Jupiter80 vs Kronos

[Bruce Lychee]

Interesting aside: the "we assume" part seems to come up a lot in discussion of the JP80! It strikes me as unusual that Roland have released so little technical detail about how this stuff actually works. I wonder why that is?

Surely it can't be fear of competitors copying their ideas, as this is an area where the devil is very much in the details and it takes years of R&D to get it working well (or maybe again that's a "we assume" that might not even be true?)

I think it has very much to do with protecting proprietary information because their approach is different than other keyboard manufacturers. They tell you they use attack samples, modeling and behavioral modeling that allows for sounds with no velocity switching and looping. Beyond that, I wouldn't expect much more.

[RonF]

Of course, there is nothing like the real thing.

Ditto

[RonF]

Of course, there is nothing like the real thing.

That's what she said....

[Randelph]

I was taken by "Bad Misters" (Yamaha guru) thoughts on using the keyboard as a controller compared to a guitar, given that a guitarist has their fingers directly on the string, whereas a keyboardist is indirectly controlling the expression, and consequently longs for a more expressive way of playing. But to me this seems like an inevitable trade-off: with a guitar/violin/etc., you've got more ways of directly controlling the sound, but the piano gives you two full hands of independent expression, so you can do more but with less depth.

And since Shawnhar wants realtime control of what he's playing from a keyboard, here's an interesting example of still using keys, but putting more controller options under your fingertips, the Eighenharp.

It also has a built-in breath pipe. This gives you more control, but the instrument would have its own learning curve. I think the JP-80 strikes a good balance because you can still play more or less like you're used to.

Eigenharp: Astonishing keys
http://www.eigenlabs.com/product/


The Eigenharp's 3D keys are amazingly sensitive - ten times more so than those on a conventional keyboard. They detect the movement of your finger to within a micron - sensing pressure for volume, side to side for effects and moving up down for pitch. It's also fully polyphonic, giving you the expressive power to put real feeling into every single note you play.

Jordan Rudess gives his take on it, starting around 1:30
http://c368672.r72.cf0.rackcdn.com/feat ... POSTER.ogg

[philmagnotta]

Here is a black and white 1960 video of an early synth, that considering its age, the audio wow and flutter if the film itself, etc. The violin patch especially is quite amazing EVEN SURPASSING Kronos and Jupiter, which as a violinist, I find the K and J rather electronic and unconvincing.
An interesting version of vibrato as demonstrated.
All in all, rather impressive especially when you consider that the live performance is superior to the film archive



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7pOqkn9J ... detailpage

[Vlad_77]

Here is another:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GbymTki8 ... re=related

I had never heard of this instrument. We have come so far and yet what I love about these early efforts was the concentration on MUSIC.

I want to learn more about this instrument! I would imagine these are museum pieces. I know these are tube driven, but are they similar to the Mellotron in that tape loops were used?

(Sorry don't mean to hijack so I will say: there IS no VERSUS; both the Kronos and Jupiter 80 are great tools for musical expression and experimentation!)

Ahimsa,
Vlad

[shawnhar]

It is interesting how many early electronic instruments like the Theramin or Ondes Martenot were ridiculously primitive in terms of sound generation (often not much more than a single unprocessed waveform) and yet offered this very direct, expressive control that made them quite beautiful, not to mention incredibly hard to play!

Modern instruments blow them out of the water in terms of timbral richness, yet fall short of the Ondes Martenot in terms of expressive control.

[JPWC]

the Kronos is capable of very expressive control, problem is just like anything else, it takes practice.

Remember

Music is more than the notes you play, and modern keyboards have every bit as much control as a theremin. Attack Velocity, pressure after touch, Modulation wheels.

If you play every note at velocity of 127, there won't be much expressiveness in the performance.

I'd say the average velocity 90, with a performance range of 40 to 127 should yield very expressive control of your timbre. Additionally, the velocity doesn't just control loudness, it can vary pitch & open up filters also.

I've found the velocity sensitivity adjustments are very dramatic and can take time and experiment to find the setting that is right to you.

I've found (through research & experimentation) that it's not the sound that makes the imitation of other instruments realistic but more of your playing techniques. A guitar can not play two or more note simultaneously, but then again, it's hard to strum a keyboard. Even two drum notes don't sound the same and I could swear I could hear the Kronos make slight timbre changes on percussion sound, don't know if it was Karma modulation or velocity.

This is what super natural is all about, give the keyboard performer more variation and control over timbre which are not normally available via normal keyboard control.

Expressiveness and control usually take years to master regardless of the instrument. And I should know, 40 years of playing and I still sound like crap.

[philmagnotta]

... "I've found (through research & experimentation) that it's not the sound that makes the imitation of other instruments realistic but more of your playing techniques."

Very true!

[michelkeijzers]

I've found the velocity sensitivity adjustments are very dramatic and can take time and experiment to find the setting that is right to you.

On strings sometimes if you hit the keys very softly you don't hear it... and after the 'hit' you cannot change the velocity anymore, that's why for strings I mostly lower the velocity sensitivity (with Tone Adjust).

[michelkeijzers]

... "I've found (through research & experimentation) that it's not the sound that makes the imitation of other instruments realistic but more of your playing techniques."

Very true!

Yes but it's human to blame a 'thing' instead of my own (playing style) if possible.

[RonF]

I've found the velocity sensitivity adjustments are very dramatic and can take time and experiment to find the setting that is right to you.

On strings sometimes if you hit the keys very softly you don't hear it... and after the 'hit' you cannot change the velocity anymore, that's why for strings I mostly lower the velocity sensitivity (with Tone Adjust).

I think that is true with many keyboards....you really have to spend some time (read: weeks) adjusting the velocity curve/sensitivity to find the right fit for your playing style. This is a parameter that many people set and forget (if they even change the factory default). Sometimes, Live, I find myself changing it to fit the type of music which the next song is.

[RonF]

changing directions just a bit....

I have been using JP80 and Kronos side by side on some projects/recordings. One thing that doesn't get discussed much is how different these two keyboards sound in a recording, or in a mix. We talk a lot about the differences of solo pianos, strings, EP's, organs, etc. But in a mix, these two boards sound VERY different, and require a very different processing to "tame" into a good sounding multi-track recording.

Both Kronos and JP80 have outstanding fidelity. I can't really give an edge to one or another. They sound different, for sure, but each with stunning clarity and dynamic range.

But Kronos has a certain "bite" to it. Its hard to put into words. The sound of Kronos, pretty much regardless of the program being used, is very present...in your face....and its "even" throughout its frequency range. It requires very little EQ in a mix, because it is so present. While it has deep bottom end....it does NOT have "full" bottom end, per se. Its bass characteristics are much more even, and requires very little roll-off.

JP80 on the other hand has a VERY full sound, especially in the bottom frequencies. Its bass characteristics require much more roll-off....but because the source material has more "boom", there is more to work with...more to "sculpt". (I work from a standpoint that EQ in a mix should almost always mean cutting....not boosting, which introduces artifacts). But where JP80 is very interesting and different than Kronos, is in its high end. I would describe this as 'Air'. You can clearly hear it....even with the JP80 reverbs turned off! Roland's samples and waves have a definite ambience to them in the very high frequencies. Its clearly "colored" in some way, at its raw waveform.

Balancing the two is very different, and its not really possible (certainly not easy) to get one to sound like the other. Kronos is much more "straight forward" in its tone and character. JP80 is much "bigger" and "ambient"....almost sounds "produced" right from its outputs (and its not coming strictly from its effects...because its "there" dry too). It really goes to illustrate how having BOTH is insanely good. Kronos makes the foundation of much of the music I am working on. JP80 brings the icing, if you will....and gives a track a very polished, "produced" feel.

I found this interesting, as I have just started using JP80 more in recordings along with Kronos. Since the thread topic here is Kronos vs Jupiter 80.......I thought is was pertinent to compare.

[shawnhar]

the Kronos is capable of very expressive control, problem is just like anything else, it takes practice.

Absolutely. I'm going to start a new thread about this since it seems like an interesting topic that has veered a long way from the JP80 comparison!

[PinkFloydDudi]

PFD

The best way to demo the Jupiter is to find an open registration, isolate the upper live set, hit the upper live set on the screen and go through the thousands of tones individually. Going through the registrations is illustrative but only reveals a fraction of the palette.

When I say strings, I definitely mean solo strings but I also like many of the ensemble sounds you didn't see in the registrations. I like the Kronos orchestral strings, but more for laying down static soundscapes than anything dynamic. You can also build some very dynamic sounding string ensembles on the Jupiter using layers of solo string sounds.

You can limit the articulations by setting the tone to mono, but the articulations are really easy to control simply through playing technique. For instance that slide you heard on the bass happened because you played a quick legato. If you have good technique and understand how the articulations are working, they can be used at your discretion.

The bass example I posted is pretty straightforward and was generated with a simple one hand line and no controllers in real time. I know I can't replicate it in real time on the Kronos, but I welcome an advice on how to try.

http://soundcloud.com/bruce-lychee/bass

Exactly right Bruce

With all the 'solo' sounds, be it flugel horn, cello, bass or oboe, how you play it determines how it sounds. Quick smooth notes slides the sound. If you want it not to slide, then play more detached (but not staccato) notes. This for me is more what I need - yes, the Kronos can be programmed to do it (as can the OASYS) but if it's programmed, it does that way every time. The JP-80 responds to how it is played - and that is a significant difference between the two boards.

The OASYS (Kronos) excels over the JP-80 in many ways (in the way I use the boards), but for full dynamic responsiveness to playing style, I am able to do more with the JP-80.

But PFD, your observation is correct - the combination is the mighty thing. I do more filmscore style than anything else (not always, but mostly) so the combination is what I have yearned for and am now lucky enough to have.

If I had to chose between Kronos or JP-80 (assuming I did not have an OASYS), I would go for the Kronos. It does more - but some not as well - than the JP-80.

Easier to respond to both of you in one post =P

I did solo many of the patches (I'm using kronos terminology for both since I have no idea what Roland calls these things). That is when the expressiveness of individual sounds was much more evident. Which again makes me think 2 things:
1) How usefull are they in a full band mix
2) How usefull are they when in a "combi".

Seems a lot of the nuances get masked very quickly. And lets say I layered a string patch with the bass patch on Bruce's demo and did a quick legato over some notes - would the strings bend like the bass did? Would neither of them?

Also,what if I wanted those individual notes to sound instead of the bend like in Bruce's example! That is what I'm saying by "forcing you" to play a certain behavior.

I want to say that you can do the bass thing on the Kronos. I seem to remember playing something and with a certain quick couple of keystrokes, it automatically slid for me. I might be incorrect in this...I don't remember exactly. I sure as hell have no idea how where you would program something like that?

We all know on the kronos you could turn portomento on so it does it every time, or take it off so it never does it, not sure if you could do something similar to velocity-sensitive portomento or something like that?

I really think the JP80 excells in individual instruments - but not the individual instruments I use most (pianos, organs, EPs).
I think when you build up "combis" in the JP80, many of those nuances that make the individual patches really great are quickly hidden.

Solo patches of solo instruments like a trumpet though - there is no question the JP80 excells over those. Those (along with their little nuances) blew me away when I was playing with them.


I can only imagine the board that would be created if both companies decided to share their technology to better serve all their customers!

Although I could see how that might not work.

Roland + Korg Architect Meeting:
Korg rep: "So what piano are we going to go with"
Roland Rep: "Well I think ours are a little better"
Korg rep: "Oh hell no"
(Fight breaks out)

lol

For me it felt like there was a layer in between me and the sound, and I didn't like that indirection.

...But for me, I just didn't like the feeling that there was someone else in between me and the final sound.

That was also a great way to put it. That "thing" between me and the sound sometimes did awesome things. Other times I wanted to tell it to cut it out and let me play how I want!
It guesses at my intentions...sometimes it is right, sometimes it is wrong. Not sure I liked that variability.

If you don't LEARN (as in practice and study) how to play these patches....then they DO trigger expressions you don't necessarily want to trigger. Its only when you become proficient in playing these patches, that YOU control the triggering!

I definitely see your point there and definitely believe you. But now you are telling me I have to adjust my actual playing technique to deal with what can literally be called a "translator" standing between me and the sound.

Bruce's bass demo I will keep going back to because it very clearly showed that slide when notes were played closely together and quickly. What if I wanted those to be individual notes sometimes, but not others? I can't play the same lick and have it one time be all the notes, and another time slide up (which is an option you can do when playing a real bass). It automatically makes me do things I might not have wanted to do - such as slide instead of playing the individual notes.

Now granted, no computer/keyboard can 100% guess your intentions, and I do think the JP80 does a very good job at putting those nuances in mostly when you would want them to show up. But there are times I was playing that it did the slide and I was like "what the hell, I didn't want that to happen".