Only thing is missing is wavetables and multiple filter models. Zenology is the next level to the XV series. If you have the Zenology, you are not missing out on anything as it does everything the XV can do and more.
XV-88 is essentially an 88-key version of the XP-30, my gigging workhorse for years (that replaced another workhorse, the JV-90). First three soundbanks are identical. It has pretty much the same JV sound engine from the early 90s, all bread-and-butter sounds for club gigging. A few welcome improvements like dedicated bank select buttons (no need to press SHIFT+number to select the bank), dedicated effects on/off buttons and more soundbanks. It also has sort of scene memory in form of favorites bank. Not the same as full scene/setlist memory in other synths but better than none. Has the same drawbacks as XP-30: most of sounds are presets, and, unlike on KORG, you can't edit and save them at the same numbers, have to save the edits as a new patch in the user bank, which is small, only 128 patches. 128-voice polyphony vs. 64-voice isn't a big deal, you don't really use it as multi-timbral sound source, never had cut notes on XP-30 (it did happen on 28-voice JV-90). Its biggest drawback is the keyboard quality: hammers under the keys are plastic with lead weights and steel pivots embedded. They break really easy at that point, then key falls down and becomes useless. My friend dumped his XV-88 (literally, put in the dumpster) because these breaking hammers drove him nuts! On later 700-series pianos hammers are one piece of metal, you can't break these. Not that heavy to carry, about the same as RD-700. Not really a full-blown synthesizer, due to limited editing options and small user memory, I called it a stage piano. FYI, keys on piano-action keyboards consist of two parts: plastic key that you see, pretty much the same as on synth-action boards, and a hammer mechanism below that creates piano-action. The myth about "wooden keys" isn't true, it's the same design with plastic key and hammer below in all of them. Even my absolute key action favorite, the Yamaha KX-88 (not the KX-8, that one is POS), has the same two-part keys.
This synth reminds me VERY MUCH of my Roland FA06, 3 oscillators, TVR, very deep and I definitely fooled people with sounds for playing Genesis and ELP. Very capable as well, and can do all the modern type sounds as well. I replaced it with the MODX7+.
The XV-88 has one bug that Roland just refuses to acknowledge because it's really just a limitation of their sampling engine. Take a monophonic patch with a ton of portamento. Hit the lowest note on the keyboard and then hold down the highest note. The note will rise, but it will never get to the correct pitch. I have not owned an XV in a very long time, but I know at least one monophonic factory patch exhibits this issue without any editing. But apart from that, I found it a very robust and useful board.
What I know (I have also been using synthesizers since the late eighties) is that all Rolands are actually close together. I don't use any Roland anymore, I don't like it. Personally, Korg had the most individuality, although the newer ones such as Monologue and Minilogue are hipster things so not my thing.
@@JeffreyScottPetro For gigs I have a Juno DS 61 with a short profile USB flash drive that holds all of the free SRX expansion boards downloadable from the Axial site for the DS series. Only one SRX can be loaded into the DS 61 at a time. That was a major decision factor for picking up the very affordable DS.
The Waldorf Blofeld is a great Synth if you only use it as a 1 Part Synth and not for multitimbrality. The Roland SH-32 and the Blofeld are 2 great examples of synths that are built wtih a Cpu that can't keep up with their promised Specs.
Defo! It's been time for a mk2 Blofeld since 2018ish. I think they mostly nailed the VA OS...just needs more horsepower and a few tweaks(higher resolution wavetables and adjustable envelope curves etc)
@@JeffreyScottPetro I don't know, I don't have anything specific in mind, but when I clicked on the video I was expecting a comparison between the two synths. Maybe I would rather called it "Creating a patch on XV-88's software editor" or something like that.
Roland are notorious for hiding amazing synthesis engines behind lacking front panel controls, the JD-Xi is a case in point. If you can be bothered to use the editors it is amazing what you can get out of these things. Thanks for the great tip!
I have gotten so used to Rolands Menu Synths since the Beginning of 2000 so i actually prefer the the Menu diving over using a Editor and it has gotten better and easier with the newer Layouts. The shift button is your friend on the Roland JD-Xi if you want to quickly move between the The Oscillator, Filter and Envelope Section/view. The MC-101 Is also layed out to be very friendly and quick to use if you want to make your own sound and it has some Nice button tricks that are easy to learn and as soon as they are in your muscle memory you will make sound faster on the unit compared to Clicking Back and forth to get to the different sections in a Editor. The MC-101 doesn't have a option to save Presets in the Traditional way so you have to save the sounds you make as Clips. The + side of the Preset/Clip saving method is that it also contains all the Settings for that patch so it will sound the same when it is loaded in a new Project and if you have a 16gb or a 32gb SD Card you won't have to worry about running out of User Preset/Clips Compared to synths that usually have between 32-256 user Presets.
You are exposing some well-kept secrets! I guess it had to happen some day. :) Great job in explaining it all. All of this is applicable to the XV-5080. I've seen the prices of the 990 go through the roof while the 3080 and 5080 just coast along at reasonable prices. I've been working on a midi controller customized for a lot of these components. These Roland units really cover the ground to analog and I've scoped analog vs digital signals and they are so close it's nearly impossible to 100% pick which is which. I fix classic synth gear all of the time and have dove deep into how these units work and they were ahead of their time and still stand up today. Thanks for the video.. I learned some stuff I didn't know!
Based on my memory. Similar, yes. The same, no, which is why you can't use the editor I demonstrated with the XP series. Both the XV and XP series use a very similar voice architecture. I believe the XP-80 came out around 1996 and is the generation just before the XV-88 which came out in 2000. I would think that a lot of what I said about the sound engine regarding the WG, TVF, TVA, and LFOs would also apply to the XP-80, but I don't own one, so I can't say for sure. I have played the XP series, and they sound very similar.
I bought an XP 80 new for $1800 dollars when it came out. I grew to hate it. The sounds just had a sameness of texture to them . Mixes sounded flat using internal voices with the sequencer. The U.I. was frustrating. Main reason I sold it at the time, is you'd program a big fat custom patch, that when played back in the sequencer, was lacking PARTS, which made your fat patch sound thin and skinny. Pluses were a nice keybed, and some of the orchestral sounds. Sold it two months later on eBay for........$1800 !!
The XV-88 has the same sound engine an XV-3080. The XV-5080 has a few more features, like loading and playing samples from a SCSI drive and more memory including user installable RAM for sample loading and more expansion card space, but I believe the sound engines are mostly the same, and they both use the editor I demonstrated. I own an XV-5080, but I haven't used it much. The XV-5080 was Roland's mega box of sounds until the Integra-7 came along.
The culprit is that holy grail synthesizers such as the Jupiter 8 are so highly coveted. I have commented before that my 2 80s era Roland models, the JX-8p and the MKS-70, might be the closest I’ll ever get to having a Jupiter 8 - and I don’t want to get any closer anyway. Then, as of 2024, I just purchased a Hydrasynth Explorer. It’s analog emulation and only has 37 keys. However, I often forget when playing some of the analog-inspired patches I’ve written that it’s analog emulation.
THANK YOU! All your videos are great and useful for manny sound designers and voicing members. Subscribed !
Thanks for subscribing, I appreciate it and your comment.
Only thing is missing is wavetables and multiple filter models. Zenology is the next level to the XV series. If you have the Zenology, you are not missing out on anything as it does everything the XV can do and more.
Great demo, I never knew about this keyboard. That software editor is great!!
My pleasure. Thanks for the comment.
XV-88 is essentially an 88-key version of the XP-30, my gigging workhorse for years (that replaced another workhorse, the JV-90). First three soundbanks are identical. It has pretty much the same JV sound engine from the early 90s, all bread-and-butter sounds for club gigging. A few welcome improvements like dedicated bank select buttons (no need to press SHIFT+number to select the bank), dedicated effects on/off buttons and more soundbanks. It also has sort of scene memory in form of favorites bank. Not the same as full scene/setlist memory in other synths but better than none. Has the same drawbacks as XP-30: most of sounds are presets, and, unlike on KORG, you can't edit and save them at the same numbers, have to save the edits as a new patch in the user bank, which is small, only 128 patches. 128-voice polyphony vs. 64-voice isn't a big deal, you don't really use it as multi-timbral sound source, never had cut notes on XP-30 (it did happen on 28-voice JV-90). Its biggest drawback is the keyboard quality: hammers under the keys are plastic with lead weights and steel pivots embedded. They break really easy at that point, then key falls down and becomes useless. My friend dumped his XV-88 (literally, put in the dumpster) because these breaking hammers drove him nuts! On later 700-series pianos hammers are one piece of metal, you can't break these. Not that heavy to carry, about the same as RD-700. Not really a full-blown synthesizer, due to limited editing options and small user memory, I called it a stage piano.
FYI, keys on piano-action keyboards consist of two parts: plastic key that you see, pretty much the same as on synth-action boards, and a hammer mechanism below that creates piano-action. The myth about "wooden keys" isn't true, it's the same design with plastic key and hammer below in all of them. Even my absolute key action favorite, the Yamaha KX-88 (not the KX-8, that one is POS), has the same two-part keys.
This synth reminds me VERY MUCH of my Roland FA06, 3 oscillators, TVR, very deep and I definitely fooled people with sounds for playing Genesis and ELP. Very capable as well, and can do all the modern type sounds as well. I replaced it with the MODX7+.
The XV-88 has one bug that Roland just refuses to acknowledge because it's really just a limitation of their sampling engine. Take a monophonic patch with a ton of portamento. Hit the lowest note on the keyboard and then hold down the highest note. The note will rise, but it will never get to the correct pitch. I have not owned an XV in a very long time, but I know at least one monophonic factory patch exhibits this issue without any editing. But apart from that, I found it a very robust and useful board.
That port issue ain't good !
What I know (I have also been using synthesizers since the late eighties) is that all Rolands are actually close together. I don't use any Roland anymore, I don't like it. Personally, Korg had the most individuality, although the newer ones such as Monologue and Minilogue are hipster things so not my thing.
Appreciate the comment.
The same would apply to the Roland Integra 7. Nice feature but I use it pretty much as a rompler. I’ll use a Kurzweil PC4-7 for VA duties.
Many Thanks 🙏 AWSOME
Thank you. I have an XV-3080 with the SRX 07 Ultimate Keys expansion board.
Awesome. Thanks for the comment.
@@JeffreyScottPetro For gigs I have a Juno DS 61 with a short profile USB flash drive that holds all of the free SRX expansion boards downloadable from the Axial site for the DS series. Only one SRX can be loaded into the DS 61 at a time. That was a major decision factor for picking up the very affordable DS.
Great Video I think Juno G has same possibilities (and also same for sampled sounds) even without using sofrware .
Thanks for the comment.
Bet you a pint the Waldorf Blofeld does more and costs less;-).
Apart from the keybed. And encoders. And outputs. And glitches.
The Waldorf Blofeld is a great Synth if you only use it as a 1 Part Synth and not for multitimbrality.
The Roland SH-32 and the Blofeld are 2 great examples of synths that are built wtih a Cpu that can't keep up with their promised Specs.
Defo! It's been time for a mk2 Blofeld since 2018ish. I think they mostly nailed the VA OS...just needs more horsepower and a few tweaks(higher resolution wavetables and adjustable envelope curves etc)
LOL, you made my day. Thanks for the comment.
Great video, nice tutorial, but I think the title must change..
Okay, I'll bite. What's the new title?
@@JeffreyScottPetro I don't know, I don't have anything specific in mind, but when I clicked on the video I was expecting a comparison between the two synths. Maybe I would rather called it "Creating a patch on XV-88's software editor" or something like that.
Roland are notorious for hiding amazing synthesis engines behind lacking front panel controls, the JD-Xi is a case in point. If you can be bothered to use the editors it is amazing what you can get out of these things. Thanks for the great tip!
I have gotten so used to Rolands Menu Synths since the Beginning of 2000 so i actually prefer the the Menu diving over using a Editor and it has gotten better and easier with the newer Layouts.
The shift button is your friend on the Roland JD-Xi if you want to quickly move between the The Oscillator, Filter and Envelope Section/view.
The MC-101 Is also layed out to be very friendly and quick to use if you want to make your own sound and it has some Nice button tricks that are easy to learn and as soon as they are in your muscle memory you will make sound faster on the unit compared to Clicking Back and forth to get to the different sections in a Editor.
The MC-101 doesn't have a option to save Presets in the Traditional way so you have to save the sounds you make as Clips.
The + side of the Preset/Clip saving method is that it also contains all the Settings for that patch so it will sound the same when it is loaded in a new Project and if you have a 16gb or a 32gb SD Card you won't have to worry about running out of User Preset/Clips Compared to synths that usually have between 32-256 user Presets.
You are welcome and thanks for the comment.
You are exposing some well-kept secrets! I guess it had to happen some day. :) Great job in explaining it all. All of this is applicable to the XV-5080. I've seen the prices of the 990 go through the roof while the 3080 and 5080 just coast along at reasonable prices. I've been working on a midi controller customized for a lot of these components. These Roland units really cover the ground to analog and I've scoped analog vs digital signals and they are so close it's nearly impossible to 100% pick which is which. I fix classic synth gear all of the time and have dove deep into how these units work and they were ahead of their time and still stand up today. Thanks for the video.. I learned some stuff I didn't know!
My XV-88 was a great synth until the keys started breaking.
Yeah, I presume you mean the hammer weights. They are easy to replace, and so are the keys. I have an entire episode dedicated to xv-88 repairs.
Am I right to feel like this is very similar to the XP-80?
Sound engine is nearly identical to XP-30. 50, 60 and 80 are a bit different but sounds are pretty much the same.
Based on my memory. Similar, yes. The same, no, which is why you can't use the editor I demonstrated with the XP series. Both the XV and XP series use a very similar voice architecture. I believe the XP-80 came out around 1996 and is the generation just before the XV-88 which came out in 2000. I would think that a lot of what I said about the sound engine regarding the WG, TVF, TVA, and LFOs would also apply to the XP-80, but I don't own one, so I can't say for sure. I have played the XP series, and they sound very similar.
I bought an XP 80 new for $1800 dollars when it came out. I grew to hate it. The sounds just had a sameness of texture to them . Mixes sounded flat using internal voices with the sequencer. The U.I. was frustrating. Main reason I sold it at the time, is you'd program a big fat custom patch, that when played back in the sequencer, was lacking PARTS, which made your fat patch sound thin and skinny. Pluses were a nice keybed, and some of the orchestral sounds. Sold it two months later on eBay for........$1800 !!
So it is a xv3080 right or more 1080 or 5080?
The XV-88 has the same sound engine an XV-3080. The XV-5080 has a few more features, like loading and playing samples from a SCSI drive and more memory including user installable RAM for sample loading and more expansion card space, but I believe the sound engines are mostly the same, and they both use the editor I demonstrated. I own an XV-5080, but I haven't used it much. The XV-5080 was Roland's mega box of sounds until the Integra-7 came along.
3080 is its rack equivalent.
The culprit is that holy grail synthesizers such as the Jupiter 8 are so highly coveted. I have commented before that my 2 80s era Roland models, the JX-8p and the MKS-70, might be the closest I’ll ever get to having a Jupiter 8 - and I don’t want to get any closer anyway. Then, as of 2024, I just purchased a Hydrasynth Explorer. It’s analog emulation and only has 37 keys. However, I often forget when playing some of the analog-inspired patches I’ve written that it’s analog emulation.
Another one I had! I recorded my second album with it and my Korg Triton. Great keyboard and I was sorry to let it go.
Thanks for sharing, it truly is a gem. Appreciate the comment.
If you ever learn to pronounce arpeggiator correctly …
I try. Thanks for the comment.