The Roland Cloud vs the Original Hardware : Part 1
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 9 июл 2023
- For a bit of fun, let's put some vintage Roland classics up against their software counterparts.
TR-808
Juno-6
Jupiter-4
#rolandcloud #analogvsdigital #comparison 
Видеоклипы
As I can’t afford the original gear, this series makes me feel so much better. I just think the Roland Cloud is getting better and better. Thanks for doing this series.
Just think of Jupiter 8 alone, i’m not dumb enough to spend $35 000 on an ancient synth that needs constant servicing when i can have 95% of the same thing for almost no money that’s actually so much better than the real thing because you can have as many of them as you want in your project and even automate each one of them in a way that would be completely impossible to do on real hardware.
During my childhood, melodies flowed in my veins. Unfortunately, the opportunity to possess those instruments eluded me, as they were expensive and living in Africa, our paths seemed parallel and irreconcilable. It was a rare chance, but I was able to taste music through the piano and a few synthesizers belonging to my friends, in the 70s and 80s. Those sounds and harmonies were my source of fulfillment. I even composed several pieces. However, as a young person at the time, the commercial mechanisms of the music industry were foreign to me. I contented myself with leaving my compositions in a wooden drawer or in the corners of my memory.
With time and technological advancements, I managed to acquire virtual keyboards (VST), even if it required some subterfuge. Sadly, my age had already taken the lead, cooling both my heart and my mind. I no longer felt enthusiasm, except for peace. Translate French to English thank you from Algeria !
Salut, je voulais juste te dire que je vis actuellement exactement la même enfance même sur le même continent avec les mêmes conditions avec la même faim de musique et de synthétiseurs.
Salutations d'Egypte!
idk if its just the levels but the hardware has a fuller tone for sure
Pendant mon enfance, les mélodies coulaient dans mes veines. Malheureusement, la chance de posséder ces instruments m'a échappé, car ils étaient coûteux et vivant en Afrique, nos chemins semblaient parallèles et irréconciliables. C'était une opportunité rare, mais j'ai pu goûter à la musique à travers le piano et quelques synthétiseurs appartenant à mes amis, dans les années 70 et 80. Ces sons et harmonies ont été ma source d'épanouissement. J'ai même composé plusieurs morceaux. Cependant, en tant que jeune à l'époque, les mécanismes commerciaux de l'industrie musicale m'étaient étrangers. Je me contentais de laisser mes compositions dans un tiroir en bois ou dans les recoins de ma mémoire.
Avec le temps et les avancées technologiques, j'ai réussi à acquérir des claviers virtuels (VST), même si cela a exigé quelques subterfuges. Hélas, mon âge avait déjà pris le dessus, refroidissant à la fois mon cœur et mon esprit. Je n'éprouvais plus d'enthousiasme, sauf pour la paix. Merci Depuis Alger Algérie !
Cool video love the jam and the synths/VST’s!!
Awesome Luke...chord changes are spot on.. Nice..
Thank you! Waiting for the next part.
FANTASTIC JOB. THANK YOU
The bass of the software Juno 60 loses a lot compared to the hardware Juno 6. The Juno 6 sounds wider and its bass is lot more prominent in the mix. I didn't expect to hear that big of a difference.
Awesome!, What output signal on the 808 is used to trigger the appgs on the juno and jupiter?.
The Accent is triggering 16th notes on the Juno and the Cowbell is triggering 8th notes on the Jupiter.
@@lukemillionmusic That's only possible with the hardware, right? Or is there a trick to do this with the software-version?
hi dude how did u get all these synthesizers?
I was wondering what is the difference between the juno x and roland cloud, because I'm hesitating of : wat's the advantage of having the harware part. Is the sound gonna be more colorful ? Thank you
I'm personally a hardware freak but this software sounds fantastic. Most people can't tell the difference and really don't care if of you used vintage synths to make your music. Great comparison.
That was a tune in itself sounded really cool. I could only hear a slight change on the 808. Like someone else said feel better that I can only afford the cloud and a system 8 to control it and how close they are. Had a 106 in 90s only cost me £400 sold for similar couldn’t afford now
Got my 106 for $150 back then. Roommate borrowed it and I never saw it again.
@@user82938 nooo I had a Korg Poly-800 got thrown out by a mates dad when they moved house
The Juno 60 is basically the same as the real thing, basically hardware to hardware variance. The TR 808 emulation sounds off and the Jupiter 4 also sounds off as well (it's the filter, i wonder if it's the patch).
That 808 sounds like it needs a bit of love
Sounds great!! I'm going to analyze the heck out of this but not as a complaint or criticism of software synths - just my try-hard observations. Overall it's really cool how close the software is and a great tool to have!
Some of perceptions and in no way meant to come off as authoritative; I'm probably hearing things wrong (and i'm listening on laptop speakers lol) :) There are some differences that I think could be adjusted for on the software side, like a slight extra brightness to the attack of the envelope of the bass patch and the stereo quality is a lil different somehow (not exactly sure what that is, but my ears sense something), and the software 808 snare + clap is very different but not necessarily in a bad way at all, just different - a bit snappier and has a more distinct tone. The poly synth too, something about the soft synth and the decay of the envelopes feels very uniform relative to the hardware version? But again I'm just nitpicking and trying to figure out *why* it *feels* different to my ears - and only something I'd do seeing a direct comparison like this. Super interesting content, thanks for sharing it!!
Only one minus of this channel is disappointedly short videos which don't let to enjoy(
Very interesting, they actually sounded much closer before the processing. You can just hear that silky smooth 80s thing all over the hardware synths at the end.
I only have VA synths personally so Im no hardware snob and was going to pick up the Roland Cloud subscription.
Do have a couple of questions, did you crank the bit/samplerate up to 24/192? Im quite happy listening to 44 so this isnt that argument, but some VSTs really benefit from the oversampling, the hardware System 8 for example runs at 96k i think.
Second I would really love to see a comparison like this just taking each VST track individually, running it out of the soundcard, recording it exterrnally then re-recording it back in. Never actually seen a test or comparison that actually tries to eliminate (reduce is more accurate) the converter question. I´m convinced this is at least a piece of the puzzle, would be even better to record each synth with a different device if possible to simulate the difference in the circuits in each synth.
The Roland Cloud Jupiter 4 filter is different from the real thing and the circuit emulation of the TR 808 also sounds off without the distortion. Oversampling can't help this.
The Juno 60 meanwhile nailed the sound.
really close...the most different sound is the snare, but no wonder, it would be interesting how different the original 808's are between themselfs..(broken 2SC828-R's) to emulate that difference in timbre and body i would prefer to use good sample-instruments like from uvi to manipulate envelops etc. in my taste.
That’s impressive how close it is. A non musician would never know.
would like to see the FX processing for each sound at the end
Great Work 👌🎧✨🤍💫
Dry it is like stereo (HW) reduced to mono (SW)
I fully agree. The SW also felt very rigid and compressed.
That's how it came across to me as well. (stereo vs mono)
Hello from Zhenya(badcomedian, Russia) 😍
great as always luke, check kazzey out on the juno 6, great sound, looking forward to your next video thanks ..
I think the hardware sounds less Dry and how could i express myself, ... more voluptuous. Its like comparing Flemish food with Dutch food, Flemish food comes from the Burgundian tradition and the Dutch food from the Calvanist tradition.
Impressive how close they are, I think Roland has the best simulations out there.
They’re close in some cases, far apart on others.
He chose an example where the cloud could compete: fairly basic waves and tones, and arpeggios.
The bigger sound differences are going to be heard with the way the notes ring out during chord voicing’s, and all the drifty, woozy vibe you get from using the hardware as an instrument. None of the plug-ins or modern digital Roland gear has ever truly figured those things out.
Hitting a basic preset 8th note bass line on a Juno-60 plug in, or just using a classic Jupiter brass preset? Yeah, plug-ins and modern ACB can do those things pretty well. But they are production tools, not instruments (the vsts, at least). Big difference.
@@79Glitch you're not going to hear that in the mix of a full song, which is the context most of us listen to and produce music in...
@@79Glitch Man shut up bruh after people upload it to youtube and spotify regular listeners can't hear the difference
@@79Glitch"they are production tools, not instruments" - typical elitist bullshit.
I don't think I understand - did you ever state any views or opinions on the original hardware vs the Cloud? I mean... you're incredibly lucky to have that hardware... You're in the rare position of being able to stand in your studio and do an actual A/B comparison between the Cloud and these very expensive vintage Roland synths... Do you actually state any observations or opinions for those of us who aren't so lucky to be able to experience the comparison ourselves? Wouldn't THAT be the point of this?
I'm not really a fan of the subscription model, nor their need to be online to authorise your licences even if you purchase a lifetime key, meaning they could basically revoke access at will.
But the synths themselves do sound pretty good. And of course it's your only option if you're after something like a D-50 or JV-1080. Personally I still prefer TAL's Juno/Jupiter emulations.
They've got their Play 4 Life offer on at the moment where you can get a lifetime key (or two) if you buy one of their yearly memberships. And even though I'd love to have an updated JX-8P soft synth (the new PG-8X version is still early in development), their licencing system is stopping me from buying it.
On the flip-side, it is nice to be able to pay $10 or so and have some great synths for a month.
It’s that tether they introduced that keeps me away from their products. If you have a hardware version of something from another manufacturer 10 years after the company disappears or ends support, it still works. Similar reason why I moved away from soft synths in general. If the maker disappears or the support for the platform dies, you basically get stiffed out of the instrument you purchased and are left with nothing.
@@entropybentwhistle Yeah it's a real shame. I'm really torn when it comes to Roland.
I've got their MC-101 and think it's an awesome little thing. I picked up the JX-08 knowing full well that's it's a Zenology VST in a box and it would sound less like a JX-8P that the free PG-8X, but I'm still very happy with it.
But when there's so many other alternatives like TAL, Arturia, Cherry Audio etc. This heavy-handed DRM just forces people elsewhere. Naturally if you want those D-50 or JD-800 tones then you're locked with Roland.
On the other hand, at least these days there's enough competition that you can look elsewhere if a company's practices doesn't suit your own preferences, so I guess it's still a bit of a golden age when it comes to synth accessibility.
@@_mickmccarthyagree with you, so TAL is license key only so completely fine, Arturia is I think also humane (does not need internet) but Cherry Audio license system is I think also pretty obnoxious (needs to phone home regularly) and not better than Roland. Only the products cost less.
thanksss for precious comparision, very very similar or i wrong?
Cool !!!
Please make a cover from Smile (instrumental) · The Why Not ITALO DISCO
I love your videos man, can you do Michael Jackson's Thriller on synth?
No part 2? 🤷♂️
How about the drums of the stone age? I am in your age, but fortunately my calendar shows 2024. My old ECO44 of the 70s is 3 times recycled... most parts as infrared-heat-radiation.
Bro I have a request to make a synth cover of "gotta pull myself together" by nolan brothers
maybe someday roland will do like native instruments and make something simlar to komplete kontrol for their virtual synths.
I'm not clear which is the cloud vs original hardware. But based on your past videos, the original hardware seems to always sound better. The sound is fuller and has character. I'm not sure I could tell the difference if you were using 2 different tools to create the same output on this. Maybe that's a sign things are improving.
can u recreate the song " i wanna dance with somebody "? , pls
Gosto de todos
sounds ☺♥♥♪
BRO♥♥
on RUclips CD audio and mp3 will sound the same due to yt data compression. But they are not the same. This is a very subjective test.
The 808 snare threw everything off. Otherwise, near perfect. No one could tell with their eyes closed.
some chorus auto panning in from cloud version more nosy
The original hardware sounds warmer, but lacks clarity and high frequencies.
The software sounds more detailed, has clear and high frequencies, but lacks a bit of the warmth of the original hardware.
I think everyone must decide for themselves what they prefer.
Agree with you 💯! Well re-created software synths has a lot more clarity and the high frequencies sound better. You can master and mix a software synth to sound just as warm has the hardware. That being said, unless you just like the nostalgia and feel of the retro synths, I don't see the point in digging up thousand of dollars to buy them, although I don't knock those that do wish to buy the hardware.
The cloud sounds slightly better
Hardware sounds more alive and better
“Why use a vibrator when I got the real thing”
@@covert0overt_810because it's cheaper to buy a vibrator than to hire a prostitute!
They sound very different, but that doesn't necessarily means better and worse. It's all about the song, style, and the feelings that it needs to evoke.
I admit, there is a tiny bit more "life" in the real thing, but not worth the hassle and cost.
Since computers are boring inwouldn t even dump my vintage stuff if the cloud sounded 5 times better
Exactly.. I've dumped using my daw 80%. I record my drum machines and synths recorded into a mixing console into a Tascam 4 track. lol.. I don't see how people can work allllll day long in front of computer and then come home and be creative clicking a mouse with vsts in their studio. But hey whatver works for their workflow. 100% in the box was just to boring as you stated.
There is quite a difference. The hardware sounds much better, has more body and better tonality. Clearly audible. On the other hand, for us who cannot have all the gear and it is quite expensive, I suppose the VSTs do a good job, and is clearly well emulated. With the aid some other plugins (eq, compressor, whatnot) the tone can be equal , i m sure. Very nice video mate. Thank you :)
Wow sounds identical
@@iSirTaki For those with fined tuned ears the hardware units sound warmer fuller and fatter and the vsts sound thinner and more static but the difference is small
@@AC-ol9lp No they don't pros can't even tell the difference its because the original cost more that's why you feel that way gtfoh🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
Wow it's actually a big difference. The analog gear sound so much better. I will settle with my Jupiter X for now, but a Juno is definitely on my wish list
THe original more punhcy and warm after processed
The differences between the two sound VERY specific. The software Juno had a shallower way of handing the stereo field. The software 808 sounded completely different; the snare was a whole other snare. Overall the software instruments seemed "glued" together too tightly. Messing with the timings a little, sending things out separate outputs using a good interface and mixing them together on a real mixing board, and adding a few guitar effects pedals would let the sounds "breathe" a lot more, so you'd get that sound without having to spend so much money on vintage gear.
Removed my original comment and would say to those newer to the subject, VST can in fact be tweaked to be dead on. It's not the VST that is really off, it is the additional time it takes to get the sounds closer. It CAN be done though. However, I think most SANE people would not care about an exact match. By the time things are mixed, it truly wouldn't matter! Only way you would ever know was to have the original and the vst. Well, I'm guess most peeps whole have the money for the real hardware would not mess with a VST to start with. So, it's never an either/or. It's what you can afford via SPACE and MONEY. Getting a chance to mess with just about all Roland's classic for 19.99 a month? Priceless if you ask me! 99% of the time, I'm guessing it is a hobbyist using this stuff, not a professional band or producer! So, to me, this ongoing venture into hardware/software remains pointless. Buy what you can afford, deal with what you can afford. Just go make some music. :)
i hate subscriptions and cloud based stuff, why cant roland do what arturia has done
Real Roland vs. trolland softcrap
No difference at all.
You have problems with either monitoring or ears. They wrote above - listen to how the bass of the iron differs from the bass of the VST, can't you hear the difference? It's huge!