 |
Korg Forums
A forum for Korg product users and musicians around the world.
Moderated Independently.
Owned by Irish Acts Recording Studio & hosted by KORG USA
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
phil55
Full Member
Joined: 28 Nov 2013
Posts: 223
Location: Nova Scotia
|
 Posted: Fri Nov 21, 2014 8:15 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| danatkorg wrote: | | StephenKay wrote: | | danatkorg wrote: | | StephenKay wrote: | | No. The Yamaha Mix Voices are a "hidden global pool" that is dynamically managed by the system. You don't have to think about it. If you just load a single song with edited voices, for example, they go "somewhere" and it all just works." |
It all just works - except when it doesn't. 
|
Aw, c'mon Dan - you could say that about anything, including the Kronos. |
If I ever say that something "just works" without including caveats, and yet there are obvious points of failure, please feel free to correct me as well. In this circumstance, Yamaha's approach is somewhat fragile, and unfortunately does not "just work" in the general case. I'd prefer something that's deterministic.
| StephenKay wrote: | | I understand you feel Korg's approach is better (go figure). |
What a silly thing to say. It's my job to improve things, not to toe a party line. My team's record with the OASYS and KRONOS speaks for itself. Data containment is something we haven't addressed yet, but as I've written I'd like to do so, and if and when we do I hope that it won't be via a cheap, fragile hack.
| StephenKay wrote: | | danatkorg wrote: | | StephenKay wrote: | | It's true that in Kronos you can modify any program location, but should you? If you do, any third party set of combis that uses that program may operate incorrectly. |
Actually, I'd strongly encourage users to feel free to modify any and all Program locations. This is another case in which the built-in SSD is really useful: it's trivial to save snapshots of the entire system, and swap between them for different projects. I never worry about editing; it's easy to pull up the factory sounds again if necessary. I'll admit that I don't use a lot of pre-programmed Combis, however. |
"I'll admit that I don't use a lot of pre-programmed Combis, however."
Yes, and that's why you can recommend that. If you did, you might not like having to replace all of the program banks in order to load a bank of combis. Most people don't, in my experience. I'm with Qui on this. |
I understand that you're also a seller of Combis which rely on the factory sounds.
It doesn't matter, however, because as I wrote above, I replace the Program banks *all the time.* The SSD is really handy for that; fast and easy. Users should never fear editing the factory sounds, since they are extremely easy to re-load when necessary. Once you're comfortable with loading and saving files - and it doesn't take much to get there! - this concern over editing data becomes irrelevant. |
Interesting conversation. Thanks for that...
_________________
Give us our daily synths. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
SanderXpander
Platinum Member
Joined: 29 Jul 2011
Posts: 7860
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 21, 2014 8:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Dniss wrote: | | SanderXpander wrote: | | Why would it matter if a sound is factory original, unless you don't like the sound you're getting? |
Say I find this nice sounding brass prgrm but I changed it so much for other uses that it's hardly recognizable.
A year later, looking for a good sounding brass timbre, I will pass right over this one because it has lost it's original timber once modified.
Make sense?
Also, I don't have to worry about messing up any combi. |
I only really MANGLE and overwrite programs when I'm quite sure I don't like them in their original form. Generally they will be adjustments like a shorter release, less reverb, etc.
Even so, as I said, it's easy enough to load the factory sounds again. Or any other bank. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Peas&Carrots
Full Member
Joined: 25 Jun 2013
Posts: 158
Location: UK
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 21, 2014 9:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
WOW - this discussion is VERY interesting...
Dan, as you know "YOU ARE MY HERO" at the moment!
Stephen, you are an all around "GOOD GUY" too.
What's going on? - I mean, Mr. Kay and Korg are like peas and carrots (sorry!)
A little bit of KARMA might be in order? (Edit: or at least Karma v3.2 for Kronos!)
Interlude over - Carry On Chaps! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Derek Cook
Approved Merchant
Joined: 20 Jul 2014
Posts: 1279
Location: Wales, UK
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 21, 2014 10:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Yes interesting debate, with me following from the perspective of a long time Yamaha user trying to learn the Korg way of doing things 
Horses for courses, pros and cons, no such thing as a perfect synth; otherwise why would I buy so many!!
The great thing about the Korg as pointed out is the built in SSD which can be loaded with loads of sounds, not to mention the huge amount of User banks in memory. Even better the feature where you can audition sounds from a PCG without loading the PCG - that is simply awesome!
All of my Yamaha boards are like Korg in that you edit a Voice or Program and a Performance/Multi or Combi picks up the edited voice. When programming motif.factory, I did come across Mix Voices in Songs; not a bad idea, but not a brilliant implementation. I prefer the way that my older Yamahas and the Kronos works, myself, and am well used to working with the concept.
_________________
Derek Cook - Java Developer
Follow kronos.factory development and submit ideas over at the kronos.factory Trello Board
My Echoes Music Website
My Carreg Ddu Music Website |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JohnDonovan
Full Member
Joined: 17 May 2005
Posts: 111
Location: London, UK
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 21, 2014 10:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I personally have always found the way Korg workstations work more intuitive and user-friendly (have used them back since the O1/X, going through a Trinity & 2 TR-Racks, a Triton Studio & Triton Rack, & now a Kronos.) As one of the Korg UK guys knows I used to work for one of the other big synth companys and as such could buy their gear with a pretty decent discount, but I still bought Korgs because I preferred them!
I guess I'm just used to the Program/Combi relationship & as Dan said, the fact that you can load different banks of programs/combis as required from the SSD its easy to change patches/setups as required. Often now I'll have a PCG I work on for a project then start an entirely new one for a new project and can always cherry pick individual patches from previous projects if I need to.
_________________
Kronos˛ / Nautilus / KingKorg / RK-100s / CX3 / Logic / ProTools / Sibelius |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
StephenKay
KARMA Developer
Approved Merchant
Joined: 18 Jun 2002
Posts: 2979
Location: Scottsdale, AZ
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 22, 2014 12:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
| danatkorg wrote: | | StephenKay wrote: | | danatkorg wrote: | | StephenKay wrote: | | No. The Yamaha Mix Voices are a "hidden global pool" that is dynamically managed by the system. You don't have to think about it. If you just load a single song with edited voices, for example, they go "somewhere" and it all just works." |
It all just works - except when it doesn't.
|
Aw, c'mon Dan - you could say that about anything, including the Kronos. |
If I ever say that something "just works" without including caveats, and yet there are obvious points of failure, please feel free to correct me as well. In this circumstance, Yamaha's approach is somewhat fragile, and unfortunately does not "just work" in the general case. I'd prefer something that's deterministic. |
It's fragile because you can use up all of the memory slots? In that case, I guess the Kronos is fragile once you fill up all the program slots.
| danatkorg wrote: | | StephenKay wrote: | | I understand you feel Korg's approach is better (go figure). |
What a silly thing to say. |
About as silly as "It all just works - except when it doesn't."
Anyway, as someone who's used the Yamaha Mix Voices extensively in a shipping product, and not just read about it in a manual, I say the feature works pretty darn well (from personal experience) - and I tortured it more than most users ever do. But it's just one approach to a particular problem.
_________________
Stephen Kay - KARMA Developer • Karma-Lab - karma-lab.com
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
danatkorg
Product Manager, Korg R&D
Joined: 21 Jan 2005
Posts: 4204
Location: California, USA
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 22, 2014 1:38 am Post subject: |
|
|
| StephenKay wrote: | | danatkorg wrote: | | In this circumstance, Yamaha's approach is somewhat fragile, and unfortunately does not "just work" in the general case. I'd prefer something that's deterministic. |
It's fragile because you can use up all of the memory slots? In that case, I guess the Kronos is fragile once you fill up all the program slots. |
Nope, the Yamaha approach we've been discussing is fragile because although it's supposed to "just work," it is a limited mechanism which fails with an obscure error message from which recovery is mysterious.
| StephenKay wrote: | | Anyway, as someone who's used the Yamaha Mix Voices extensively in a shipping product, and not just read about it in a manual, I say the feature works pretty darn well (from personal experience) - and I tortured it more than most users ever do. But it's just one approach to a particular problem. |
I'm sure it's worked well enough for your KARMA sounds, but a few Yamaha users have already disagreed with you in this thread.
_________________
Dan Phillips
Manager of Product Development, Korg R&D
Personal website: www.danphillips.com
For technical support, please contact your Korg Distributor: http://www.korg.co.jp/English/Distributors/
Regretfully, I cannot offer technical support directly.
If you need to contact me for purposes other than technical support, please do not send PMs; instead, send email to dan@korgrd.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jimknopf
Platinum Member
Joined: 17 Jan 2011
Posts: 3374
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 22, 2014 2:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
Stephen, I can only say I understood the Yamaha idea by what you describe and not by actually using it. So maybe I'm missing something I fail to see up to now.
But if I compare the two systems we discuss, I would always prefer the actual Kronos system as far as I understand both so far.
First of all, it does not reduce my limits to some user banks plus the additional, VERY limited global pool you described. In this case quantity gives me all the freedom for managing program versions I want.
Second, the Kronos gives me a freedom the Yamaha doesn't remotely offer, and which I regard as essential for organisation: it allows me to use different autostart setups. That's ten times more powerful from my view than anything Yamaha offers.
This is not just a theoretical option. I just have done something I should have done two years ago already, and never dared to do. I have checked all factory and user programs in my Kronos, and kicked out each and every one I was sure I don't use. After doing that I made a plan how to reorganize the remaining programs in HD1- and EXi-Banks in a way which gives me very direct and fast access:
- now I only have to browse through sounds I really want to use and can most of the time do so without even using the category search. I carry zero ballast around in my standard system: something not even possible on a Yamaha
- this also allowed me to separate VA banks according to engines (which helps me find the sounds I'm after based on different basic sound character)
In one sentence: for the first time since playing the Kronos I really made the instrument completely personal and mine, with a workflow a lot superior to anything I ever had (or have seen) on any synth or workstation!
Does that cause me any trouble? No:
I had hesitated so long fearing the loss of working combinations. But for half a year, I actually made notes which combinations I really used in band play, or recording. Result:
- In band play, I nearly never(!) used any factory or bought combination. They just don't fit for songs I use or write, and I write my own nearly every time I need one. i detected that most factory and bought combinations just have one single usability aspect for me: some of them are good examples how to achieve something.
- For recording, I just don't use the typical string section of a combination: I use separate instruments on separate tracks. Again, I only use combinations if I want to have direct access to all the instruments from the Kronos, which I use in a Cubase song, at the same time while recording. But I surely don't use the classical combi offer, with few exceptions.
It was no big deal to re-arrange my own combis, once I had my own program management going. It is also no big deal to restart a Kronos with the factory banks, check possibly useful combis whenever searching for some, make a note about the programs used, and then load them into my own structure.
In one word: Dan is completely right about the massive advantage of sound organisation in a Kronos IMHO. And it becomes clear as soon as you really use it, just like with the 256 Yamaha slots. I just think the Kronos structure gives me much greater flexibility to organize sounds for different projects.
One last thing:
Complete program management within Combis is definitely a good idea for the future. But the main reason is not staying within the present Program/Combi relation, but strictly moving towards song related sound organisation.
In former times, keyboarders were glad to use sounds in different songs (a pinao wherever it is neede etc.). Today they use song contexts, not just with one or two splits, but with change of instruments and instrument groups during a song. So complete program saving within combis is the way to go.
_________________
Kronos 73 - Moog Voyager RME - Moog LP TE - Behringer Model D - Prophet 6 - Roland Jupiter Xm - Rhodes Stage 73 Mk I - Elektron Analog Rytm MkII - Roland TR-6s - Cubase 12 Pro + Groove Agent 5
Last edited by jimknopf on Sat Nov 22, 2014 2:16 am; edited 3 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
StephenKay
KARMA Developer
Approved Merchant
Joined: 18 Jun 2002
Posts: 2979
Location: Scottsdale, AZ
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 22, 2014 2:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
| danatkorg wrote: | | StephenKay wrote: | | danatkorg wrote: | | In this circumstance, Yamaha's approach is somewhat fragile, and unfortunately does not "just work" in the general case. I'd prefer something that's deterministic. |
It's fragile because you can use up all of the memory slots? In that case, I guess the Kronos is fragile once you fill up all the program slots. |
Nope, the Yamaha approach we've been discussing is fragile because although it's supposed to "just work," it is a limited mechanism which fails with an obscure error message from which recovery is mysterious. |
Obscure error message? "Mix Voices Full?" Uhmm, I guess my mix voices are full. "Mysterious recovery process?" Free up some memory?
Anyway, as enjoyable as it's been, it's time to end this debate. I merely explained the way Yamaha approaches a particular problem, since someone was talking about a global pool of program slots for this purpose - and that's how they do it. I found their way useful; if others don't, that's cool.  And, contrary to your implications, it actually works fine. I didn't say it was the best way, or the only way, or advise anyone to switch to Yamaha. Was just offering up some experience I've recently had with a competitor's line of synths.
Heck, I still think the Kronos is by the far the best all-around workstation and synthesizer, due to the nine synth engines and the onboard KARMA.
And adding the ability to edit the Programs from directly within the Combi or Song is fantastic, regardless of where you have to store the edits. As we've both agreed, it would be ultimately the best to have the ability to store them directly in the song or combi - memory permitting someday.
_________________
Stephen Kay - KARMA Developer • Karma-Lab - karma-lab.com
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Vkhandelwal
Junior Member
Joined: 09 Nov 2012
Posts: 52
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 22, 2014 3:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| danatkorg wrote: | | runningman67 wrote: | | kbrkr wrote: | This is a freakin awesome list of enhancements for a 2-3 year old Synth.
Korg Rocks! |
To confirm......my original Kronos will benefit from this upgrade?
I'm still on 2.10 I think.
|
Yes.
| runningman67 wrote: | | If yes, will it effect the Libraries I have from QuiRobinez and all my songs saved in disk mode on the sequencer? |
I don't know that I understand the question. Sounds are not changed. |
Korg beats all brands by releasing new os for existing users while launching new workstation.. Had purchased kronos x few months ago and glad that i went for a hight integrity brand like korg .. Cheers and loads of appreciation from a user who has uncontrollable GAS 
_________________
Kronos x 61, Korg PA-700 ,Korg Wavedrum Global, macbook pro , logic x,M-audio bx5, |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
QuiRobinez
Approved Merchant
Joined: 25 Aug 2007
Posts: 2539
Location: Netherlands
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 22, 2014 3:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| runningman67 wrote: |
If yes, will it effect the Libraries I have from QuiRobinez and all my songs saved in disk mode on the sequencer? |
no the current sound sets from me aren't affected since they are program sound sets.
About your songs i have no idea, i've read somewhere on this forum that the program order was changed and some sounds were added, but i don't know if that's true. If the program order is the same then all your songs will work as before, otherwise you have to find the sound programs again in your song.
Maybe Dan can confirm if the os2 program order is the same on os 3 on the kronos 1, kronos X and kronos 2? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
danatkorg
Product Manager, Korg R&D
Joined: 21 Jan 2005
Posts: 4204
Location: California, USA
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 23, 2014 5:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
| QuiRobinez wrote: | | Maybe Dan can confirm if the os2 program order is the same on os 3 on the kronos 1, kronos X and kronos 2? |
Hi Qui,
The Program bank/number order is separate from the OS version. Installing the new software on a KRONOS or KRONOS X will not alter the Programs in memory, in any way.
The KRONOS 2 has new Programs, and so the bank/number order is new as well. Unofficially, I would not be surprised if tools were available to convert older Combis to work with the new Program order, but no announcements have been made so please don't quote me on that!
_________________
Dan Phillips
Manager of Product Development, Korg R&D
Personal website: www.danphillips.com
For technical support, please contact your Korg Distributor: http://www.korg.co.jp/English/Distributors/
Regretfully, I cannot offer technical support directly.
If you need to contact me for purposes other than technical support, please do not send PMs; instead, send email to dan@korgrd.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rosen Sound
Approved Merchant
Joined: 06 Jan 2010
Posts: 1056
Location: Los Angeles, California
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 23, 2014 6:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
Okay maybe I'm really missing something.... but doesn't tone adjust solve 99% of the problems discussed here? If we assume that you choose your program because it's almost what you need, then we can assume that the adjustments you're more likely to make are things like the ADSR, LFO rate, Filter cutoff, etc all of which can be adjusted via tone adjust, and saved with the combi, sequence, etc.
If the adjustments goes beyond those, I'd be willing to say that at that point, you'd probably want to save it as a new "base" program anything.
In my kronos world, if I end up editing something too much to taylor one thing, I'll save it to a new location, and then edit it again to make it more versatile all around, and save it again. If i can get the "taylored" program in tone adjust, then I might even overwrite it.
please correct me if I'm wrong, but tone adjust can now be saved with each set list slot now too... right? I know transpose is there, which is a big one. But even if tone adjust is not saved per set list and only per combi, program, etc, then to me, that is an infinitely more powerful than Yamahas approach....
Hopefully I'm not way off here.
_________________
Current gear: Korg Kronos 61, Oberheim OB-8, Alesis Vortex
Past Gear: Triton Extreme w/moss & ram, Korg Radias, Kurzweil Micropiano, Triton classic, & Karma
Come visit my Burbank California repair shop/recording studio! Rosensound.com
And my band: Sirion.us.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
QuiRobinez
Approved Merchant
Joined: 25 Aug 2007
Posts: 2539
Location: Netherlands
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 23, 2014 8:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| danatkorg wrote: | | QuiRobinez wrote: | | Maybe Dan can confirm if the os2 program order is the same on os 3 on the kronos 1, kronos X and kronos 2? |
Hi Qui,
The Program bank/number order is separate from the OS version. Installing the new software on a KRONOS or KRONOS X will not alter the Programs in memory, in any way.
The KRONOS 2 has new Programs, and so the bank/number order is new as well. Unofficially, I would not be surprised if tools were available to convert older Combis to work with the new Program order, but no announcements have been made so please don't quote me on that! |
thanks Dan, this is exactly the information i needed for the combi sets i'm working on. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
StephenKay
KARMA Developer
Approved Merchant
Joined: 18 Jun 2002
Posts: 2979
Location: Scottsdale, AZ
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 23, 2014 9:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Rosen Sound wrote: | | Okay maybe I'm really missing something.... but doesn't tone adjust solve 99% of the problems discussed here? |
Nah.. maybe 50%.
Tone Adjust is quite useful for certain modifications to the Programs. But there are many types of edits that simply cannot be accomplished using tone adjust. (Unless Korg were to add more Tone Adjust assignments.)
For example, a pet peeve of mine: You cannot remove velocity sensitivity to the filter. You *can* remove it to the amplitude, using "Amp Velocity Intensity", but there is no such assignment that does the same thing for Velocity. Another thing that can't always be done correctly in Tone Adjust is modifications to the Filter and Amplitude Envelopes. The offsets work to a certain degree, but they do not allow as minute adjustments as actually editing the envelopes in the program. For example, if you take an HD-1 pad sound and try to use Tone Adjust to have the amplitude slowly decay to nothing, you will likely find that the decay sounds unnatural, is either too slow at one point and too fast at the next increment and you can't really get it to decay in the smooth fashion your ear wants to hear - whereas it could easily be accomplished by editing the program itself. The Tone Adjust envelope assignments certainly work well for simple tweaks like a little less attack, a little more release - but not for more invasive edits. Another thing you can't do with Tone Adjust is edit the multisamples in an Oscillator individually. And you can't change what modulations the JS up and down and other controllers are assigned to. Those are just a few examples. So Tone Adjust is great for some things, but not everything.
_________________
Stephen Kay - KARMA Developer • Karma-Lab - karma-lab.com
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
