M3 vs Fantom G6

[vEddY]

got it, good change
So the Rd700GX did not float your boat ?
I am a little surprised given the GX has twice the Wave rom vs the SX
Plus they added a new acoustic piano. I know the ' Supernatural ' is onboard the GX, too
Thanks !

Hmm, doesn't the G have twice the ROM compared to regular Fantom, as well? Didn't sound all that different There are a couple of points where it really does sound better - it sounds more expressive to me, and with the patch hold feature - it does sound a bit different. But maybe this patch hold thing is "smudging" the view a bit

I mean, I have to admit, when I heard the jump in sound/sonic quality from Triton series to OASYS - now that's what I call a leap. Maybe I should re-check my "levels" here, maybe that comparison is just too hard for other companies' products to handle

I mean, today I heard a Motif XS8 stuffed up to its eyeballs with everything they could possibly put in. It sounded pretty damn good, with all of the updates since last year. And even with those, some analogue-lead-type sounds I heard today there sounds pretty much "lame" compared to AL-1...

[Boynton]

Fantom-G will most likely not be available in stores until a month or two after Roland's projected date, which is April. Historically, I wouldn't look for this synth until mid-summer at the earliest. After all, they aren't even letting people play it in person. They still need to finalize the OS and the wave ROM.

Regarding the "wow" factor, while I respect and appreciate vEddY's great NAMM coverage, I think this is dangerous territory. It's hard to make a comparison given that the "G" is not playable by non-Roland personnel, and can only be heard through headphones in the midst of a cacophony of NAMM madness, which even headphones can't eliminate altogether.

This again circles us right back to the original issue: There's no point in discussing a Synth A vs Synth B issue. Especially when one of the synths is still in beta.

To the original poster: You can go to a music store and check out a Korg M3 right now. So do it. If you are now putting the Roland Fantom-G in your comparison list, then you just caused yourself to wait until it too is in the store. This could be anywhere from 3 to 6 months, even longer. You can't short-circuit this process by soliciting third-party opinions. Ultimately it's you - your ears, your gut which is the only deciding factor.

In the meantime, you obviously know where to go for information on the Korg (here). For all things Fantom, go to www.fantomized.info

[vEddY]

Regarding the "wow" factor, while I respect and appreciate vEddY's great NAMM coverage, I think this is dangerous territory. It's hard to make a comparison given that the "G" is not playable by non-Roland personnel, and can only be heard through headphones in the midst of a cacophony of NAMM madness, which even headphones can't eliminate altogether.
This again circles us right back to the original issue: There's no point in discussing a Synth A vs Synth B issue. Especially when one of the synths is still in beta.

As expected, you shed some realistic light on this one. That seems fair.

That being said, the biggest "wow" for me this year was Spectrasonics and BFD2. BFD2 has a lot of demos on FXpansion website but even though those demos sound ok, they don't sound nearly as good as playing it in person. Freakin' amazing. Even the v1 and 1.5 were pretty awesome, but this new engine rocked my boat heavily.

Also, I had a very nice meeting with people from Washburn (and their mother company in general). The new Randall amp (Kirk Hammet signature model) is pretty much awesome. I couldn't stop playing it for quite awhile. And that was a nice into before checking Extreme concert last night which btw RAWKED...

Is anyone using IK multimedia's stuff, Ampeg SVX and Amplitube? Those sound pretty good to me, as well...

[LEVEL4]

. . . Although - I gotta say this - it doesn't really sound all that much different then the Fantom to me, at least not through the PA or on the headphones hooked up. They're openly bragging how it has a much better sonic quality, but I've seen enough PRware in my life not to trust anything that I don't try myself.

Well, I, for one, really appreciate your honest first impressions of the Fantom G's sound. It's really hard to get this kind of feedback for some reason out of the few who were lucky enough to drop by the Roland booth at this winter's NAMM. From the video, the G doesn't sound that much different from the X-series to me either. Regardless, I'll still probably end up getting one.

[vEddY]

Well, I, for one, really appreciate your honest first impressions of the Fantom G's sound. It's really hard to get this kind of feedback for some reason out of the few who were lucky enough to drop by the Roland booth at this winter's NAMM. From the video, the G doesn't sound that much different from the X-series to me either. Regardless, I'll still probably end up getting one.

Anytime. It has interesting sounds as sounds, but in terms of sound quality, I'm still missing the "WOW"... Whatever you do, I think it will blend nicely in whatever setup you already have. I think it's a good "second keyboard" to have with whatever you have as a first keyboard. The same thing goes for PC3x, if you're a bit more into regular stuff, and a bit less into synth stuff. I really like Kurz's piano and similar sounds. De gustibus...

[FRETPICK]

Seems to me that Roland have D.I the SRX boards into the G from the start. Then maybe added tones from the G synth line. ie the new sound set being dropped in. Who knows.

Just thought I'd say that.

[Unitary]

I dont know why we should compare these two machines. I see the Fanthom (as many of the Roland instruments) as a toy whilst the M3 can be used on stage as well as in the studio.