Roland Jupiter 80 Synthesizer (Acoustic Preset Mega Preview)

Ready for a bajillion in-depth audio demos of the Roland Jupiter 80 synthesizer?

Here’s the official demos, featuring the Jupiter 80 presets for Acoustic Bass, Acoustic Steel Spring, Electric Piano, Fingered Electric Bass, Flamenco Nylon, Flute, Marimba, Organ, Piano, Strings, Timpani, Trumpet, Violin………..

Roland’s clearly proud of the Jupiter 80’s modeled acoustic instruments. But, as the demos show, the state of Roland’s modeling is pretty impressive and, in the right hands, pretty expressive, too.

We’re looking forward to more demos that explore the JP80’s creative synthesis potential. In the meantime, though, check out these Jupiter 80 sound demos and let us know what you think of the 80’s Acoustic Bass, Acoustic Steel Spring, Electric Piano, Fingered Electric Bass, Flamenco Nylon, Flute, Marimba, Organ, Piano……

44 thoughts on “Roland Jupiter 80 Synthesizer (Acoustic Preset Mega Preview)

  1. Definitely decent on some of those instruments! This SuperNatural tech seems actually able to deliver quite well for some of these. I’d like to hear some of them (flute, trumpet, violin) again without being doused in reverb, though. Always makes me skeptical when I hear tons of reverb – they’ve gotta be covering up mediocrity with that, no?

    1. This is complete roland crap! (just like the new juno's) Try remaking the Jupiter 8 or at least a emulation of it. Maybe call it something else instead.

  2. Yes, let's remake something, let's travel into the past and never have anything new! Sorry, I just don't get that mentality. If you want a Jupiter 8, ebay one.

  3. Most of us know about Roland's usually unimpressive offerings. This seems considerably better than I expected from Roland. At the very least, it's an impressive set of demos. Not that I'd buy this one, but I wonder how editable those sounds are.

  4. "Yes, let's remake something, let's travel into the past"

    Uh, you realize that's a video of a "synthesizer" making an acoustic bass sound, right?

  5. What a unique idea! Goodness. I've never heard that one before. What a brilliant contribution to this discussion. Please, do go on…

    :-S

  6. So? How many so-called "synthesizers" have an acoustic bass sound? Many? Completely not the point, as most people use synths to emulate other instruments anyway. My point was about the nostalgia for old equipment and judging all new instruments as shit because it doesn't fulfill someone's nostalgic need.

  7. Sounds like Microsoft General Midi bank. Talk about "nostalgia," please make a good VA or anaog with dual filters and/or FM preferably both, if Roland had continued in the direction from their 80s domination both them and Yamaha could be kicking Korg and Access and Clavias butts on dual filters, FM etc

  8. The sounds are great, but what terrible footwear!
    Interesting to compare to Korg's demos where you actually see the guy's face and how much fun he's having – it's vital to communicate enthusiasm!

  9. This sort of board is aimed at live use and has a place. I suspect however the vast majority of board users are at home with a DAW and can get sounds just as good from VSTi's at a fraction of the cost.

  10. I don't mind the new Jupiter for what it is, I just don't see the value in raping a noble heritage (back when Roland used to take chances) for a bit of cachet by assosciation.

    I the meantime I am more than happy with my Jupiter 6 with it's Europa mod….

  11. I just think the Jupiter 80 is terribly uninteresting. How often will my music need a realistic performance of a solo trumpet from a synthesizer? If I need a solo trumpet (or a marimba or a flute, whatever) I'll just write a chart and call a trumpet player!!! I just think the Jupiter name could have been put to way better use.

  12. Just to chime in: I agree on most points here: some of these emulations are good (some, like the strings, were not), but I don't care. With the "Jupiter" name, I want synth sounds. This deserves one of the "JD/JV/XV" series names, from what I've seen so far.

    If Roland could convince someone like WC Olo Garb to do a demo for this synth, I imagine I would be more impressed.

    …Don't get me wrong; the dude playing obviously has skill, and the synth is obviously capable of emulation. …But, like I said, it's the name. If someone says, "Really? A new Jupiter? Rad! Let's hear the violin patch!" …then they need a good swift charlie-horse. Conversely, if someone at Roland said "We just made a board that's obviously a MOTIF-killer and can compete with Korg's Oasys engine!", and some exec replied "Rad! Let's call it the Jupiter-80!" …then they, too, shall receive said charlie-horse. Perhaps three.

  13. people getting hung up on names are silly

    the Jupiter 8 is a legendary poly synth. i have to wonder.. how many people complaining about how the Jupiter 80 is nothing like the 8 even have half of the money needed to purchase a Jupiter 8.. let alone what a brand new, modern Jupiter 8 would cost.

    i love sound design.. and my most used synthesizers don't have patch memory… so something like the Jupiter 80 has limited appeal to me… but i realize who this synth is for and appreciate that.

    this synth is for musicians who are just interested in playing an instrument.. they need an expressive, dependable and great sounding instrument because their "wow factor" for the audience is the music.. the performance.. the kind of performance that an experienced musician exudes without even trying… not turning knobs or any of the gimmicks that anyone can learn to do in under an hour

    in the studio its no problem to have real musicians playing real instruments… the cost of which will quickly surpass the Jupiter 80's price tag.. but for a professional album sometimes there is no substitute for the real thing

    for traditional touring and performing musicians… the ones that actually have real chops when it comes to playing the Jupiter 80 fits the bill perfectly. it can cover so many basses.. you don't have to have trunks full of gear.. or have all the different musicians needed to play all those instruments to their full potential.. one man and one keyboard can fill many different roles..

    Jexus / WC Olo Garb is a sound design monster… he's a decent player too… but i have a feeling he would find this synthesizer mostly boring

    i like the Jupiter 80.. but lack the chops to benefit from owning one. i guess i just don't get the pointless hate… this is obviously a sound business decision by Roland, i believe they will do well with it

  14. For a stage synth, this is actually really good. Lots of standard decent sounds. I could see alot of cover bands, lounge bands, bar bands, etc, owning one of these. Outside of that, it's not really that exciting, and certainly not going to approach any decent VA synth. What this offers that a Nord, Fantom, Kurzweil, doesn't have i couldn't tell you. Roland needs to wow us again, and not use the old names for a modern style workstation.

  15. In my experience, Joshy*, most "sound business decisions" are worthy of hate (ever seen a Cost Benefit Analysis?). And I wouldn't say it pointless to complain. It's misleading marketing, and worth people getting frustrated over.

    It would be silly for people to get "up in arms" about it… but I don't see that happening. I see people complaining in the comments on a post with 10 minutes of video that they all took the time to watch. Roland's "sound business decision" cost those people 10 minutes each. I think it's fair for them to be grumpy in a comment.

    Besides which, plenty of people (including me) are admitting that the sounds were good. …It's really just about the name. It's a tease. Nobody likes a tease.

    * (See what I did there? Har har.)

  16. Seriously. There is *nothing* tackier than an emulated trumpet/sax/flute/guitar solo. No matter how good it is, it's always just the right amount of 'off' from the real thing.

  17. VST's aren't real time enough? A laptop and a usb keyboard is much smaller, (and more stable), then many of the synths, (especially retro), out there.

  18. This thing sounds just excellent, for 'real world' instruments. (Not 'real world' good, but there is only one thing that sounds THAT good ~ acoustic) I definitely see the advantage of this modeled characteristic. After all, everything can't be emulated with a variation of a saw wave.

  19. One thing these major manufactures consider when designing these "workstations" is the fact that churches are one of their biggest customers. They have the money and need for these types of synths. When we see a 3K keyboard know that they are targeted towards these institutions more than we realize.

  20. That distinction has blurred over the years and is almost a non-issue. Most of the keyboardists I know use a computer on stage nowadays, combined with a controller and some sort of interface.

    Computers are now strong enough to play 16 part performances without crashing or glitching up. That said, with plugins like Kontakt and Trillian, there really is no NEED for hardware workstations any more… in fact, most of the big name plugins sound much better, are easier to use, and have much larger preset libraries.

    Something like Muse research's receptor is half the price, and does 1000000000x more (and can sound a million times better) with the same stability of "hardware".

  21. Sounds nice but it's not the Jupiter we all have been waiting for!
    And it's pretty expensive for a digital synth!
    No.

  22. Those of you that say this sounds like other sampling workstations aren’t listening very closely or paying attention to the Jupiter-80’s technology.

    This is all synthesized, not sampled, which Is pretty damn amazing. And it does Jupiter-8 sounds just as well.

    The brass and winds on this are especially impressive to these ears.

    1. I don't care HOW the sounds are made, so long that it sounds as good as my NI and Spectrasonics stuff…. and it doesn't.

      So…. modelling, VA, ROMPLER, FM…. I don't care. I want emulations that compete with the $400 plugins I own… Roland isn't even close to that level of quality yet. For that amount of money, I'd rather buy a Nice mac laptop with Apogee converters and some plugins (and a controller keyboard).

      Roland has failed me yet gain.

  23. This is just an over expensive and over glorified rompler. Would you stick a Porche badge on a Ford? This is what Roland have done with this. We can clearly see what it is and what it isn't.

  24. Based on what Roland has said, the JP80 is not a Rompler, but is using physical modeling:

    "SuperNATURAL Acoustic Tones represent a completely new sound-generating technology, one which not only reproduces the sounds of acoustic instruments, but also uses Behavior Modeling Technology to model the way in which each instrument uniquely responds to the performance expression of the player.

    In contrast to the old method of seeking realism merely in the sound’s waveform, this is a major advance which models the details of how the sound of each individual instrument responds to the performer’s playing.

    While previous physical modeling sound generators model the structure of an instrument
    (such as the shape of its resonator, the length of the tube, and the material of the vibrating
    parts), Behavior Modeling Technology additionally models the response and movement of each specific instrument as it reacts to performance techniques such as trills, portamento, vibrato, and dynamics."

    Physical modeling synthesis and sample playback are very different beasts, with different pros and cons.

  25. Based on what Roland has said, the JP80 is not a Rompler, but is using physical modeling:

    "SuperNATURAL Acoustic Tones represent a completely new sound-generating technology, one which not only reproduces the sounds of acoustic instruments, but also uses Behavior Modeling Technology to model the way in which each instrument uniquely responds to the performance expression of the player.

    In contrast to the old method of seeking realism merely in the sound’s waveform, this is a major advance which models the details of how the sound of each individual instrument responds to the performer’s playing.

    While previous physical modeling sound generators model the structure of an instrument (such as the shape of its resonator, the length of the tube, and the material of the vibrating parts), Behavior Modeling Technology additionally models the response and movement of each specific instrument as it reacts to performance techniques such as trills, portamento, vibrato, and dynamics."

    Physical modeling synthesis and sample playback are very different beasts, with different pros and cons.

  26. I can see the 4th or 5th gen of their modeling synth engine sounding great. Great idea, bad execution. (doesn't sound very realistic to me, compared to many plugins out there) Reminds me of when roland introduced variphrase… it took them 3 or 4 devices to get to a v-synth level product.

  27. how is this in the jupiter family? the juno and jupiter in the past has meant analog. this is just another modeling workstation. seriously… what kind of keyboard player wants or needs these sounds? gah! some of these are horrid. ill stick with my juno-60 and hire a guitar player when i need that sound covered.

Leave a Reply