WISH LIST FOR NEXT ROLAND UNIT ? What's your ultimate pedal?

Started by Elantric, February 10, 2008, 08:54:36 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Elantric

VG-99 Enhancements List - submitted to Roland US at NAMM

Friday Jan, 18, 2008:
Vance Galloway and Steve Conrad met with the Roland US Guitar Products Manager, Peter Swiadon.

Vance and I sat down with Peter for close to an hour discussing the VG-99 Enhancements List.
http://vg-8.com/wiki/VG-99_Enhancements
Two printed hard copies of this document were provided to Peter In addition I informed Peter of the new Vguitar Forum and I printed out various bug reports which have been posted here recently. Peter was most interested in hearing about VG-99 bugs, and he will review our VG-99 Enhancements list with others inside Roland. No specific time frame for a future VG-99 Firmware release was provided.

On Sunday, Friday Jan, 20, 2008, all three of us met again. Roland US feels independent user groups such as ours, Yahoo VG-99users or VG-8.com are the best method for sharing user created VG-99 patches. Nothing is in the works at Roland US to provide a similar resource.

I informed Peter of the need for Roland US to check to be sure they have the latest versions of the VG-99 software downloads. My gripe is the crippled Mac VG-99 Editor 1.01 download link, that is actually missing the Librarian, and only has a stale Version 1.00 VG-99 Editor. He will look into this.
_________________
Steve C

   
chipstar
PostPosted: Mon Jan 21, 2008 3:46 pm    Post subject:    Reply with quote
Wow. 10 pages... This is pretty thorough. I wish that hardware concerns could have been addressed but I'll take what I can get. I truly appreciate the time and effort that you put into this.

later,
Chipstar


   
scarr
PostPosted: Mon Jan 21, 2008 4:26 pm
That's a nice wish list. I hope Roland offers solutions, especially to the plethora of low-hanging fruit in there.

Which bugs were discussed? It'd be nice to know what problems might be getting addressed in the near future.

   
mos6507
PostPosted: Mon Jan 21, 2008 7:29 pm
I'm so glad the word got officially out to them. All of my suggestions included Smile

I only saw one typo in there. Otherwise a very professional document.

Considering that the VG-99 was heavily influenced by the "Next-Gen VG" Wiki, I'm hopeful that Roland will continue to use this feedback. Still with the communication with Roland was more direct and transparent but this is probably as good as it's going to get due to their heirarchical corporate structure.

   
Sustainiac
PostPosted: Mon Jan 21, 2008 7:44 pm
Submitting these documents to Roland US is about as good as it gets for us. Short of flying to Japan, and locating my friend at Kanda Shokai (Fender Japan)
http://www.kandashokai.co.jp/

to help me translate and participate in a VG-99 design review meeting with the actual Roland Japan engineers at Roland Headquarters.

Though in many ways its frustrating. A bit like if you lived in Cleveland, Ohio - and had a meeting with the local Cleveland Ohio Honda Car dealer to see if they can tell Honda in Japan to change how the instrument panel works on the 2008 Honda Civic .

Roland US is Roland Japan's largest customer. But the actual decisions on what gets included and what does not for the next VG-99 update happens in Japan.
_________________
Steve C
   
Sustainiac   
PostPosted: Mon Jan 21, 2008 8:16 pm    Post subject:    Reply with quote
>Which bugs were discussed?

Last Thursday Jan 17, 2007 at 6pm - I printed out these threads from our Vguitar Forum and handed them to Peter Swiadon at Roland US

Bugs and Workarounds
http://vguitar.freeforums.org/viewtopic.php?t=82

Frustrations....
http://vguitar.freeforums.org/viewtopic.php?t=78
_________________
Steve C
Back to top    
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website        
baranger1
   PostPosted: Tue Jan 22, 2008 12:11 am    Post subject:    Reply with quote
Steve,

Is there any way we can get this to Japan?

I know for a fact they do not listen much to the USA.

A few years ago I tried to offer my help on a development basis.
I am a studio musician and have done thousands of sessions.
I believe I could offer the some invaluable help on the studio front but was told all the work was done in Japan and they would not need any help here in the US.
I even sent Roland US a years worth of musician union work dues paper work showing all the sessions I had for the year using Roland/Boss gear.
It was about 3 inches thick!

I think our only chance is to get it direct to Roland Japan.

PS On a side note I even tried to buy Roland stock to show my support and was told by my broker it is only sold in Japan!

Bill


   
Sustainiac
PostPosted: Tue Jan 22, 2008 1:50 am   
>Is there any way we can get this to Japan?

I'm exploring all avenues in pursuit of getting our VG-99 wish list delivered to the responsible parties at Roland Headquarters Japan. The world is shrinking, the people in Hamamatsu, Japan will want to hear our thoughts.
http://www.roland.co.jp/ir/financial.html
_________________
Steve C

   
baranger1
PostPosted: Tue Jan 22, 2008 9:58 am    Post subject:    Reply with quote
Steve,
Thanks from all of us for your hard work!
Hope you had fun at the show.
The Namm show used to be here in Chicago and it was of the highlights of the year for me.
It was so much fun.
I would go home with 40 lbs of literature!

Bill

   
feloniouspunk
PostPosted: Tue Jan 22, 2008 12:46 pm    Post subject:    Reply with quote
Bill- You reside in Chicago? Have you played any live gigs using the 99? I know you said you were studio, but I thought I would ask. I would be curious to hear someone else work a 99 in a live situation.
_________________

   
baranger1
PostPosted: Tue Jan 22, 2008 2:51 pm    Post subject:    Reply with quote
Sorry I do not play live.
For the past 15 years I have been just a studio player.
I do use the 99 on all my sessions now and it is such a pleasure to use.
It is fast, sounds fantastic and with the ribbon and D beam it has become a true extension of the instrument.
I recently sold a VERY expensive Guitar-FX unit ( not to name names) as I was able to copy the sounds I was using and as the operating on the FX unit was way to clunky and slow for session use.
The 99 is very hands on friendly.

Its on the air now on a bunch of TV spots.
I had a call a few weeks ago to do a NASCAR spot where they wanted a a banjo, pedal steel and dobro that were loaded with wild effects and to sound like they twisted and coming from the twilight zone.
How perfect for the VG-99!!!!
Could not have been done with out the VG.

For live use I have a pair of TEC 21 powered speakers I will fire up one day.
It would take a rebuild of EQs to make it work.
Good luck
Bill

   
Sustainiac
PostPosted: Tue Jan 22, 2008 3:42 pm    Post subject:    Reply with quote
> I recently sold a VERY expensive Guitar-FX unit

Let me guess - TC G-Major??, Fractal Axe-FX??
_________________
Steve C


   
baranger1
PostPosted: Tue Jan 22, 2008 5:41 pm    Post subject:    Reply with quote
I aint tellin! Smile

Bill


   
Mincer
PostPosted: Wed Jan 23, 2008 10:50 am    Post subject:    Reply with quote
So as far as the Pitch to Midi issues, did they at least admit that it wasn't up to GI-20 levels?

Sad part is that Roland historically fixes bugs in firmware releases, and doesn't add any new features. And they are really slow at doing that too.
_________________
www.daveeichenberger.com

       
martyn
PostPosted: Wed Jan 23, 2008 3:07 pm    Post subject:    Reply with quote
Great list and thank-you for all the great effort but I am a little sad all of my suggestions seem to have been edited out or mislaid - compare button, direct monitor and USB routings patch programmable, different eq algorithms, etc.

Martyn
his list will be shared with the folks in Japan, but this will be through their normal channels.


quote="Sustainiac"]>Is there any way we can get this to Japan?

I'm exploring all avenues in pursuit of getting our VG-99 wish list delivered to the responsible parties at Roland Headquarters Japan. The world is shrinking, the people in Hamamatsu, Japan will want to hear our thoughts.


http://www.roland.co.jp/ir/financial.html[/quote]


   
vanceg
PostPosted: Sat Jan 26, 2008 8:20 pm    Post subject:    Reply with quote
No, as a matter of fact they say that the VG-99 is at LEAST as capable and fast (er) than the GI-20.

BUT that the String Sensitivity settings on the VG-99 are MUCH MUCH more critical than they are on any other Roland V-Guitar product. It is HIGHLY recommended that you experiment with your string sensitivity (GK settings) to optimize them for MIDI tracking if that is your primary use of the VG-99.



Mincer wrote:
So as far as the Pitch to Midi issues, did they at least admit that it wasn't up to GI-20 levels?

Sad part is that Roland historically fixes bugs in firmware releases, and doesn't add any new features. And they are really slow at doing that too.
Back to top    
View user's profile Send private message        
vancecg
PostPosted: Sat Jan 26, 2008 8:22 pm    Post subject:    Reply with quote
martyn wrote:
Great list and thank-you for all the great effort but I am a little sad all of my suggestions seem to have been edited out or mislaid - compare button, direct monitor and USB routings patch programmable, different eq algorithms, etc.

Martyn


If they were in the Enhancements list online, they made it into the document we presented to Roland.


   
vanceg
PostPosted: Sat Jan 26, 2008 8:26 pm    Post subject:    Reply with quote
vanceg wrote:
martyn wrote:
Great list and thank-you for all the great effort but I am a little sad all of my suggestions seem to have been edited out or mislaid - compare button, direct monitor and USB routings patch programmable, different eq algorithms, etc.

Martyn


If they were in the Enhancements list online, they made it into the document we presented to Roland.
Also note that they may have gotten combined with another similar request - so be sure to look not only for the exact text that you used in the Enhancements list but also for related items.

Compare button was discussed and go a response of "That's an idea that we had at one point that didn't make it into the final version" (not exact quote)
USB routings being Patch Programmable got a response of "I'm not sure that's possible with the system architecture" (not exact quote)
Direct Monitor (muting) got a response of "That's an interesting point. I wonder if more than a couple of users would need that" (not exact quote)

Vance

   
vanceg
PostPosted: Sat Jan 26, 2008 8:29 pm    Post subject:    Reply with quote
chipstar wrote:
Wow. 10 pages... This is pretty thorough. I wish that hardware concerns could have been addressed but I'll take what I can get. I truly appreciate the time and effort that you put into this.

later,
Chipstar


Well, the idea was to provide feedback on the current system. We know that Roland isn't going to add to or significantly change the VG-99 hardware in the immediate future, so we were looking for "doable" changes.

What specific hardware "concerns" do you have?

Vance


       
chipstar
PostPosted: Sun Jan 27, 2008 9:34 pm    Post subject:    Reply with quote
Check the wishlist thread that I started. These are valid hardware oversights considering the 7 year gap since the last VG system. These are the same issues with the GT-6B that were not addressed in the GT-10B.

later,
Chipstar


   
mos6507
PostPosted: Mon Jan 28, 2008 4:54 am    Post subject:    Reply with quote
vanceg wrote:

No, as a matter of fact they say that the VG-99 is at LEAST as capable and fast (er) than the GI-20.

BUT that the String Sensitivity settings on the VG-99 are MUCH MUCH more critical than they are on any other Roland V-Guitar product. It is HIGHLY recommended that you experiment with your string sensitivity (GK settings) to optimize them for MIDI tracking if that is your primary use of the VG-99.


In which case the string sensitivity settings should be separated between the VG and GuitarToMIDI section, if they have to be artificially attenuated for GTM.


   
scarr
PostPosted: Mon Jan 28, 2008 2:41 pm    Post subject:    Reply with quote
mos6507 wrote:
vanceg wrote:

No, as a matter of fact they say that the VG-99 is at LEAST as capable and fast (er) than the GI-20.

BUT that the String Sensitivity settings on the VG-99 are MUCH MUCH more critical than they are on any other Roland V-Guitar product. It is HIGHLY recommended that you experiment with your string sensitivity (GK settings) to optimize them for MIDI tracking if that is your primary use of the VG-99.


In which case the string sensitivity settings should be separated between the VG and GuitarToMIDI section, if they have to be artificially attenuated for GTM.

Maybe if we just got a sensitivity (offset) knob on the GTM it'd be enough.
_________________
Tritone Paradox


   
Mincer
PostPosted: Tue Jan 29, 2008 1:16 am
So there aren't separate sensitivity settings for VG tracking & GtM tracking?
_________________
www.daveeichenberger.com
   
vanceg
PostPosted: Tue Jan 29, 2008 1:29 pm    Post subject:    Reply with quote
chipstar wrote:
Check the wishlist thread that I started. These are valid hardware oversights considering the 7 year gap since the last VG system. These are the same issues with the GT-6B that were not addressed in the GT-10B.

later,
Chipstar


Nobody ever said there weren't valid hardware enhancement requests....just that we were dealing with software based requests in the hopes of getting some solutions in the near-term.

Vance
       
mos6507
PostPosted: Tue Jan 29, 2008 2:15 pm
Mincer wrote:
>So there aren't separate sensitivity settings for VG tracking & GtM tracking?


No, just the play feel settings.

I actually think the GtM patches should be decoupled entirely from the VG ones.

   
chipstar
PostPosted: Wed Jan 30, 2008 2:38 am
No worries. Just my two cents. I've been railing for changes to the Boss GT Series for 4 years and still no change. Apparently, fidelity is not a concern. Oh well.

later,
Chipstar

Elantric

Peter Swaidon wrote>

"we discussed all these items with Roland; they said that unfortunately some things are not possible for technical or resource reasons but agreed to consider all of what could be implemented in future versions of the VG-99."

TygermanGB

Greetings from Berkeley CA,
I have many requests for the new versions but tops on my list is patch chains. Its a list of patches in order for a song or performance. One the VG-99 is in chain mode it would only navigate the patches in the current chain. The unit would store many (32+) of these chains. It would be nice if the chain came with a unique set of the f1-f5 hot patches as well.
-Ty
Parker Guitars - VG-99, VG-8ex, GR-55, GP-10, US-20 and Bidule/Mobious/Jamstix NI for soft synths

Kevan

I'd appreciate it if Roland would simply add 48k digital output. Seems odd that it doesn't.

Kevan

Kenmac

One thing I can't understand, and I mentioned this when I joined the forum, is why Roland didn't include the CHET (Gretsch) model in the VG-99? That's a *very* useful tone for a lot of rockabilly, country and especially early Beatles songs. I'm really hoping Roland will rectify this with a future software update. Now, I wouldn't go as far as saying we have to hold their feet to the fire but it really would be nice to have it back. Hopefully others here will agree with that.
"Let them brush your rock and roll hair."

Billy Kaffadrin

*    External effects loop via usb, through Firmware supporting an Edirol usb audio interface directly on the VG99 usb port. 
       Can insert vintage analog effect pedal before the VG99 effects through usb loop.

*    Larger editor screen for G300 and other synths, with editable objects.

Billy

mos6507

Quote from: Kevan on March 18, 2008, 09:24:26 AM
I'd appreciate it if Roland would simply add 48k digital output. Seems odd that it doesn't.

Kevan

Whatever features require a hardware refresh I'm not keen on because I paid a ton of money for this rig and don't intend to pay Roland again for small incremental improvements.  I don't think I'd pay for another unit unless it did something that was a real big leap forward like having a true polyphonic (6 channel) mode where the entire signal path services only one string at a time.

Michael Dolan Doubleneck
Les Paul Custom

VG-99
FTP

surdaas

^ Are you opposed to adding hardware modules?  With a USB port there is, in theory, a possibility to add hardware modules to enhance the VG-99.  Like external effects send/return loops.  This needs to happen and it should be an option to place these loops anywhere in the chain.  Adding an analogue tube preamp or enhancer would appease the tube-crew, and the ability to add certain pedals and computer plugins could make up for specific effects the VG-99 MOD effects doesn't exactly cover.

Elantric

The VG-99 has a USB Client port  - not a USB Host Port -  so the "added hardware module" would be a PC or MAC running VST FX or AMP Sims.
 

https://www.vguitarforums.com/smf/index.php?topic=485.0

surdaas

Not entirely.  It shouldn't make a difference if the VG-99 is a host or client - client seems logical in this case if the right usb host controller was available.    A PC/Mac host could work but I'm looking for something less cumbersome like dedicated hardware.  Currently I use my DAW and audio interface to mix in the VG-99 and send its output to VSTs and external analog effects, but I need a way to introduce the effects anywhere in the VG-99's COSM effects chain.

Brainstorming here and assuming many things I know little about... Maybe a VG-99 firmware upgrade can allow ASIO input from a DAW via USB (perhaps its ASIO driver is already capable of this?), which would then work with a special COSM module for external audio processing (ie effects loops) that can be returned to the 99 and placed anywhere in the VG-99's processing chain.  Roland/Edirol could make a new audio interface box with a number of true bypass loops that could be the USB host controller to do this in lieu of a computer.

But at the end of the day, all the options are more complicated or expensive to make up for a limiting and negligent design omission.  Another reason why, if it were not for VG-99's superior and versatile instrument modeling, I probably would have buyer's remorse over the VG-99 in comparison to something like the GT-Pro.  Roland's engineers always seem to design the V-Guitar systems as the be-all-end-all "only guitar effects system you will ever need" (circa 1995 VG-8 advert) when reality says otherwise.  I'm looking forward to the eventuality of Roland and Line-6 licensing and selling a kit for the onboard guts of VG-Strat/Variax - and the next generation of onboard instrument modeling technology where these will be entirely programmable virtual instruments and platforms for hosting VSTis.

telengard

Quote from: Kenmac on March 20, 2008, 09:06:23 PM
One thing I can't understand, and I mentioned this when I joined the forum, is why Roland didn't include the CHET (Gretsch) model in the VG-99? That's a *very* useful tone for a lot of rockabilly, country and especially early Beatles songs. I'm really hoping Roland will rectify this with a future software update. Now, I wouldn't go as far as saying we have to hold their feet to the fire but it really would be nice to have it back. Hopefully others here will agree with that.

I'd like to see this too, as well as a little more deep editing possibilities on the VARI guitar.

~telengard
Still stuck in the 1980s.  My mame cabinet, mini home studio, and 8 bit game room:
www.briansturk.com

Elantric

>Not entirely.  It shouldn't make a difference if the VG-99 is a host or client - client seems logical in this case if the right usb host controller was available.


I agree - any device with a USB Host controller that could gain access to the VG-99's ASIO audio driver, and offered real time audio effects would be a good candidate for a VG-99 expander.

To change topics,
For my own VG-99 live use I'm actuallly looking at interfacing the new Line6 M13 into the VG-99's signal path.

vanceg

I'm using a laptop as a psudo effects loop via USB with the VG-99.  Works just fine...though most of the time I just run out of the VG-99 via SPDIF into an audio interface on the computer so that I can run out in quad (VG-99 won't do 4 channels of output from the laptop).

But the USB loop works pretty well.

Vance

Elantric

Vance,

Regarding the USB "virtual FX Loop"  - can you elaborate on your rig?

I'm aware of "Console" for winXP

http://console.jp/en/

console is a plug-in host that allows you to freely combine plug-ins of different formats such as VST2.0 and DirectX (DX) audio. Its modular system allows for flexible routing, and together with its intuitive user interface, enables sound creation at the next level.

And the VST host mentioned here:
https://www.vguitarforums.com/smf/index.php?topic=485.0

http://www.hermannseib.com/english/vsthost.htm
of course any typical DAW app works too - although I have heard the latency is a moving target - some DAW apps are better than others.



Anyone have any experience with Soundflower on a Mac?

http://www.cycling74.com/downloads/soundflower

mech

Quote from: sustainiac on April 04, 2008, 10:32:49 AM
Anyone have any experience with Soundflower on a Mac?

Yeah, I use it every once in a while when I need to shuttle audio between various applications.  I've used it with Live, Reaktor, Bidule, and a few other scatterred apps that I've merely been testing out. 

Works fine.  You can use either the simple 2-channel version for occasions when you need to send a simple mix out from one app to another, or the break-out 16-channel version if you need to route multiple streams to multiple applications.  I like it better than Rewire in most cases, because I don't have to worry about setting up the whole Master/Slave thing.

Haven't had a crash or any real difficulties thusfar.  No muss, no fuss: it simply does what it says on the label. ;)

--m.
_____
GK Guitars: Frankenvox (fretless Vox 11-string GK Oud); Switch Innovo III MIDI; Line 6 Variax 300
VG Tech: VG-99 (x2); VG-8EX; WP-20g
Control: FC-300, EV-5, FS-6
Outboard: Macbook (Live, Bidule, Reaktor, etc), Looperlative LP-1, various boutique FX

truth57

1. I would start with relevant OS support such as 64 Bit, i.e. Windows Vista 64 Bit and Windows XP 64 Bit drivers for the VG-99......

2. I would like to see more interaction between the physical knobs on the VG-99 and the software editor, particularly the ability to have the F1 - F6 knobs interact with the COSM amps which coincidentally also have 6 knobs, and the knobs found in each of the FX modules and EQ modules throughout the editor. I realize that these knobs are already assignable, but the parameters do not allow for this type of interaction.

3. As I believe has already been previously mentioned, I would also like to see the F1 - F6 switches being assignable as extensions of the Direct Patch buttons, in order to expand the possible range of Direct Patch selection from a mere 5 to 11. That should be sufficient for most short gigs, where as 5 are not.

4. It would be great also if each of these F1 - F6 switches could be assigned to a recallable Category, so that one could very quickly audition various ranges of sounds according to category, then select one for each switch, in addition to the existing Direct Patch switch assignments.

5. I would also like to be able to have each of the F1 - F6 switches assigned to effects on/off, so that the unit could then function in 'Stomp Box' mode (maybe it already can do this, but I haven't really checked it out yet).

6. I would find a GK-? interface with built in programmable pots for virtual tone control and something similar to the Variax model switching knob really really useful in a live situation, and I have no idea why this has not already been suggested or implemented, as this gives the Variax the edge in terms of controllability on stage. A programmable 5 way selector would also not be such a bad idea, and I see no reason why all this could not be integrated into a GK type unit without making it very much bigger or more cumbersome.  The 5 way switch would then free up the S1 and S2 switches for options that were better suited to them, such as A/B selection - they are ill suited to virtual p/up selection by the fact that there is no way to tell what position one has selected visually nor by touch, whereas we are more or less all used to using a 5 way selector purely by touch, so it would make far more sense. The fact that so many of us change the function of the Volume control to tone shows how much this function is missed, but I also find the Volume control important. Furthermore, a unit with the Volume Tone 5 way arrangement would conform to what most of us are already used to, and the addition of the suggested Variax type selector pot would be no more difficult for one to adjust to using than the physical one already found on all Variaxes. The fact that it is actually no more than a simple pot is also a stroke of genius on Line 6's part, as it requires no special pot. The selector mechanism is purely mechanical and is built into the knob itself.

7. While we are on the subject of knobs and switches, surely Roland could come up with a better pot for volume violining effects using the pinky? The present GK volume knob is impossible to use in this way as its circumference does not allow sufficient mobility. A larger knob would probably help, but I have been unable to find a substitute that fits such as small post.

David

vanceg

I just run in and out of Ableton Live.  A stereo input comes into live, which is my output from the VG-99 via USB. Then that gets processed in Ableton and gets sent back out via USB to the VG-99. From there it goes out the analog outputs of the VG-99.

Though I must admit that using the VG-99 as the audio interface does cause more latency than when I just run a SPDIF digital output from the VG-99 into the SPDIF input on my RME Fireface 400 interface.  So most of the time I just get my signal into and out of the computer using the digital outs on the VG-99 and the RME.

Vance


Quote from: sustainiac on April 04, 2008, 10:32:49 AM
Vance,

Regarding the USB "virtual FX Loop"  - can you elaborate on your rig?

I'm aware of "Console" for winXP

http://console.jp/en/

console is a plug-in host that allows you to freely combine plug-ins of different formats such as VST2.0 and DirectX (DX) audio. Its modular system allows for flexible routing, and together with its intuitive user interface, enables sound creation at the next level.

And the VST host mentioned here:
https://www.vguitarforums.com/smf/index.php?topic=485.0

http://www.hermannseib.com/english/vsthost.htm
of course any typical DAW app works too - although I have heard the latency is a moving target - some DAW apps are better than others.



Anyone have any experience with Soundflower on a Mac?

http://www.cycling74.com/downloads/soundflower


LeeMorant

I would like to see at least 400ms of pre-delay on pitch shifts and harmoniser! To try and get some eventide Ballerina 12/24 thang going.  VG just seems a little restricted in terms of pre delay, unless i'm missing something obvious!

jkstraw

I'd like to see a triple humbucker on the vari guitar!  I can't believe it isn't there!

jkstraw

Also more than 16 'Assign' slots.  That is a real limitation.

beatpete

Quote from: jkstraw on May 12, 2008, 04:40:41 PM
Also more than 16 'Assign' slots.  That is a real limitation.
I love it! someone who's as crazy assigning controllers as me. i'm just thrilled there are twice as many as the VG-88!

vanceg

Quote from: beatpete on May 13, 2008, 07:56:16 AM
I love it! someone who's as crazy assigning controllers as me. i'm just thrilled there are twice as many as the VG-88!

This has been requested since before the VG-99 actually shipped.  It is on our official list of enhancements and we have been told by Roland that it is very very unlikely that they will enable more than 16 assigns because they feel this is enough. You can control 32 parameters from the 16 assigns.

I have, and will remain, a huge proponent of getting 32+ assigns.

Vance

mesaman

I didn't see this mentioned anywhere.  I'd like to be able to copy an entire chain to another patch (guitar, FX, amp, etc.)  I would be fine with it being an editor only feature, but I think it would be really great to be able to easily combine A from one patch with B from another, for example.

mesaman

Here's another one - I like the tuner on/off option by pressing the same patch number on the FC-300, but I have double tapped a patch change too many times and ended up in tuner mode.  An option to require you to hold down the current patch for a couple of seconds to go into tuner mode would be useful.

prongs_386

As mentioned above, I feel that pre delay is something missing from the vg99.
I would like to see not only the ability of adding pre delay to 12 string etc... but also just a pre delay on the cosm guitar or something like that so patches can be made with two guitars offset to each other.