Have I got this right?

I'm pretty sure that Roland will let Fantom gradually evolve and bring all necessary features through firmware updates.

Looking back to Fantom-G series developing stages, that's exactly what they did. From this perspective, it’s just incredible how much new stuff their updates use to add to the old Fantom-G functionality. Not to mention that they also use to update it with new fresh sounds.

I don't see why that shouldn't happen with this new Fantom as well.

Cheers.

Agreed, I see Roland incorporation new updates for this new system in the future.

I think a lot of people who post on this synth are being overly critical. No one is forgcinf anyone to purchase this instrument, yet so many people want to bash it and justify why they aren’t going to get it becuasae it didn’t release with X feature like an old version did.

Many products are released with “coming soon” features, so this is nothing new.

In the meantime, people who appreciate the synth for what it is today are already getting one and getting on with it, rather than fuss about its shortcomings...

In the past Roland hasn’t always delivered on the promises with new updates...

I stick to the Fantom G and see what happens to this... if they update it I will consider one...

It is not being critical and I am not interested on bashing it, but just knowing what you really get... if I didn’t have the Fantom G I would have already bought it...

I might buy the Jupiter XM to get the ZenCore engine and connect it to the Fantom G instead...

Thanks anyway

L

You got the gist. Fantom G was a very capable machine, no doubt. I'm a little curious how the machine performed with 100+ tracks of midi plus 24 tracks audio running simultaneously.

I could give you an even bigger list of benefits the new Fantom has over the G but I think you know what they are already.

They may or may not address these things in firmware updates. Always buy a product for what it does now, not on the expectation or hope that the features you want will be added later.

Well, FG clearly could only directly access 32 midi channels, vs the Fantom 16 .. the high track count allowed the user to use the phrase structure (modern day parlance would be "clips") to reuse those 32 channels .. as obviously you cant access 100+ midi ch :)

Over the years I totally got over the gas seen by improvements in sound quality (FA etc) by buying the integra 7 and using the FG as a sequencer & master controller for the I7, a Virus, Nova and an OB-6.

I think there are probably many folk like me.. the Fantom G was a beautiful well made piece of gear with a phenomenal UI, great sequencer, deep editing, sampling, RPS and a long host of (what turn out to be) really great features...These folk have looked at everything that came out, got green when hearing the FA...and so jumped on the I7... and now?

In reality, it is not unreasonable more than a decade later to be looking for something that is better across the board than the FG.. and so far it seems that for me at least, right now, the Fantom would appear to be a step back in everything except some sound improvements .. and that actually, is the easiest thing to find a solution for by using other gear... sequencer?..not so much

Devnor wrote:

You got the gist. Fantom G was a very capable machine, no doubt. I'm a little curious how the machine performed with 100+ tracks of midi plus 24 tracks audio running simultaneously.

I could give you an even bigger list of benefits the new Fantom has over the G but I think you know what they are already.

I believe Roland has recognized some things are better done in a host. Everyone works differently but the thing most have in common is the DAW. Players that don't own synths yet likely use a DAW. Buy a Fantom and it's going to work with your stuff. The alternative is to abandon everything you've been using and do it all in the new Fantom - because that's the way workstation users worked 15 years ago. That makes no sense. They can't do both at a high level, at least 1 week after the product ships.

Too bad Fantom doesn't have a real sampler and SSD storage device. That would really drive up the price so a decision had to be made. Samplers are probably the easiest thing to substitute and we've all got our preferences whether you use giant libraries or old Akai orchestra hits.

As a synthesizer guy, the ZEN Core Fantom has much more sex appeal than the G for me, and right now is the only real rival to the Kronos. Is it perfect? What keyboard is?

We always deal with this in every cycle of new tech to hit the market. Are the new toys that much better than what we have now? In most cases, arguably yes. But rather than look for validation of what you have or whether you should dump and buy the new toys, fire up what you have and play around with it. Then go to a store and see if the new kit gives you something you want. It shouldn't be such a big drama.

By the way, I love workstations. Actually prefer them. I don't like being handcuffed to a computer all the time. Turning on one thing rather than several is so much more convenient for me.

GCFKeys wrote:

I'm pretty sure that Roland will let Fantom gradually evolve and bring all necessary features through firmware updates.
Looking back to Fantom-G series developing stages, that's exactly what they did.

In what universe did that happen?

I own a G7 for many years now. As far as I know, the G got one main firmware update which merely contained content instead of features. It's still missing the possibility to make a track 'Solo' (which the X could). And it's still missing the possibility to automate audio tracks. To name a few.

Apart from that, there's no workstation that beats the Fantom G where it comes to sequencing and editing without the need of a DAW. But Roland should support their products better. Much better.

Sutur wrote:

GCFKeys wrote:

I'm pretty sure that Roland will let Fantom gradually evolve and bring all necessary features through firmware updates.
Looking back to Fantom-G series developing stages, that's exactly what they did.

In what universe did that happen?

I own a G7 for many years now. As far as I know, the G got one main firmware update which merely contained content instead of features. It's still missing the possibility to make a track 'Solo' (which the X could). And it's still missing the possibility to automate audio tracks. To name a few.

Apart from that, there's no workstation that beats the Fantom G where it comes to sequencing and editing without the need of a DAW. But Roland should support their products better. Much better.

This is alarming.

I have been reading posts in this forum and also in facebook and watched videos on youtube.

People are reporting possible hardware faults, freezes at startup or saving tones, midi implementation not quite there, questioning the pads functionalities, talk about missing vocoder, loose screens, etc.

I hope Roland responds quickly...

GCFKeys wrote:

I'm pretty sure that Roland will let Fantom gradually evolve and bring all necessary features through firmware updates.

Looking back to Fantom-G series developing stages, that's exactly what they did. From this perspective, it’s just incredible how much new stuff their updates use to add to the old Fantom-G functionality. Not to mention that they also use to update it with new fresh sounds.

I don't see why that shouldn't happen with this new Fantom as well.

Cheers.

Yeah, but they also managed to screw up the Librarian, who doesn't support multisamples and left you with a half backed system and only three ARX cards to choose from. Drums, E-Piano and Brass, which are all very good. There was no real VA in the machine and an ARX card could have delivered that. Maybe a JP-8000 or V-Synth card.
This time they included a nice VA engine, but left some other stuff out. And who says they will not stop and leave it in an inconsistent state again? Over 3000€ for a machine of a company you can't trust? Not that Korg acts any better. The Kronos still runs on 1995 software.

Saxifraga wrote:

GCFKeys wrote:

I'm pretty sure that Roland will let Fantom gradually evolve and bring all necessary features through firmware updates.

Looking back to Fantom-G series developing stages, that's exactly what they did. From this perspective, it’s just incredible how much new stuff their updates use to add to the old Fantom-G functionality. Not to mention that they also use to update it with new fresh sounds.

I don't see why that shouldn't happen with this new Fantom as well.

Cheers.

Yeah, but they also managed to screw up the Librarian, who doesn't support multisamples and left you with a half backed system and only three ARX cards to choose from. Drums, E-Piano and Brass, which are all very good. There was no real VA in the machine and an ARX card could have delivered that. Maybe a JP-8000 or V-Synth card.
This time they included a nice VA engine, but left some other stuff out. And who says they will not stop and leave it in an inconsistent state again? Over 3000€ for a machine of a company you can't trust? Not that Korg acts any better. The Kronos still runs on 1995 software.

Yes I was looking for more ARX cards, they could have delivered a VA engine and more polyphony.

I also read that the iArpeggiator on the Jupiter X/XM is much better than what on the Fantom... and that the Fantom cannot yet create its own arpeggio and it is not multi parts...

Not sure I understand Roland ...