Roland D-50 Synthesizer User reviews -Page 41

Synth Site: Roland: D-50 Synthesizer: User reviews Add review

One Click listings

Average rating: 4.4 out of 5

page 9 of 23: <<< 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21
22 23 >>>

izim a professional user from uk writes:

Well i owned the d50 eyars back and sold when everyone was selling all this stuff and buying the jd800 and jp8000 some time later , with their improved midi transmission and new looks.Years later i bought back the d50 along with my sh1091 and a few other old bits of gear.Why ?because if you stand a v synth playing a d50 patch next to a d50 you notice somethinsg lacking.Play a d50 next to a jd800 and you notice somethings lacking.Its a simple equation - the d50 along with alot of other old roland gear used low grade convertors and outputs(low in todays standards) and the result is a sublime mix of analogue and old digital sound quality .The pads on the d50 leave most people i know and have played them to looking very surprised , for glassy icey and lush bendy , totally out there sounds and especially pads this synth cannot be matched .. .i was never sure why and i have tried this next to EVERYTHING - Korg karma , Matrix 1000 , Triton , motif , dx7 , Jd800 , jp9000 , moog , you name it i have used it or tried it and the D50 ? it cannot be copied , replicated or replaced , jv1080 - ? using d50 waveforms ?jd800 uising d50 waveforms ? i'm sorry guys but hoiw many times will i have to read wankers go on about how this synth is old and outdated.It may not be reaktor or a nord modular - which i use extensively but aks youeself why i would still own one if i have and use every softsynth and other ' modern ' uptodate synth . . . because nothing else sounds like the d50.I find it quite funny you guys asking why they still fetch good money -why do you think ?beacuse they sound crap they make good money ? they sell for good prices as people with ears know the differnce between the older well built gear and todays super hi res 24 bit sounds like its in a box synths . . .

Anyone reading this because they fancy a d50 ?buy one if you have good ears and dont need 14 lfos patched to osc pitch to feel good and make great music . . .if your old enough and wise enough to have realised creativity is about simplicity and clarity then dont checkout a d50 , buy one . . . its one of a kind and as i said.I have sampled it , tried selling and getting it in fantom form etc and to be frank that a game for wankers who believed what roland told them when they said buy this it does what this did.

The same idiots who slag down this synth probably use a nord or access virus for 303 slide sounds and have a great Sh101 patch in there triton . . .

i rest my case.I rarely write reviews but this thread caught my eye and its a case of pearls before swine here.

These guys who say the d50 is out of date are suffering from myopia i am afraid big time . . .

Pearls before swine . . .

Rating: 0 out of 5 posted Sunday-May-08-055 at 16:11

droom a professional user from canada writes:

people buy synths for different reasons. some buy them beacause they want to replace real instruments and sound like a orchestra. people that buy a d50 genraly are more into making sounds that sound like synthesisers. thats what the d50 is a synthesiser wich a fairly unique sound engine and form of synthesis. synthesis mean to create. not to copy its a great synthesiser but if you are llooking for real orhestral sounds buy a sample playback unit. one of the coolest alltime pad and nosie synths

Rating: 4 out of 5 posted Sunday-Jan-09-055 at 16:37

Tom Olsen a professional user from US writes:

Quote: "The M1 sunk [the D50] without trace in the late 80s, then the JD sunk the M1."

The first part of this is true, the second part not at all. The JD-800 was not a big seller (in fact Roland admitted "a flop" at the time of its release in 1991) and was a pretty misunderstood synth upon its release. The M1 which was already out for 3 years went on to stay #1 and sell 250,000 copies right up until the last production run in 1994, eclipsing everything in its path including Korg's newer workstations. The second part of the quote is what today's knobbage crowd has opined about the value of synths and the JD800 in particular, and thus raised the value of what was in fact a brilliant synth orignally misunderstood. But you cannot rewrite history.

Rating: 0 out of 5 posted Monday-Dec-13-044 at 06:47

VOGIATZIS CHRISTOS a professional user from GREECE-THESSALONIKI writes:

I knew about d-50 but i wouldn't buy it if wouldn't listen it from one of the best musicians here in Greece NIKOS APOTAS.The sounds that he did make in this synth is fantastic.D-50 has marvelous pads,nice big strings and special greek violin and sazzi.I have one piece and i don't sell it for any price.It is very good synth and i am lucky to have it thank's to Nick.

Rating: 0 out of 5 posted Sunday-Dec-12-044 at 13:03

Chris writes:

An interesting notion. The JD800 is a nice but out of date synth, whilst the D50 is 80s cutting edge. Hmmm... The JD offers a unique interface for a synth of its type, and quality sounds which are the stable offering on very recent Rolands. The D50 is extremely dated in its sounds, is noisey, has limited polyphony, is difficult to program and has an interesting sample clipping effect. The M1 sunk it without trace in the late 80s, then the JD sunk the M1. It's called evolution. The D50 is the worst of all digital synths, as it should be. I can't think of another synth which is more dated in its sounds and which is least likely to come back into fashion.

Rating: 2 out of 5 posted Wednesday-Aug-11-044 at 04:50

page 9 of 23: <<< 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21
22 23 >>>

More Stories: