Best Midi Controller Keyboards for Controlling M3 M

[apex]

[quote="Shakil"] statements/questions from me are in bold. I don't know how to quote a specific part like yall do... then answer it, and then come back and quote something else. SORRY!!!

Well, it will easier than with other controllers. The ease comes in the way Fantom-G lets you select MIDI out switch.

What do you mean "the way the Fantom-G lets you Midi Out switch"?


I run M3-m and Z1 from Fantom-G. I have dedicated channel 1-10 for M3-m and 11-16 for Z1. I also had Motif XS before. Then I dedicated channel 1-8 for M3-m, 9-12 for XS and 13-16 for Z1.

On the Motif XS what did you do with the other 13 channels of the multi that you weren't using?

I used the first channels of the groups as global channel for the devices, that called up settings on them by saving the bank select and program select messages saved in Studio Sets on Fantom-G. Works great.

So, on Fantom-G midi channel 1, you would have:

the MSB & LSB settings for the M3-m and you'd have the global receive channel of the m3 set to midi channel 1 so that it was all triggered by whatever you did on midi channel of the Fantom-G? So what was happening on channels 2-10? Why do they have to be allocated for on the Fantom-G if you were sending all the info on channel 1?

then you'd have channel 9 set to MSB & LSB settings for the Motif XS? (followed by the same question I asked about the m3)

etc... for the z1.

Also you could do this same thing as far as Live Mode On the Fantom G too right?

I did all the layering on the devices. That way the sound was same regardless of the controller used (keyboard or DAW).

When you say you did all the layering on the devices, you're saying that you layered similar patches (as far as how you use them in the sequences or songs) and you put them on the same midi channel...? so technically you could have been still using 16 sounds from the m3-m or the motif xs, but you were only using 10 midi channels (for the m3-m) and 3 midi channels (for the xs)? etc....[/b]

[Shakil]

What do you mean "the way the Fantom-G lets you Midi Out switch"?

Apex... there is unique feature in Roland Fantom series workstations. It's called Keyboard Switch. What is does is that it sends midi to parts that have KB switch on.. even when those parts are on different MIDI channels. So, you still have separate settings for volume, pan, etc, but you get notes to all of those parts if KB switch is ON. This is a great feature since you don't need to set all parts to same MIDI channel for layering.

On most workstations you get 16 parts, each linked to a MIDI channel. You can set each Part to be Internal, External, or Both. But, in Fantom-G, you get 32 parts. 16 for internal and 16 dedicated for external MIDI.

Now, the icing on cake is that the KB switch is dedicated as well for external parts. If you set PAD mode to #10 (External MIDI Tx switch), you can see which parts are receiving keyboard notes.

This is excellent for live play. I can very easily bring parts into my playing by just turning on MIDI tx switch for that channel.

Let's say I have to bring synth lead in a song section during a solo, I just press the pad for that part, and turn it off when I don't need.

On the Motif XS what did you do with the other 13 channels of the multi that you weren't using?

Well, I was getting 32 parts in total. I didn't have to use all 16 parts in all equipment. I was using 4 arps from XS, and then I was layering some, but I didn't use more than 8 parts on XS any way, because of the effects flawed design. [Don't get me started on that].

So, on Fantom-G midi channel 1, you would have:

the MSB & LSB settings for the M3-m and you'd have the global receive channel of the m3 set to midi channel 1 so that it was all triggered by whatever you did on midi channel of the Fantom-G? So what was happening on channels 2-10? Why do they have to be allocated for on the Fantom-G if you were sending all the info on channel 1?

then you'd have channel 9 set to MSB & LSB settings for the Motif XS? (followed by the same question I asked about the m3)

etc... for the z1.

Also you could do this same thing as far as Live Mode On the Fantom G too right?

Well, the global channel was used to call up the settings on M3-m, XS and Z1. Instead of using program changes ... etc. for each channel, I saved the setups on M3-m, XS, and Z1 themselves, and just called up for each song. Rest of the channels were used to play parts and phrases.

When you say you did all the layering on the devices, you're saying that you layered similar patches (as far as how you use them in the sequences or songs) and you put them on the same midi channel...? so technically you could have been still using 16 sounds from the m3-m or the motif xs, but you were only using 10 midi channels (for the m3-m) and 3 midi channels (for the xs)? etc....

I mean I did all sound setup on the devices, included keyboard zones, layering, levels, pans.. etc.

Yes, there are different ways of layering... key range and also velocity range.... I could have slow string on low velocity and piano on higher velocities... so I could have a string pad with left hand and right hand playing piano... etc.

[strom32]

Has anyone bought a Korg Nanocontrol and placed it under the sequencer control buttons on the M3 to extend the M3's control options? I've noticed that the Nanopad sits under these buttons quite well and some rotary encoders and additional sliders on the NanoKontrol could be useful if mapping is possible outside of the range on the onboard sliders and pads is possible..

[gjvti]

As far as I am aware korg nano-tools work only with PC (through it) - so I don't see how M3 can benefit from them direct midi controller such as novation Remote zero would fit better in my opinion. That is korgs strategy each korg product is totally on its own and incompatible with other korg products as much as possible

[strom32]

I'm thinking NanoKontrol > PC,MAC > M3 route for midi.....

[BasariStudios]

That is korgs strategy each korg product is totally on its own and incompatible with other korg products as much as possible

LOLZ! Quiet true!

[kanthos]

As far as I am aware korg nano-tools work only with PC (through it) - so I don't see how M3 can benefit from them direct midi controller such as novation Remote zero would fit better in my opinion. That is korgs strategy each korg product is totally on its own and incompatible with other korg products as much as possible

I doubt this has anything to do with strategy. It's much more likely that Korg didn't see the value of buying a $50-$100 crappy controller for use in a live keyboard rig. Even for small-size controllers, something like the Novation Nocturn just feels better than the nanoKontrol (though the latter obviously has more knobs and faders and such).

My nanoKey is *perfect* for being able to be away from my keyboards and work on sounds on my laptop (though I'd never try to arrange a track with it; I only use it for auditioning sounds), and when I use it live, it's just as a bank of 25 extra buttons to control things through my laptop. I think it's fair to say that I'm going outside the expected usage of the nanoKey by doing this.

The nano series was designed for the musician on the go with a laptop, not for the gigging keyboard player, so it's not a surprise to me that they're not compatible, but this is Korg having their products address different needs instead of trying to make everything useful to everyone.

Besides, unless someone manufactured a box that could translate Korg's USB devices to MIDI (basically, a small, single-purpose computer or at least something with a chip hardcoded to understand Korg's MIDI-Over-USB format), how would you redesign the nano series to have a standard size MIDI OUT port on it? That'd ruin the whole point of having a tiny controller.

[X-Trade]

As far as I am aware korg nano-tools work only with PC (through it) - so I don't see how M3 can benefit from them direct midi controller such as novation Remote zero would fit better in my opinion. That is korgs strategy each korg product is totally on its own and incompatible with other korg products as much as possible

I doubt this has anything to do with strategy. It's much more likely that Korg didn't see the value of buying a $50-$100 crappy controller for use in a live keyboard rig. Even for small-size controllers, something like the Novation Nocturn just feels better than the nanoKontrol (though the latter obviously has more knobs and faders and such).

My nanoKey is *perfect* for being able to be away from my keyboards and work on sounds on my laptop (though I'd never try to arrange a track with it; I only use it for auditioning sounds), and when I use it live, it's just as a bank of 25 extra buttons to control things through my laptop. I think it's fair to say that I'm going outside the expected usage of the nanoKey by doing this.

The nano series was designed for the musician on the go with a laptop, not for the gigging keyboard player, so it's not a surprise to me that they're not compatible, but this is Korg having their products address different needs instead of trying to make everything useful to everyone.

Besides, unless someone manufactured a box that could translate Korg's USB devices to MIDI (basically, a small, single-purpose computer or at least something with a chip hardcoded to understand Korg's MIDI-Over-USB format), how would you redesign the nano series to have a standard size MIDI OUT port on it? That'd ruin the whole point of having a tiny controller.

Well, it has been brought up before:
The M3, Triton Extreme, and OASYS all have USB-A (Host) ports. No external box needed, it seem to me an obvious use to allow their future keyboards to recognise their own USB MIDI format. Besides the advantage of keeping the MIDI port free, USB-MIDI is faster than the 32150bps 5-pin-DIN MIDI spec. Imagine if the Radias could connect to the M3 through USB whilst still connecting another synth to the MIDI out, or connecting a readily configured (using the software) nanoPad/Key/Kontrol, PadKontrol, Kontrol49, MicroKontrol or even a TR or other USB equipped workstation as another controller (complete with joystick and buttons)

[gjvti]

I doubt this has anything to do with strategy. It's much more likely that Korg didn't see the value of buying a $50-$100 crappy controller for use in a live keyboard rig. Even for small-size controllers, something like the Novation Nocturn just feels better than the nanoKontrol (though the latter obviously has more knobs and faders and such).

My nanoKey is *perfect* for being able to be away from my keyboards and work on sounds on my laptop (though I'd never try to arrange a track with it; I only use it for auditioning sounds), and when I use it live, it's just as a bank of 25 extra buttons to control things through my laptop. I think it's fair to say that I'm going outside the expected usage of the nanoKey by doing this.
....

Ok, maybe you are right about strategy aspect, but as Ableton Live user I don't see a need for 'crappy controller' either, because in Ableton you easily map desired functions to standard PC keyboard and even play notes and chords to control software arpeggiators. I recorded most of my Ableton programmed tracks this way. Or alternatively now you can also use touch OSC form your mobile to control your PC software - so were is the need for crappy (as you said) korg nanos ... for me it is still a puzzle