The OASYS Plug-Ins Suite

[Kevin Nolan]

Hi Schweats,

You'll get no argument from me about the quality of Omnisphere (which I own) - or any soft synths or sample libraries for that matter – there are fantastic instruments out there for sure. And I can assure you –there are lots of aspects to playing and synthesis that easily stretch me!
But I wasn't really arguing against soft synths, rather, I was arguing for hardware development. I also think it's excellent that Dan is suggesting that 'software only' solutions are not the priority for Korg as it means they are committed to hardware developments. If I'm arguing against anything here it's cheap controllers which usually means tacky key action and lousy controllers.

Cheers,
Kevin.

[spritex]

Well, Korg can make controllers that would have preset mappings for the software instruments. If those controllers were good quality they would also be of interest to those who don't wan't their plugins.

The latency thing is a thing of a past, if you have any decent audio solution in your computer - in fact we now have lower latencies in computers than we used to in standalone synths.

Also, all the integrated sequencers in workstations are pretty restricted in features and usability compared to good computer software. And with plugins, you can save all the sound/FX assigments and edits with your songs without even thinking about it in a hassle-free way.

[spritex]

My point is, by not having plugin versions Korg must be loosing a lot of potential sales.

The reasons I don't want more hardware:

1) I have carefully selected my own hardware control setup, which consists of: an early Novation Remote 49 as a keyboard. I am not using the knobs in it, took them off even to make flat space for my computer keyboard and a Novation Nocturn as a knob controller. I like Nocturn because it is compact and there is enough space between the knobs - many controllers have them too closely spaced. And finally a Korg Padkontrol on the right hand side on it's own table.

To replace these with another controller, it should have the same keyboard quality, same spacing of knobs etc. And I am not too keen on selling what I have now because it works for me and I'd be loosing money for no real reason.

2) I already have the computing power inside the computer, and I can simply update the computer if I want more synthesis muscle in all of my synths. Having a closed system for a single synth feels old-fashioned and waste of resources now.

But of course I understand that economics is what dictates what get's done. I wonder though what is viable nowadays, especially in these economic times. I'd guess that the majority of KVR users for example are much like me.

[przemm]

Hi Kevin, I see your point, but don't you think that the current state of synth integration with DAW and cheapness of the controllers partly stem from the unwillingness of the Big 3 to take software world seriously? I will give an example from the engineering department. People claim that mixing ITB just don't feel proper - no knobs, faders etc. Only the mouse and screen. But if you sit in front of Euphonix MC Pro/System 5MC or Digidesign Icon these limitations are all gone - you can turn knobs, push faders and much much more. Of course there is the price issue, because these things are awfully expensive but it is possible to have that kind of experience. Question: why it is not with synths?

Secondly, I think that we have to notice that the world changes and many musicians, especially young ones, are not tided to the hardware paradigm that the Big 3 seem to promote. They seem to be comfortable working in software/hybrid domain and produce great music.

I really believe that companies should treat the software-based musicians more seriously. I love my Euphonix MC Pro - it really does something magical to the workflow - and workflow is for me as important as the feel of a real instrument.

[Mike Conway]

I think that we have to notice that the world changes and many musicians, especially young ones, are not tided to the hardware paradigm that the Big 3 seem to promote. They seem to be comfortable working in software/hybrid domain and produce great music.

Maybe, but how many of those guys actually know how to sample a sound, chop it up and loop it? I'm showing my age, but I think the state of movie soundtracks is way down from the melodic days of the 70's and 80's, when it was more about the notes played, as opposed to the videogame style industrial soundscapes. That's not to say that I don't enjoy the backdrop to something like 30 DAYS OF NIGHT, but man do I miss being able to hum the theme of a movie, when I walked out of a theater.

I really believe that companies should treat the software-based musicians more seriously.

Aside from the Big 3, they do! Software rules the world.




I don't see why everything has to be integrated. I want to see workstations going the route of the Fantom G. However, there can be a happy marriage of people using both. I also think it's okay to use one or the other. Omnisphere looks kick ass. Too bad I don't like making music on my computer, because I wouldn't mind going through the 6 DVDs worth of sound data. Maybe I'll install it on a mIko so I can carry it around with me. Don't give me that laptop alternative, because as processor instensive as that program can be, I would want the heavy duty power. (Btw, I'm typing this on my 2 year old, dual core laptop. The thing has already shown its age faster than my desktops.)

Dedicated control interfaces really inspire me, and by "dedicated", I mean they have keys attached. I don't understand, in this world now dominated by music software, why anyone has a problem with the way the Big 3 develop their hardware??? Thank goodness it still thrives, because not many software apps give you the convenience of the hardware workstation, and that includes that wonderful processor hog called Omnisphere.

I keep seeing nightmare posts, where people had to reinstall their legit copy of East/West Symphonic Orchestra, yet can't get any instruments to come up. A Fantom, Motif or M3 just plain works. My Yamaha samplers from 1987 still work and I won't get rid of them, because of the wonderful sound collections I've built up.

I will pick up Omnisphere, someday. For $500, that's a no brainer. But, don't knock hardware for existing and doing what it does so well.

I've literally spent years worth of man hours editing on computers, using Premiere, Sony Vegas, DVD Architect, After Effects, Photoshop, CD burning software, Soundforge, Canopus, Matrox, etc. Yet, I like to turn away from the mouse and keypad, when I go make music. I want to feel connected to my instruments and I do.

I had the Korg Legacy Collection, from when I bought my Triton Extreme (free promo). I never got into those synths, until I got them into the OASYS. The differences in interfaces were night and day.

Some people like mint icecream and cherry. I can't stand it. I'm a double fudge brownie guy and there's no changing that.

[Kevin Nolan]

Hi Kevin, I see your point, but don't you think that the current state of synth integration with DAW and cheapness of the controllers partly stem from the unwillingness of the Big 3 to take software world seriously? I will give an example from the engineering department. People claim that mixing ITB just don't feel proper - no knobs, faders etc. Only the mouse and screen. But if you sit in front of Euphonix MC Pro/System 5MC or Digidesign Icon these limitations are all gone - you can turn knobs, push faders and much much more. Of course there is the price issue, because these things are awfully expensive but it is possible to have that kind of experience. Question: why it is not with synths?

Secondly, I think that we have to notice that the world changes and many musicians, especially young ones, are not tided to the hardware paradigm that the Big 3 seem to promote. They seem to be comfortable working in software/hybrid domain and produce great music.

I really believe that companies should treat the software-based musicians more seriously. I love my Euphonix MC Pro - it really does something magical to the workflow - and workflow is for me as important as the feel of a real instrument.

I agree with you that excellent controllers can allow for computer recording and mixing to become an altogether different experience. But that's my point - its the excellent controllers that contribute significantly to the work flow. Of course there are massive advantages to computer solutions - as mentioned before I'm not really debating that. A lot of what the computer brings is great - especially raw DAW control - with countless MIDI and audio tracks for example. But when it comes to live interaction - whether creating, playing or mixing, I suggest (as indeed you do) that tactile live and sophosticated interaction with physical controllers is preferable to everyone.

Regarding the world changing - I also agree. But that does not been throwing out all that has stood the test of time. The piano is 200 years old and yet provides massive scope for cutting edge innovations in music even today. The same is true for the guitar. While I agree that many make good music with computer-only solutions, this does not negate the valid demand for the very best musical instruments. Again, a guitarist would not compromise on this. So I don't subscribe to the point that just because the 'world is changing' that we should abandon progress in making top-notch hardware electronic instruments. I also believe that most people using computer-only solutions would rather have stunning hardware controllers if they had the choice, could afford them or actually knew what they are missing.

I'd also suggest that, as you seem to suggest in what reads like an slightly ageist comment, creating cutting edge computer-music is not exclusive to young people. Indeed many of the best dance artists are pushing on a bit. And there are plenty of young people writing crap. But there are also young people all over this world, right now, pushing the boundary more than you or I – and they are doing so on Steinway grand pianos in classical and jazz music or on fender-strats in pop/rock and so on. I'm confident they are demanding only the very, very best instruments. The demand for stunning instruments, including synthesizers, is as legitimate now as it was in the ‘60s and ‘70s.

To me this current era of computer dominated music is an interim phase. It looks like this generation is awe-struck by the plethora of affordable software plugins that supposedly emulate classics of the past - whether emulating effects or synthesizers. It also seems to me that this is massively flawed situation on three fronts - 1) software plugins cannot ever adequately emulate classics to an acceptable degree 2) the preoccupation with emulating past classics shows a gargantuan lack of new-thinking in design and 3) software only-solutions are a pale shadow of real world instruments, tube amps and compressors and so on. I'm confident that not one world-class music release by any serious artist even today is released without massive usage of real and classic instruments, effects, performers and engineers. The notion that it can all be done in the box with plugins is a myth perpetuated buy a current generation of cottage-industry companies who have hundreds of thousands of aspiring musicians as their market. But it’s largely mediocrity and I'm confident it will not last. Bit by bit people will demand better and better hardware controllers and instruments and I'm confident that we'll come full circle where only the best will do - it's already happening - you Euphonics controller is a case in point.

But in relation to synthesizers in particular, my point is born out of the notion that there are surely incredible designs sitting idle right now because nobody will fund them and the market does not demand them because of cost or because most don't know what they are missing and could have. Arturia's CS80V is an interesting sound generation source - but it's not a musical instrument. I own the CS80 and it's an awesome instrument. Sit down at one of these and you'll immediately know what I mean (and I do not say this from some elitist stand point – I had to look under every rock for 10 years to eventually find one and spend a fortune having it restored - so finding great instruments has not been easy in any way).

Finally I don't believe my points here are dated, elitist or age-related. I believe all musicians of all ages should look for the best instruments; I believe that is a timeless point and is born out by the massive worldwide demand for guitars and pianos for example. And even though I'm no 'spring chicken' I'm not old and challenge myself daily to be innovative - and still have virtually of my musical ambitions only in the planning stage - so I'm not prepared to lie down and declare new or old stunning synthesizers dated and outmoded just because Reason post an ad to that affect or because some new kids on the block can link 16 loops in a line in Ableton.

Kevin.

[Mike Conway]

Damn software! This would go well with my copy of Sonar. I just got this in the mail:

Native Instruments Komplete 5 $399!
Included with this bundle.
* KONTAKT 3 - The most popular software sampler
* MASSIVE - One of my go to gritty, big, unique synths for live and studio
* BATTERY 3 - A drum machine with sounds ranging from traditional to
unique
* PRO-53 - A dead on knock off of the Prophet, fat, lush and pretty
* ABSYNTH 4 - If you need sci-fi, ambient or crime scene music then this is
the synth
* FM8 - Great arps and a huge library of sounds
* B4 II - The best software organ on the market
* REAKTOR 5 - 3 words, Reaktor User Libraries, I hope you have tons of
free time
* AKOUSTIK PIANO - Three famous grand pianos and one vintage upright piano
* ELEKTRIK PIANO - Rhodes, Wurly, Clav and tons of variations
* GUITAR RIG 3 - My personal favorite for guitar software

This is another "gonga". I've been long intrigued by Native Instruments. Arturia, too - but I would still rather have the Origin.

Just window shopping. No, I'm not made of money. Quite the opposite - I'm married!

[spritex]

Heh, I have been eyeing that Komplete deal too. But because I don't need it I decided not to fall for it.

Too many plugins causes distraction and that leads to lack of creativity. That is indeed a problem with cheap software - you just have to learn to control yourself.

BTW, I think that we have gotten past the hardware emulation craze. There are now genuinely new synths that have purely started their life as software and have been matured in that realm for several years.

A good example is U-He Zebra which is one of the most respected softsynths and has a GUI that makes complexity simple. That GUI couldn't also be sensibly reproduced with buttons and knobs on a hardware synth -there would have to bee a lot of page-switching at least.

Hmm, in fact a solid soft synth with longevity has another plus vs. hardware - it can get better over time, sometimes radically - while retaining it's character and old features. This is rare with hardware, Oasys of course was an exception.

[przemm]

Kevin/Mike:-) - I appreciate your input and to be honest I agree nearly all the points you postulate. I am a song-writer (pop/rock) and currently I am also finalizing my first CD that will be published till the end of the year. I am primarily a guitarist and I love quality instruments - I own a couple of high-end guitars and that's why I have my Oasys. Being also an avid audiophile, I pay a lot of attention to the quality of sound - that's why I use Bricasti/Lexicon/Eventide/Thermionic Culture/Neve outboard in my productions. I strongly believe that it's the front end that makes really a difference to sound quality - musicians, engineers, instruments, microphones, preamps, compressors (in that order) - garbage in means garbage out. But sound quality is nothing without a great song, a great arrangement and great lyrics.

I agree with Mike that the mainstream cinema music is not as appealing as it used to. I went to see the recent Transformers movie (don't laugh:-) only to listen to sound design and that was spectacular - the film was total rubbish, but the sound effects were really impressive - but guess what, I don't remember any music from this movie...

Anyway, recently I was making a background violin part for one of my songs and I used a violin from EastWest Gypsy collection. Boy, that violin rocks - it's very musical, great articulations, great sound as for a VI instrument. I ended up with a very good background track that while buried a bit in a PCM96 hall reverb sits perfectly in the mix. Does it sound like a real violin with a real player? Definitely not for a seasoned musician, but it sounds realistic - I couldn't have done it with Korg/Roland/Yamaha synths simply because they are not there, and looking at the evolutionary approach they assumed, they will not be there soon. But to be honest, music creation with VIs is rather music sculpturing and post-production because you don't have proper controllers to control all the articulations in real time.

From my perspective, I use Oasys only for electronic sounds/heavily effected/sometimes piano because virtual instruments far excel synths in emulating natural/acoustic instruments. Synth programs, even those from Oasys, can't be compared with East West or VSL libraries. And that's the point I am trying to make - the Big 3 lost grounds in terms sonic quality, innovation and integration with current computer-based setups. Apart from Oasys, they offer the modification of the same concept, e.g. Motif, Motif ES, Motif XS or Phantom line - interface and sounds haven't changed much during recent, say, 8 years, while during that time we saw a giant leap in terms of sonic quality in VI and software sample libraries.

I like to look at music creation from a broad perspective. While arranging, I concentrate not only on melodic, harmonic and rhythmic aspects, but also even at the initial phase I try to visualize its role in the mix - panning, effects, volume changes and interaction with other sounds in terms of frequency distribution etc. And that's is possible with the environment that integrates analog instruments, digital and analog outboard, DAW sequencers, plugins etc. But I really miss the powerful VI master controller. Confronted with the choice of an Oasys as is now or Oasys as a physical controller/dongle with SW engines running on my Mac Pro, I would surely choose the later. But as Mike said, horses for courses:-)

Anyway, nothing sounds as good as a Bach cantata in a great room with great musicians and singers live - that's purely analog:-).

[Mike Conway]

Przemm, you write really good posts, because they are interesting enough to quote and respond to! To explain my defensiveness of integrating hardware with the software, it is because of things like Yamaha making a DX Plug in for the Motif, yet you needed a computer to do deep edits (Thank heavens for MOD-7!!!!!!)

Another example is the Virus TI. You need the computer to make simple arp patterns! This blows. My desktop is 64 bit and I cannot open up Virus Control, which states 32 bit. I never have. Perhaps, there is something I can do, but how frustrating that I have a fricken TI and cannot access updates (I'm still at 2.0), sounds or arps. I tried half a dozen times and gave up. My other desktop's OS is too old to load it, and my laptop will not do it. I hate that! Love the TI, though. I will get it sorted, one day, but I'm too damn busy to delve into other possibilities. I feel like Sina, when he is mad. I WANT TO TYPE IN BOLD CAPS!

I agree with Mike that the mainstream cinema music is not as appealing as it used to. I went to see the recent Transformers movie (don't laugh:-) only to listen to sound design and that was spectacular - the film was total rubbish, but the sound effects were really impressive - but guess what, I don't remember any music from this movie...

Same here. I enjoyed those sound FX and the Steve Jablonsky score. I quickly snagged the soundtrack, because it is one of the few that is really quality stuff. Get this, the first TRANSFORMERS score (not rock soundtrack), goes Used, for $70 - $300 on Amazon!! Here's the LINK

....Ah, It has lowered to $59 for the lowest CD. Still...

From my perspective, I use Oasys only for electronic sounds/heavily effected/sometimes piano because virtual instruments far excel synths in emulating natural/acoustic instruments. Synth programs, even those from Oasys, can't be compared with East West or VSL libraries. And that's the point I am trying to make - the Big 3 lost grounds in terms sonic quality, innovation and integration with current computer-based setups. Apart from Oasys, they offer the modification of the same concept, e.g. Motif, Motif ES, Motif XS or Phantom line - interface and sounds haven't changed much during recent, say, 8 years, while during that time we saw a giant leap in terms of sonic quality in VI and software sample libraries.

I understand. This is also why Kevin is frustrated about the lack of RCM programming, with samples and MOD-7. Such a synthesizer can get a lot of mileage out of a small library. There is magic and realism in there, when done right - like what you can get out of good physical modelling. It is time consuming, though. The OASYS has a lot of the tools to compete, or at least sound great. That includes loading some of our own samples to get the best out of it. I grabbed some off my other gear (A5000 and E4K) to round out some things.

You are right, though. The next big workstation (and I said this 4 or 5 years ago) is going to be one that has a library of several gigs, just like a dedicated sample library. This board will literally have to have the likes of East West's Symphonic Orchestra (or similar equivalent) and an interface that makes it easy to work with. If it has additional synthesis, like the Physical Modelling used in Wivi or Synful Orchestra, then that could really be something. (Not that I'm even close to whining about my OASYS. Far too many untapped possibilities, yet.)

[przemm]

Hi Mike, thanks for the link - yes, the first part of Transformers was much better to watch and to listen to:-). Gonna buy one:-).

I recently sat at the Roland V-piano and I found it amazing. IMO it was more musical/piano-like experience than playing Ivory/East West or Oasys piano (I like it a lot for pop sounds). So perhaps the modeling not sample-based workstations is the future of the synths.

I love MOD-7 sounds and I really regret that my programming skills are so weak. I have programmed some sounds but compared with Korg programs they are just puny attempts. I really admire the skill of Korg's programmers - lots of experience, musicality and good ear. My Oasys cries for more sound banks and more ready-made sounds! It is much easier to tweak sounds that to create them from scratch having in mind the complexity of MOD-7 or other Oasys engines.

I don't want to moan about the Oasys - I love her for sounds that contribute to my music. I think I know her now quite well (partly due to your DVD - thanks a lot for it!) but still there are some many areas to explore.

[Mike Conway]

Przemm, don't bother with that first link. The same composer did the sequel that you just saw. The new CD score is only $14, HERE.

I've heard nothing but good things about V-Piano. What an amazing feat.

[iksrazal]

I was hesitant to reply here since while I have some decent gear like an O and had an mpc4k until it crashed recently, I'm definitely not anywhere close to being "pro" . Nevertheless...

I'm going in the opposite direction of software, ie I'm buying more hardware. Since I live in Brazil I have to wait until my family visits to bring me gear later this year. (Brazil import taxes are outrageous and there's a tourist visa loop hole, but that's another story). On my list of things to buy are an mv8800, TI2, a nord rack and maybe the Radias - all on ebay hopefully. Why?

Well I recently tried the Spectronics Stylus RMX. Coming thru my pair of genelec 8030a speakers, I definitely noticed an inferior sound quality compared to my dedicated hardware. I stream a jazz station from the USA which sounds great on the same computer, so I don't think its a config issue. I'd be curious to compare the sound of the PC Korg-Legacy-Collection software to what I get out of the O LAC-1 to see if its just an inherent problem with general purpose PC and non-tweaked OS sound limitations. If I have to buy expensive PC hardware to get these DAW's to sound as good as an O and plus do lots of tweaking, I fail to see the point versus dedicated music hardware, particularly on the second hand market.

Recently I read a comment from someone I respect that the TI sounds a lot different coming out of the TI usb than its TR outputs, and that just about all general purpose PC generated sound is inferior to some peoples ears than VA / analog stuff. That view sums up my opinion so far.

Plus having two hands to tweak knobs instead of a mouse, and also having 16 big drum pads on something like the mpc4k, just seems like more of a "music creation" environment to me. Plus mpc4k drums sounded better to me than any software drums I've heard. All imho, ymmv.

As for cracking, just about all the software listed in this thread is available as a bit torrent. I currently use Reaper for trying out VST's, which is optionally free as in beer. I mention this since the Arturia Origin is a good example I think of how the market is going, ie, I don't think its going to work out for them.

IMHO, all these little analog companies like Dave Smith and John Bowen seem to have a brighter future than the Arturia's out there. I hope Korg picks up on that but I doubt it since from what I've read they think high end analog is a very small market. I'm personally watching to see how the Solaris sales numbers compare to the O, ie not a house hold name nor much of a marketing dept.

Sorry for my long rant, I hope I'm on topic .

[przemm]

Hi Iksrazal, as far as drums are concerned - have you heard Superior Drummer 2.0? They are primarily rock drums but the quality is astounding - no hardware, apart from real drums, can touch it by long run. I like Oasys drums too (cymbals aside) - acoustic or electronic - and I use it very often (but they need a bit of tweaking).

I all depends on the music you make and your needs. I am finishing my first CD (soft pop/rock) and an average piece has got lots of tracks (from 60 to 80) with lots of different acoustic instruments/synths/lead and background vocals. Usually I use 5 different hardware reverb effects to build the ambience, lots of sound shaping with EQs and compressors, lots of automation, vocal comping and layering etc. Most pop songs are done that way I guess - really lots of work with every piece. On the other hand I try to avoid overprocessing and want my music to sound as natural as possible. Anyway, it would be very difficult to do it on Oasys or a beat machine. A DAW environment integrating hardware/software is ideally suited to my needs. There is a place for great hardware and great software or units that combine both worlds. I use Lexicon PCM96 reverb through Firewire in Nuendo - I have got two stereo/four mono high-quality reverb machines accessible directly from Nuendo and it is working great (not so great in Logic though:(). I use Neve 8801 channel strip with full recall from the computer - no need to remember separate settings for each guitar, vocals etc. It really helps you to concentrate on music and production and sound absolutely great. And I think more and more companies go in that direction. I firmly believed in Yamaha mLan technology (I bought 01x and Motif ES) but it failed - both on sound quality and reliability level. Then I bought Oasys and slowly started to build my current setup based on a Mac Pro and Nuendo/Logic.

So as you see, I am looking at Oasys from a broad perspective and simply would love to see Oasys better integrated with my setup - full recall, possibility to use Oasys effects (some of them are really good and usable), no need to bounce, rebounce etc and the possiblity to control other VIs and DAW.

[przemm]

BTW, I also prefer buying analog gear - looks better, feels better, retains its value. I have just bought a Horch RM2J microphone that makes even Oasys preamps and 16-bit converters sound unbelievably good. I am sure I will have it longer than any plugin, Mac or even Oasys:-).