Korg Forums

[nightplayer]

I would like to request a the following new software feature updates to be added to the current Kronos OS version.

A "Setlist Tempo" input box & a "Tempo Lock" software button, are very welcomed features, if they can be added to the top left or top right corner of the Setlist mode.

Those software features need to be inside of the Setlist mode, and NOT to be inside of the "Global" mode for the entire keyboard.


Speaking of the "Global" mode, it will be very nice to have those features added to the keyboard's "Global" mode as well. This will enable the user to be in control of the tempo of the entire keyboard (outside of the "Setlist" mode).


Those features alone will enable the Setlist user to do the following on a global Setlist level:


1. Setting a global tempo value for the entire Setlist.
2. Locking/Unlocking the tempo settings of the entire Setlist on a "virtually global" scale from within the Setlist mode itself.

This will make a significant difference to the live players whom heavily rely on the Setlist mode.

Having the ability to maintain the same tempo while switch between sounds and Combi's within the Setlist mode, will ensure that the KARMA tempo will follow along as well, which is the main reason for requesting this specific feature to be added.

This will save a lot of time for live performers and will save them the need to have the tempo setting for those sounds and Combi's pre-edited and saved prior to using them in the Setlist mode.

I think those features alone are very crucial to the live performers, and will make the KRONOS more of a practical live performance synth for live players.



Also I would like to request adding the same "Tempo Lock" feature to the following Keyboard modes:

Program Mode.
Combi Mode.
Global Mode.

It makes a lot of sense to have the ability to lock the tempo for an entire keyboard mode while navigating through the presets of the mode as a whole.

The Global mode will need to have both of the requested features to be added:

Global Tempo Set.
Global Tempo Lock.



I just hope that the Korg software development teams keep an open eye on this forum, and take those requested features into their considerations when releasing the next Kronos OS update.


Your thoughts are greatly appreciated.
_________________
Night Player
KRONOS-73, Jupiter-80 v2.0, V-Synth GT V2.0.

[GregC]

[nightplayer]

GregC, Thank you for replying back.

Do you think that Korg will discontinue the Kronos workstation anytime soon?

Thank you.
_________________
Night Player
KRONOS-73, Jupiter-80 v2.0, V-Synth GT V2.0.

[GregC]

[nightplayer]

An interesting read Greg.
My personal thoughts on this topic are as follows:

I think that Korg will definitely stop producing the Kronos workstations at any point in time, and will produce performance-oriented synthesizers, like what Roland did with the Jupiter-80/50, and lately with coming up with the RD-2000 stage piano that incorporates the easy integration with the VSTi's computer-based environment.

The same analogy goes for Yamaha as well. They moved their workstation features into the arranger market by producing the Genos arranger workstation, discontinuing their MOTIF workstation, and replacing it with a performance-oriented synth with the ability to integrate easily with the computer and sending 16-Stereo/32-Mono digital audio channels straight to the computer via one USB cable (no DA/AD conversion is needed), like the Montage.

It seems to me that: this is going to be the vision of a high-end synthesizer moving forward, and how easily it integrates with the computer-based recording environment.

This of course, is coming on the expense of getting rid of the keyboard's internal sequence, which is a crucial tool for those who want to take full advantage of the synth engines and features such as KARMA in the Kronos, and offload that to the computer environment with the following selling point: The user will have the freedom to work with the DAW of preference.

This also is in addition to dropping other important synth features that the pro users can not live without, in favor of bringing the price point down to a "medium"/"affordable" price range.

Just my few thoughts, in regards to this interesting read.
_________________
Night Player
KRONOS-73, Jupiter-80 v2.0, V-Synth GT V2.0.

[GregC]

[nightplayer]

Or, on the other hand, they could pursue an interesting route:

They could come up with a performance synth centered around DAW integration, as we discussed above, with keeping the KRONOS linage of products to a minimum (like 1 or 2 variations at most so that they can keep the production cost in that direction under more control), for some time for the purpose of studying the market after releasing their performance synth.

This will be with keeping in mind that: depending on the sales numbers for each of the two products, they will come to a solid decision in terms of wither or not to keep or discontinue the KRONOS at any point in time.

This would be due to the following reasons related to the KRONOS:

1. The KRONOS (in my openion) is currently the most advanced digital workstation on the planet, conceptually.
Up until this time, none of Korg's competitors was able to come up with a synth/workstation keyboard that surpasses the KRONOS. Released back in 2011 and still, in my personal opinion, the most powerful synth/workstation on the planet until today (conceptually).

2. As you probably know, the KRONOS is the result of many many years of Korg's most advanced in-house R&D, beginning with releasing the Original OASYS that was released back in the early 1990's and failed, going through releasing the OASYS PCI card for computers around 1998, proceeding to releasing the full OASYS music workstation in 2005 that was selling for +$10,500 fully expanded, and finally making the strategic move that took full advantage of all for the above R&D history of the OASYS development by repackaging the OASYS in the KRONOS form-factor with a re-designed OS around a resolution of 800x600 instead of 600x480 for the 2005 OASYS case, and a design that utilizes the SSD technology to dramatically improve performance. This is of course with packaging the KRONOS in a very cost-effective packaging that utilized the use of low quality industrial design materials that I may dare to say: weak and fragile. All of this is to produce OASYS for the masses within the price range of $3,000 - $4,000, backed up by an online sound library market that mimics the "tablet" App-store business model.

3. The extensive R&D cost had been already spent over the past many years of the OASYS/KRONOS developments. The current KRONOS software is at its very solid and finest stage now. That does't require any kind of another spin of an extensive R&D work. Minor OS re-hashes here or there might be added from time to time (or might not be that necessary), but the core of it has already been hammered.





My reasons for stating all of the above are coming from my observations to their arranger line of products/market and the continuity of the current PA-series of arranger workstation.

Korg came up with their Professional Arranger" series of keyboards back in 2001 I believe, with the release of the Pa80 arranger keyboard, which is considered their successor for the i-series line for arrangers.

The year 2004, was the year of releasing their first top of the line pro arranger keyboard, the pa1x pro, that featured a color touch screen, 8-assignable sliders with 4-different modes, and many more important improvements over the original Pa80.

Since that time, we have seen families of products until today.
The Pa1x family of products.
The Pa2x family of products.
The Pa3x family of products.
The Pa4x family of products.
&
Maybe we should expect a Pa5x to be released within the next couple of years or so (unless if they decided to come up with a new series of arranger workstations, which I personally doubt it).

All of the above arranger families are using the same OS framework, for the most part, till today.
The PA4x is still using the Objective-Oriented OS that was released from the days of the PA80, with a redesign around a new screen resolution and some graphical/theme enhancements, but the core of the OS extends roots back to the days of the Pa1x series, which was released back in 2004.

My point is:
By observing Korg's PA line of products among the past 17 years or so, and by keeping in mind the already solid KRONOS platform that we have at hand today (given its long history of R&D that extends its roots back in time to the 1990's), Korg, in my personal opinion, is not losing anything by keeping the KRONOS in production for many years to come with only coming up with some cosmetic changes from time to time (given the fact that no other competitor, in my opinion, was able to come up with a synth/workstation that surpasses it, concept wise).


Or:
They could decide to move the KARMA technology to the arranger line of products (like what YAMAHA did with the GENOS by porting their workstation features to their arranger line), and focus on the Performance Synth concept.

At the end, I think it is not easy to predict their future plans for their products.
_________________
Night Player
KRONOS-73, Jupiter-80 v2.0, V-Synth GT V2.0.

[nightplayer]

Also, speaking of the processor technology used in the KRONOS and its availability in the future to continue producing the KRONOS, I for one, don't think this could be an issue.

Intel Corporation is still releasing the Pentium processors that were developed back in the 1990's for clients who are seeking an x86 processor architecture for applications that do not require extensive processing power today.

In my personal opinion, and from a hardware standing point, I do not think that the computer parts used for any of the KRONOS generations, could become a limiting factor for continuing to produce the KRONOS in the future.

In fact, I think that they have the freedom to chose the type of motherboard and processor architecture that they prefer today, as long as it does not interfere with the way their software talks to the processor, or in other words, as long as their software does not interfere with the microprocessor's instruction-set of commands.

They could use an Intel i3 processor today (if they wanted to), or any other type of processor, as long as its instruction-set is compatible with the processor that is currently in use by the Kronos today, which is from an instruction-set point of view as of today, I don't think it could be an issue.

Newer generations of microprocessors today are continuing to support the legacy processor architectures, which were developed +30 years ago.

Case and point: The x86 processor architecture, was the processor architecture that was developed for early 1990's computers and even goes back in time to the 1980's. This type of processor architecture and its instruction-sets is still supported by almost most of the current generation of microprocessors today, as well as being supported by the software developers until today.
Software developers are using software compilers that are compiling the software code to meet the x86 instruction-set specifications today.

Maybe using an Intel i3 or another type of a fairly recent processor today for an application like the KRONOS, could be (from a Krog's prospective) more of a too fancy type of a processor to include in the synth due to the following two reasons:

1. Their software will not take full advantage of the processor's massive processing capabilities.
2. An unnecessary extra expense that they will need to consider for a design environment that is driven by extreme cost saving constrains. A design environment that is focusing on cutting down every possible corner, to the point of using low quality industrial design materials for cost reduction purposes. Think of it as they are trying to recover from the production, the long history of R&D costs, and the number of units sold in the days of its predecessor, the OASYS.


It is just Korg that is in control of deciding what type of a microprocessor to use for their Top of the line synth, how much of a processing power they are wanting to include in it, and their justification for how much that is they are willing to spend in that processor to meet their design specifications and cost reduction constrains.

At the end, I could be wrong.


I don't know, what do you think?
_________________
Night Player
KRONOS-73, Jupiter-80 v2.0, V-Synth GT V2.0.