Synth Site: Roland: System 100 modules: User reviews Add review
Average rating: 4.8 out of 5
page 1 of 1:        1 
shekhar a professional user from england writes:
i haev the 101 synth, 102 expander and 104 sequencer and im fortunate that they are all in mint condition. that aside, this is quite a powerful bit of kit on its on, and what with multi tracking usign logic or whatever you use to record audio, it's a doddle to put together a track using just this on its on (early human league used to use this for drums as well). very powerful sound (filter sounds liek 18db/oct which is the tb303), and lots of potential for sonic magling. having owned an arp2600, this is more versatile and more stable (like all roland gear) and no tunign probs whatsoever.

if you can get one before they go above 2000 pounds (uk) for just these three mods alone.

Rating: 5 out of 5 posted Wednesday-Sep-06-2006 at 04:55
Mike Miller a professional user writes:
System 100 is a phat sounding synth. It's great for leads and basses. Orbital has one and once you hear it you instantly know where they get such great warm bass sounds.

Rating: 5 out of 5 posted Sunday-Jan-14-2001 at 18:23
Calle a professional user from Stockholm , Sweden writes:
This is one beefy system. I recently got myself a complete system (101 keyboard/synth , 102 expander synth , 103 mixer , 104 sequencer and a pair of 109 speakers). The first thing that strikes me is that the sound is not at all as Roland-y as the system100M. This one has got the same filter as the SH-5 synthesizer and is to my ears closer to Moog than traditional Roland. Then again I constantly run it with a grey ARP2600 as one big synth to make things even more fun , so that might fool me a bit , dunno.

The PWM on the system is sweet sounding indeed , actually warmer sounding than the 2600´s , and using the hard and soft sync inputs on the 102 expander is a quick way to get wonderful lead sounds. A drawback is of course that there are very few patchpoints , but it hasn´t bothered me so far and I doubt that it will later. I can only see that it would be a serious issue if you´re into very experimental stuff , and the most important jacks are there for my needs.

The 103 mixer is quite a crude box with a built-in spring reverb , which is actually one of the better ones I ever heard. Instant sci-fi and nostalgia...

The 104 sequencer is easy to master and useful for a number of purposes. You can control cv-pitch and gate as well as changes in modulation/filter sources. For pitch purposes I find it a bit unreliable and dodgy though , getting those knobs in exactly the right position takes some time and there are better ways of controlling that via Midi/cv boxes imo.

I think the system is great for all sorts of sounds. It excels at bass and lead in particular , and I´ve even got some Tomita strings out of it (monophonic but great :-) It might be limited on it´s own , having only two oscillators , so you´ll probably feel the need to expand it with other modulars at one point or another but it has a definite unique character all of it´s own. Character is the key here.

Rating: 5 out of 5 posted Thursday-Oct-12-2000 at 21:49
a professional user writes:
Bass sounds are very phat! I am integrating my system with Doepher modules. Will let you know how it works out later.

Rating: 4 out of 5 posted Friday-Jan-22-1999 at 20:58
page 1 of 1:        1