SY-1000 vs VG-99 Alternate Tuning and Harmonist

Started by Piing, December 15, 2019, 09:53:04 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Piing

I have been comparing the Alternate Tuning and the Harmonist parameters of the VG-99 (pages 26-30 and 116-117) with the SY-1000 (pages 24-25 and 47), one by one, and I believe that we can safely say that the SY-1000 will cover all the features of the VG-99 for these two functions :)

I read somewhere that the SY-1000 range was only -12/+12 but it is -24/+24, same as the VG-99

Plus some additional features at the SY-1000:

  • DROP-A tuning (though that can be set at the VG-99 with the User type)
  • 2 Voices at the Harmonist!!  They can be set in mono or in stereo
  • Level, Pre-delay (in ms or BMP) and Feedback parameters for the harmonist voices
  • 10 memory slots to store Harmonist Variations that can be used at the patches

No PAN control for the harmonist voices when set in stereo. Shall we add that to the firmware wish list?

mooncaine

However, the manual for the SY1K assures us that the Harmonist effect is monophonic input only. It says that playing 2 or more notes will not do.

Piing

Quote from: mooncaine on December 15, 2019, 10:22:54 PM
However, the manual for the SY1K assures us that the Harmonist effect is monophonic input only. It says that playing 2 or more notes will not do.

I missed that point. Then, we cannot say that the SY-1000 Harmonist can replace the VG-99

Vaultnaemsae

Vaultnaemsae's SoundCloud:
https://soundcloud.com/vaultnaemsae

Frank

Quote from: Piing on December 15, 2019, 11:38:59 PM
I missed that point. Then, we cannot say that the SY-1000 Harmonist can replace the VG-99
Polyphonic harmonist is one for the wish list I think.

vanceg

Quote from: Frank on December 19, 2019, 02:09:16 AM
Polyphonic harmonist is one for the wish list I think.

Absolutely - The Poly Harmonist is 100X more useful than the mono version.  There is no other product I know of other than the VG99 that has this.  It's profoundly powerful but since almost nobody has used it (since the VG-99 is only moderately popular) I think folks don't realize what it can do. It's really pretty profound to have user definable scales on a poloyphonic harmonizer.   You can do anyting from simple harmonizing solo lines to creating pedal tone/drone notes, to complex chordal reharmonizations.... heck... you can set it so you never play a note outside the key you playing in... it's DEEP man. 

I'm a strong advocate for more Poly effects and absoluteing having the Poly Harmonizer.

chrish

Quote from: vanceg on December 19, 2019, 09:54:29 AM
Absolutely - The Poly Harmonist is 100X more useful than the mono version.  There is no other product I know of other than the VG99 that has this.  It's profoundly powerful but since almost nobody has used it (since the VG-99 is only moderately popular) I think folks don't realize what it can do. It's really pretty profound to have user definable scales on a poloyphonic harmonizer.   You can do anyting from simple harmonizing solo lines to creating pedal tone/drone notes, to complex chordal reharmonizations.... heck... you can set it so you never play a note outside the key you playing in... it's DEEP man. 

I'm a strong advocate for more Poly effects and absoluteing having the Poly Harmonizer.
That is the one feature I wish they would add to the SY1000.

However, all is not lost. With the VG99 I would dial up a Baritone guitar alt tuning and only use the VG to output the Baritone midi information to an external PCM synth or mono analog synths or both.

Then parallel that audio with my regular guitar sound. My regular guitar sound signal path is all  analog 12ax7 tube pre and spring reverb into digital fx back to a mixer and out to a stereo micro Tube amp.

I will also mix in a GR300 to that regular guitar sound.

aliensporebomb

#7
Since the new box has pitch up and pitch down from the hex pitch tuning I think it will do what you ask (update 2022: yes it does - mostly) - I don't know too many who used the "harmonist" effect or "pitch shift" in FX A or FX B chains to accomplish pitch transposition because they are both rather coarse compared to the super clean polyphonic pitch transposer they use to create 12 string and drop tunings and other things.   

I always use that hexaphonic pitch transposer in the alt tune section.  THAT's the one to use, super clean and ready to do anything you might need it for.  And it's the harmony section in that alt tune section that is the powerful one.   

Unless you guys found some other way of doing intelligent clean cool sounding harmonies I can't think of any other way to do it than the way I discuss.
My music projects online at http://www.aliensporebomb.com/

GK Devices:  Roland VG-99, Boss GP-10, Boss SY-1000.

vanceg

Yeah - THAT is the one!  The VG-99's HARMO... Man that is FANTASTIC.  But alas.... not in the SY-1000.

Quote from: aliensporebomb on December 19, 2019, 09:41:04 PM
Since the new box has pitch up and pitch down from the hex pitch tuning I think it will do what you ask - I don't know too many who used the "harmonist" effect or "pitch shift" in FX A or FX B chains to accomplish pitch transposition because they are both rather coarse compared to the super clean polyphonic pitch transposer they use to create 12 string and drop tunings and other things.   

I always use that hexaphonic pitch transposer in the alt tune section.  THAT's the one to use, super clean and ready to do anything you might need it for.  And it's the harmony section in that alt tune section that is the powerful one.   

Unless you guys found some other way of doing intelligent clean cool sounding harmonies I can't think of any other way to do it than the way I discuss.

Elantric

#9
Quote from: vanceg on January 29, 2020, 07:56:41 PM
Yeah - THAT is the one!  The VG-99's HARMO... Man that is FANTASTIC.  But alas.... not in the SY-1000.

SY-1000 Harmonizer in each FX block
This works well - 2 part Stereo Harmonizers with User defined -24/+24 step harmonies
and you can use up to Three in parallel per patch   



Compare to the VG-99 version below

Frank

#10
Quote from: Elantric on January 29, 2020, 08:05:16 PM
SY-1000 Harmonizer in each FX block
This works well - 2 part Stereo Harmonizers with User defined -24/+24 step harmonies
and you can use up to Three in parallel per patch   



Compare to the VG-99 version below


I think Todd was referring to the diatonic, polyphonic harmonizer ("Harmony"), in the VG-99 and VG-8/88.
Which isn't currently possible in the SY-1000.

A big V-Guitar development point for me, would be to harness modern DSP power and not only bring back the polyphonic harmony from these units, but permit per string diatonic/user defined harmony within the polyphonic harmonizer.

Nobulusprime

The Polyphonic Harmoniser has been with the VG range from the beginning. It's what Holdsworth used on 16 Men of Tain. One good reason to keep my VG99 I guess. I hope that the SY1000 can incorporate this but I'm guessing it might be a DSP issue :(

BROCKSTAR

#12
Yeah I read somewhere that Steve said the sy-1000 only has like 15% left for firmware stuff... I don't see this being added since it'll most likely be a DSP hog. I doubt many things in the wish list will be added now with 15% only considering it'll be needed for bug fixing and small things to keep the unit going. I could be wrong? Maybe 15% is a lot in DSP world? 

Frank

Quote from: Nobulusprime on February 02, 2020, 04:14:44 AM
The Polyphonic Harmoniser has been with the VG range from the beginning. It's what Holdsworth used on 16 Men of Tain. One good reason to keep my VG99 I guess. I hope that the SY1000 can incorporate this but I'm guessing it might be a DSP issue :(


Indeed, polyphonic harmony and Vari Guitar are just some of the many reasons why I've stuck with the VG range since I bought my first VG-8EX in 1998.

It would be great to see them both return.


mooncaine

Quote from: BROCKSTAR on February 02, 2020, 04:53:02 AM
Yeah I read somewhere that Steve said the sy-1000 only has like 15% left for firmware stuff... I don't see this being added since it'll most likely be a DSP hog. I doubt many things in the wish list will be added now with 15% only considering it'll be needed for bug fixing and small things to keep the unit going. I could be wrong? Maybe 15% is a lot in DSP world?
Maybe they could offer a choice, 2 different firmwares. I would love to jettison some of those models and amp models in exchange for a proper polyphonic harmonizer. Take the banjo, please.

mos6507

Quote from: mooncaine on February 02, 2020, 07:43:02 PM
Maybe they could offer a choice, 2 different firmwares. I would love to jettison some of those models and amp models in exchange for a proper polyphonic harmonizer. Take the banjo, please.

Personally I think if they're going to charge a grand for this that the internal hardware shouldn't impart any compromises.  The feature-set should match the hardware and everything should be balanced.  They chose to have three INST blocks and each should all do everything the VG-99 can do and more, otherwise it's a design flaw and in a couple years when more powerful DSPs come down in price it will be obsolete yet again but the hardware will be locked in and they'll keep selling it for years and years.  I would have rather they got ahead of the curve and sourced a more powerful DSP and offered the unit at a higher price-point than to scrimp on features.  I'd even have rather they limited it to only two INST blocks and loaded it up with more features and FX blocks instead.  I mean, how often are you going to layer all of them at once?  It's more important that an individual layer have more features than to have more layers with fewer features.

As it is, if they want to add a new feature and make it so that all three INST blocks support it then you multiply the processor requirements by 3.  If they make it so that only one INST block has "special" features the others don't then it gets a little kludgy.
Michael Dolan Doubleneck
Les Paul Custom

VG-99
FTP

vanceg

I agree to a very larger degree:  I'd rather see more of a "no compromise", "flagship" type product that can "do it all". 
But - This has to make sense from a financial point of view. You say that if they are going to charge a grand for this, then there shouldn't be any compromises. Well, the SY-1000 is what they believe they can make and sell for $1000.  How much more might you be willing to pay for an "ultimate" processor that does have more power.

We can absolutely assume that Roland is making the most out of the chip that they are using. It may not be obvious to us why one or another feature is not included in the SY-1000.  For example - it may not be strictly a matter of processing power that keeps one feature or another from working on the SY-1000;  it could be that eliminating one of the three INST sources and that entire signal chain might NOT have enabled more features in the SY-1000.  My point is that it's not NECESSARILY quite as straight ahead as eliminating one feature in order to open up DSP power for another feature. 

After talking with the Roland design team, It strikes me that these folks have undoubtedly made some hard decisions about what to include and what not to include in the SY-1000 and are likely pushing the chip that they have in there as far as they can.

Of COURSE it woudl be possible for them to design a more powerful device... the question is: Would we pay for it.

Frankly, I'd say yes.  Yes I would personally be more willing to pay $1200-1700 for a "ultimate" guitar processing and synthesis box.... I wonder if $1200 would do it?




Quote from: mos6507 on February 02, 2020, 08:38:44 PM
Personally I think if they're going to charge a grand for this that the internal hardware shouldn't impart any compromises.  The feature-set should match the hardware and everything should be balanced.  They chose to have three INST blocks and each should all do everything the VG-99 can do and more, otherwise it's a design flaw and in a couple years when more powerful DSPs come down in price it will be obsolete yet again but the hardware will be locked in and they'll keep selling it for years and years.  I would have rather they got ahead of the curve and sourced a more powerful DSP and offered the unit at a higher price-point than to scrimp on features.  I'd even have rather they limited it to only two INST blocks and loaded it up with more features and FX blocks instead.  I mean, how often are you going to layer all of them at once?  It's more important that an individual layer have more features than to have more layers with fewer features.

As it is, if they want to add a new feature and make it so that all three INST blocks support it then you multiply the processor requirements by 3.  If they make it so that only one INST block has "special" features the others don't then it gets a little kludgy.

mos6507

I've said it before but it seems clear from me that they are marketing this as an upgrade path for SY-300 users rather than VG or GR upgrade.  That explains the factory patches being heavily stacked with synth tones, Ghostbusters demos, etc...  Maybe in their minds the synth tones are seen as the bread and butter and the guitar modeling is just a bonus.  I think that factored into them culling certain VG-centric features.

The suggestion earlier for two firmware versions might be something they could consider, but not to confuse the market with two competing firmwares, but to just split the product into two skus (similar to the VG-99 vs. VB-99).  I mean, is the VB-99 really that different electronically inside or is it just different firmware?  The same could be done with the SY-1000.  Drop an INST channel, add in tons more FX blocks and missing Poly FX, call it the VG-1000 and you'll satisfy those who are more VG-centric and don't need so much layering.

That's all assuming they simply don't have the bandwidth to add in all the features on the firmware wish list...
Michael Dolan Doubleneck
Les Paul Custom

VG-99
FTP

gumtown

The ultimate software accompaniment for the SY-1000 would be "Boss Firmware Studio", and compile your own designer firmware set by DSP limit.
No need for firmware updates, only Boss Firmware Studio needs be updated.

Want 6 instrument modeling/synth engines and no effects ?, just drag and drop them in.
Want just one instrument modelling/synth engines and loads of deep effects ?, just drag and drop them as you like in the firmware editor and update the SY-1000.
Free "GR-55 FloorBoard" editor software from https://sourceforge.net/projects/grfloorboard/

chrish

When I was building houses, I built it then put it on the market. If someone liked it, they purchased it. If they didn't, they moved on to a home that they would enjoy.

I didn't build custom homes because it's very difficult to please the average consumer and the builder then has to deal with a lot of BS.

A friend,who did build custom houses, once had a client who was determined to have Christmas dinner in their new vacation home and really stressed out my friend who was trying hard to make that happenen. It didn't. Building is complex.

Another builder friend had a motto printed up on his business card. "We'll get it right no matter what it costs" but not everyone could afford to hire him.

From reading the forum, I have a greater understanding of just what they can and can't put in these coded boxes and why. Building is complex and its very hard to please everyone all of the time.

I think Roland did a great job with this and I'm sure the very talented folks here will get the most out of it.

Just hope they continue to share their patches with those of us who have to pound nails for a living and have to find the time, when the hands are working, to even to play guitar. ;)





mos6507

#20
Homes don't have firmware updates.  Roland does have the flexibility of evolving this thing post-release.  They didn't meet with VG forum members just to tell them it was their way or the highway.

It's easy to say just hold onto your VG-99 but the problem is it has a narrower digital signal path.  So you give up audio fidelity in exchange for those missing features.  I think if Roland wants to establish a new baseline for 13-pin users then they should offer all of the core features that have been present in previous units somewhere in the product lineup.

What I've noticed from their past releases is they tend to always spinoff multiple variants based on whatever the current hardware platform is, despite how niche it may be.  Some of this stuff is sort of head-scratching but it's what they tend to do.  If they make the determination that the processor is too maxed out to add back in some of these features I don't think it's out of the realm of possibility for them to trim some synth functionality in exchange for more VG functionality and send it out again as a rebadged product.

The reason why I don't see them branching the firmware and maintaining the both for the SY-1000 is it causes end-user confusion.  They have to make two sets of documentation, two MIDI implementations, etc...  The only way to really make it clear is to create an artificial separation.  They could, of course, allow both units to load either firmware if you wanted to effectively transform one unit into another, but it wouldn't be marketed that way.  As long as they're just adding functionality then they can just update tone studio and the documentation but if they are taking things away in order to restore missing functionality then that's where it's effectively a product branch because you don't want to pull the rug out from under people.





Michael Dolan Doubleneck
Les Paul Custom

VG-99
FTP

mos6507

Quote from:  Bluesbird on February 03, 2020, 08:54:46 AM
Maybe they'll use the same form factor for a GR-1000, and VG-1000?

We're getting ahead of ourselves.  I think it's just good to have a "party line" if we have their ear at least once a year at NAMM.  If they say they can't do X, Y, Z because they don't have the CPU then we'll have a viable Plan B to suggest but in the meantime we can hope they can add these features in without removing others.

Michael Dolan Doubleneck
Les Paul Custom

VG-99
FTP

germanicus

I highly doubt we will see a VG-1000. The SY-1000 fills that space (expensive, dense guitar/fx/amp modeling device with alternate tunings that also does guitar synthesis processing and Pitch to Midi).

I cant imagine them dedicating resources to slightly skew a different device to an extremely small segment of the market desiring the features left out of the sy1000.
Don't get me wrong, its missing a few things I would like.

Im not sure we will even see another GR unit but who knows.
My albums done with modeling/guitar synth at http://music.steamtheory.com

JTV69/59P/Godin LGXT/Multiac ACS/Variax 700 AC
Helix/FTP/GP10/VG99/SY1000
Traynor k4

admin

#23
Quote from: germanicus on February 03, 2020, 11:23:11 AM
I highly doubt we will see a VG-1000. The SY-1000 fills that space (expensive, dense guitar/fx/amp modeling device with alternate tunings that also does guitar synthesis processing and Pitch to Midi).

I cant imagine them dedicating resources to slightly skew a different device to an extremely small segment of the market desiring the features left out of the sy1000.
Don't get me wrong, its missing a few things I would like.

Im not sure we will even see another GR unit but who knows.

That Sums up my expectations as well.

After playing the SY-1000 for the past month, its very tough to go back to GR-55

There are specific use cases for a cover band- like if you must deliver genuine Piano sounds, Saxophone sounds  - but in that case  - skip the GR-55 as I much prefer using a:
GK Guitar > US-20 A/B/Y Gk Router > into SY-1000 & GR-33   


Go to 07:30 for Piano


Or

GK Guitar > SY-1000 ( and its Main Out into a PA > SY-1000 MIDI Out > Waldorf Blofeld loaded with Grand Piano Samples for PCM type tones



vanceg

It strikes me that the SY-1000 is absolutely a synth-oriented device and that the guitar modeling inside the SY-1000 is meant to enhance the synth capabliites.  I totally agree that it's not REALLY a VG series upgrade.  I suspect they noted that many of the people who were accepting the VG-series technology were also into pushing the boundries of guitar tone toward more "synth like" features and are being responsive to that market:  Lot's of very responsive, direct,  non-MIDI type synth with some added guitar modeling.

I'd think that if they wanted to create a device that would concentrate more on modeling and hexaphonic effects, they might come out with a totally separate product and lable it with the VG moniker. To create two separate firmware versions of the SY-1000 that focus on different aspects of it's capabilites I think would be counter to Roland's previous behavior.  But yes, perhaps the "VG" variation of this product hardware would essentially be an SY-1000 completely relabled as the VG-1000.  I'd hope they'd change the hardware some... but I see where you are coming from.

I do like the 3 signal chains Idea... perhaps if some of the Synth models were removed, we could fit a lot more guitar-modeling type processing onto the same hardware that runs the SY-1000 and still keep the three chains.

Quote from: mos6507 on February 02, 2020, 11:09:16 PM
I've said it before but it seems clear from me that they are marketing this as an upgrade path for SY-300 users rather than VG or GR upgrade.  That explains the factory patches being heavily stacked with synth tones, Ghostbusters demos, etc...  Maybe in their minds the synth tones are seen as the bread and butter and the guitar modeling is just a bonus.  I think that factored into them culling certain VG-centric features.

The suggestion earlier for two firmware versions might be something they could consider, but not to confuse the market with two competing firmwares, but to just split the product into two skus (similar to the VG-99 vs. VB-99).  I mean, is the VB-99 really that different electronically inside or is it just different firmware?  The same could be done with the SY-1000.  Drop an INST channel, add in tons more FX blocks and missing Poly FX, call it the VG-1000 and you'll satisfy those who are more VG-centric and don't need so much layering.

That's all assuming they simply don't have the bandwidth to add in all the features on the firmware wish list...