No question, the G's MIDI sequencer is nicely spec'd, but it is like the polar opposite of the OASYS, with shortcomings on the other end. By that, I mean you can do certain things better with each unit. Too bad, they aren't married!
The actual sequencer seems great, but as Kevin said, the audio has workflow and space limitations - I believe about 500 megs is the limit, per project.
The OASYS can move large amounts of audio and samples very quickly, but audio is still 16 bit.
One of the guys at NAMM said that the G couldn't record your voice and a guitar at the same time - and run them to separate busses! WTF? The flipside is that the OASYS bus system is amazing - you can reroute completed tracks and re-effect to your heart's desire, but the sequencer is only 16 track and 192ppqn.
The G has 22 FX processors. But, from what I'm hearing, you can't chain several MFX, like you can on the OASYS (where you can chain all 16!). From the Roland forums:
The Fantom G, although it has per part MFX, doesn't allow you to chain any more effects blocks than the X
As pointed out by Dan and some others, G synthesis (including ARX cards) is sample based - no VA's, FM or Physical Modelling. The ROM is much like the Triton Extreme, in that most of it comes from SRX cards' sample material.
If Roland had more than 2 ARX slots and some of those cards were VAs and other synths, it would stand closer to the OASYS and its synth engines, but.....no cigar! I've heard some sound demos and they sound just like my old Fantom, though I'm sure the resolution is better.
Still, I would like to have that V-Drums card, and that sequencer really looks killer. Elvis, weren't you looking for drums? The ARX cards add more polyphony and effects, which is very nice. The screen graphics are very very sexy, but it isn't a touchscreen. (like I said, each has something the other doesn't.)
That's the end of my opinionated post. It's all based on reading, some demos and hear-say. I will audition a G, myself.
)
