Chrisoft::Blog(r#"EDIROL SD-80: A Trapped Beast")

This article is about my hands on of the EDIROL STUDIO Canvas SD-80. -Even though I’m a newcomer to the STUDIO Canvas owners community, -veterans may still find something interesting here.

UPDATE: links to board shots are fixed.

UPDATE: A sequel to -this article has been posted. The sequel contains new updates, -discoveries and corrections to this article.

UPDATE (2022-06-30): the sequel is now -actually published.

STUDIO Canvas acquired

Ever since I learned that ZUN uses a SD-90 as one of his major -synthesizers here, -I’ve always been dreaming to get my hands on one of those. But these -things are not particularly easy to find in China. There are plenty of -deals on ebay though. However, after a failed purchase attempt made in -2016 which also led to the ridiculous suspension of my ebay account, I -left the idea alone for multiple years. Things changed earlier this -month, when owner203 helped me -acquire my very own SD-80 and kindly delivered it from Japan.

I did not go for a SD-90 since they are all ridiculously priced in -2019. The deal I tried to make back in 2016 would cost me around $300 -(shipping included). Now they are all way beyond $400. This forced me to -resort to lower-end models, namely the SD-80 and SD-20. There’s also the -SD-50 which I almost bought back in 2014, before I found out it is -essentially a stripped-down version of Roland SonicCell without the SRX -expandability. Therefore although the SD-50 retains the compatibility -with the synth engine found in SD-90 (both are from models supporting -SRX, namely the XV-5080 and SonicCell), it comes with a complete new set -of waveforms and patches which makes it sounds totally different. So the -SD-50 is definitely a no go.

The only choices left are SD-80 and SD-20. SD-20 can be found very -cheap online (from $59). However SD-20 does have half of the polyphony -and most editability of other STUDIO Canvas’ axed. Also gone are 3 -entire sound banks (and presumably some waveforms). On the other hand, -SD-80 costs a lot more (starting from ~$200), but is capable of -generating everything the SD-90 can (the only missing part in SD-80 -compared to SD-90 is the audio interface). After deciding no more -compromise should be made, I went straight for the SD-80.

The module arrived two weeks after the order was placed. It certainly -wasn’t the happiest SD-80 in the world: the chassis bears quite a lot of -scratches all around. The value knob takes a lot of force to turn and -has a good amount of friction on it, to which I found a quick solution -by simply pushing the knob downwards a little bit while turning it. -Aside from the looks, the module itself is in perfect working order. It -came with a power cord and its rack mount ears, but without any of its -original paperwork or the CD-ROM. As most of the documentation and -drivers can be found online, the only things I’ve lost are the demo midi -files, which is still a shame.

- - - - - - - - - -

- - Top cover - -	- - Label with S/N -removed. Visible on top left corner is a foot pad that seems to be a -slice of cork. - -
- - Left half of -the front panel. Buttons yellowed out, showing the module’s age. -Scratches and dents are visible. - -	- - Wow! Such -Optical! Much MIDI! - -

The configuration

Connection to the computer

Without the audio interface portion, it’s impossible to use the SD-80 -with only a USB connection: you need something for it to connect to in -order to make a recording.

To begin with, I wanted to get something that accepts S/PDIF input -for the audio interface. But those kind of things are scarce today. The -closet model I could find in Chinese market was from an unknown vendor -and comes with a very sketchy chip, whose official driver only supports -up to Windows 7 32-bit. As a crappy digital interface may sound worse -than a more decent analog one, I went for one of the cheapest audio -interfaces available: a Focusrite Scarlett Solo (which is more than 5 -times the price of the weird digital interface and probably still better -than the one comes with SD-90 as it supports up to 192 KHz sampling -rate).

For a audio equipment novice, connecting things up wasn’t that -straightforward: I tried connecting the phone output on the SD-80 to the -line in of the audio interface and it kind of works. There is just one -tiny problem: the left and right channels got mixed up into -one, and is only on the right channel in a stereo recording. At first I -thought it was my cable. But after a couple minutes of researching, I -found out that every input on an audio interface is actually mono. -WHY? Guess I’ll never know.

So I got another TRS to XLR connector. After connecting the left -channel of output 1 on the SD-80 to the microphone input on the audio -interface and the right channel to line level input, it produces stereo -recordings as expected. The resulting audio is very unbalanced though, -due to the microphone input being much more sensitive than the line -level input. In order to balance them I played a sine wave on the SD-80 -and adjust the input level of each channel so that while turning down -the volume knob on the SD-80, the level indicators on all channels stop -blinking at the same time.

The ‘direct monitor’ switch on Scarlett Solo enables live monitoring -of the input without operating system intervention and therefore, -without latency. However the direct monitor feature on Scarlett Solo is -limited to mono only, so in order to get stereo monitoring, a round-trip -through the computer is required.

Settings things up in Linux

If you are absolutely insane and using Gentoo Linux just like me, -make sure you’ve already got working audio and have the following kernel -configuration items enabled:

Device Drivers --->
-    <*> Sound card support
-        <*> Advanced Linux Sound Architecture --->
-            [*] USB sound devices
-                <*> USB Audio/MIDI driver

Both SD-80 and Scarlett Solo should then just work out of box (if you -are using pulseaudio [1]).

At first I thought only the ‘generic’ USB mode of SD-80 is supported -by this kernel module, however it turns out the ‘vendor’ USB mode works -just fine as well. It also suffers a lot less stuttering.

The USB vendor ID and product ID is 0582:0029. Changing the USB mode -to generic makes it 0582:002a.

In order to monitor the input, load the loopback module first:

pactl load-module module-loopback latency_msec=1

(latency_msec means exactly what the name suggests)

then move it to the audio input of the audio interface:

pacmd move-source-output 7 alsa_input.usb-Focusrite_Scarlett_Solo_USB-00.analog-stereo

where 7 is the index of the loopback followed by the name of the -input of your audio interface. Usually you can use tab completion, -however if you are still unsure, you may also use a GUI utility such as -pavucontrol.

I haven’t tried JACK yet. But using QjackCtl should make everything a -breeze.

The editor for SD-80 works perfectly using wine.

Setting things up in Windows

Setting things up in Windows is somehow more tedious than it should -be. Roland didn’t bother releasing a driver for Windows 10, but a web -search indicates the driver for Windows 8/8.1 works on Windows 10 with a -minor tweak. As the device works with a generic driver on Linux even -when the USB mode is set to ‘vendor’, it will probably work on Windows -without the Roland driver too. Although I’d rather install the official -driver for Windows 8/8.1 because there is one.

The tweak is simple. Open up RDIF1023.INF in a text -editor, copy everything under section [Roland.NTamd64.6.2] -to section [Roland.NTamd64.7] and you are good to go. -Driver signature enforcement has to be disabled as stated in the quick -start manual.

Settings up monitoring is as simple as clicking on a checkbox in the -control panel or a button in your DAW. You just don’t see one use the -command prompt for this purpose on Windows.

What does it sound like?

Well, it sounds super ‘ZUNish’, if you’ve ever listened to Touhou -music. It’s definitely the best sounding module back in 2002 (barring -those extendable modules such as XV-5080).

SD-80’s take on clouds.mid (an easter egg thing in Windows 95)

All instruments are from the ‘solo’ set. The trumpet is ‘Tp.Dark -vib’, which is the famous ‘Romantic Tp’ with a significant lower filter -cutoff. Everything else is the basic variant.

SD-80’s take on th06_02.mid

In general the STUDIO Canvas sounds more expressive than most other -tone generators, virtual or not. This is probably related to its default -non-zero modulation level (10) on every part. [2] Technically this makes it GM2-incompatible as -section 3.3.2 of the GM2 specification says the default value for -modulation depth should be 0.

Also the STUDIO Canvas has a bunch of waveforms of instruments played -with vibrato, which is absent on some expandable modules such as the -XV-5080 [3], making vibrato sounds -much more natural than simulating with LFO modulating the pitch and -other parameters.

Relation -to EDIROL HyperCanvas and the Cakewalk TTS-1

There’s a rumor saying HyperCanvas and TTS-1 is essentially the -‘classical’ set from the STUDIO Canvas. And I believed the rumor has -been around for quite some time. Finally I can check it out myself.

flourish.mid on SD-80 with every instrument from the ‘classical’ set -and basic variant selected.

flourish.mid on Cakewalk TTS-1, everything also from bank 0.

The first impression is they do sound quite alike. But as soon as the -drums kick in, you’ll find out they actually sound different.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

-	-SD-80 -	-TTS-1 -
-Piano -	- -	- -
-Marimba -	- -	- -
-Nylon Guitar -	- -	- -
-Fingered Bass -	- -	- -
-Soprano Sax -	- -	- -
-Sweep Pad -	- -	- -
-Drums -	- -	- -

It’s quite obvious that the drums set of TTS-1 is actually taken from -SC-88Pro (except Elec. Snare, which is taken from Electric Set). The -piano sounds almost identical[4]. Sax, marimba and sweep pad -also sounds identical. Bass seems to heve different velocity curves and -guitar in TTS-1 sounds more bright.

Further more, if you have Super Quartet, which is also made by -Edirol, you may find out they also share many similar sounds, namely -‘Rockabilly’, ‘Jazz Bass’, ‘Rock Bass’ and ‘Acoustic Set’, which -correspond to ‘Rockabilly’, ‘Jazz Bass’, ‘Fingered Bs2’ and -‘St.Standard’[5].

These old Edirol software synthesizers might have a very different -engine compared to the XV engine found in the STUDIO Canvasses -considering the DSP power of PCs of that time period. So it’s normal -that the TTS-1 produces subtly different sound even when the same -samples are used.

- - - - - -

-
bonus clip: flourish.mid on SOUND Canvas VA (SC-88Pro Map) -

-
bonus clip: Drums from flourish.mid on SOUND Canvas VA (SC-88Pro -Map) -

SOUND Canvas VA doesn’t simulate anything it claims to perfectly, but -it’s the best result someone who doesn’t physically own a SC-88Pro can -achieve I guess.

All audio files above were recorded using Cakewalk by Bandlab. -~~The Cubase Pro purchase was just for more instruments to be added -to my HALion library.~~

Here are more bonus clips recorded using arecord on -Linux.

th06_13.mid

th06_15.mid (I didn’t bother adjusting fade in value for the vibrato -LFO.)

And finally SD-80 in a mix, featuring two signature instruments ZUN -used a lot in recent games (‘Romantic Tp’ and ‘Reed Romance’) and also -‘St.Sm Choir’.

深海七花～Forgotten Benefit_extended_remix
-(Theme of stage 6 boss of Touhou Kaikeidou, -arranged a bit. Originally by Crystalwings)

UPDATE: 2019-10-12

Now that I’ve been using my SD-80 for some time, I could say more -about the sounds built into it.

Piano sounds in the SD-80 are not super compelling, mainly because -it’s too bright and thin. Sure it has improved a lot since the early -days, but it’s still nowhere near the real thing.

Guitars and basses are in a similar situation. Most of these are also -nowhere near realistic. However there is something worth of -noting in this category, which is distortion guitar. Dist guitar presets -with MFX pre-applied are much more better sounding than the old plain -sample-based sounds.

Orchestral sounds are expressive, sometimes overly expressive. There -are not much variations either: no spiccato or solo pizzicato sounds. -With a bit of tweaking though, symphony tracks do sound decent on the -SD-80.

Lead sounds and pads are superb, especially those from the special -sets. With the editor a lot more nice sounds could be created. A lot of -presets with step modulation typical of that days could be found both -built-in and on the Internet (as midi system exclusive messages).

Drums are half decent. Somehow I don’t really like Roland’s choice of -their acoustic drum sets. I would always turn to other virtual drums for -acoustic drums. Electric drum sounds are pretty good, but there are -simply not enough electric drum sounds inside the SD-80.

Also I don’t really like how Roland arranges the sounds into 4 GM2 -sound sets. This severely limits the number of different kind of -instruments. For example, rather than a lot of different vocal sounds -that can be found in the SC-8850, in the SD-80 we only have Voice Oohs, -Voices Oohs 2, St. Vox Oohs and Enh.Vox Oohs.

The GS and XG lite modes don’t sound very good, which contain sounds -that are more like stripped down version of its native presets than a -genuine GS or XG lite synthesizer. The GS sounds are almost pathetic: it -only come with the same instrument map as the SC-55, and sounds really -cheap. Compatibility wise, however, the SD-80 does a nice job. It does -seem to support all NRPNs and control messages of these standards (even -though it sometimes screw up parameter scaling). But due to the fact -that there aren’t really a lot of usable sounds in these modes, I don’t -find these modes particularly useful.

The SD-80 has 32MB of sample content [6], which is on par with -both SC-8850 and XV-5080. This is quite surprising because some of the -sounds in XV-5080 are so much more realistic than those in SD-80 or -SC-8850. The XV-5080 managed to squeeze 1083 samples into the 32MB wave -ROM while the SD-80 only comes with 589 samples, which are often of -lower quality. I don’t quite get why Roland did this.

Working with the SD-80

Fighting against latency

Even though Scarlett Solo can achieve a very low latency, there’s no -way I can squeeze out enough processing power out of my ULV dual core i7 -to handle it. Therefore I was forced to live with ~11 ms latency, which -is not that high, but still a quite significant amount to deal -with.

Cakewalk’s glitchy latency compensation makes things even worse: it -works in some projects but completely out of order for the others. In -order to listen to a full mix, I have to make a short recording, which -is really annoying. As this is much more expensive time-wise, I started -using more guesswork before trying a full mix and it’s probably not -good.

Recording

Recording is simple and works as expected. However I seem to suffer -from quite a high SNR value, which hovers around ~90 dB. Perhaps it’s my -crappy cables making me pay.

Editing the sounds

The best thing about SD-80 is its editability. Neither SD-90 nor -SD-20 came with the same level of editability upon launch. [7]

As claimed by the Sound On Sound -review, the editor for SD-80 is very similar to the one for XV-2020. -The editor exposes a generic sample-based synthesis engine quite -comparable to the one found in HALion (with more restrictions, of -course). It lets you take full control of the synthesis engine and even -create new patches not found anywhere else.

The synthesis engine consists of four layers (with up to two samples -[8] for each layer, plus -frequency modulation), four filters (one for each layer), eight envelope -generators (amplitude EG and filter EG for each layer), two LFOs -[9] and a 4*4 modulation matrix. There are also 90 -post-processing effects (some of which are combinations of multiple -simple effects, hence the name ‘MFX’) to choose from for each -channel.

Restrictions aforementioned include inability to use external samples -so you are essentially locked in to 589 built-in waveforms (which is -probably fine because it’s not what the STUDIO Canvas line is aimed at), -limited number of envelope nodes, limited modulation routing, restricted -number of different MFX’s that can be used at the same time (3).

The editor has quite terrible user experience. Guess it’s common for -such decades-old software. It comes with a twenty-page pdf manual (which -contains a lot of excerpts from the XV-5080 owner’s manual), which focus -on the internals of the synthesizer, and a html manual, which focus on -the interface of the editor.

I’ve also tried editor software for other STUDIO Canvas modules using -the same generation of XV engine. The SD-20 editor works seamlessly with -SD-80, and it only offers basic parameters editing just like TTS-1. The -SD-90 editor, despite being extremely similar to the SD-20 editor, -doesn’t work at all, which is not surprising as it’s essentially the -SD-20 editor plus an editor for the audio mixer and audio effects -processor found in the SD-90, which the SD-80 lacks.

By the way, if you have hi-dpi display and use Windows 10, be sure to -use ‘System (Enhanced)’ scaling behavior for the SD-80 Editor. It scales -perfectly that way.

I’m not going to scatter the post with even more pictures, so please -follow the links for selected screenshots of the editor:

main -screen / ‘part -survey’ / layers -/ amp -EG / LFO / -layers -mapping / modulation -matrix / patch -options / ‘part -all’ / MFX -editing / Rhythm -layers editor / Rhythm amp -EG

Impact on the workflow

First of all I’ve to record and thus, deal with latency, noise and -clipping. It’s pretty annoying as already mentioned above.

Also the SD-80 doesn’t integrate very well with any DAW. There’s no -way your settings of this hardware synth get saved automatically with -your project like a virtual synth. Also forget about automation and all -sort of things. You have to use MIDI events and system exclusive -messages (especially tuning some obscure parameters) for this purpose, -and DAW software doesn’t have great support for system exclusive -messages in general.

Quirks

The SD-80 is GM2 compatible. However many midi files you randomly -find may not play on it even when the device is in GM2 mode. If the midi -file being played has any sort of bank selection event not recognized by -the SD-80, the corresponding part will produce no sound at all.

If your midi file has NRPN messages, things will get even worse. -These things are essentially undocumented for the SD-80. All I could say -is good luck keeping your eardrum intact. [10]

The manual says ‘This set (“classical” set) is also used when GM2 -data compatibility is important’. However upon receiving the GM2 on -message, the module automatically selects ‘contemporary’ set for every -part. It seems impossible to change this behavior.

The XG Lite mode has way more instruments available than what the -manual has listed. Bank 18 patch 1 gives you ‘Piano 1d’ (presumably -‘Mellow Grand Piano’ in XG specification), which is not listed in the -manual. It actually has 489 normal patches, 49 sfx patches, 2 sfx kits -and 9 drum kits [11]. It’s quite irony to find out that they have more patches -for their competitor’s standard than their own legacy standard. However -these sounds are relatively lame when compared with authentic YAMAHA XG -synthesizers of the same period. Particularly some sounds in different -variant slot of the same patch number sounds almost identical. Roland -obvious put less effort in these sounds in terms of sound designing.

MIDI timing messes up if events flood in within a demisemiquaver -worth of time. This quirk resembles the problem QMidiPlayer for Windows -suffered from in its early days. But I’m pretty sure the cause is -completely different. [12] Also this could be a -common issue of old MIDI devices, as my old YAMAHA keyboards does the -exact same thing.

The sound generated by the SD-80/90 is phasey as could be heard in -ZUN’s early works. If unsure, take a look at the spectrogram.

The module, as all electric appliances do, generates heat. The manual -says “A small amount of heat will radiate from the unit during normal -operation”, and the chassis do get quite warm even when it is completely -idle. This didn’t become an issue until later.

Finally there are a couple of quirks in Roland’s former partner -Cakewalk. Whenever the input signal level exceeds 0dB, instead of -clipping the audio, it produces a loud cracking or popping sound in the -record. Cubase and arecord have no such problem.

Another quirk with Cakewalk is its metronome. Metronome settings in -Cakewalk is saved on a per-project basis and there’s no way to change -the default value (unless creating a template, which is useless for -existing projects). By default it sends the metronome to the default -MIDI device, which result in records with metronome clicks in them.

Beneath the chassis

Although I cherish the module quite a lot and there are warning text -on top of it (which I can’t read because it’s in Japanese and … well, -English), I disassembled the unit.

CAUTION!! -注意!! ATTENTION!! (/a.tɑ̃.sjɔ̃/) -

As most other vendors does, Roland build their audio equipment ‘like -a tank’. The entire chassis is made out of aluminium and steel, and has -an absolutely crazy amount of screws on it. The front panel came off -after taking out 5 screws on top and bottom, after which I took out the -value knob and the rubber button sheet for a cleanup.

The top cover was freed after taking out 11 screws. Under the top -cover lies the guts of SD-80. All boards except the power supply board -uses SMD components extensively. The main board is made exclusively -using SMD components, which is probably quite impressive back in the -early 2000s.

The power supply module is surrounded with thick plastic sheet -presumably for insulation. Rated voltage for the module seems to be -changeable by using different pin layouts on the input side. The power -supply module is made of two separate boards. The two boards are -connected with two wide connectors that only have a few pins on them. I -would guess the pin layout on the connectors sets the rated voltage of -the module but I’m not sure. I would definitely test that out -someday.

I took note of the engravment of every chip on the main board, which -could be found in chart B below.

- - - - - - - - - - - - -

- -	- -
- -	- -
- -	- -

What the manual doesn’t tell

A very sensible thing to do after the disassembly is to search the -engravment on the chips online. Searching ‘RA08-503’ found on the -largest Roland-labled chips [13] brings up a whole -new world to me: service manuals for Roland synths. Sadly there are no -manuals for any STUDIO Canvas models, nevertheless, they are very useful -for learning more about the insides of a Roland synthesizer.

There are a couple of models bearing the ‘RA08-503’ chip found in the -SD-80. Examples include XV-5080 and MC-909. This chip is referred to as -‘XV’ in their service manuals (also in the SD-80, as you will find out -later). It’s safe to guess they handle the most important work of a -sound module – tone generation. Also I observed that all modules -supporting 32 parts and 128 polyphony have two of these chips in them, -while the ones with only one chip only supports up to 16 parts and 64 -polyphony. Maybe that’s the limitation of the single chip. Also one can -tell the chip also handles some weird job such as LED indicators from -the circuit board schematic.

A very lonely chip on the right side has ‘6417706’ on it. Turns out -this is a microprocessor implementing the SuperH architecture. It’s the -same CPU as found in MC-909 (which makes sense as they are produced -around the same time). Linux kernel has support for this -processor[14]. The processor has a maximum clock speed of 133 MHz and is -underclocked to 128MHz in the MC-909. It’s probably underclocked even -more in the SD-80. There’s an unpopulated D-sub connector presumably for -debugging near the CPU.

Testing mode

According to the service manuals available for other models, they all -have a hidden test mode. Some also have the ability to update system -firmware. Entering testing mode often involves turning the power on with -a combination of keys pressed. Every model have its own way to enter -testing mode and there’s no obvious pattern. At that point, I was -desperate to dive into it. So I simply tried all button combinations -consisting of one to three buttons. The result didn’t let me down. I -found three combinations that make the SD-80 boot into special -modes.

INST + SHIFT + PART▶ = Test Mode
INST + PAGE◀ + PREVIEW = Program Updater
SYSTEM + PAGE◀ + PREVIEW = Program Updater

Below is everything I found about these modes.

Test Mode

00 Version Check
-1.03 0022 2002/07/29

(Preview blinks, pressing it doesn’t seem to do anything)

01 Device Check
-      ALL OK!!

(I got NG:XV2 shortly after heavily using the module for -a while. MFX in test 7 produces no sound at all, system delay only has -the dry sound, everything else was normal. More on this later.)

02 MIDI Check
-MID1:x MID2:x THRU:x

(No MIDI cable for me until I’m home… Input from USB does not -count.)

03 LCD Check
-PAGE:Sel / ENC: Contr

(PAGE buttons switch among the following four patterns: none, full, -chequerboard 0, reversed chequerboard. Contr=Contrast)

04 SW/LED Check
-    ooooo ooooo

(All buttons and indicators light up. Transparent buttons turns off -its light, opaque buttons turns off LED above or below it, ENTER button -turns off nothing. The five o’s on the left corresponds to -the upper row, others corresponds to the lower row. Pressing a button -turns its character to #, releasing it causes it to change -to ..)

05 Encoder Check
-  Value(0-23) = xx

(+ Plays C3, - Plays E3, both using the piano voice. Value starts at -00. Interestingly if the encoder is turned too fast, the value on screen -does not change until you stop.)

06 Sound Check
-Push button to check
-   Left channel
-   Center channel
-   Right channel

(INST/EFFECTS/SYSTEM blink, pushing one makes it constantly on while -others still blinking and plays the corresponding check. Plays sine wave -on the selected channel(s))

07 Effect Check
-Push button to check
-     MFX(Delay)
-    System Delay
-    System Reverb

(Same as test 06. The sounds used for these checks are snare, -castanets and side stick respectively.)

08 Factory Reset
-   Push [PREVIEW]

(PREVIEW blinks, pressing it really resets!)

The SD-80 still works as a sound module in test mode – it will play -any incoming midi stream. The module is in native mode regardless of -your settings. MFX doesn’t seem to be working normally (likely due to -it’s reserved for test 07). Switching between tests resets some (if not -all, depending on the test switching to) of the synthesizer’s states. -Switching to test 05 sets some of the instrumental parts to piano and -others to a certain synth lead patch. Switching to test 06 sets sine -wave and piano on all instrumental parts just like test 05. Switching to -test 07 sets certain instrument parts to a drum patch, the patch -‘Xtremities’ could also be heard. Other parts are set to piano.

Program Updater

Program Updater
-Version: 1.03

Program Updater
-Prog:12D3[12D3]1.03

Program Updater
-Updt:66FB[66FB]1.00

Program Updater
-Boot:5170[5170]1.01

Update by MIDI
-[ENTER][SHIFT(Exit)]

Update by USB
-[ENTER][SHIFT(Exit)]

INST = Program version (INST lights up)
EFFECTS = Updater version (EFFECTS lights up)
SYSTEM = Boot version (SYSTEM lights up)
SHIFT = Returns to initial screen of the updater
PART◀ = Update by MIDI
PART▶ = Update by USB

MIDI and USB indicators blink on any screen with the top row saying -Program Updater. Selecting a source makes the corresponding -indicator constantly lit and the other go out.

If this mode is entered with the combination SYSTEM + PAGE◀ + -PREVIEW, INST, EFFECTS, SYSTEM will do nothing instead. This combination -is probably reserved for consumers.

Sound generation does not work in the program updater.

Presumably the update MIDI files are similar to earlier models: -stream of system exclusive events containing firmware blobs. No program -update could be found for the SD-80 on the Internet. There are update -files for the SD-90 however, which updates its system software to -version 1.03.

Messing around sans the -chassis

As the two XV chips are arranged in a master-slave manner, I tried -figuring out which one is acting as the master. I threw a bunch of midi -files at it while measuring the temperature of the XV chips… with my -fingers. Both chips turn quite toasty but IC19 is always warmer than -IC27, sometimes it’s even a little difficult to keep my finger stay on -that chip.

When the action gets more intense, IC27 starts to warm up. Before I -was just going to conclude that IC27 is acting as the master, I realized -that I will never come into a meaningful conclusion without further -reverse engineering: I have absolutely no idea how the load is -distributed between the two XV’s!

Frustrated, I entered testing mode to find out whether there’s -anything interesting if it’s run with chassis removed. To my surprise, -the device check failed with NG:XV2 and a bunch of other -errors in the following tests. I thought I was doomed, but a reboot of -the module solved the problem completely and it never show any trace of -abnormality that day.

The other day, however, the problem returned. After messing with the -SD-80 editor and creating random complex patches for an hour, I randomly -decided to check out the testing mode again, where I was greeted by the -NG:XV2 failure the second time. Again, a reboot solved the -problem for the day. No amount of hardwork will put the SD-80 into a -buggy state if it boot straight into normal mode. At this point I -thought it could be a bug in the test or the device check could be quite -sensitive to temperature, which is probably not a very good thing as -there are no vent holes for airflow on the module whatsoever.

A few more days, I found my SD-80 frozen after keeping it on doing -almost nothing for a day. In yet another case, it just randomly froze -during playback after half day of usage. I’m unsure these instability -are specific to my machine.

Chart A

[15]

- -------- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Model	Tone Generator	CPU	Storage	# of parts	# of polyphony (‘voices’)
SC-55	TC24SC201AF-002 (PCM Custom)	H8/532	256K SRAM2, Wave ROM3, EPROM, CPU has RAM and ROM built-in	16	24
SC-88	MBCS30109 (Custom Sound Generator) -‘XP’	H8/510	EPROM/Mask ROM, SRAM2, Wave ROM4, DRAM*2	32	64
SC-88Pro	RA01-005 (Custom Sound Generator) -‘XP3’	H8/510	EPROM, SRAM2, Wave ROM5, DRAM*3	32	64
SC-8850	2*RA09-002 (Custom) ‘XP6’	SH7017	64KB System ROM, 8M System Flash, 256K SRAM (USB controller), 24M -DRAM (EFX effects + System), 16M Data ROM or Flash, 2128Mbit Wave ROM, -2*4M DRAM (XP effects), 256k SRAM (framebuffer)	64	128
SC-8820	RA09-002 (Custom) ‘XP6’	SH7017	64KB System ROM, 256K SRAM (USB controller), 16M Data ROM or Flash, -2*4M DRAM (EFX effects + System), 128Mbit+164Mbit Wave Rom, 4M DRAM (XP -effects)	32	64
JV-1080	MBCS30109B (XP Chip) ‘XP’	SH7034	CPU has 64KB Program Flash + 4KB SRAM built-in, 512kbit SRAM, 1Mbit -DRAM, 8Mbit Data ROM, 21M DRAM (XP effects), 4Wave ROM	16	64
JV-2080	TC170C200AF-005 (TG) ‘XP’	SH7034	CPU has 64KB Program Flash + 4KB SRAM built-in, 2*DRAM, DRAM (XP -effects), DRAM (LCD framebuffer), DRAM, SRAM, ROM or Flash	16	64
XV-5080	2*TC223C660CF-503 (RA08-503) ‘XV’	SH7042	21Mbit SRAM, 256kbit (LCD framebuffer), 216Mbit (DRAM), 16Mbit -Flash, 216Mbit DRAM (XV effects), 2128Mbit Wave ROM	32	128
XV-5050	TC223C660CF-503 (RA08-503) ‘XV’	SH7016	8Kbit EEPROM, 32Mbit Flash, 16Mbit DRAM, 16Mbit DRAM (XV effects), -2*128Mbit Wave ROM	16	64
MC-909	TC223C660CF-503 (RA08-503) ‘XV’	SH7706 -@ 128MHz	264Mbit SDRAM (system), 16Mbit Flash (program), 256Mbit Flash -(program, user), 16Mbit DRAM (external effects RAM), 4Mbit DRAM (XV -effects), 264Mbit Wave SDRAM, 128Mbit Wave ROM	16	64
SD-80	2*TC223C660CF-503 (RA08-503) ‘XV’	SH7706	16Mbit Flash, 216Mbit SDRAM, 216Mbit EDO DRAM, 2*Wave ROM	32	128

Chart B

Follow the link in the first column for a board photo with that chip -visible. Sorry for the shaky photo and poor depth of field.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

-Label -	-Engravment -	-Remark -
-IC 1 -	-62292 361 -	-(8-pin) Unknown -
-IC -2 -	-6417706 SH3 BC13008 133 0413 -	-176-pin QFP, SH7706 CPU -
-IC -3 -	-LH28F 160BJE-BTL80 SHARP JAPAN 0428 7xN -	-Flash Memory (16Mbit) -
-IC 4, -6 -	-SANYO LC381616IET-70 KZA7G0CD1 0042 -	-SDRAM (16Mbit) -
-IC -5 -	-‘H5’ or ‘115’ (illegible) -	-(5-pin) Unknown -
-IC 7 -	-4D46 LV 00A -	-NAND Gate -
-IC 8, 20, -22~25 -	-4C1Y LV 245A -	-Bus Transceiver -
-IC 9, 11 -	-F P42AB VT245A -	-8-bit Transceiver -
-IC -10, 12 -	-0431H LVXC3245 -	-Configurable 8-bit Transceiver -
-IC 13 -	-VHC T139A 4 23 -	-Dual 2/4 Decoder -
-IC 14 -	-‘H12’ or ‘H2’ (illegible) -	-(5-pin) Unknown -
-IC -15 -	-4D36 LV 04A -	-Hex Inverter -
-IC -16 -	-4D16 LV 14A -	-Hex Schmitt-Trigger Inverter -
-IC -17 -	-Roland R02902867 137 352B100 -	-I/O Processor? USB controller? -
-IC 18 -	-VH3 139 4 24 -	-Dual 2/4 Decoder -
-IC 19, -27 -	-Roland R01455956 RA08-503 JAPAN 0330EAI F0032ZAC -	-Voice Generator + LED & LCD Controller etc. (‘XV’) -
-IC 21 -	-7WU04 4.F -	-Inverter (CMOS) -
-IC 26, -30 -	-HYUNDAI GM71C18163CJ6 0040 AG1 KOREA -	-EDO DRAM (16Mbit) -
-IC -28 -	-Roland R02678601 23C128L-529J 0224E7007 -	-Wave ROM (128Mbit?) [16] -
-IC -29 -	-Roland R02678612 23C128L-535K 0222E7005 -	-Wave ROM (128Mbit?) -
-IC 31, -35 -	-4570 431 -	-Regulator -
-IC -32, 34 -	-PCM1716E 27ZDHFM -	-DAC -
-IC -33 -	-04 16H TC9271FS -	-Digital Audio Modulator/Transmitter -
-IC 36 -	-A E -	-(3-pin) Unknown -

Verdict

The SD-80, a product in Roland’s more budget-friendly Sound Canvas -(Studio Canvas) line up, is a great sound module mainly focused at -standards compliance at its time. In my opinion it’s the direct -successor of the SC-8850, while the SD-90 is the direct successor of the -SC-D70 (both are audio interfaces with a sound module integrated).

The Studio Canvas family is Roland’s first and last line up of sound -modules that map nearly all instruments to the GM2 instrument map. While -making the instrument mapping less confusing, this instrument mapping -has its limitations. No later Roland sound module does the same -thing.

Hardware wise, the SD-80 is extremely close to the XV-5080. But the -SD-80 being a ‘Rompler’, its hardware capability is severely limited by -Roland by matching them with worse wave ROM contents than its -professional counterpart. This seems to be true across almost all -professional and budget-friendly Roland synths in the 90s. (SC-88 has -the same tone generator as JP-1080 (‘XP’), SC-88Pro has the same tone -generator as JP-2080 (‘XP3’). SC-8850 and SC-8820 use a newer revision -of the ‘XP’ chip (‘XP6’), which seems to be unused in a professional -product.)

Roland no longer makes ‘romplers’ today. Due to their unique sounds, -these canvases might become a collector’s item in the future.

Things to do besides -imitating ZUN

The SD-80 does not like QMidiPlayer very much. So the first thing to -do is quite clear.

Giving it a total makeup is the second thing on my bucket list. I’ll -probably ditch the original top cover and front panel altogether and -make some custom acrylic glass parts for it.

Porting Linux to it might be a very fun (also atrocious) thing to do. -The internals of the SD-80 is capable of doing much more than what it -does as a STUDIO Canvas. It’s got the same main processor as the MC-909, -just think about the possibility out there (this is also the reason why -I call it a ‘trapped beast’ in the title of this post). The only thing -against this is that I am shy of any experience with this level of -hardware hacking.

Setting up a web service where people upload their midi files and -have them rendered with the SD-80 also sounds pretty cool. But I’m -afraid I’ll receive something from Roland by then and it wouldn’t be -fine for me. Is it really illegal to use a instrument on a time-sharing -basis?

Seriously though if I could pull it off, I’ll probably add a donation -button and buy more classic sound modules for the site. Eventually it -will turn into an online museum for sound modules… screw it I’m talking -utter nonsense again.

Also somehow extracting the waveforms and creating a instrument bank -for HALion or Kontact is tempting. But the odds of being sued by Roland -is even higher even though they did not explicitly disallow sampling -their early products. To be honest I found it disturbing about the -sampling restriction on these ‘unconventional’ instruments.

Newer Roland sound modules?

Newer Roland sound modules such as SonicCell and the latest INTEGRA-7 -seems to maintain the compatibility with their original ‘XP’ synthesis -engine to some extent – as they all support SRX expansion in a certain -way. The synthesis engines are obviously improving over the years as -Roland says the SRX expansion sounds built into INTEGRA-7 will sound a -little different compared to earlier modules.

However, disappointment strikes as soon as I saw the ‘READ’ button on -screenshots of the editor software for the INTEGRA-7. I felt Roland -really need to make more use of the USB bandwidth: the presence of that -button implies the editor software still can’t reflect the realtime -status of the synthesizer. [17] This is a huge -drawback of using a hardware synthesizer that Roland still fails to fix -to this day.

Also, the INTEGRA-7 is super expensive for an amateur and Roland -ended their budget [18] SOUND Canvas / STUDIO Canvas product line years -ago. So no more Roland sound modules for me I guess.

Trivia

A XML file in the SD-80 editor (Script/SD-80EditorScript.xml) -contains patch list and wave list for all SRX expansion cards, -confirming the fact that the editor is based on an editor for some other -sound module with expansion slots.
There are two crystal oscillators on the main board of SD-80. X1 -is a 24 MHz one and X2 is a 16.934 MHz one. Both are out of range of -SH7706’s allowed external clock frequency (clock mode 0 has a input -range of 25 MHz to 66.67 MHz, clock mode 1 has a input range 6.25 MHz to -16.67 MHz). MC-909, which has the same CPU as the SD-80, has a 16 MHz -crystal as the CPU clock source and the CPU operates at 128 MHz. There’s -also a 16.934 MHz crystal in the MC-909, which is tied to its tone -generator (the same tone generator as the one inside SD-80, RA08-503 or -‘XV’). X2 in SD-80 is also very close to one of its tone generator chip. -My blind guess is that the output from X1 in SD-80 goes through a -frequency divider and the CPU operates at 96 MHz. XV-5050 also has a -16.934 MHz clock source tied to its XV chip. XV-5080 however doesn’t -have a 16.935 MHz crystal directly tied to its XV chip, but rather a -11.2886 MHz one going through a 3:2 PLL producing a 16.9329 MHz -clock.

If you want to learn more …

Gigadenza, -owns multiple sound modules, including the latest INTEGRA-7.
Romantique Tp, a -Touhou music addict that I came across on Steinberg user forum.

-If you spot a mistake or have anything you wish to share on this topic, -please do not hesitate to drop me a message. -