>
> Yup. Note however that there's a new baby on the market now: the
> Fishman Triple Play. Apparently, it's from the guy who worked on the
> Axon's algorithms originally. There are already a couple of Godin
> equipped with it right out from the factory.

I'm interested. I don't think Fishman is going to have solvency
problems anywhere soon.

[Didier Verna]

Gerry <add...@domain.com> wrote:

>> Yup. Note however that there's a new baby on the market now: the
>> Fishman Triple Play. Apparently, it's from the guy who worked on
>> the Axon's algorithms originally. There are already a couple of
>> Godin equipped with it right out from the factory.
>
> I'm interested. I don't think Fishman is going to have solvency
> problems anywhere soon.

I'm interested as well but there are a couple of things that make me
reluctant to buy one right now. This device appears to be focused on
MIDI captation in a studio rather than for live situations:

- Big + is that it's a wireless device.
- Big - is that the whole programming is embedded in the transmitter
(the thing that you stick on the guitar), not on the receiver which
appears to be a simple USB stick. If you want to plug it in a rack
instead of a computer, you need an additional USB to MIDI
converter.
- Another consequence is that if you use several guitars, you need to
buy one triple play for each, and then you're ruined.
- Finally, because the whole thing is embedded into the guitar device, I
don't see how you can remotely (i.e. via MIDI) change presets. There's
also no way to know exactly which preset you're currently in; there's
only a couple of push buttons on the device. To me that's a real
showstopper.

Take this with a grain of salt though. I haven't read the manual
thoroughly yet, so I may have misunderstood a couple of things.

[Gerry]

On 2016-01-03 09:24:02 +0000, Didier Verna said:

> Gerry <add...@domain.com> wrote:
>
>>> Yup. Note however that there's a new baby on the market now: the
>>> Fishman Triple Play. Apparently, it's from the guy who worked on
>>> the Axon's algorithms originally. There are already a couple of
>>> Godin equipped with it right out from the factory.
>>
>> I'm interested. I don't think Fishman is going to have solvency
>> problems anywhere soon.
>
> I'm interested as well but there are a couple of things that make me
> reluctant to buy one right now. This device appears to be focused on
> MIDI captation in a studio rather than for live situations:
>
> - Big + is that it's a wireless device.
> - Big - is that the whole programming is embedded in the transmitter
> (the thing that you stick on the guitar), not on the receiver which
> appears to be a simple USB stick. If you want to plug it in a rack
> instead of a computer, you need an additional USB to MIDI
> converter.
> - Another consequence is that if you use several guitars, you need to
> buy one triple play for each, and then you're ruined.
> - Finally, because the whole thing is embedded into the guitar device, I
> don't see how you can remotely (i.e. via MIDI) change presets. There's
> also no way to know exactly which preset you're currently in; there's
> only a couple of push buttons on the device. To me that's a real
> showstopper.

Doesn't sound much different from what the Roland GK-2a or G3 or the
RMC pickups do.

You still have to buy the floorboard to accomplish almost anything.

> Take this with a grain of salt though. I haven't read the manual
> thoroughly yet, so I may have misunderstood a couple of things.

Trust me; I'm in no rush. I've got what I need, probably for the
remainder of life, providing I don't have to go through a flood or
earthquake. I'm not sure how Axxon worked, but I know the general
physics issue involved; not being able to accurately track a low pitch
until it has made it through a full cycle or more, which is similar to
the inability to read a higher pitch if it is too brief. I don't know
how that can be definitively overcome. But I'm sure nerds out there
are working on it.

[Didier Verna]

Gerry <add...@domain.com> wrote:

> Doesn't sound much different from what the Roland GK-2a or G3 or the
> RMC pickups do.

It is, because the GK or RMC pickups are only that: hexaphonic
pickups. No processing involved, so you're free to plug whatever you
like behind, notably either an all-in-one device like a GR-55, or a
guitar-to-midi converter first, and then a regular synth (that's what
I do: Axon 100 followed by a Roland Integra 7). In particular, when
you use several guitars, you need one pickup per guitar, but the rest
(converter + synth) in only one instance.

[rpjazzguitar]

Gerry, You may have already answered this, but I want to make sure.

My problem with the GR30 is that the latency on the lowest few notes on the guitar was too noticeable. Is the GR33 noticeably better in that specific area?

[Gerry]

I have a GR30, and a GR55, no GR33, so can't compare.

[Gerry]

On 2016-01-03 16:15:20 +0000, Didier Verna said:

> Gerry <add...@domain.com> wrote:
>
>> Doesn't sound much different from what the Roland GK-2a or G3 or the
>> RMC pickups do.
>
> It is, because the GK or RMC pickups are only that: hexaphonic
> pickups. No processing involved, so you're free to plug whatever you
> like behind, notably either an all-in-one device like a GR-55, or a
> guitar-to-midi converter first, and then a regular synth (that's what
> I do: Axon 100 followed by a Roland Integra 7). In particular, when
> you use several guitars, you need one pickup per guitar, but the rest
> (converter + synth) in only one instance.

I was cleaning up dumptruck folders on my hard drive and came across my
scanned notes from the GR55 setup. I note that I have to guitar
setups, the Ibanez Roadstar with a GK2a and the Brian Moore with a
build-in RMC. The settings are different and I recall the GK2a as
noticeably more problematic in tracking than the RMC.

[da...@brusegard.com]

Has anyone tried the GR55 with flatwound strings? does it get worse, or no noticeable difference based on string type?

[Joey Goldstein]

On 2016-02-06 7:48 PM, da...@brusegard.com wrote:
> Has anyone tried the GR55 with flatwound strings? does it get worse, or no noticeable difference based on string type?
>

I think my Axon tracks the GK-3 signal better with roundowunds and a
plain G.
But I might be fooling myself.
It was quite a while ago when I had flats on that guitar.
But I've got it set up now better than I remember it being back then and
I'm using .011 to .049 XLs right now.

I think that Roland made the GK-3 expecting that most users would be
using light gauge roundwounds with a plain G.
Of course in both the Axon and the GR, individual string sensitivities
can be be adjusted.
But my current setup (using XLs) does seem a bit more stable than my old
setup (using Chromes).

I've never really worked extensively with the Axon, or the GM-70 I had
before that, though.
I spend hours and hours setting it all up and then it just sits there
while I practice playing tunes on my Tele.
lol

[Gerry]

On 2016-02-07 00:48:02 +0000, da...@brusegard.com said:

> Has anyone tried the GR55 with flatwound strings? does it get worse,
> or no noticeable difference based on string type?

I use it exclusively with flatwound strings. I don't have that many
porblems with it, so I can't say if there is or isn't a noticeable
difference.

[Didier Verna]

Joey Goldstein <nos...@nowhere.net> wrote:

> I think my Axon tracks the GK-3 signal better with roundowunds

Same experience (but with piezo pickups).

--
Resistance is futile. You will be jazzimilated.