Roland GR55 Guitar Synth
Gerry
the way it allows me to work with a computer. It occurs to me that the
later (now discontinued) GR33 had a "faster" chip and A/D processing.
I assume the next incarnation, the stripped down version GR20 had at
least the same faster technology. I pondered whether with the GR20,
Roland had about given up on the thing.
Now I note there is a GR55 and apparently the processing has taken
another step forward, by how much I don't know. At this point every
millisecond of additional speed I can get out of processing
guitar-to-midi processing is desirable for use with the computer.
Really functional internal sounds would be a bonus too.
Anyone have experience with this unit?
http://tinyurl.com/4g5p58y
--
-- At this point Sharazad saw the approach of morning and discreetly
fell silent.
sheetsofsound
if the pitch detection technology was so great, why does it need a hex
pickup? When they get to the point that they can process signal from a
standard pickup, then i'll be interested.
sheetsofsound
sheetsofsound
ho...@jhu.edu
> or this:
>
> http://www.digital-ear.com/digital-ear/index.asp
I do not think either of these solutions are polyphonic (correct me if
I am wrong). Only individual PUs for each string can do that.
Andy
sheetsofsound
i don't know if those solutions are polyphonic or not but it's untrue
that only individual PUs for each string is the only way to convert
polyphonic source material.
The software technology for converting polyphonic pitch to midi has
been maturing at a rapid rate. Take a look at http://www.notionmusic.com/
THey have already licensed their technology to several guitar tuners
which can now tune multiple strings at a time. It can also convert an
entire band track to midi keeping each instrument on a separate track.
eric s
I bought a gr55 and hex pickup, installed it on a nice solid-body
guitar (a reverend jetstream), did the best I could do to get the
setting/spacing right, and I was very dissatisfied with the tracking
so I returned the whole shebang to sweetwater. My recommendation is
that you get it professionally installed by someone who really knows
what they are doing.
Eric
Dallas Selman
guitars beautifully. Great sounds and features on this unit.
"eric s" <esie...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:76c7274a-3ac4-47fe...@r35g2000prj.googlegroups.com...
Gerry
> I bought a GR-55 and it is the best thing out there. Tracks my Godin
> guitars beautifully. Great sounds and features on this unit.
Thanks for the info. Did you ever use the GR30 or GR33? Any
comparison to be made?
Gerry
> I bought a gr55 and hex pickup, installed it on a nice solid-body
> guitar (a reverend jetstream), did the best I could do to get the
> setting/spacing right, and I was very dissatisfied with the tracking
> so I returned the whole shebang to sweetwater.
Same here, but realizing I'd done a shoddy job, I then took it to a
luthier to install properly. It then worked fine.
> My recommendation is that you get it professionally installed by
> someone who really knows
> what they are doing.
Agreed. When I got a Brian Moore i8 with the RMC built into the bridge,
the difference was dramatic.
vermelho
Hey Jack,
Yes, intensive proccessing does allow technology to seperate pitches,
however this is nowhere near realtime, and even with optimistic "Moores
Law" computers, seperating the pitches in a chord is going to be a
factor when it's just milliseconds of delay that we are sensitive to in
monitoring our playing.
I've had polyphonic based synths and modelers for over 15 years. The
GR-55 is getting favourable reviews from insiders because it covers 3
bases well.
With this model lineage, it is mainly aimed at replacing the
GR-30/33/20 series with internal synthesized sounds derived from pitch
detection via a polyphonic pickup (magnetic like Roland or Piezo like
Godins). These internal sounds are marginally faster, and optimized in
type for guitar controllers than MIDI through an outboard synth or
softsynth (via your computer). However, the past generation GR series
never had an optimum MIDI output - those dedicated to driving external
boxes preferred either the AXON (now defunct) or the Roland GI-20,
which did only this. The 3rd category - and to me the most relevant,
is the modeling approach, which again is best done with a consistent
tuned flat POLYPHONIC pickup. With this you can deliver retuned
strings (not recommended on a guitar with acoustic properties) or
octaves, and synth like sounds which use your string tone as the basis
for proccessing. You can for instance have an octave lowered modeled
contrabass on lower 2 strings, and a different sound on remaining
strings...
There is no "pitch detection" or delay - (unless the proccessing
programs it). Yu are basically applying the same proccessing as a
synthesizer, except instead of starting with a generated
square/sine/etc wave you are starting with the string tone. This is
how the classic GR-300 "synthesizers worked that
Metheney/Abercrombie/Summers/Belew used very effectively. In fact,
there is a GR-300 patch, with all the adjustment parameters of the
analog boxes built in! It also lets you sound like a nylon string in a
concert hall, Les Paul through a Marcshall, Strat through a fender etc
very effectively. In fact most string instruments can be done very
effectively (sitar/oud/etc). Very nice archtop sounds can be made -
especially when combining acoustic guitar tones with modeled archtops
with pickups. Any combination can also be blended with your natural
pickups. I have the VG-99 which just does the latter, albeit with
more channels, but the GR-55 looks more road worthy and with diverse
options.
As with the traditional guitars / amps you are such a great reference
for, the proof is in the actual auditioning, with the caveat that you
will need to invest time to get set-up and tune the sounds you are
interested in - the presets for both synth and modeling are mainly
oriented towards rock/pop. There is a good online community dedicated
to these systems at http://www.vguitarforums.com People there are
sharing personal patches for specific uses, computer editors and help
in what can be a very complex setup before you really feel you are
hearing the capabilites of the unit.
This is where something like the Godin Jazz multiac will really
shine.... I want one, but not there yet - I have Godin LGXT electric
and nylon string multiac guitars used which I use with my VG-99 and
each still have distinctive natures with the same patches. Metal shred
on the nylon doesn't cut it (bends suck!), and the acoustic sounds are
just more real with the nylon (although I'm hearing some of the actual
guitar in my lounge noodling.
Hope this helps!
sheetsofsound
it for compositional notation. As far as midi guitars, I don't like
any of the godins I've played. As guitars they are weak and
uninspiring to me, from the nylon strings up through the multiac jazz.
Gerry
> ...the past generation GR series never had an optimum MIDI output -
> those dedicated to driving external boxes preferred either the AXON
> (now defunct) or the Roland GI-20, which did only this.
Okay, well that answers one question; whether the GI-20 (which I
incorrectly called the GR20 upstream) was (it is discontinued) faster
than the earlier GR30/33 series.
> The 3rd category - and to me the most relevant, is the modeling
> approach, which again is best done with a consistent tuned flat
> POLYPHONIC pickup.
You mean something other than either magnetic and or GK technology,
like a piezo pickup?
> With this you can deliver retuned strings (not recommended on a guitar
> with acoustic properties) or octaves, and synth like sounds which use
> your string tone as the basis for proccessing. You can for instance
> have an octave lowered modeled contrabass on lower 2 strings, and a
> different sound on remaining strings...
These are some of my favorite uses too, including tuning as a Cuban
tres or cuatro, Puerto Rican cuatro, "Nashville" tunings (lowest three
strings tuned up an octave) and various other hybrids. Unfortunately
I've always had to do that output as midi-data or internal midi-patch
which have difficulties with speed or sound quality respectively.
> There is no "pitch detection" or delay - (unless the proccessing
> programs it). Yu are basically applying the same proccessing as a
> synthesizer, except instead of starting with a generated
> square/sine/etc wave you are starting with the string tone. This is
> how the classic GR-300 "synthesizers worked that
> Metheney/Abercrombie/Summers/Belew used very effectively. In fact,
> there is a GR-300 patch, with all the adjustment parameters of the
> analog boxes built in! It also lets you sound like a nylon string in a
> concert hall, Les Paul through a Marcshall, Strat through a fender etc
> very effectively. In fact most string instruments can be done very
> effectively (sitar/oud/etc). Very nice archtop sounds can be made -
> especially when combining acoustic guitar tones with modeled archtops
> with pickups. Any combination can also be blended with your natural
> pickups. I have the VG-99 which just does the latter, albeit with
> more channels, but the GR-55 looks more road worthy and with diverse
> options.
So, to some extent the dedicated activities of both the VG88/99 and the
GR30/33 have been merged in the GR55?
> This is where something like the Godin Jazz multiac will really shine...
Which uses RMC as with my Brian Moore i8, if memory serves.
While on related topics, I was looking at a youtube demo of the GI20 in
conjunction with FS-5 foot-switching. It's interesting enough but
somewhat complicated for users that already have plenty of
foot-switches on their GR30/33/55 which are directly programmable. But
I noted a comment in the video regarding the (late lamented) Axon:
"...the developer of the Axon, Andras Szalay, noted that guitar player
John McLaughlin switched from using the Axon to the GI-20 beacuse he
found it easier to use. Apparently many Axon users are remarking that
they feel the new Roland GR-55 is the best unit yet for pitch-to-MIDI
conversion."
Especially as Axon is gone, it's good to hear high praise for the GR55;
that there there is something comparable and that it's not currently
discontinued!
Greg/oasysco
> i'm more interested in something like this:
>
> http://www.petersontuners.com/index.cfm?category=149
That device is monophonic only, which most of the time would probably
be sufficient.
Greg
Dallas Selman
sale.
"Gerry" <add...@domain.com> wrote in message
news:2011060308440620146-address@domaincom...
icarusi
news:2b3b1d5e-75a0-49b4...@s9g2000yqm.googlegroups.com...
> Anyone have experience with this unit?
Not yet, but I'm interested because it has the COSM/VG88 stuff included with
the synth stuff all in one box. Don't know if it's in the right order for me
or if there'll be enough control on the parameters like the GR33 allowed for
alterantive tunings etc. I had to make my own box to x-fade and mix between
guitar and synth sounds, so I'd want to do the same with the COSM and synth
parts. If it's just an all or nothing which only allows per patch settings
with no overall global mix between COSM and synth it won't suit my uses. On
Roland's past record for 'performance friendliness' I have low expectations.
I doubt if Roland ever prerlease products to performers in advance of the
final product, or if they do, they're not at the right level of creativity.
icarusi
--
remove the 00 to reply
http://icarusi.wordpress.com/
icarusi
>> The software technology for converting polyphonic pitch to midi has
been maturing at a rapid rate. Take a look at http://www.notionmusic.com/
THey have already licensed their technology to several guitar tuners
which can now tune multiple strings at a time. It can also convert an
entire band track to midi keeping each instrument on a separate track. <<
Can't see anything on live midi input there, only import and live playout
stuff. The Boss DR5 always had a reasonable mono pitch-to-midi. For
input-to-score, pitch never seemed to be a problem, intelligent timing was
the problem, unless you played as accurately as a sync clocked sequencer.
I did use the DR5 as a PTM unit to convert some MC202 sequences to midi.
MC202 only had DIN sync and CV and saved sequence files FSK to tape. If you
know those accronyms you must be *old*. I think the DR5 did DIN sync but I
may be wrong.
icarusi
news:ieKdnX1sOoYW-3TQ...@brightview.co.uk...
Had a quick try out yesterday but was trying other stuff. The GR55 will
xfade between any two of the four 'voices', 2 synth, one COSM/VG and normal
guitar. The VG section has some preset alternate tunings but also any custom
tuning of the 6 strings +/- 24 semitones, so you could fade-in a VG custom
tuning over a normal guitar sound, for guitar-impossible close-voiced
keyboard chords.
I was trying to check for ADSR filter, for emulating hand-damped pinao
sounds, but the demo guy brought up the LFO with the f on zero which would
probably work but I suspect if the synth section is based on the Juno6
there's filtering other than LFO. The 'patch' display is mega but less
legible in edit mode, although much more on-screen at once tha the GR33. It
has USB so there may be an option to use that rather than the midi to drive
soft synths better than external midi modules, which IMO, other than
Roland's own, have never worked too well with the GR range.
The price minus hex PU is pretty good, probably equivalent to the GR33 plus
inflation but includes the VG section. I haven't troubled VG stuff much,
finding it pricey and underwhelming, so better if a VG fan checks out that
part. The whole package looks good if you don't have a GR33 and/or need
synth+VG stuff in a smallish steel box. There's still the hassle of hex PU
to use it, added cost, and which guitar to use it on, if you have
guitars/plural.
I didn't have time to audition the synth or VG sounds much but in the age of
Ax and Line6 may not be state-of-art for recording or player experience but
should be ok for those used to older Roland kit or those needing the synth
emulations and VG options in one box.
The GR33 was was the first box for me which hit the right combinations of
tracking, sounds, options and ease of use and I supect the GR55 is similar
without being a step-change on synth or VG.
vermelho
I have a VG-99, but haven't got my hands on a GR-55 yet. Kinda worried
I'll start obsessing for it...
Although line 6 and others have better factory presets, IMHO the VG has
much more modeling capability. The material I heard from advanced
programmer/players (Bill Rupert) was spectacular. Having the GR-300
modeled inside is pretty neat too. Strictly the GR-300 worked the same
way - no pitch detection, but modeling the individual string sounds.
Even for this, a piezo with individual pickups per string is desirable
- both in keeping overtones clean, and the ability to proccess
different strings different ways.
vermelho
maybe you've been unispired because you haven't spent time with them
them plugged them into one of these boxes that they are optimized for.
I'm very pleased with the ergonomics and feel of my Godins, and the
sound palette is very versatile through the VG-99. I get tired of the
synthesized (pitch detected/synth) sounds, but the sound pallete
available with the COSM modelling is what I use virtually every time I
plug in. You do have to work to build your own patched though.
icarusi
news:2011060611425863220-vermelho@maccom...
> The material I heard from advanced programmer/players (Bill Rupert) was
> spectacular. Having the GR-300 modeled inside is pretty neat too.
> Strictly the GR-300 worked the same way - no pitch detection, but modeling
> the individual string sounds. Even for this, a piezo with individual
> pickups per string is desirable - both in keeping overtones clean, and the
> ability to proccess different strings different ways.
Seems like the GR300 section is VG99 only and it has 2 COSM 'voices' to the
GR55 single voice. You seem to be the man to check the GR55 COSM section vs
the VG99. I suspect it's a 'cut down' but should be the same sound quality
on single voice patches. How is the VG99 midi out into Roland synths?
Gerry
Perhaps this would help. It's a link to the GR55-related manuals:
http://www.roland.com/manuals/en/index.cfm?PRODUCT=GR%2D55
I've about decided to get one, mostly for it's purported speed in
processing, and also because I think it will last me pretty well for 10
years or so.
icarusi
> Seems like the GR300 section is VG99 only and it has 2 COSM 'voices' to
> the GR55 single voice. You seem to be the man to check the GR55 COSM
> section vs the VG99. I suspect it's a 'cut down' but should be the same
> sound quality on single voice patches. How is the VG99 midi out into
> Roland synths?
I notice the GR55 can't act as a midi-in synth module (don't know about usb
over midi though). Probably won't affect most users but the the GR33 could
do this, and so accept midi filter boxes looped in, or act as a midi module
taking keyboard or other midi input. OTOH the usb o/p can record direct to a
DAW and patches can be edited and stored via usb rather than via midi
(although the midi edit/library option is still available).
Gerry
> "icarusi" <icar...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:9r-dnTCP68zl-HDQ...@brightview.co.uk...
>
>> Seems like the GR300 section is VG99 only and it has 2 COSM 'voices' to
>> the GR55 single voice. You seem to be the man to check the GR55 COSM
>> section vs the VG99. I suspect it's a 'cut down' but should be the same
>> sound quality on single voice patches. How is the VG99 midi out into
>> Roland synths?
>
> I notice the GR55 can't act as a midi-in synth module (don't know about
> usb over midi though).
If you mean midi via usb, my midi hub is usb.
> Probably won't affect most users but the the GR33 could do this, and
> so accept midi filter boxes looped in, or act as a midi module taking
> keyboard or other midi input. OTOH the usb o/p can record direct to a
> DAW and patches can be edited and stored via usb rather than via midi
> (although the midi edit/library option is still available).
>
> icarusi
--
Gerry
comes with a Gk3 pickup for installation on your instrument, and the
other does not. I'm will buy only the base unit, since I have a built
in midi pickup in my Brian Moore i8 make by RMC.
But it makes me wonder about the changes that have taken place between
the gk3 and the previous incarnation, the gk2a. The synthesizer I now
have, the GR30, came with a gk2a.
Is the technology in the gk3 substantively different than the gk2a and
the RMC? That is, will I need to update my RMC pickup on the Brian
Moore in order to make the most efficient use of the GR55? Is the RMC
pickup relevant to the distinctions between the gk3 and gk2a?
ic
> Is the technology in the gk3 substantively different than the gk2a and the
> RMC? That is, will I need to update my RMC pickup on the Brian Moore in
> order to make the most efficient use of the GR55? Is the RMC pickup
> relevant to the distinctions between the gk3 and gk2a?
AFAIK all the 13pin pus work the same way, analogue hex into the synth/vg
unit plus some lines for sending patch change via the buttons, synth/guitar
switching and synth/vg volume.
I was trying the GR55 patches today and found all the velocity curves for
keyboard sounds to be too heavy. One of of the reasons I stopped using the
GR33 was this drawback. Ok for pounding out rock riffs but no good for
anythig subtle. It was most noticeable on piano/clav sounds with a
pronounced attack. I was considering using a compressor on the GR33 but the
GR55 has combined outs so that would affect the cosm sounds too.
Some of the cosm sounds were harsh on the 'phones' out setting but ok on the
'stack' out setting, but the 'out' is global so some of the synth sounds
sounded muffled on that setting.
I'll try using the patch eq next time I try the GR55 when the Roland
specialist is back from his leave.
--
icarusi
Gerry
I'm looking forward to any additional input you have at that time. I
feel quite sure I'll be getting one, as there's always "something
better" to be had three years from now. But life--at my age--is short,
and getting shorter.
Didier Verna
> I was trying the GR55 patches today and found all the velocity curves for
> keyboard sounds to be too heavy. One of of the reasons I stopped using the
> GR33 was this drawback.
I think that's more an issue of playing style (and mapping your own
playing dynamics with equivalent MIDI information). The VG-99 has a
"play feel" parameter that you can use to effectively reduce the
dynamics of the synth sounds and I believe the GR-55 has it too.
There's even a setting that completely disregards your own velocity.
--
Resistance is futile. You will be jazzimilated.
Didier Verna <did...@didierverna.com> http://www.didierverna.com/
Gerry
>> I'll try using the patch eq next time I try the GR55 when the Roland
>> specialist is back from his leave.
>
> I'm looking forward to any additional input you have at that time. I
> feel quite sure I'll be getting one, as there's always "something
> better" to be had three years from now. But life--at my age--is short,
> and getting shorter.
"something better" hasn't managed to arrive. But a 45% discount off
list (instead of the stock 38%) did arrive.
I've been working with it for about 3 days, and have managed to clear 5
or 6 operational obstacles slowly but surely. Thanks god for
http://www.vguitarforums.com.
I have a GR30 and a Boss GT3. The GR55 works like significantly
advanced versions of both of those, in a single box. Still there's a
lot of learning and acclimation to do since the UI is dramatically
different than all others. I still have a few weeks before I have to
make up my mind, if I decide to send it back.
So many projects...
--
Sunday is my new usenet day. All the others are for fun.
David J. Littleboy
>On 2011-07-08 22:40:58 +0000, Gerry said:
>>
>> I'm looking forward to any additional input you have at that time. I feel
>> quite sure I'll be getting one, as there's always "something better" to
>> be had three years from now. But life--at my age--is short, and getting
>> shorter.
>
>Well, that's how I felt three years ago. Now, three years later, "something
>better" hasn't managed to arrive. But a 45% discount off list (instead of
>the stock 38%) did arrive.
It looks to me that technology has plateaued. Intel CPU clock rates hit 3
GHz in 2002 and haven't budged since. Sure, you get more CPU cores, but by
even the slowest (number of transistors doubles every 2 years) version of
Moore's Law, we should be seeing 64-core CPU chips by now, but rarely see
more than 4. Ditto in high-end digital cameras (well, the Sony Alpha 7R is
sort of interesting, but the Sony sensors are much noisier than even Canon
ones at high ISO). What we're getting is better low end stuff. Which is fun.
But the 5DII is over 5 years old, and a 5-year old digital widget that isn't
blown out of the water by current models is something we've never seen
before.
So it's time to shut up and play with your toys, because that electronic
gizmo being old is no longer an excuse.
--
David J. Littleboy
Tokyo, Japan
Gerry
being new and confusing as an excuse. Hmm. At least the latter makes
me *feel* like I'm getting traction. From this point on in life I
figure perceptions are all I've got left.