VA-section of the JP-80: Supernatural?..

Well, every new product is in the same vein as older ones in the sense that you use the knowledge and experience developing them. SuperNatural It's not related to the V-Synth GT directly more than this. SuperNatural is just a name that Roland decided to call its new technology just like COSM, VariPhrase, REAC or AP-Synthesis. It can be used on every other product they want.

You can forget about those names and just play / tweak / hear.
You'll find interesting information in Roland 's Jupiter 80 "parameter guide manual" that will let you imagine the possibilities.

V-CeeOh wrote:

SuperNatural is just a name that Roland decided to call its new technology just like COSM, VariPhrase, REAC or AP-Synthesis.

Yes, I see that. But I'm interested in what it means in the JP-80 world.

I understand what the supernatural take on acoustic instruments is (behaviour modeling, articulation variations etc.) but how does that translate to analogue style oscillators?

In what way is the supernatural synth section of the JP-80 superior or different than the one in the V-Synth?..

I'm also a V-Synth (GT) owner and asking myself the same question.

It's my understanding (pure speculation) that "SuperNatural" VA means that the oscillators have a better definition because of more powerful DSP than in previous VA from Roland, resulting in less aliasing than in the V-Synth for example.

It's also my understanding that some of the basic waveforms (not speaking of the PCM waves here!) are more like the ones generated by the VCO's of the JP8 than the "perfectly" calculated ones from previous VA synths.

Perhaps something related to the filters, too...

I'm hesitant to mention it but there's a video with Scott Tibbs where he briefly mentions modelling filters after older synths.

I happen to own the V synth GT and Jupiter and was able to speak to Scott Tibbs at his demo 2 months ago.

I asked him about SN and the Jupiter. I wanted to confirm that every non synth sound was indeed SN and also had him walk through some of the technical aspects related to the physical and behavioral modeling. I was familiar with the SN pianos and EPs and was interested in what SN meant when applied to other instruments. We discussed how SN acoustic sounds have no velocity switching and the unique dynamics and articulations associated with each instrument.

When Scott told me the synth sounds were SN, I was a little puzzled and told him I thought that was a bit of an oxymoron. He did seem to pause for a moment but did say that when it comes to SN synth sounds, the focus is on the quality of the sounds... Using Roland's most powerful and advanced VA synth to create the best quality synth sounds. A little more vague than his previous answers, but by that time, he had answered 20 min worth of my questions so I was ready to move on to the register.

I did also speak to Scott about the V-synth GT. He called it his baby. He did say the Jupiter synth is more powerful but, as we know, the V is a completely different beast and he thought I would be thrilled with the combo... I am.

vox wrote:

I'm also a V-Synth (GT) owner and asking myself the same question.

It's my understanding (pure speculation) that "SuperNatural" VA means that the oscillators have a better definition because of more powerful DSP than in previous VA from Roland, resulting in less aliasing than in the V-Synth for example.

It's also my understanding that some of the basic waveforms (not speaking of the PCM waves here!) are more like the ones generated by the VCO's of the JP8 than the "perfectly" calculated ones from previous VA synths.

Perhaps something related to the filters, too...

The V-Synth uses modeled VCO's to generate some of its oscillators, & pcm waves + Variphrase technology to create some others. I believe both sources pass through COSM modeled filters and APR synthesis.

It is strictly my opinion, but I think the Jupiter-80 nixes the modeled VCO's & increases the role of APR synthesis expanding the capabilities of the pcm + variphrase sources.

I would bet very few people can tell a difference between pcm+variphrase & modeled VCO... I wouldn't be surprised if most people preferred pcm+variphrase. If you think about it, with the low cost of Ram nowadays, the power of today's computers, you could provide "long" sampled waveforms for very little cost. Or you could supply several waveforms plus some kind of randomizer, then pass it through variphrase to produce the same results as a modeled VCO at a fraction of the cost & a fraction of the computing power.

Why exactly are you making conjectures when evidence says otherwise?

The V-Synth uses modeled VCO's to generate some of its oscillators, & pcm waves + Variphrase technology to create some others. I believe both sources pass through COSM modeled filters and APR synthesis.

It is strictly my opinion, but I think the Jupiter-80 nixes the modeled VCO's & increases the role of APR synthesis expanding the capabilities of the pcm + variphrase sources.

You are incorrect. This thread is about the JP-80's VA section and it does not use pcm waveforms.

I would bet very few people can tell a difference between pcm+variphrase & modeled VCO

You are confusing pcm+wariphrase and modeled VCO. The former is used for SN acoustic tones and the latter is used for the VA. Two toally different sound generation sources.

IMO Roland does a great job of creating synth sounds no matter what the technology they use. I think the Supersaw in the JP was a single one with pitch shifting to create the detuned versions.

In any case, it sounds good.

Bruce Lychee wrote:

Why exactly are you making conjectures when evidence says otherwise?

The evidence supports me, completely. This is from the V-Synth splash page @ RolandUS.com

AP (Articulative Phrase) SYNTHESIS technology models the performance behavior and nuance of acoustic musical instruments for naturally expressive sound

Sounds like the beginning of SuperNATURAL to me. Apply this to classic synth sounds....... & you have SuperNatural synth tones.

They're telling you right there in the manual

The JUPITER-80 provides SuperNATURAL Acoustic Tones, which reproduce not merely the sound
of acoustic instruments, but also their performance expression.
A dedicated sound generator suitable for each tone automatically analyzes differences in the
phrases, chords, and melodies played by the musician.

The JUPITER-80 features SuperNATURAL Synth Tones, which realistically deliver everything from
vintage analog synths to digital synths.
The distinctive behavior of an analog synth’s oscillators and filters has been analyzed in order to
reproduce their unique sound.

It's the same thing. The Supernatural sound engine analyzes what is played and applies a calculation to an acoustic instrument like a piano, guitar, violin, oboe, etc...

The Supernatural sound engine does the same for a Jupiter-8, Juno, Moog, CS-80, Oberheim, etc...

Kinda like a modeling amp. I plug my guitar into a box that models a JCM 800, Plexi, Twin, Deluxe, or Mark I.
That box can be a Line-6 or a Fractal Audio Systems. In this case, the Jupiter is more in line with the Fractal Audio System.

Bottom line. If traditional VCO modeling gets you 28 voice polyphony out of the V-Synth GT at the cost of a V-Synth GT, there is no way Roland can deliver an instrument that is light years ahead of the V-Synth GT (and the Jupiter is, with the amount of tones that go into a register, the effects used, & the polyphony) at roughly the same cost using that technology.

Ditch the VCO half of the V-Synth & develop the other side.... & you've got a Jupiter.

bottom line version 2..

Bruce is right.. You ARE making conjecture (or is it unsubstantiated and uninformed rambling?) when the evidence says otherwise.

thunderkyss wrote:

AP (Articulative Phrase) SYNTHESIS technology models the performance behavior and nuance of acoustic musical instruments for naturally expressive sound

Sounds like the beginning of SuperNATURAL to me. Apply this to classic synth sounds....... & you have SuperNatural synth tones.

APS is a THIRD synthesis engine in the V-Synth GT. In structures 1, 2 and 3 you can layer APS with OSC 1 and 2. In structure 4, you can have APS filtered by the COSM filters.

I do not agree with your statement saying that today's RAM costs and DSP power allow for calculated waveforms to be replaced by PCM (may it be Variphrase or not.) Think of PWM, for example.

In this specific thread we're asking ourselves what makes the VA of the JP80 "SuperNatural," as the APS in the V-Synth GT has nothing to do with the VA and that the VA section of the JP80 is only analog.

My answer was : the calculated waveforms of the JP80 benefit from higher computing power, thus resulting in a better definition and less aliasing than pervious VA engines from Roland. This might produce a smoother sound, less digital with more warth, more alike its analog ancestor. And the Supernatural label being more a marketing trick for "higher quality" with regard to the VA.

Chrisk-K wrote:

This thread is about the JP-80's VA section and it does not use pcm waveforms.

According to the Jupiter brochure downloadable from Roland's web site, it does:

"More than 350 types of PCM digital-synth waveform patterns are onboard, plus a coveted collection of analog waveforms that harkens back to classic vintage synths."

It sounds like the "coveted collection" ( SAW SQUARE PULSE/PWM TRIANGLE SINE NOISE SUPER SAW ) is not PCM, and the rest are. It continues:

"PCM waveform patterns let you recreate contemporary digital synth sounds"

and lists 30 examples.

You can download the brochure ("Jupiter Series Catalog") at
http://www.roland.com/products/en/JUPITER-50/

The link is about half way down the sidebar.