Roland A-800 PRO midi controller

[EverythingIBM]

I desperately need a MIDI controller. Can't believe I have gone for as long as I have without one.

My choice was to buy a Roland A-800 Pro for around $300; however, I heard that these have aftertouch issues.


Can anyone else confirm this would be an alright purchase?
Or... if I should just get an entirely different controller altogether?

[IvanIvanovich]

I use my Ensoniq ESQ1 for a controller coupled with a midi to usb cable. If you have a decent synth with midi ports already, I'd just grab a cable.
[ Attachment Invalid Or Does Not Exist ] 22697[/ATTACH]

[EverythingIBM]

I use my Ensoniq ESQ1 for a controller coupled with a midi to usb cable. If you have a decent synth with midi ports already, I'd just grab a cable.

The only synth I have with a keyboard is the JUNO-60 --> I could use it as a midi controller, but I'd rather not wear out its keyboard
I might settle on something like the Alesis Q49. Figure a smaller more compact controller is better for my lack of space.

Do MIDI to USB cables actually work? I'd expect something like a USB to MIDI *converter* to be a better idea:
http://cgi.ebay.ca/MIDI-USB-Cable-Converter-PC-Music-Keyboard-Adapter-/360288723102?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item53e2e1a09e

[IvanIvanovich]

I've never had any problem using it with NI software. Even used an old cheap Yamaha PSR something sometimes before it met an unfortunate circuit bending accident. That thing was crap, no velocity sense, just on or off.
Same thing, cable / converter. Just the newer nicer ones don't have a bulky box in the middle of it. Juno60 is nice. I've got a Juno106 but it needs fixed.
That Alesis looks pretty decent. Might look at the Akai MPKs.

[nathanscribe]

Having had an M-Audio Axiom I can safely recommend avoiding them.  Feels like playing a weather-beaten doormat with a layer of sponge cake underneath.

Never heard of issues with the Roland; what are the AT issues you mention?

For cheap old kit, I hear good things about the Ensoniq synths - various models had polyphonic AT (separate AT for each key, whereas the normal type is channel AT - one AT sensor across the whole board).  Never used one myself but have had them suggested by folk I trust.

Most controllers these days come with a splurge of knobs and sliders, but my experience of these has been that they're more trouble to deal with than they're worth.  My usual method now is not to use a controller at all, but I don't use softsynths.  Also, if you get one with USB on it already you can skip the converter cable.

If you can try out a Novation, go for it.  My brief dabblings have placed a little star next to them in the margins of my brain.  Pleasant action, solid feel, but I've no long term use so can't comment on them further.

[EverythingIBM]

I've never had any problem using it with NI software. Even used an old cheap Yamaha PSR something sometimes before it met an unfortunate circuit bending accident. That thing was crap, no velocity sense, just on or off.
Same thing, cable / converter. Just the newer nicer ones don't have a bulky box in the middle of it. Juno60 is nice. I've got a Juno106 but it needs fixed.
That Alesis looks pretty decent. Might look at the Akai MPKs.

Oh yeah, I have a cheap ****ty yamaha thing, I could use it as a midi controller, but my model M is more pleasant to use to play notes on... coincidentally, I was thinking of circuit bending it.
Does your Juno-106 have voice issues? The resin on the voice chips might have become electrically conductive and damaged them. You'll either have to try taking off the resin, or, buying replacements.
 

Having had an M-Audio Axiom I can safely recommend avoiding them.  Feels like playing a weather-beaten doormat with a layer of sponge cake underneath.

Never heard of issues with the Roland; what are the AT issues you mention?

For cheap old kit, I hear good things about the Ensoniq synths - various models had polyphonic AT (separate AT for each key, whereas the normal type is channel AT - one AT sensor across the whole board).  Never used one myself but have had them suggested by folk I trust.

Most controllers these days come with a splurge of knobs and sliders, but my experience of these has been that they're more trouble to deal with than they're worth.  My usual method now is not to use a controller at all, but I don't use softsynths.  Also, if you get one with USB on it already you can skip the converter cable.

If you can try out a Novation, go for it.  My brief dabblings have placed a little star next to them in the margins of my brain.  Pleasant action, solid feel, but I've no long term use so can't comment on them further.

I think that ensoniq synth sounded pretty awesome, digital with analog filters is a very smart idea.

Oh I used M-Audio controllers. That's why I didn't bring them up: overpriced and feel TERRIBLE; like a cheap children's casio or something. For the price you're paying, the feel should at least be moderate.
"[M-Audio Axiom] Feels like playing a weather-beaten doormat with a layer of sponge cake underneath." <-- that's a classic quote right there.

Yeah I'm not too hot for the knobs and sliders; I just want something with KEYS that feels nice to play on.

I was at the music shop today... and I must say... most of the synth keyboards felt like CRAP! I really appreciate the JUNO 60's keyboard a lot more now (not that I ever thought it was bad, I just didn't know synths today felt like rubbish).
I got to try out a minimoog... The keys were all yellowed (due to poor plastic manufacturing) and felt like an M-Audio keyboard. The sound wasn't too great either; just basic waveforms. Any synth can pull off a plain square or sine. Presets sucked ass. Moog is overrated by nostalgic purists. A juno-60 can kick a minimoog's ass any day. Or perhaps I'm just spoiled

Although the Roland digital pianos sound like the JV series --> except with a weighted keyboard.

The microkorg wins the most terrible feel for a keyboard award, however.

Oh! They did have an A-500 Pro -- but it was overpriced ($340 or something). The feel wasn't the greatest, but, I'd get one if it was $200.

[IvanIvanovich]

Not really sure yet what the problem is with the Juno. Probably something on the power board as it just shuts down right away. Some parts on the modulation board look suspect as well. I came across it at a flea market for $20, so if I can't fix it, I can always sell it for parts and make a profit.
I agree wholly about the moog being over rated. My ESQ1 kills the moog easily, and I feel that it's moog voice sounds better than the real thing too. The ones I have on a 'bootleg' cart sound even better. As far as the moog's feel, some Casio are better.

[EverythingIBM]

Not really sure yet what the problem is with the Juno. Probably something on the power board as it just shuts down right away. Some parts on the modulation board look suspect as well. I came across it at a flea market for $20, so if I can't fix it, I can always sell it for parts and make a profit.
I agree wholly about the moog being over rated. My ESQ1 kills the moog easily, and I feel that it's moog voice sounds better than the real thing too. The ones I have on a 'bootleg' cart sound even better. As far as the moog's feel, some Casio are better.

 
Woah! That'd be cool to see one of those at a flea market. Definitely would stand out to anyone who knows what it is

Yeah, the ESQ1 has many killer sounds, lots of punch. Many sonic possibilities (especially with those awesome filters).
Whereas a bland moog outputs some warbly sine with sucky filters. I use software with better "filters".

A lot of vritual analog synths easily replicate moogs (sometimes sounding better than a real moog as you mentioned); because there's nothing to them.
In the juno for example, its waveforms (in their primitive nature) *sound* different from the normal sawtooth or pulse (very warm). Plus you get the cool Roland chorus effects. I also love the juno's "squelchy" resonance. I thought the moog might sound like that (boasting as "analog"), but it didn't. At all.

That's the end of my moog rant; it's been on my mind for a long time. Especially watching people religiously spill their emotions over what has to be the most boring synth ever created.

Sure Bob Moog may have pioneered some stuff; but he continued making the SAME BORING SYNTHS!

[nathanscribe]

Haha, you see now I've had a couple of Moogs for a while and am very familiar with their sound.  When you say Minimoog, I presume you mean Voyager, because no other synth ever labelled Minimoog ever had presets.  The Little Phatty (worst name ever) does but it's not a Mini.

As for the sound, I disagree - nothing else I've ever played has the same thick, creamy, weighty tone.  It sounds miles away from the old Junos.  Whether or not it's to your taste is a different matter, but each synth has its own set of tonal qualities that make it what it is.  Your comment about 'basic waveforms' is strange as all analogue synths start with them.  They all sound pretty samey if you just take the basic waveform without filtering etc.  There are variations due to the way the circuits generate them, but the real sound of a synth lies in its filter, and the way the stages (VCO, VCF, VCA, modulation) interact.  There are subtle overloadings going on, waveform phasing, or loose component tolerances, or clean, well-managed levels etc. that all contribute to the way something sounds.  To my ears, the Juno sounds defined, solid, and kind of well-mannered.  Compare it to a Jupiter or SH and you still get that basic Roland tone but they're much edgier.  The Junos are good reliable all-rounder polys, but I'd say a Moog is a really good bet for classy, powerful leads and basses.  Horses for courses.

That variation in analogue guts is also why I've never found that feel in any software or VA or other digital recreation of an analogue.  They're all too static, no matter how deep the bass goes or how overdriven the filter gets.  Next to the real thing they're very much a compromise IMO.  Then there's the interface - give me knobs and sliders any day.  Stuff I've had with two buttons and a datawheel - or even worse, software - just gets abandoned infavour of something I don't have to think about to program/tweak.

None of which matters if you have something you like the sound of, as that's what you make music with.  Plenty of folk relish software and do good things with it.  I get my kicks from hardware.  That said, I wouldn't mind a Mellotron softsynth as real ones are waaaay out of my price league...

And BTW, nobody who buys a Moog uses its presests. :music:

[EverythingIBM]

Haha, you see now I've had a couple of Moogs for a while and am very familiar with their sound.  When you say Minimoog, I presume you mean Voyager, because no other synth ever labelled Minimoog ever had presets.  The Little Phatty (worst name ever) does but it's not a Mini.

As for the sound, I disagree - nothing else I've ever played has the same thick, creamy, weighty tone.  It sounds miles away from the old Junos.  Whether or not it's to your taste is a different matter, but each synth has its own set of tonal qualities that make it what it is.  Your comment about 'basic waveforms' is strange as all analogue synths start with them.  They all sound pretty samey if you just take the basic waveform without filtering etc.  There are variations due to the way the circuits generate them, but the real sound of a synth lies in its filter, and the way the stages (VCO, VCF, VCA, modulation) interact.  There are subtle overloadings going on, waveform phasing, or loose component tolerances, or clean, well-managed levels etc. that all contribute to the way something sounds.  To my ears, the Juno sounds defined, solid, and kind of well-mannered.  Compare it to a Jupiter or SH and you still get that basic Roland tone but they're much edgier.  The Junos are good reliable all-rounder polys, but I'd say a Moog is a really good bet for classy, powerful leads and basses.  Horses for courses.

That variation in analogue guts is also why I've never found that feel in any software or VA or other digital recreation of an analogue.  They're all too static, no matter how deep the bass goes or how overdriven the filter gets.  Next to the real thing they're very much a compromise IMO.  Then there's the interface - give me knobs and sliders any day.  Stuff I've had with two buttons and a datawheel - or even worse, software - just gets abandoned infavour of something I don't have to think about to program/tweak.

None of which matters if you have something you like the sound of, as that's what you make music with.  Plenty of folk relish software and do good things with it.  I get my kicks from hardware.  That said, I wouldn't mind a Mellotron softsynth as real ones are waaaay out of my price league...

And BTW, nobody who buys a Moog uses its presests. :music:

My apologies, it wasn't a minimoog, it was one of those phatty things:
http://www.moogmusic.com/products/phattys/little-phatty-stage-ii
They ought to change the name to the moog skinny.

I realize what I said about the basic waveforms is a bit askew as that's the building blocks for all synths... but what I meant is... Moogs don't delineate away from the basics. When I hear a moog, I always hear a straight sine or square and nothing else. They're just so damn plain!

The Juno-60 can sound a lot like a Jupiter; especially in the "strings" department (heck, they even share some of the same knobs, sliders, and even the keyboard is the same).

In terms of preference, I really like the old roland synths (especially the Jupiter-4, it has an awesome sound to it --> dare I say, I'd choose it over the jupiter-8). Moog isn't my type

[nathanscribe]

I've never compared directly, but I know a couple of folk who've had both a Juno 60 and Jupiter 8 - I trust them enough to believe them when they say the Juno covers a fair bit of ground the Jupiter can.  They don't share their sound because they have some of the same controls - they share a sound because they share electronic DNA.  The Jupe does have more sonic potential though.

Regarding the Moog LP, if you think it sounds thin, I suspect it wasn't set up very well - mine can shake the furniture.  As for not moving away from the basics, I'm not sure I follow you - it has a pretty standard setup for a monosynth (and a fair few polys too), though if you're used to software maybe you have come to expect more than just the 2-VCO, single 24dB LPF setup.  I get some of my most oddball sounds from the simplest kit - it's just a matter of knowing what to do with it and pushing the limitations.  The Moogs have a particular tone that is their hallmark - if you want it, you want it - if you don't, you don't.  Don't dismiss it out of hand.  I get a lot of use from my LP.  It's a workhorse.

[EverythingIBM]

I've never compared directly, but I know a couple of folk who've had both a Juno 60 and Jupiter 8 - I trust them enough to believe them when they say the Juno covers a fair bit of ground the Jupiter can.  They don't share their sound because they have some of the same controls - they share a sound because they share electronic DNA.  The Jupe does have more sonic potential though.

Regarding the Moog LP, if you think it sounds thin, I suspect it wasn't set up very well - mine can shake the furniture.  As for not moving away from the basics, I'm not sure I follow you - it has a pretty standard setup for a monosynth (and a fair few polys too), though if you're used to software maybe you have come to expect more than just the 2-VCO, single 24dB LPF setup.  I get some of my most oddball sounds from the simplest kit - it's just a matter of knowing what to do with it and pushing the limitations.  The Moogs have a particular tone that is their hallmark - if you want it, you want it - if you don't, you don't.  Don't dismiss it out of hand.  I get a lot of use from my LP.  It's a workhorse.

 
I didn't mean the junos and jupiters sharing knobs was related to sonic quality, I just meant it [potentially] alludes to the fact the internals may indeed share similarities as well being [near] of the same period of time too (1982).

The Jupiter-8 sucks like over 100 watts, it's pretty massive.

Yeah, another thing is I don't like monosynths (having the rare option to turn it on is nice for when I need portmanteau). Need at least four voices.

Moog isn't for me, definitely. Although I can sympathy with moog for his resistance to going 100% digital.

[nathanscribe]

I didn't mean the junos and jupiters sharing knobs was related to sonic quality, I just meant it [potentially] alludes to the fact the internals may indeed share similarities as well being [near] of the same period of time too (1982).

No, I didn't think you did!  It's interesting, having had plenty of synths with broadly similar controls over the same kinds of parameters, how different they sound.  But yes, Roland had their family sound, for sure - partly it's down to the same filters in a lot of them, but there are also enough differences to keep people like me buying 'em when there's a chance...

Have you considered the DSI stuff?  (Mopho/Tetra)

[EverythingIBM]

No, I didn't think you did!  It's interesting, having had plenty of synths with broadly similar controls over the same kinds of parameters, how different they sound.  But yes, Roland had their family sound, for sure - partly it's down to the same filters in a lot of them, but there are also enough differences to keep people like me buying 'em when there's a chance...

Have you considered the DSI stuff?  (Mopho/Tetra)

 
I was interested in a prophet '08 rack module. If the price goes down, or if I can get one for cheap, why not.