View other reviews for this product:
Sy55
Published on 09/26/10 at 05:54
.
UTILIZATION
.
SOUNDS
.
OVERALL OPINION
I am far from having been around the machine, but I will not lie by saying he was disappointed by the set offered by the Fantom G. For several reasons:
1) If I love and know the sound from the Roland U-20 (!), I had a JV880, then a XP60 then a Fantom Xa and now the G6, the synthesis has not really changed since the JV880 (that far anyway!) and especially since the Fantom Xa: some filters (which I find less "digital" so better than the Motif XS which has made a lightning in my set) and the step LFO. The speed of the envelopes is not his forte and he must use tricks to get a bass strikes, even if it seems a little better at this point that the Xa. But in a pinch, it does not matter, I have VA for that.
2) The samples are mixed: the guitars and acoustic sounds in general are lower than the Motif XS. There are sounds that are still toy!
3) Roland mocked the world in 1500 saying provide patches online, but there are plenty of "copy / paste" or "subtle" changes. There are 94 (!) Piano patches, while a dozen would suffice. Paid by the user to adapt these basic sounds in his piece is not it?
Worse, I do not know the difference between patches and some times there are 4 in a row! I do not understand this, I think the Fantom Xa offered more variety for example, synth sounds, especially with the SRX Ultimate Keyboards. I was hoping that with a 256 MB memory (thus double the Xa with its SRX) the entire set would be good and a consistent level.
If you are looking for a set of presets and homogeneous quality, take the XS, which only the piano seems way (in terms of rest). Yamaha has solved the problem by proposing a piano sound to a much higher level (S700) to be loaded into RAM XS keyboard.
Let us return to the GF: Update V1.50 is essential and finally offers a piano right, but yet we perceive the transitions in the layers of samples. One wonders if the problem is not the synthesis that offers "only" 4-layer stereo (it becomes difficult!), Whereas in the XS offers 8.
I am more inclined to think that I just bought the PC3 Kurz, whose memory, however, a smaller piano conceals much more enjoyable to play because if samples appear less rich, they seem much better managed (12 layers) .
So why keep it, you say?
1) Apart from the acoustic piano, I do not want the hyper-realism. I do not care whether my sound is the exact copy of Wurli model 52. I prefer to make "my" sound. Guitars, sax and other sounds are interested but are secondary (phew!).
2) For the screen considerably higher than that of Reason, which makes it easy to live, even though the ergonomics of the human-machine interface could be even better with the same hardware. The proof of the simple tabulation of values of the edition when such a screen would be talking more beautiful graphics. Despite this, the Fantom beats XS. The XF he filled the delay?
3) For many effects and a fairly good level (from that side, he did not blush or face the XS Kurz '), but were a little frozen: who uses 16 insert effects ( the PFX) in parallel? I would rather have 8x2 as the XS, or better still a pool of 16 as the Kurz '.
4) To his manager sequencer 128 MIDI tracks and 24 audio tracks with insert effects with 2 extra. Finally a machine that allows me to move from computer! YES!
5) His look is a bit flashy certainly good, but a notch below the XS, a real tank (knobs, sliders, wheels, the XS inspires confidence).
What had happened: I sold and bought ... a juno G with SRX-07 which I found on the Fantom Xa sounds I liked. Admittedly, the machine is less luxurious, but a pure sonic standpoint, the Juno G has nothing to be ashamed of the comparison. Instead, it has the advantage that it can be customized using a SRX, what more does the Fantom G.
UTILIZATION
.
SOUNDS
.
OVERALL OPINION
I am far from having been around the machine, but I will not lie by saying he was disappointed by the set offered by the Fantom G. For several reasons:
1) If I love and know the sound from the Roland U-20 (!), I had a JV880, then a XP60 then a Fantom Xa and now the G6, the synthesis has not really changed since the JV880 (that far anyway!) and especially since the Fantom Xa: some filters (which I find less "digital" so better than the Motif XS which has made a lightning in my set) and the step LFO. The speed of the envelopes is not his forte and he must use tricks to get a bass strikes, even if it seems a little better at this point that the Xa. But in a pinch, it does not matter, I have VA for that.
2) The samples are mixed: the guitars and acoustic sounds in general are lower than the Motif XS. There are sounds that are still toy!
3) Roland mocked the world in 1500 saying provide patches online, but there are plenty of "copy / paste" or "subtle" changes. There are 94 (!) Piano patches, while a dozen would suffice. Paid by the user to adapt these basic sounds in his piece is not it?
Worse, I do not know the difference between patches and some times there are 4 in a row! I do not understand this, I think the Fantom Xa offered more variety for example, synth sounds, especially with the SRX Ultimate Keyboards. I was hoping that with a 256 MB memory (thus double the Xa with its SRX) the entire set would be good and a consistent level.
If you are looking for a set of presets and homogeneous quality, take the XS, which only the piano seems way (in terms of rest). Yamaha has solved the problem by proposing a piano sound to a much higher level (S700) to be loaded into RAM XS keyboard.
Let us return to the GF: Update V1.50 is essential and finally offers a piano right, but yet we perceive the transitions in the layers of samples. One wonders if the problem is not the synthesis that offers "only" 4-layer stereo (it becomes difficult!), Whereas in the XS offers 8.
I am more inclined to think that I just bought the PC3 Kurz, whose memory, however, a smaller piano conceals much more enjoyable to play because if samples appear less rich, they seem much better managed (12 layers) .
So why keep it, you say?
1) Apart from the acoustic piano, I do not want the hyper-realism. I do not care whether my sound is the exact copy of Wurli model 52. I prefer to make "my" sound. Guitars, sax and other sounds are interested but are secondary (phew!).
2) For the screen considerably higher than that of Reason, which makes it easy to live, even though the ergonomics of the human-machine interface could be even better with the same hardware. The proof of the simple tabulation of values of the edition when such a screen would be talking more beautiful graphics. Despite this, the Fantom beats XS. The XF he filled the delay?
3) For many effects and a fairly good level (from that side, he did not blush or face the XS Kurz '), but were a little frozen: who uses 16 insert effects ( the PFX) in parallel? I would rather have 8x2 as the XS, or better still a pool of 16 as the Kurz '.
4) To his manager sequencer 128 MIDI tracks and 24 audio tracks with insert effects with 2 extra. Finally a machine that allows me to move from computer! YES!
5) His look is a bit flashy certainly good, but a notch below the XS, a real tank (knobs, sliders, wheels, the XS inspires confidence).
What had happened: I sold and bought ... a juno G with SRX-07 which I found on the Fantom Xa sounds I liked. Admittedly, the machine is less luxurious, but a pure sonic standpoint, the Juno G has nothing to be ashamed of the comparison. Instead, it has the advantage that it can be customized using a SRX, what more does the Fantom G.