As I have put in other comments below other demonstration of the JD-800, I had the chance to play this synthesizer when one showed up on the floor of my favorite instrument retailer in 2003. But for the fact that I didn’t have a lot of cash at that point and was generally discouraged from getting too much equipment, I might’ve purchased it there and then. Today, in 2024, I’ve got an ASM Hydrasynth Explorer which I’m trying to program sounds on emulating the sound set on the JD-800 and DX7 (along with classic analog synths).
Do you think the Roland Fantom (2019) with it's Jd800 and D50 can have such a good sound ? i always thought the preamp and perhaps converters and maybe some sort of exciter contributed to the sound. You do say it in the video about the converters but i wondered if you had compared it yourself ? Ps: maybe one of Roland last great digital synths and the analog kind of sounds are so good ...
Yeah I think you're right. There's definitely something in the output stage of the early Roland digital synths that made them sound 'richer' and more dynamic than their later digital synths. I bought the JV-80 synthesizer in 1992, which had a very similar synth engine to the JD-800, but with different samples more suitable for multi-timbral use. It had a 'presence' slider on it that gave it a more pronounced high-end and bass. I think it was more than just a simple EQ. After a key broke I switched to the XP-50 synthesizer that had just come out then (which has the same synth engine as the JV-1080 module). Although this had most of the same samples and sounds from the JV-80, I didn't find it sounding quite as rich and dynamic as the JV-80 did.
Excellent synthesizer. What makes is special is the careful selection of the waveforms, geared towards reproducing electronic sounds, rather than acoustic. Even if the JD piano became "classic" enough to made it to the SH-4d. Anyway, to me personally, the JD-800 is a further development of the D-70, which in turn was a merge between the U-20 and S-770 multimode filters. One negative aspect of the JD-800 is that it lacks oscillator intermodulation of any kind. The D-70 doesn't have it either, but at least it has DLM (Differential Loop Modulation), which produces some excellent Moog bass type of sounds. The earlier D-series like the D-50 and D-10/D-20 used to have variable pulse wave generator, which the JD-800 could definitely use, but I guess by the late '80s, both the players and manufacturers realized that such features were obsolete, relegating both the D-series and Yamaha DX-series to the past. Sampling was in, and for a good reason. There's really no difference between a sawthooth weaveform played back from a memory address, versus generating one with a software algorithm. Now, let's address the obvious. The looks and feel of the JD-800 are second to none. To be honest, all Roland synthesizers sound great, being it a D-50, D-20, U-20, D-70, JV-80, etc. But none of them has the presence of the JD-800. I also find it amazing, that the synth aficionados never refer to the JD-800 with the derogatory "rompler" term. They would say the JD-800 has single-cycle waveforms, or that it has software generated waveforms, but let's face it, the JD-800 samples are just sample read from an address, just like in the Roland W-30. It's also interesting that when they encounter a D-70 or M1, they immediately utter the world "rompler". To me, both the M1 and D-70 are excellent synthesizers with wealth of progamming parameters to keep you occupied as much as you'd like. The JD-800 takes the nod when it comes the build quality and presence factors.
Thanks for the feedback!! & what detail - I think to sum up - the main thing about the JD800 is that every paremter is on the board making it quick to program - a usual feature on analog synths but a rare feature on digital synths - making this a unique synth
@AndyWhitmore Well, JD-800 isn't much different from the D-50 with a PG-1000 programmer attached. The D-70 no longer needed a "programmer" because a lot of parameters could be viewed on its larger screen. To me, personally, the term "programming" should apply to the software developers who wrote the synthesizer's operating system. Calling sound settings changes "programming" is a bit like calling changing Windows or Mac control panel settings programming. I'd call it editing at the most. As far as the derogatory term "rompler" goes, if the Korg M1, Roland D-70, or JV-80 are commonly termed as a romplers, so should be the JD-800, since synthesis concepts on all these instruments are exactly the same. As a side note, the JD-990 had an edge over the JD-800 in synthesis parameters, since it had oscillator sync and oscillator cross modulation parameters that JD-800 did not have. So, as a synthesizer, the JD-990 is actually more powerful.
@@AndyWhitmore I can understand a lot of people will remember the JD800/990 for this, but I thought it was a preset... apparently not! I could not find a video about making the patch.
Old digital synths are great - but they are easier to replicate than analog synths - but I do like the fact that the synth switches on & plays - where as i had the Wavestation as a virtual synth - but had to pay £300 when I upgraded the Mac then when I upgraded again - I went & bought the stand alone unit - 2nd hand for £400! - Guess what - 2 years later - it still works!
Still annoyed about the sequencer because wen you want to do your own stuff the . Grunts. Keep coming in. So I use midi it aturia b step .. it’s definitely a no buy. But I’ve already bought it
Excellent playing! I always love when a person testing presets knows where they want to take each sound to feature it.
Glad you like it!
As I have put in other comments below other demonstration of the JD-800, I had the chance to play this synthesizer when one showed up on the floor of my favorite instrument retailer in 2003. But for the fact that I didn’t have a lot of cash at that point and was generally discouraged from getting too much equipment, I might’ve purchased it there and then. Today, in 2024, I’ve got an ASM Hydrasynth Explorer which I’m trying to program sounds on emulating the sound set on the JD-800 and DX7 (along with classic analog synths).
Good luck with your sounds!!
Beautiful synth! One of my all time favorites! I caught that Child of Vision/Supertramp riff… very nice!😁
I'm glad you enjoyed the synth! Supertramp has such a timeless sound, and that riff is definitely a classic!
3:49 (Spun Glass) - This beautiful preset has been used on Genesis song - "Hold On My Heart", layered with pad sound from Korg Wavestation!
Thanks for pointing out!!
Nice demo! I really like this synth...just scared of the red glue issue. It sounds killer! Great playing.
No problems with mine!
That Iceman Pad is used in Neon Kitchen by Devon Hendryx
Really - thanks for the update
Preset #75 - Velo Crunch is one of the main leads Kevin Moore used on Dream Theater’s early albums
Absolutely correct - Thanks for watching - 😃👍😎
Cool yes but where did you get that Oberheim shirt. I seriously need that in my life. Cheers !!! 🥂
Thanks- it was a present from one of my engineers!!
I've got the jd990 rack version. I bought it 2nd hand from Peter Schmeichel, ex man United goalkeeper.
I think the JD990 is exactly the same insides as the JD800 - a good buy!
at the beginning, it sounded like 808 pacific state, i was just expecting the synth sax to start playing :)
Watch this space- I have a video of 100 famous synth riffs on the original synths coming up soon!! Thanks for watching!!
Do you think the Roland Fantom (2019) with it's Jd800 and D50 can have such a good sound ? i always thought the preamp and perhaps converters and maybe some sort of exciter contributed to the sound. You do say it in the video about the converters but i wondered if you had compared it yourself ? Ps: maybe one of Roland last great digital synths and the analog kind of sounds are so good ...
Thanks for watching!🤪
Not compared myself!!
@@AndyWhitmore 😆 existential questions ....thanks for your reply....
Yeah I think you're right. There's definitely something in the output stage of the early Roland digital synths that made them sound 'richer' and more dynamic than their later digital synths. I bought the JV-80 synthesizer in 1992, which had a very similar synth engine to the JD-800, but with different samples more suitable for multi-timbral use. It had a 'presence' slider on it that gave it a more pronounced high-end and bass. I think it was more than just a simple EQ. After a key broke I switched to the XP-50 synthesizer that had just come out then (which has the same synth engine as the JV-1080 module). Although this had most of the same samples and sounds from the JV-80, I didn't find it sounding quite as rich and dynamic as the JV-80 did.
Excellent synthesizer. What makes is special is the careful selection of the waveforms, geared towards reproducing electronic sounds, rather than acoustic. Even if the JD piano became "classic" enough to made it to the SH-4d. Anyway, to me personally, the JD-800 is a further development of the D-70, which in turn was a merge between the U-20 and S-770 multimode filters. One negative aspect of the JD-800 is that it lacks oscillator intermodulation of any kind. The D-70 doesn't have it either, but at least it has DLM (Differential Loop Modulation), which produces some excellent Moog bass type of sounds. The earlier D-series like the D-50 and D-10/D-20 used to have variable pulse wave generator, which the JD-800 could definitely use, but I guess by the late '80s, both the players and manufacturers realized that such features were obsolete, relegating both the D-series and Yamaha DX-series to the past. Sampling was in, and for a good reason. There's really no difference between a sawthooth weaveform played back from a memory address, versus generating one with a software algorithm.
Now, let's address the obvious. The looks and feel of the JD-800 are second to none. To be honest, all Roland synthesizers sound great, being it a D-50, D-20, U-20, D-70, JV-80, etc. But none of them has the presence of the JD-800. I also find it amazing, that the synth aficionados never refer to the JD-800 with the derogatory "rompler" term. They would say the JD-800 has single-cycle waveforms, or that it has software generated waveforms, but let's face it, the JD-800 samples are just sample read from an address, just like in the Roland W-30. It's also interesting that when they encounter a D-70 or M1, they immediately utter the world "rompler". To me, both the M1 and D-70 are excellent synthesizers with wealth of progamming parameters to keep you occupied as much as you'd like. The JD-800 takes the nod when it comes the build quality and presence factors.
Thanks for the feedback!! & what detail - I think to sum up - the main thing about the JD800 is that every paremter is on the board making it quick to program - a usual feature on analog synths but a rare feature on digital synths - making this a unique synth
@AndyWhitmore Well, JD-800 isn't much different from the D-50 with a PG-1000 programmer attached. The D-70 no longer needed a "programmer" because a lot of parameters could be viewed on its larger screen. To me, personally, the term "programming" should apply to the software developers who wrote the synthesizer's operating system. Calling sound settings changes "programming" is a bit like calling changing Windows or Mac control panel settings programming. I'd call it editing at the most.
As far as the derogatory term "rompler" goes, if the Korg M1, Roland D-70, or JV-80 are commonly termed as a romplers, so should be the JD-800, since synthesis concepts on all these instruments are exactly the same.
As a side note, the JD-990 had an edge over the JD-800 in synthesis parameters, since it had oscillator sync and oscillator cross modulation parameters that JD-800 did not have. So, as a synthesizer, the JD-990 is actually more powerful.
How is the famous pizzicato sound programmed?
I'll come back to you!
@@AndyWhitmore I can understand a lot of people will remember the JD800/990 for this, but I thought it was a preset... apparently not! I could not find a video about making the patch.
@@studio48nl DO IT!
Just to let you know it's your fault I just bought one yesterday ;-)))) couldn't be happier with the choice. Always wanted one anyways.
Enjoy! Glad u wanted it that bad!! How’s it going?
Cool synth
Thank you for the compliment!
3:23 this sounds like metallic madness past
That’s what we do!!
@@AndyWhitmore wait that was intended?!?
@@DubiousDepthsRadio no - i was just jamming!
@@AndyWhitmore ow okkk
İ have JD08 boutique series it has the same voices even some of them are more brilliant and clear...
Old digital synths are great - but they are easier to replicate than analog synths - but I do like the fact that the synth switches on & plays - where as i had the Wavestation as a virtual synth - but had to pay £300 when I upgraded the Mac then when I upgraded again - I went & bought the stand alone unit - 2nd hand for £400! - Guess what - 2 years later - it still works!
Time for me to sell my JD800!!
Why 😅
@@Suppenhuhn0815 Justr replying to the comment above!
the best pad machine on earth after korg wavestate...
It is really good- and so is the WSR1!
The fantasia 90` It's the sound of anime
Agreed
You're talking to the wrong camera mate.
Thanks for the feedback! I'll make sure to double-check my camera angles next time!
Still annoyed about the sequencer because wen you want to do your own stuff the . Grunts. Keep coming in. So I use midi it aturia b step .. it’s definitely a no buy. But I’ve already bought it
Thanks for sharing!
200 quid on roland cloud.