Roland Jupiter-Xm In-Depth Review

The latest loopop video takes an in-depth look at the new Roland Jupiter-Xm synthesizer, a workstation that offers five parts: four for synths and one for drums.

The synth parts can use a variety of sound engines, like the JX-8P or JUPITER-8, with enough polyphony to create thick layers and complex backing parts. The drum part features soujnds of classic Roland drum machines, including the TR-808, TR-909, TR-707, CR-78 and others.

The video covers an overview of the Jupiter-Xm, and a deeper dive into the capabilities and programming of Roland’s ZEN-Core engine and an exploration of the Xm’s I-Arpeggio.

Topics covered:

0:00 Intro
1:00 Overview
3:00 Connectivity
3:40 16 Buttons
4:00 Scenes
4:35 Parts
6:20 Models
8:00 Model assign
9:20 Function
9:55 Partials
10:50 Drum kits
11:55 Effects
14:20 I-Arpeggio
18:00 Sequencing
23:00 Model control
25:20 Osc & filters
27:25 JP-X model
31:30 Menu layout
34:15 Pros & cons

17 thoughts on “Roland Jupiter-Xm In-Depth Review

  1. *insert generic comment about keyboard when 99% of the synth community can’t play keys*
    *insert generic comment about digital*
    *insert comment about lacking innovation and they should clone their own old synths*

    Better than all Behringer trash put together. A stupid drum machine from Behringer costs $400, yet a synthesizer that can produce entire tracks at $1,500 is sooooo crazy because it’s not

    b E h RRRR i n G eee rRRR

    Get over yourselves, shills.

  2. C’mon, what it wants to be is Roland history in a box. Its a huge library in hardware form. You either like that or you don’t. IMO, the price is reasonable. I find the OS/GUI to be an odd compromise in a way, but it also has a certain elegance. Its a major chameleon that offers synths, a vocoder and RD pianos. That’s no small thing. Besides, two Boutiques would cost almost as much as the Xm and be far less capable. No contest!

    1. Typical uninformed comment conflating soft synths with digital synths.

      First off – read up on analog circuit modelling. It will make your laptop weep and choke.

      Second of all, nobody wants to watch you make music on a laptop anymore, if they ever did. DAW-free performance is so much more fun as a user and as an audience, and Roland is coming up with interesting hardware for modern creators/performers.

      If it’s not your bag, that’s cool, but this looks crazy fun to me.

  3. Strange that it’s called a “workstation” in the description. There’s a 64-step sequencer, but it’s not like you can chain various sequences into a song. This seems more like a performance instrument that would require an external DAW to create a song out of it’s multitimbral parts. When think of a workstation, I think of my EPS-16+, which has an 8-track sequencer for sequencing a full song, bar by bar.

  4. Strange that it’s called a “workstation” in the description. There’s a 64-step sequencer, but it’s not like you can chain various sequences into a song. This seems more like a performance instrument that would require an external DAW to create a song out of its multitimbral parts. When think of a workstation, I think of my EPS-16+, which has an 8-track sequencer for sequencing a full song, bar by bar.

  5. my hands are too big to play minikeys in any “real” way like a normal keyboard… so that sucks balls because otherwise this thing is really interesting to me

    maybe they will put out a desktop version

  6. This keyboard is 3.68″ high by 22.68″ wide by 12.12″ deep. No one is shoving this in a backpack. That’s why the lack of full-size keys is frustrating. If Korg can give the Wavestate full-size keys, then why not Roland? (And the Wavestate is half the cost). I think most synthheads would rather have full-size keys or none at all for a product like this with so much power behind it.

  7. Bluetooth audio, knobs, batteries, speakers, and all the sound engines of the flagship synths. $1500 does sound high but what currently on the market beats that…..

Leave a Reply