I am a owner of a Roland MT32, Sound Canvas SC55 and Sound Canvas SC88 and i am really happy. I would love to acquire also a Yamaha M50 or M80 but it is not necessary. All this stuff already complete me 😀.

moturimi1 wrote on 2018-03-04, 10:44:

I used to own a lot of different external GM modules to test the playback capacities in DOS games.
SC-55, SC-8820, SCD-70, SC-8850, SD-20, SD-50, SD-90, SD-80, K2000, K2000XV, MU-10, MU-50, XV-5050, XV-3080, JV-1010, NS5R, AG-10, DOX-1 (Korg PA-60).
I have to say that in most cases the GM bank of the modules is underwhelming. Most use only basic instrument patches. The modules shine with individual sound banks or instruments.

This was a hard lesson to learn back in the 2000s. I had been chasing the holy grail with AWE32 and Live! Sound Fonts for years, and finally got a real synth module: An Ensoniq MR Rack. The demos sounded amazing. GM files sounded... not amazing. As it turns out, to get spectacular results, you have to be a spectacular composer who knows how to use the tools available in that particular module.

It's only gotten worse for GM. Today's soft synths are the way to go, with multi-GB sample libraries for every classification of sounds. (GB of pianos, GB of choirs, etc.) You can create a fairly convincing synthetic orchestra, if you're sufficiently qualified to operate a MIDI sequencer. But throwing a generic MIDI file at it will not yield impressive results. Real instruments have too much expressiveness that is only accurately rendered when the synth provides control of those parameters, and the composition makes use of them. Realism can't be had with static articulation. It's a fool's errand.

Shponglefan wrote on 2018-03-11, 16:11:

derSammler wrote:

"not to be confused with simply selecting the SC-55 map"

I should read more closely shouldn't I? 😵

But how is the SC-55 mode otherwise set on the SC-88 Pro? I know there's an SC-88 compatibility mode, but not aware of how to set an SC-55 one.

I don't have direct knowledge of the SC-88Pro, but I think they may have been confusing the map for a single channel with remapping all channels. At least, that's how it's done on my SC-8850. I press both PART arrows at the same time to access ALL parts, and select the INST MAP, after that, to make the entire synth use the other sounds. It doesn't revert the map automatically even when sent a GS reset. You can reset the map through the SHIFT+Part Left Arrow->Initialize All, though, or just by setting it with the method I already mentioned. Still, if that is what they were saying, it is too confusingly worded to be left unsaid, as it really is just using the map of its predecessors (along with the throwback sounds that are used when you change the map of any one part/channel).

Edit: 2023-04-23
Just in advance of me being able to test the SC-88 Pro, I stumbled onto the details of its compatibility mode (which is what they truly meant): Roland SC-88 Pro (hopefully) helpful hints

On page 112 of the SC-88 Pro manual ("Creating compatible data for the unit / SC-88"), it says that holding SELECT while pressing ALL, and subsequently pressing either SC-55 MAP or SC-88 MAP, puts it in this compatibility mode. There, it infers the uses of the Bank Select LSB message (CC#32). When set to 0 (and also by default), it will be using the MAP you've selected on each part. It seems to me, that this is just the SC-88 Pro's method for changing the front-panel user-selected MAP for all parts. With compatibility mode disabled (hold SELECT and only press ALL without pressing a MAP button), it appears it would be using the SC-88 Pro ("Native") MAP for a CC#32 value of 0, which of course would mean the selected MAP for all parts is the SC-88 Pro ("Native") MAP.

The SC-8850 and SC-8820 always use the front-panel user-selected MAP when a CC#32 message of value 0 is set. So, I believe, this compatibility mode is only a different interface to change the selected MAP for all parts.

Of course, CC#32 may be set to 1-3 or 1-4 to force a specific MAP on the SC-88 Pro and SC-8850/20, respectively.

However, the CC#32 set to 0 is most important as, aside from it being the default MAP, it's how sequences are made to be device independent. If a newer GS synth is used, it's no problem for the Native MAP which will have the older variations. On the other hand if it's older, and it doesn't have the variations being used, this would work best when a device actually has variation fallback. While only the original SC-55 (and contemporary devices like the CM-300/500) have variation fallback, they also don't have alternate MAPs. Luckily, they aren't adversely affected by this slightly more modern concept of the GS Bank Select LSB CC#32, and ignore it.

While the SC-88 manual appears to be missing the mention of the SC-88 Pro's compatibility mode, on page 125 (in the Appendix: 7 - 21) it lists all the MAPs used with the LSB values. The SC-55 MAP is selected with values of both 0 and 1, and the SC-88 MAP is selected only with the value of 2. Although that seems troublesome, it's refuted on page 133 (7 - 31 in the SysEx section of the Appendix), where it says the front-panel user-selected MAP is chosen by a value of 0 (and is the default), the SC-55 MAP by the value 1, and the SC-88 MAP by 2, just like the later GS synths are for those values.

Also, it's important to note that the SC-88 and newer only use "almost the same sounds" as the SC-55mkII when using the SC-55 MAP, otherwise Roland wouldn't have gone out of their way to state it nearly everywhere it's mentioned in the SC-88 Pro manual.

I hope that helps,

Lucas

SirNickity wrote on 2020-03-11, 18:43:

This was a hard lesson to learn back in the 2000s. I had been chasing the holy grail with AWE32 and Live! Sound Fonts for years, and finally got a real synth module: An Ensoniq MR Rack. The demos sounded amazing. GM files sounded... not amazing. As it turns out, to get spectacular results, you have to be a spectacular composer who knows how to use the tools available in that particular module.

It's only gotten worse for GM. Today's soft synths are the way to go, with multi-GB sample libraries for every classification of sounds. (GB of pianos, GB of choirs, etc.) You can create a fairly convincing synthetic orchestra, if you're sufficiently qualified to operate a MIDI sequencer. But throwing a generic MIDI file at it will not yield impressive results. Real instruments have too much expressiveness that is only accurately rendered when the synth provides control of those parameters, and the composition makes use of them. Realism can't be had with static articulation. It's a fool's errand.

I've been trying to improve the static articulation just by changing patches from GM to SuperNATURAL on the INTEGRA-7 (and SysEx Editing) by using my qmidiroute patch (live MIDI editing, tuned for the INTEGRA-7, applied generically for every song). I agree that it's hit-and-miss, especially with some instruments' bend ranges (or controllers) that can cause strange whistles, but I love most of the results I've had. I think the SuperNATURAL sounds are Roland's attempt at giving users simple control over near-realism. Although one would think the INTEGRA-7 would be much better, simply by using its (PCM, not SuperNATURAL) High Quality GM bank, that sounds fairly like the Sound Canvas family, so without qmidiroute it wouldn't be that different. If you (or anyone else) have any MIDI files you want me to test my setup with, please share them with me and I'll try to capture the INTEGRA-7 audio for you. This fool, anyway, doesn't mind trying to improve the situation. 😉

The current release of my qmidiroute patch for GNU/Linux (if you want to try tuning it for your Ensoniq MR Rack) is being hosted here again (the site's back up as of about a week ago)!: https://www.midimusicadventures.com/phpbb/vie … ?p=18702#p18702

Here are before-and-after qmidiroute-modified MIDI files & recordings (GS with HQ GM vs. SuperNATURAL from qmidiroute) of the INTEGRA-7 which I captured for the Sound Canvas Comparison Project: https://1drv.ms/f/s!AsMEa3-pVaQOgTFgPKo_7ao-xOxh?e=37FqN6

Enjoy! 😀

moturimi1 wrote on 2018-03-04, 10:44:

I used to own a lot of different external GM modules to test the playback capacities in DOS games. SC-55, SC-8820, SCD-70, SC-88 […]
Show full quote

I used to own a lot of different external GM modules to test the playback capacities in DOS games.
SC-55, SC-8820, SCD-70, SC-8850, SD-20, SD-50, SD-90, SD-80, K2000, K2000XV, MU-10, MU-50, XV-5050, XV-3080, JV-1010, NS5R, AG-10, DOX-1 (Korg PA-60).
I have to say that in most cases the GM bank of the modules is underwhelming. Most use only basic instrument patches. The modules shine with individual sound banks or instruments.
I still have the AG-10, DOX-1, SD-80, K2000XV (including K2000). (I do not need any sound canvas, because sound canvas va is available)

The sound of SC8850/8820 are not as good as SC55/88/88Pro, don't buy them just because of their bigger model number....
SD series is even worse, sounds bland, lifeless, soulless...
Whether a midi module is good or not depends on the sound designer, not specs or model number....

Midi modules started going downhill around 1997-1998,
I personally recommend SC88/SC88Pro/MU80/MU90 for playback midis
JV1010 works well on some GM midis, but not on most GS/XG midis.

Some midis recorded by JV1010:
Final Fantasy 5 :
https://youtu.be/VAHKv86RLfc

LUNAR Silver Star Story:
https://youtu.be/uE9biRlthSM

Chrono Trigger:
https://youtu.be/TX3ooEBl2LY
https://youtu.be/JqV5JnXZzwQ

shandavid wrote:

The sound of SC8850/8820 are not as good as SC55/88/88Pro, don't buy them just because of their bigger model number..

I think that's rather subjective.

I own an Sc55mk2 and an 8820 and in most things arranged for 55/88 the standard mode of the 8820 is actually very, very good and clearly higher quality than either of the previous machines are capable of.

Admittedly where people have arranged music around the quirks of either the 55 or 88 you can have 'odd' sounds, but in the majority of cases the out of box sound of the 8820 with it's clearly improved patches can make a night and day difference.

That's not just DOS games either, I've used both the 55mk2 and 8820 across MSX, PC-98 and X68k, and in most cases the 8820 does (subjectively, of course) sound better - Castlevania on the X68k has a sound canvas arranged midi soundtrack and it sounds substantially better in the 8820 than it does on the earlier sound canvas devices.

That's not to say anyone should buy an 8850 or 8820 purely for Dos GM music purposes!

megatron-uk wrote on 2023-08-26, 19:47:

I think that's rather subjective. […]
Show full quote

shandavid wrote:

The sound of SC8850/8820 are not as good as SC55/88/88Pro, don't buy them just because of their bigger model number..

I think that's rather subjective.

I own an Sc55mk2 and an 8820 and in most things arranged for 55/88 the standard mode of the 8820 is actually very, very good and clearly higher quality than either of the previous machines are capable of.

Admittedly where people have arranged music around the quirks of either the 55 or 88 you can have 'odd' sounds, but in the majority of cases the out of box sound of the 8820 with it's clearly improved patches can make a night and day difference.

That's not just DOS games either, I've used both the 55mk2 and 8820 across MSX, PC-98 and X68k, and in most cases the 8820 does (subjectively, of course) sound better - Castlevania on the X68k has a sound canvas arranged midi soundtrack and it sounds substantially better in the 8820 than it does on the earlier sound canvas devices.

That's not to say anyone should buy an 8850 or 8820 purely for Dos GM music purposes!

I agree with everything you've said, but I have no experience with non-emulated Japanese computer soundtracks. The Castlevania X68000 soundtracks were fun to capture, though, from an emulator, and I've listened to them using every sound module I own. Of course there are improvements to the French horn, etc on newer maps, but the old maps are still accessible on newer modules in all of the Sound Canvas family. I do like the SC-8850 and SC-8820, and think the negative comparison of them, especially to the SC-88 Pro is unfair. To my ears, the SMF demos included on CD by Roland for the SC-88 Pro sound exactly as they sound on the SC-8850 and SC-8820 (in their native maps, sure, but obviously also with the SC-88 Pro map selected). All the older SMF demos on Roland's included CDs also play with little difference on these newer modules with the correct map selected, at least none that I can cite off the top of my head. That said, the SC-88 Pro sounds fine, as does the SC-55 mkII, the original SC-55 (as heard from my CM-500s), and the SC-33. I don't have the SD-* modules, because they don't include the backwards-compatible maps of the Sound Canvas family. Due to their lack of these maps, I assume they will sound different.

And, yes, for gaming/GM, any Sound Canvas module will do excellently, at least if variation fallback isn't a concern. Upgrading isn't necessary for those uses, but aside from variation fallback, newer Sound Canvas modules aren't a hindrance.

If you can run a semidecent PC as your MIDI device then I would just use VirtualMIDISynth and the Musyng Kite soundfont.. There is no better alternative in my mind.

megatron-uk wrote on 2023-08-26, 19:47:

I think that's rather subjective. […]
Show full quote

shandavid wrote:

The sound of SC8850/8820 are not as good as SC55/88/88Pro, don't buy them just because of their bigger model number..

I think that's rather subjective.

I own an Sc55mk2 and an 8820 and in most things arranged for 55/88 the standard mode of the 8820 is actually very, very good and clearly higher quality than either of the previous machines are capable of.

Admittedly where people have arranged music around the quirks of either the 55 or 88 you can have 'odd' sounds, but in the majority of cases the out of box sound of the 8820 with it's clearly improved patches can make a night and day difference.

That's not just DOS games either, I've used both the 55mk2 and 8820 across MSX, PC-98 and X68k, and in most cases the 8820 does (subjectively, of course) sound better - Castlevania on the X68k has a sound canvas arranged midi soundtrack and it sounds substantially better in the 8820 than it does on the earlier sound canvas devices.

That's not to say anyone should buy an 8850 or 8820 purely for Dos GM music purposes!

I used to own a SC8820, SC8820 sounds slightly better than the SC8850 & SC-D70
SC8820 has more instrument sounds, including 88PRO sounds, this is why you think 8820 is better than 55
But the newly added instrument sounds of SC8820/8850 are not good, they are bland, weak, soulless modern sound

SC8850 and SCD70 are two of the worst Sound Canvas, because they use switching power supply, not linear power supply

In the past, people thought that SC8850 was the best, because it had the largest ROM, 4vocies per note, etc. Those were just marketing gimmicks

Be warned, it's really easy to fall down the midi module rabbit hole. I fell pretty hard. Currently the owner of an MT32, SC55, SC88Pro, MU90, JV1010 and JV1080, and a digital piano. All I wanted was a sound canvas!

Honestly, any midi module is pretty cool to have, I could talk about one or the other, but hey they're all cool and fun. That's how I ended up with so many, they all kinda rock. I think anyone would be happy with just one, I slightly regret not just getting the SC55 and calling it a day... but it's so hard to resist once you start down that path...

midicollector wrote on 2023-09-02, 02:22:

Be warned, it's really easy to fall down the midi module rabbit hole. I fell pretty hard. Currently the owner of an MT32, SC55, SC88Pro, MU90, JV1010 and JV1080, and a digital piano. All I wanted was a sound canvas!

Honestly, any midi module is pretty cool to have, I could talk about one or the other, but hey they're all cool and fun. That's how I ended up with so many, they all kinda rock. I think anyone would be happy with just one, I slightly regret not just getting the SC55 and calling it a day... but it's so hard to resist once you start down that path...

I agree .

My current favorite is the SC-88 .

shandavid wrote on 2023-08-30, 11:48:

I used to own a SC8820, SC8820 sounds slightly better than the SC8850 & SC-D70 SC8820 has more instrument sounds, including 88P […]
Show full quote

megatron-uk wrote on 2023-08-26, 19:47:

I think that's rather subjective. […]
Show full quote

shandavid wrote:

The sound of SC8850/8820 are not as good as SC55/88/88Pro, don't buy them just because of their bigger model number..

I think that's rather subjective.

I own an Sc55mk2 and an 8820 and in most things arranged for 55/88 the standard mode of the 8820 is actually very, very good and clearly higher quality than either of the previous machines are capable of.

Admittedly where people have arranged music around the quirks of either the 55 or 88 you can have 'odd' sounds, but in the majority of cases the out of box sound of the 8820 with it's clearly improved patches can make a night and day difference.

That's not just DOS games either, I've used both the 55mk2 and 8820 across MSX, PC-98 and X68k, and in most cases the 8820 does (subjectively, of course) sound better - Castlevania on the X68k has a sound canvas arranged midi soundtrack and it sounds substantially better in the 8820 than it does on the earlier sound canvas devices.

That's not to say anyone should buy an 8850 or 8820 purely for Dos GM music purposes!

I used to own a SC8820, SC8820 sounds slightly better than the SC8850 & SC-D70
SC8820 has more instrument sounds, including 88PRO sounds, this is why you think 8820 is better than 55
But the newly added instrument sounds of SC8820/8850 are not good, they are bland, weak, soulless modern sound

SC8850 and SCD70 are two of the worst Sound Canvas, because they use switching power supply, not linear power supply

In the past, people thought that SC8850 was the best, because it had the largest ROM, 4vocies per note, etc. Those were just marketing gimmicks

The SC-D70 has S/PDIF output , so if you don't like the integrated switch mode PSU's effect on the unit's analogue output, why not just use an external DAC of your choice with it ?

darry wrote on 2023-09-02, 02:29:

The SC-D70 has S/PDIF output , so if you don't like the integrated switch mode PSU's effect on the unit's analogue output, why not just use an external DAC of your choice with it ?

That's well said, and another aspect worth mentioning is that if true MIDI inputs are used in favor of the USB-MIDI input on the SC-8850, SC-8820, and SC-D70, the analog audio output is clean. The SC-8820 uses an external (switching or linear) power supply when using its non-USB MIDI input, but of course real MIDI input avoids the USB ground loop noises and cleans up the audio output. That can be done on the SC-8850 and SC-D70 too. The SC-D70 doesn't necessarily need to have that problem solved, though, because it was the only Sound Canvas to support USB digital-audio, which is again a pristine copy of the digital audio just like S/PDIF (except that it's transferred over USB instead of toslink or RCA coaxial cable). Because these USB models may still be connected in the same way as all older Sound Canvas models had to be, using 5-pin MIDI inputs to avoid USB ground looping, it is unfair to classify them as unavoidably noisier.

jaffa225man wrote on 2023-04-25, 22:50:

I've been trying to improve the static articulation just by changing patches from GM to SuperNATURAL on the INTEGRA-7 (and SysEx […]
Show full quote

I've been trying to improve the static articulation just by changing patches from GM to SuperNATURAL on the INTEGRA-7 (and SysEx Editing) by using my qmidiroute patch (live MIDI editing, tuned for the INTEGRA-7, applied generically for every song). I agree that it's hit-and-miss, especially with some instruments' bend ranges (or controllers) that can cause strange whistles, but I love most of the results I've had. I think the SuperNATURAL sounds are Roland's attempt at giving users simple control over near-realism. Although one would think the INTEGRA-7 would be much better, simply by using its (PCM, not SuperNATURAL) High Quality GM bank, that sounds fairly like the Sound Canvas family, so without qmidiroute it wouldn't be that different. If you (or anyone else) have any MIDI files you want me to test my setup with, please share them with me and I'll try to capture the INTEGRA-7 audio for you. This fool, anyway, doesn't mind trying to improve the situation. 😉

The current release of my qmidiroute patch for GNU/Linux (if you want to try tuning it for your Ensoniq MR Rack) is being hosted here again (the site's back up as of about a week ago)!: https://www.midimusicadventures.com/phpbb/vie … ?p=18702#p18702

Here are before-and-after qmidiroute-modified MIDI files & recordings (GS with HQ GM vs. SuperNATURAL from qmidiroute) of the INTEGRA-7 which I captured for the Sound Canvas Comparison Project: https://1drv.ms/f/s!AsMEa3-pVaQOgTFgPKo_7ao-xOxh?e=37FqN6

Enjoy! 😀

I was asked through private messaging to capture the INTEGRA-7's SuperNATURAL (remapped by my patched qmidiroute) output of the Age of Empires soundtrack, and although there is some volume difference (especially with really overpowering ORCHESTRA drums in the game winning files) and SuperNATURAL-reinterpreted guitar slides in a couple places (Music2 and XMusic9), I hope it gives a better example beyond my prior recordings for the Sound Canvas Comparison Project I already linked.

They're 96 KHz, 24-bit, digitally (USB-audio) captured to Ogg Vorbis format encoded at quality 5 out of 10, but 3 is the default. https://1drv.ms/f/s!AsMEa3-pVaQOghpJKVQj4NrLQBaZ

Thanks!

darry wrote on 2023-09-02, 02:24:

midicollector wrote on 2023-09-02, 02:22:

Be warned, it's really easy to fall down the midi module rabbit hole. I fell pretty hard. Currently the owner of an MT32, SC55, SC88Pro, MU90, JV1010 and JV1080, and a digital piano. All I wanted was a sound canvas!

Honestly, any midi module is pretty cool to have, I could talk about one or the other, but hey they're all cool and fun. That's how I ended up with so many, they all kinda rock. I think anyone would be happy with just one, I slightly regret not just getting the SC55 and calling it a day... but it's so hard to resist once you start down that path...

I agree .

My current favorite is the SC-88 .

I agree also, but you just had to name the one I don't have yet... 😉 I can't imagine, though, it's offering anything different from the SC-88 Pro. And I prefer the SC-885o to the SC-88 Pro probably because the SC-8850 was my first upgrade from the SC-33 (my only Sound Canvas at the time) and it has those past maps and plays them all equally well to my ears (except maybe the SC-55's map but, then, none other than the actual SC-55 variants will be perfect). I definitely don't regret my first choice of the MT-32 (old), but it was a major impetus to buying so many others.

i want to throw out an alternative idea. Getting one of these box midi solutions locks you into one sound set usually and its likely going to be expensive.
For about $50 for a roland UM-ONE and a computer you can play any soundfont from a MPU-401.
Another very versatile solution is mt32pi (serdashop has some) where you can get mt32 emulation and soundfonts via fluidsynth.
I think either would give you many options and cost less.

Pickle wrote on 2023-09-05, 00:21:

i want to throw out an alternative idea. Getting one of these box midi solutions locks you into one sound set usually and its l […]
Show full quote

i want to throw out an alternative idea. Getting one of these box midi solutions locks you into one sound set usually and its likely going to be expensive.
For about $50 for a roland UM-ONE and a computer you can play any soundfont from a MPU-401.
Another very versatile solution is mt32pi (serdashop has some) where you can get mt32 emulation and soundfonts via fluidsynth.
I think either would give you many options and cost less.

Yes, MUNT is amazing and offers a mostly complete solution to the MT-32 and CM-32L. There's no hardware I know of yet to support the MT-32's full button/select wheel interface, but it's probably only a matter of time (it's nice to be able to view each instrument's name and volume, as well as make volume adjustments). With the MUNT software running on a computer, you can see the instrument names and master volume, but I think mt32pi doesn't show it all. My dream for an external emulated MUNT interface would include every possible button-combination & screen on the MT-32 (overflow assign, sound group & sound choices, etc.) and have support for all the MIDI ports (IN/OUT/THRU). It would be quite nice to have a CM-32L with the screen and all the buttons, but I wouldn't want to use parts from the real modules as they're rarer, never to be produced again, beauties.

Soundfonts could be a good solution too, but for the authentic sound of the SC-55 (as game authors would have been programming around in the early nineties) I doubt any soundfont can emulate its NRPNs and SysEx. I also doubt any DOS games tampered with those very specific features, though, which is important because it would be a type of vendor lock-in if they had. Sure, just having the sound samples is probably good enough for many, but if one could end the purchasing rabbit hole with just an SC-55, I think that would be better (although it's unlikely, as we've seen in this thread). It just becomes a goal to try improving on the standard SC-55 because MIDI makes it downright easy, and it's fun, however bad it is for saving money and time. Similarly, soundfonts also take advantage of MIDI's easy adaptability, yet they make the pursuit of "best sound" free and infinitely adaptable. Still, I think having a basis in the hardware that originated many computer soundtracks, is useful and can be revealing.

It's not exactly lock-in, but we do become used to how it sounded, and variety, then, tends to be obvious and possibly annoying. The MU1000 EX/MU2000 EX's GS emulation is made by Yamaha, a Roland competitor, yet it still sounds mainly pretty good to me. Maybe by that time their collaboration on General MIDI 2 was enough to have them cooperating over the GS specifications. It's just too bad the SC-8850's unofficial XG-Lite mode seems lighter than Yamaha's GS mode.

Incidentally, XG for GS synths and GS for XG synths are other conversions I support with my qmidiroute patch, but some XG files have wide reverb cutoff sweeps that cause uncomfortably loud rumbles and whistles on GS.