Jupiter80 vs Kronos

sani · Post by **sani** » Tue Sep 20, 2011 9:35 am

cello wrote: Play a 5 note chord and you therefore have 5 x 30 = 150 elements sounding. Hope I'm right with that - let me know if I'm wrong!

You're right theoretically. But there is an important information on Rolands website regarding the polyphony on the jp80, and so far, everybody talked about the number 256 and nobody took care about the rest of the statement:

256 voices (varies according to the sound generator load)

It could be that the initial poster has made a mistake or that there is a polyphony reserve function activated, but personally, I wouldn't expect that the polyphony drops down to 72 voices by using just 12 synth sound partials. That's IMHO quite lot.

SanderXpander · Post by **SanderXpander** » Tue Sep 20, 2011 10:37 am

Isn't a synth sound partial an oscillator? So 12 partials would be 12 oscillators... as far as the competition goes, I don't think 72 notes with 12 oscillators is very bad, is it?
You can't compare it to a sample playback engine, that takes vastly less cpu power. It could easily have 256 voices in the most basic sample playback mode, yet 72 voices with a 12 oscillator VA. Just look at the difference in polophony in Kronos between AL-1 or MOD-7 and HD-1/SGX-1.

sparkie · Post by **sparkie** » Tue Sep 20, 2011 12:35 pm

Rocness wrote:Just when I thought I was out, they pull me back in ! (quote from The God Father part 3 ) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UPw-3e_pzqU

You guys are so funny .
The Kronos is a very good instrument but the JP-80 is on another level .

The Jp-80 showed me that Korg sounds , do not fit in a mix well .

The JP-80 sounds ,go so well together ,that it starts to sound like a finished recored very quickly, plus with supernatural it gets magical .

The workflow of the JP-80 is amazing

As far as polyphony don't believe the lies , this thing kicks out 256 voices .

I have had the drums, bass , chord progression, and leads going at the same time, sequenced lovely with a MPC with no drop outs what so ever . BTW my chord progressions use huge 9th and 13th type of jazz chords, you know what I mean .

Jupiter is stunning to look at in person , specially at night when all the stars come out .
I luv the ipad type touch screen and the vibrate metering to show you who playing what .

I'm kinda glad, that people sleep on the JP-80 .

Yes you nailed it... and yes your back in!!

The sounds on the Jupiter 80 "do" layer up really nice all together and seem like they are really made for each other. The TOne blender will then tweak all those sounds in a realistic combination also. On the other hand the Kronos laying really wasnt to my liking, and when you turn on Karma sometimes I would get a weird farting type sound..or super fast synthetic drum roll or something that seemed to be out of sync or an unnatural beat..especially when you start tweaking the settings. Looking at... or playing a Jupiter for 5 mins is a missed opportunity. Time will tell I am sure.

GregC · Post by **GregC** » Tue Sep 20, 2011 1:44 pm

sparkie wrote:
Rocness wrote:Just when I thought I was out, they pull me back in ! (quote from The God Father part 3 ) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UPw-3e_pzqU

You guys are so funny .
The Kronos is a very good instrument but the JP-80 is on another level .

The Jp-80 showed me that Korg sounds , do not fit in a mix well .

The JP-80 sounds ,go so well together ,that it starts to sound like a finished recored very quickly, plus with supernatural it gets magical .

The workflow of the JP-80 is amazing

As far as polyphony don't believe the lies , this thing kicks out 256 voices .

I have had the drums, bass , chord progression, and leads going at the same time, sequenced lovely with a MPC with no drop outs what so ever . BTW my chord progressions use huge 9th and 13th type of jazz chords, you know what I mean .

Jupiter is stunning to look at in person , specially at night when all the stars come out .
I luv the ipad type touch screen and the vibrate metering to show you who playing what .

I'm kinda glad, that people sleep on the JP-80 .
Yes you nailed it... and yes your back in!!
The sounds on the Jupiter 80 "do" layer up really nice all together and seem like they are really made for each other. The TOne blender will then tweak all those sounds in a realistic combination also. On the other hand the Kronos laying really wasnt to my liking, and when you turn on Karma sometimes I would get a weird farting type sound..or super fast synthetic drum roll or something that seemed to be out of sync or an unnatural beat..especially when you start tweaking the settings. Looking at... or playing a Jupiter for 5 mins is a missed opportunity. Time will tell I am sure.

a weird farting sound is more of a personal problem than a Kronos problem
':lol:'

DennyC · Post by **DennyC** » Tue Sep 20, 2011 2:37 pm

SanderXpander wrote:Isn't a synth sound partial an oscillator? So 12 partials would be 12 oscillators... as far as the competition goes, I don't think 72 notes with 12 oscillators is very bad, is it?
You can't compare it to a sample playback engine, that takes vastly less cpu power. It could easily have 256 voices in the most basic sample playback mode, yet 72 voices with a 12 oscillator VA. Just look at the difference in polophony in Kronos between AL-1 or MOD-7 and HD-1/SGX-1.

That to me is a brilliant point! Anyone can configure complex sounds or utilize complex sounds and therefore gobble up the polyphony. Both of these boards are very fine boards and are extremely high quality in sound nuances and color. Sometimes it can boil down to which flavor do you prefer...chocolate or vanilla? Although for me there are other features that did weigh in on a decision on which to purchase.

I guess I have to also agree with a point made by another previous poster. I was really impressed with the JP80, so much so that I got lost in it and spent an hour and a half at the music store....completely undisturbed(not a GC). It all boils down to needs and personal preference. Because I have a K61 on order(just heard it is supposed to come in on Thurs. and then ship to me--a 2 month wait), I made a second trip to the music store to check my last requirements--E guitar lead sounds, not just synth lead sounds. On a scale of 1-10, I gave it a 10+ on my first visit. In the interim, I researched the the presets (registrations) on the pdf, called Roland and verified them.

My conclusion on those sounds(critically for me and my purposes), was that they didn't really wow me like the strings and the piano and brass.
Both of these boards sound great to me in those categories.

The polyphony discussion is analogous to my ability to run out of effects processors. I like to stack sounds but in sequence mode. So I concluded that overall it would be better for me to have the extra sequencer(More midi and audio tracks), Karma, drum track and the data storage. I had to give the Korg 61 the nod. I really do not mean any disrespect to any of you that chose the JP80. I would love to have one also, but I do not think I will sell my Oasys 76 to get it. Although, I would rather have the Kronos 61 and the JP80 rather than my Oasys 76 and the JP80.

I really like this forum and you guys have been very helpful to me so far and I really appreciate it.

sani · Post by **sani** » Tue Sep 20, 2011 3:07 pm

SanderXpander wrote:Isn't a synth sound partial an oscillator? So 12 partials would be 12 oscillators... as far as the competition goes, I don't think 72 notes with 12 oscillators is very bad, is it?

It's actually 6 notes in the example and not 72 as you mentioned above, but you probably made a mistake.

SanderXpander wrote:You can't compare it to a sample playback engine, that takes vastly less cpu power. It could easily have 256 voices in the most basic sample playback mode, yet 72 voices with a 12 oscillator VA. Just look at the difference in polophony in Kronos between AL-1 or MOD-7 and HD-1/SGX-1.

I agree completely with that part. It is just that some people took the 256 voice statement from Rolands website for granted and thought that you get 256 voices under any circumstance.

jimknopf · Post by **jimknopf** » Tue Sep 20, 2011 3:46 pm

Then a significant difference is that

- Korg gives us information on polyphony from various engines
- while Roland does not specify that and prefers to name nothing but a possible maximum

Guess which approach looks more transparent and sincere to me

aron · Post by **aron** » Tue Sep 20, 2011 4:30 pm

It could easily have 256 voices in the most basic sample playback mode, yet 72 voices with a 12 oscillator VA

I'm sure this is it. Interesting. It makes sense that for a VA, that polyphony might be as low as 6 notes. I guess we can ask the poster to try it with a different test.

hmmmm look at his post:

i tried this same test with a random selection of different oscillators - pcm and super natural - and each time the result was the same.

wow. I have no idea now.

and....

I suspect there's a fixed polyphony limit of 64 per liveset. This is also reflected in the voice reserve parameter for each liveset which can never exceed 64. Seems to be no dynamic voice allocation across different parts as far as I can tell

Rocness · Post by **Rocness** » Tue Sep 20, 2011 4:45 pm

sparkie wrote:Time will tell I am sure.

Your right .

Funny how this polyphony argument comes from a new Roland Clan member
with 1 post , who rants about there new Jp-80 and never returns .

Funny thing is , I have an Oasys and a JP-80 , so I know 1st hand about Korg's voice stealing compared to the JP-80 256 voices. Unlike all these experts on this thread .

Here's a quote from Future Music Mag review of Jupiter-80 .

"The 'Supernatural Acoustic' tones are superb (as we mentioned earlier) and if you're careful how you layer and play them, they could almost pass for the real thing. They respond smoothly and authentically and this really is as close as you can get to playing the real instruments but on a keyboard."

So this is also something people may want to consider in a new keyboard,
because if they want the most realistic acoustic sounds on the planet , noting right now can compare to supernatural technology in the JP-80.

Devnor · Post by **Devnor** » Tue Sep 20, 2011 5:22 pm

Rocness wrote:Funny how this polyphony argument comes from a new Roland Clan member with 1 post , who rants about there new Jp-80 and never returns .

This is why I have not spent much time "testing" the Jupiter.

Perhaps we aren't testing correctly. All the OP has done at this point is create a single tone with 3 PCM partials (same sample) and use that 4x in the lower live set. I took it a bit further and created second tone with same PCM sample, used it 4x in the upper live set and split the keyboard. Same result. What happens if we mix it up a little bit more?

Rorcus · Post by **Rorcus** » Tue Sep 20, 2011 5:38 pm

oooh this thread is just...

sani · Post by **sani** » Tue Sep 20, 2011 5:43 pm

Rocness wrote: Funny how this polyphony argument comes from a new Roland Clan member
with 1 post , who rants about there new Jp-80 and never returns.

Excuse me, what's wrong with you? He said clearly that he's very happy with the jp80 but has discovered some disappointing things. And instead of making some useless posts like some others, he made a real test to backup where and why he's disappointed. That's all. I consider his one contribution more worth than hundreds of your fanboyish posts with absolutely zero value.
Like this:

Rocness wrote: Here's a quote from Future Music Mag review of Jupiter-80 .

"The 'Supernatural Acoustic' tones are superb (as we mentioned earlier) and if you're careful how you layer and play them, they could almost pass for the real thing. They respond smoothly and authentically and this really is as close as you can get to playing the real instruments but on a keyboard."

What has this to do with actual, real polyphony some people have measured on the JP80? Can't we talk about a technical aspect of a keyboard without the danger that you jump in with yet another preach about how celestial the jp80 is?

Here you have a quote from MusicRadar about the Kronos:

Simply put, Korg has made one of the best-sounding and most fully featured keyboards to date.

Will you sell your jp80 now that you've read this?

apex · Post by **apex** » Tue Sep 20, 2011 5:47 pm

jimknopf wrote:Then a significant difference is that

- Korg gives us information on polyphony from various engines
- while Roland does not specify that and prefers to name nothing but a possible maximum

Guess which approach looks more transparent and sincere to me

and I still don't understand "exactly" how the Kronos polyphony works...

I have been thinking about it quite a bit lately... and it's starting to weigh in on my decision.

Has anyone had any real problems with the polyphony from the Kronos?

And can someone give an OUTRIGHT description of how the Kronos polyphony engine runs?

Thanks...

jimknopf · Post by **jimknopf** » Tue Sep 20, 2011 6:00 pm

Apex, I am probably the wrong person to ask that, because my sonic preferences don't take me to the polyphony limits too often, preferring few great and clearly recognizeable sounds over any kind of fat layering anytime, no matter if recording or live. Most of us use more than just one instrument anyway, if required.

But I can tell that I didn't even face big polyphony problems with the Fantom G (if so, only in rare cases), and I also don't have any with the Kronos either.

So to me the question does not reflect any everyday polyphony problem, but is just an interesting case concerning transparency and user expectations raised by companies.

Devnor · Post by **Devnor** » Tue Sep 20, 2011 6:42 pm

jimknopf wrote:So to me the question does not reflect any everyday polyphony problem, but is just an interesting case concerning transparency and user expectations raised by companies.

Sorry but isn't this the thread that was moved because Jim threatened to leave the forum?