Fantom S88 Sequencing Fantom XR

Latency? MIDI is not the speediest interface around, if you send lots of notes simultaneously they may be transmitted with a slight delay.

latency could be a problem I guess if you try to use all 32 channels of MIDI, and 192 voices once you have the extra box. But you won't really know that until you try it.

I can't really think of any other gotchas, other than the process of moving stuff between the two might be a pain in the butt, as you connect one via USB to your PC, then disconnect it, then connect the other.....

That librarian and editors are not compatible, nor are the files they save. Fortunately, you can load an FSL file (fantom-S librarian) using the Fantom-X software - but not the other way round. (though there is an easy fix)


Loz
http://fantom.wilkesworld.co.uk
Just say no to religion.

I am not worried about midi latency. If I experience latency then the sounds will be recorded in Protools as Midi or Audio. But Lawrence the whole thing of shuffling patches, performances and samples between what is essential different architecture has me worried, which is why I asked. I want the process to be seamless.

I have to evaluate how much sense it makes for compatibility between the two. Essentially I would be doing all sound development on the S88 and transferring to the XR for live giging (I don't take the S88). I have the option of doing my midi compositions in Protools but of course its fun to sit at the S88 and sequence the whole thing as well. I have found it to be a nice change.

I also prefer to program sounds on a hardware interface rather than a software interface.

Stephanie Sante
Recording Artist
www.santemusic.com

Perhaps I exagerated the problem.
First they are NOT different architectures. Everything is fully compatible - just that Roland have put a couple of arbitary hurdles in your path.

First, I guess it depends how many connections you have.
With modern computers you should have enough USB connections to keep both FS and FS permanently connected.
If so, then dragging samples and songs from one to the other should be a simple drag and drop using your computer UI. They are totally compatible.

Patches and performances seem to be the more difficult as they are not in their own files, so you need to go via the librarian software. But I don't think that is a major issue - it just takes a few more button pushes than perhaps it needs.

Read the patch or performance from the FS with the FS librarian.
Save.
Open with FX librarian.
Write to FX.
(you can do that en masse, not just one at a time)

The patches and performances are totally compatible, it is purely down to Roland making the two librarian file formats different - and then the only difference is a S in the header of one, and an X in the other. Purely to stop someone loading an FX patch into an FS and find they dont have the right waveform (not that this hurts anything - it just selects the wrong one)

Remember that the FXR doesn't have a built in sequencer of course, so it cannot play back your sequences on its own.

Loz
http://fantom.wilkesworld.co.uk
Just say no to religion.

Lawrence,

So based on what you wrote below are the in ROM Samples in the X that different from the S and are they actually in different locations?



>The patches and performances are totally compatible, it >is purely down to Roland making the two librarian file >formats different - and then the only difference is a S in >the header of one, and an X in the other. Purely to stop >someone loading an FX patch into an FS and find they >dont have the right waveform (not that this hurts >anything - it just selects the wrong one)


Stephanie Sante
Recording Artist
www.santemusic.com

The FS doesn't have all the FX waveforms remember.
So loading an FX patch that uses FX waveforms into the FS means the FS cannot load the same waveform - it doesn't exist. So you get a totally different one.

All the FS waveforms are in the same place inside the FX.
But the FX has a 2nd bank of further waveforms.
Here's the waveform list.
http://fantom.wilkesworld.co.uk/fantom%20s%20x%20wave%20list.htm

If the FX patch uses waveforms that are in the FS as well, then no problem.

As the FS patch can only use FS waveforms as these are in the same place on the FX, then again, no problem.

It is only when you try to load the FX patch using FX waveforms back into the FS it goes amiss.

I guess Roland tried to make it so you cannot load an FX librarian file into the FS because of backward compatability issues like this.

Loz
http://fantom.wilkesworld.co.uk
Just say no to religion.

Thanks Lawrence. I understand completely now. The situation is what I hoped it would be.

I wanted to make sure Roland was intelligent concerning the implementation of the waveforms. Its appears there were. By leaving locations the same for existing and then just extending the banks makes alot of sense.

Stephanie Sante
Recording Artist
www.santemusic.com