Roland's follow-up "XP" synth architecture is based around the Fujitsu-produced, MBCS30109 custom PCM core, and is found in the SC-88, JV-1080, XP-variants, etc.Ĭoncerning CPUs, the SC-55 and SC-55mkII use a 16-bit Hitachi H8/532, and the SC-88 uses a 16-bit Hitachi H8/510. The difference in clarity and soundstage is strikingly obvious to me. Given the much-improved output stage of the SC-55mkII, it's my opinion that anyone suggesting that the SC-55 is the better-sounding of the two hasn't done an adequate comparison. The SC-55mkII uses the (also Toshiba-produced) TC6116AF core, which is better-described in the JV-880 service notes as being a TC24SC201AF with integrated HG62E11B23FS gate array. The SC-55 is based on Roland's "GP" synth architecture, and uses a Toshiba-produced, TC24SC201AF custom PCM core. They have form for it, they used a bass boost on the old Junos! Eric Persing alluded to some JV trickery going on in a post on here a few years back. (Edit: Thinking further on this, this sort of thing could be what makes the high resonance stuff and phasers on the Super JV onwards sound grating to my ears). The guitars really sparkle, that can't just be a higher anti-aliasing filter. I suspect one of the tricks Roland employed was an exciter or dynamic EQ (BBE style). I played the JV1010 the other day and it did not sound quite as bad as I remember, but it didn't seem to have the warmth, presence or inspirational qualities of the JV880. I'll have to do a proper side by side check with the JV1010. Of course, there could be (my!) faulty memory or just different patches involved. I've had JV1080, XV2020 and used my mother's JV1010. Both are 32k playback engines.There could be more to it than just the antialias filter. That could be the reason, but I always feel that the JV-80 sounds more hi-fi as well, with brighter overall character.Because 1080 has improved antialias filter.
0 kommentar(er)
