Synth Site: Roland: U-220: User reviews Add review
Average rating: 3.7 out of 5
page 6 of 13:   <<<  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  >>>
+MICHAEL+ a professional user from USA writes:
ya ok the u-220 isent the cats ass of rack gear i find only one thing it is good for it has to be the best yes the best keyboard guitar ever!!!!if you have the cards u-110-07 u-110-14 super ac and electric guitar i use the ax-1 controler two zoom 9150 fx two ada micro cab 2and art x-15 and it rips 6 outs are great direct1 crunch rym direct2 razor-leads and mix bass or 12 string hooked to a se-50 and thats all its good for ive never heard. better except maybe a fairlight really

Rating: 5 out of 5 posted Sunday-Jan-28-2001 at 09:36
Matthew a professional user from USA writes:
The U220 gets some bad press from users who compare it to new synths. If you can afford a $1,000 or 3,000 new synth, by all means get it! The U220 has it's own sounds and can be found for less than $200 in classified ads. I have found it very clean and strong in my midi system. As with all sound modules, it is good to have different ones as different instruments. Even the Trinity or K2300 with it's own internal electronics will impart it's own sonic character on all the sounds it reproduces. So it's nice to have the different modules for unique sounds of the unit itself. Matt

Rating: 4 out of 5 posted Friday-Dec-08-2000 at 13:07
CONRAD a professional user from ENGLAND writes:
THERE IS A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN SOUND CHARACTER AND SOUND QUALITY the reason why many people respect the U220 is because it has very good sound quality;a mix using one of these will sound good but may require external processing due to its lack off filters. why many people dislike it is because many of its sounds,though high quality lack modern character i.e. they are dated. unfortunately in my experience i have found that many newer modules have an up to date contemporary sound but lack the u220s quality of sound, many of the raw samples in SOME newer modules are brighter and sometimes more compressed sounding.LISTEN BEFORE YOU BUY!!! it may also interest you that the u220 was noted for its "sluggishness" i.e. it doesnt respond to midi as fast as more modern modules but that is typical of many early sound modules.

posted Saturday-Oct-28-2000 at 12:41
Peter writes:
Sorry - my mark below was supposed to be 3! I give it a 4 now to compensate the average rating..

Rating: 4 out of 5 posted Thursday-Jul-20-2000 at 10:15
Peter a hobbyist user writes:
Don't buy it if you already have some newer gear like XP-50, QSR .. And don't use the U-220 without some nice external reverbs. It has some good sounds (piano, strings..), and some nostalgic D-50 sounds like "fantasia", "bellpad" (unuseful these days, but nice) and the rest is shit. I'm very split in this matter. The rawsample quality is very good if you consider that this unit was made in -89! The userinterface is easy to use once you learned it. The unit is very solid (look inside!). Summary: buy it only if you don't have any similar gear, already have a good reverb and have been offered a good price (I payed $110 w. card/man.). Or if you are nostalgic.. Do you want a dedicated pianomodule? Try some- thing else (nanopiano..)! BTW. I'm interested of patches for U220.. send me an email if you have some good ones.

Rating: 2 out of 5 posted Thursday-Jul-20-2000 at 10:12
page 6 of 13:   <<<  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  >>>