Even though it's the end...

[Kevin Nolan]

Sorry Swampfox - my apologies to you.

Best regards,
Kevin.

[Swampfox]

I completely understand my friend...a more than understandable mistake...

[tonecre8]

tonecre8,

So...Keep selling those M3's...keep updating the software to the M3...in the end it just means more goodies for us HD users...oops, I meant Oasys users.

I'm not budging...The Oasys is a bad motha @*#&$^!!!! Shut yo mouth...I was just talking about the Oasys...

LOL

Listen Swampfox, it's not a verses thing that I'm referring to, at least that wasn't my intention. But you can't reasonably quantify any fraction of capability on one machine verses the other. Sure you could say it has some features which YOU deem much more powerful but in a sense it's subjective because those features may only matter to you. The thing that differentiates this from say HD and LE is that no studio that's worth it's weight is saying "Hey lets just get a 002 (or 003) and a control surface and call it a day". No, odds are any Pro Tools user that could afford full on HD would certainly buy an HD system. Again I'm talking the type of users to whom HD is targeted. Not the bedroom studio producer types.

By contrast, the Korg line is a bit unique. Who is the Oasys really targeted for? It's a ~$7k piece of equipment. Bedroom producers usually sell all their other pieces to purchase it. This is often ill-warranted, the O doesn't really do everything well. It should have never been marketed that way. That phenomenal power that you speak of requires an intricate knowledge of the machine. Beyond what most "preset types" are willing to invest. Most of those users eventually sell the O, for a loss.

The live, gigging musician? Perhaps, but those numbers wouldn't support a flagship business model. Studios for hire? Not likely and here's the rub. Going back to the HD analogy they are the ones more able to afford one right? And surely all that power you speak of wouldn't be wasted on them? Or would it? Looking at the comparison of the M3 and the Oasys, that power you speak of is most certainly replaced by other gear in a studio setting. It's about value. An M3, Motif XS and some virtual analog, though costing slightly more, has way more value.

Truth is there is no workstation in the class of the Oasys, there, I said it. But ironically, there isn't a need for one. A flagship should separate itself a bit more definitively than the Oasys does to be sucessful.

I'm gonna "shut my mouth" now before my O hears me.

[Swampfox]

This is why I love this forum...great debates, excellent points, and ALL valid opinions...


I couldn't agree with you more than on your last post Yes its true. But... I wasn't trying to imagine for one second that one piece of hardware or software is the savior to a producer's/engineers's studio(s) desires/needs...but its probably my fault in magnifying the HD to Oasys analogy too much instead of explaining the marketing advantages/disadvantages for both companies-in my analogy.

Again, I couldn't agree more that one keyboard is never absolutely enuff...personally I wouldn't be satisfied with every keyboard/synth in the world...I'd still want more

Where I was going with the original anaolgy is that this (M3) is another excellent way to sell more and more korg keyboards for KORG. Like I said, not everyone can afford an Oasys...so for korg to put all of there attention on just the Oasys alone wouldn't be smart...Thats all I was getting to. And although I agree, as well, that the M3 is a magnificent piece...its not the oasys. Why not have both? You do and I do...But we like many people on this forum are not the average buyer...


In closing...I fully see your points...I only hope you see mine as well. Marketing, selling more, expansion of all there products versus just one "big dog"...


"The Big Dog Will Live On..."