15 Years later.... and …

[Sharp]

Hi all.

This is not a rant as such, I just want to bring up a few points that should be discussed regarding the gap there is between hardware keyboards and the software / DAW market which is growing at an alarming rate.

I've always been a huge fan of Yamaha's VL technology and I'm the proud owner of a Yamaha VL70m and the Yamaha WX5 Wind Controller to go with it. Even to this day I believe it's the most expressive instrument on the face of the planet, and even though it may not be that realistic at times it still has unlimited uses.

Back when I saw the first VL-1 keyboard 15 years ago, I was convinced that this was the future and that within a few years we would have keyboards with every sound imaginable modelled to an unbelievable level of realism. Fast forward 15 years to the present date and I got to admit it's very disappointing when you look at the entire keyboard market and compare it's development to the software market / PC DAW.

After so many years Yamaha went nowhere in my opinion and what's worse is that they actually abandon the entire VL Technology. I also can't believe that nobody else developed their own either. OK, we have some unbelievable modelled synths, but when you have no point to measure from it's easy for modelled synths to sound like.... well whatever they want to be like as it does not matter. We have no base line to compare them against really. That said, ok I know you can also say we don't need a base line if we want something new and creative so I'm not complaining about what modelled synths we have even though in hardware form the selection is limited. The OASYS has some of the best and deepest around but there's not exactly much choice when you look around at what others and doing. Yamaha are certainly not interested. Anyway what I would like to focus on in this thread is real-world sounds and the 15 years of development we haven't seen. I think this needs to be then compared to the short time the software / DAW market has existed and just how far that has come, and how much it has exploded as more and more people flock to this way of working.

When you actually do compare hardware Keyboards to VSTi's, man things can appear to be bitterly depressing on many levels. Keyboard manufactures have utterly dragged their heels in the dirt on so many levels actually. Take Yamaha, the inventors of the almighty VL Technology are even still using the same AWM 2 PCM Technology to date. I almost cringe when saying that. It's such a plastic dated sound.

Don't even get me started on sequencers. The OASYS right now does not actually function much different from...let say a KORG Trinity. In fact it's probably almost identical on many levels. The updates the M3 got were the most any KORG keyboard ever changed in this regard since the days of the Trinity. Even at that though they are all mainly visual add-ons. It's just as limited in function as a Trinity for the most part. Actually the M3 has actually less function if you want to get technical about it since it can't do HDR when the Trinity could.

Go back to Yamaha for a second and the Tyros line is utterly ridiculous. Yamaha takes a big step back from the PSR 9000 / 9000 Pro, drops many functions like the Sampler, and launch a new line called the Tyros. Each keyboard then comes out with a few more sounds and styles, same everything else. Over time all the old PSR functions start to slip back in again, like the Sampler.

Looking at their Workstaiton line and all I can say there is... for crying out loud, another Motif was just released. How many more times can you milk the same cow. Seriously... this is milking a cow at an alarming level.

I'll exclude KORG from all this when it comes to sound design and engines, although the Triton series did get a little milking. Funny really when the Trinity series before it had a much better sound engine and that got no milking at all.

The OASYS and the Trinity are by far the closest to each other in sound on many levels. Maybe it's because the Trinity's existence was born from the original OASYS project. Either way ACCESS and HD-1 are by far KORG's best sound engines ever and I'm delighted with the work that was done here. It's why I play KORG keybaords and why I own this site. Got to love KORG's sound.

Now lets look at PC software development.

From a real world point of view we have WIVI, Synful, Pianoteq, VB3, and a handful of other worthy VSTi's all doing ultra realistic work in Modelling real world sounds. Many of which are truly ready to replace sampled sounds in many situations.

Sequencers on the PC do everything you can imagine, unlimited tracks, everything. PCM based sound libraries have also exploded and you can buy anything you want at an ultra realistic level, where on the other hand hardware keyboards to date still do not support one single commercial sampling format available.

That is in my opinion totally unacceptable and also proof that keyboard manufactures are truly trailing behind at a level they can't complete with.

Anyway.... I could go on and on here but basically what I'm trying to say that is in 15 years of development, it's rather disappointing to see how far keyboard manufactures have fallen behind the actual technology that's available. Rather than trying to change their approach and encompass what is going on around them and try to integrate that with their own systems, they continue to develop new products using the same idea's that the last 15 years of development have been based on.

It's that very fact that has given reason for the explosion and massive levels of development we see all around us in the PC DAW market.

When I play my Mediastation and I load up a few Gigabytes of samples, a few VSTi's and stream audio tracks I wonder how the hell Lionstracs can develop something like this and KORG, Yamaha, and Roland can continue to develop the same type of workstaitons they have always done.

So... what do you think ?
How do you feel about the last 15 years of development.

Regards
Sharp.

[ldascanio]

Hi:

I feel like you in many ways, specially regarding modelling technology.
As Z1 owner and looking what followed with the Oasys PCI card, the main reason to get my Oasys 88 was Modelling technology , the promise of an open architecture (with the wrong assumption that it would be also openend to developers as in the PCI card) and further development of the modeled engines already present in Z1, the ones in the PCI card not present in Z1 as vocals plus some new also. I already know now that many of my assumptions in that respect were also wrong. Cartainly we have the STR-1 model in that direction..maybe also the organ model (but I feel this model more an adaptation to Oasys from the already available organs from Korg already in the market more than a specific development for Oasys).

I love modelling engines mainly due to expresiveness. Due to high computing power needed for such models I would expect much more closer realism right now with available micorprocessors than in the times of Z1 also... or VL line as you mentioned.... but I'm still waiting same as you...

At least in the case of KORG I'd like to really know how much of this situation has to do with lack of interest from Korg to develop such engines and how much is related to agreements involved/money as technology developed by KORG has been as far as I know always based on SONDIUS - YAMAHA patents and a license signed in the late '90s with Yamaha and Standford university.

Rgds.

[peter m. mahr]

I was so excited when Yamaha released their VL series. Not affordable to me during that time I purchased a Prophecy and loved to use its synthetic, string and brass models. As posted somewhere else in the net already years ago, irony of history that we ended up with models of analogue synthesizers.

peter

[Rohan_of_Arc]

Well, I have to agree with everything that you have said, 100%.

Another area in which retrogressive actions are made is musical expressiveness.

Poly aftertouch? Where is it these days (other than on the vax77 folding controller)? I had it on my old Ensoniq boards from many moons ago.

Even our Oasys has only 1 expression pedal input. My old Roland A80 controller from the early '90s had 4. This is ridiculous.

I am awaiting the day when a manufacturer gives us keyboard players a real instrument with true expressiveness that good players deserve, I'll be paying very close attention. It could (and should) have been done by now.

Please don't think that I am knocking the Oasys. I just feel that with so much power under the hood, things like poly aftertouch and multi-pedal setups should have been standard features.

[Kontrol49]

The only thing or technology that that has really excited me in the past 15yrs is the V synth series,A Rompler engine a VA engine,LA technology,Vocal modelling,AP synthesis and awesome sampling and Live manipulation abilities built into a machine with touchscreen access,Perhaps nothing new that you can't build from several previous devices,but an exciting and useful product.

Synth technology has become stale since the mid 90s with most of it being rehashed and rebadged in various Forms,the biggest advance in Workstations we've seen lately was perhaps the Fantom G series,And the most exciting synth Korg designed prior to the Oasys was the Z1 which is a direct descendant of such

Korg are light years behind even devices like the QY/MPC/MV which knock spots off them both from a playing and programming point of view which even have the most basic and advanced of midi/Audio manipulation tools that the Oasys Lacks,even with the large touchscreen of the O,its still clumsy to use as a HDR in comparison to even a product of their own for Audio recording(D16XD)which in terms of Audio recording and ease of use makes the Oasys seem like painting your house through the letterbox and they were both designed by Korg???????? talk about a step backwards!

and even those are not even on par with Software.Its kind of like manufacturers are scared to take that leap of faith into building such an instrument that gives a compromise,maybe the Openlabs bridged a gap but......Where do you go from there...its like there in the design house saying what shall we do today lets have a vote on who wants more sound libraries but less sequencer functions..Korg still live on the M1 synths more sequencer events or more Programs/combis option in the global menus!!! Like somebody said elsewhere in this forum,its as if they know that as long as the sound is good people will forgive it for being less of an actual DAW

I'm not sure what else manufacturers can do to relight the synth market in terms of new synthesis methods everything turns to software nowadays or nods towards reinventions of older products,what else is there left to create with hardware that would revolutionise a Musicians needs and approach to making music your always going to leave out a certain population of the music market because not one device would suit all.

I'm still on the fence with the Oasys though I kind of hold onto the feeling that although they've discontinued its build somehow there will be some massive updates in the wings,I find it strange that althouh the Oasys is essentially a computer,they never seen fit to intergrate it as a VST environment like the M3,and yet they were totally able to upgrade the m3 midi capabilities,So what exactly was the design philosophy behind its Workstation environment because in terms of an open and all in one audio/Midi recording suite it still falls short,even for me thats more or less hardware based and thrived on the Triton/Trinity sequencer environments for a long time

[Sharp]

Just to add to what I've said, I also believe that the lack of interest from hardware manufactures to embrace community based projects is also a further example of them not being in tune with the evolution music technology has taken and the massive shift there has been away from workstaitons to DAW's.

Take the work Daz was trying to do on the M3. He gets to the final stages of developing software for the M3 and KORG can't even provide him with the final piece of information he required to finish his FREE program. That's a lost opportunity for KORG and their end users.

The Arranger division in KORG have even intentionally encrypted their files which has killed all end user development. I do not understand why they would do that ?

VS.... Take the attitude of Lionstracs who make Open keyboards. In the spirit of a open source community I was given detailed information on the file formats and system files. So much so that I compelted writing my own librarian that also generated system files for integrating sound from Linux Sampler and VSTi's with the custom interface of the keyboard. Now I'm looking at expanding this to write system files to integrate virtual knobs and sliders on the screen of a VSTi with the actual controllers on the keyboard. Again, the information on what files I need to modify has been given to me freely. No hacking like Daz had to do every inch of the way with KORG.

I'm not picking on KORG here. Yamaha, Roland and other hardware manufactures are all the same. They don't seem to have the interest or resources for working with the end users on stuff like this.

Regards
Sharp.

[chilly7]

Jast my small observations:

Well, i was really disappointed with Yamaha, Korg and Roland.
and i did not know what to do, except a put a bulled in to my head why so many people are jast that stupid and don't want to do anything, because there are so many possibilities and areas where can be improved if to speak about Workstation in particular but they still give us the same and the same.

ofcouse i think it is stupid to say that motif xs, m3 and fantom G sounds plastic when u connect them thrue digital out in ur high end studio, but it is fairly to say that when u compare their possibilities and and sound to the hight qualit VSTs then they does not sound nearly as good .

I wish somebody could make an open keyboard, but nobody has done it yet, of cause exept Korg Oasys. but now it is obended like many other great things like VL from Yamaha and so on

of couse many trolls may say that Oasys cost like a luxury car, but in fact it is not. even back in the days when it's price tag was 9.000$ for Oasys it is not that much.
because in all developed countries almost awry body has a car. But for 9.000$ u can buy only cheap car.

So if u are musician don’t buy a cheap car and get a keyboard

As I seid I am realy disappointed with The Big 3. But I have found out that Kurzweil is a bit more interesting it term of architecture. Yes maybe their pc3 looks like crupp and they have that small screen but VAST and their KDF effect processor and real time control and assignments almost all keyboard parameters to what ever u want is far superior to any else that already exists in a hardware keyboard and in some way it even better then Oasys . Jast if to look for kurzweil they were real innovators because back in the day when Yamaha has their Motif classic in 2000 and they claiment that it is jast super keyboard kurzweil had their k2600 or 2500 wich with possibilities are very clouse to pc3 wich still in 2010 is superior to yamaha motif Xf in term of architecture , but because Kurzweil from 2004 to 2007 were nearly dead because of backrutcy, kurzweil really done nearly nothing and now day Kurzweil cannot competite with VSTs sound quality either…

So in conclusion for now I am done with the Big 3 unless they will come up with something new

[ozy]

Hi Sharp.

I read your "rant" [You called it a rant. I found it to be interesting, not a lunatic's manifesto],

and my reaction was to briefly sit in front of my rack:

a) the most recent synth is a roland xv-5080, ---> 2000?

b) 6 yamaha vl70m and vl-1 provde brass and winds ---> 1994/1996

c) analogue provides analog ... ---> 1973 to 1984.

Three pieces are from the mid '2000s, one is from late 2000s, but they are replicas of mid -70s technology.

d) m1 and 03r/w provide sample/based patches ---> 1989/1992

e) wavestation provides pads ---> 1992/1993

f) korg provides vocoder... ---> 1990 ca

g) midi provides connectivity ---> late 80s

h) the masters are from early 2000 and late 90s

h) everything else (sampling, sequencing) sits in a small box marked "korg m3m".

Ok, the latter is 2007 stuff.

You know what?

It sounds huge.

The keybeds are strong and feel good.

The physical modeling is exciting.

The analogue roars.

And the korg samples of the m1 and 01/w years just kick ass.

I don't feel I'd need something new.

And above all: I don't feel I want to spend money on something new, and disappointing.

On ALL of the above machines I created NEW sounds in the past month.

Repeat: every single piece of that stuff was good for creating NEW sounds for the years 10 of the current millennium.

If they don't want my money, who cares? Why should I worry about Korg or Yamaha losing business?

If they don't, why should I?

I keep spare pieces. I work on thingamajigs circumventing the old hardware limitations (VL polyphony, analogue modding, etc).

I could only dream of instruments which could do the same things CHEAPER, LIGHTER, MORE PORTABLE.

Not basically different.

Finally: as far as the magic world of computers is concerned... On a computer, it's just easier to FAKE new features.

I had a look at "monster" software synth which can produced "thousands" of patches", based on New Name technologies.

Know what?

I heard some hundred trillions of fancy PADS. Swirls, bells, ahhhhs and ooooohhhs and sweeeps. Nothing a matrix 6 stacked on a m1 and a wavestation can't do.

Not one single sax worth the pinky of Vl-1.

Not one lead punchier than the average viontage analogue.

Some good emulation of orchestral strings and pianos. A nice hammond or two.

But still old procedures and gimmicks for articulation. playing notes with your right while fiddling with your left for pizzicato.

Come on: thrut is, 15 years have gone by without progresso for MUSIC TECHNOLOGY, not for hardware alone.

Or, even worse, for music.

Listen to what is produced by half a zillion nerds perched on their Reason: who needs new tools? They just need new ears

Now, THIS was a rant!

[SCHWEATS]

I believe that the hardware manufacturers are strangled by the
accountants and lawyers and business managers who do not share
the passion for the innovations we would all like to see. Hence, the milking of , or rehashing of, certain technologies to the nth degree.

If any of these companies are publicly traded companies (I'd assume
at least Yamaha, Korg, Roland are without researching that info) on various stock exchanges worldwide, you then have the added pressure
of stock price having enormous influence on the executives in charge
deciding on what is produced and what is not.

Lastly , in the grand scheme of modern day business, musical instrument manufacturing is a very , very small niche and the mantra of business is always cut costs which beats as loud as can be from the largest of war drums inside every company by the executives in charge.
Yes, I'd like to have a more robust sequencer in my Oasys but, ultimately I haven't milked everything out of it , and I have my computer and my Digital Performer and I'm simply amazed we have the tools we have at the current price points. I'll continue to muddle through ......some how My 2¢ (or pence) Schweats

[Sharp]

The guys have a thread going in the M3 section that points to the Motif website.
http://www.korgforums.com/forum/phpBB2/ ... hp?t=56204

It's a good read.

Regards
Sharp.

[McHale]

The big synth companies are fully aware of where software synths are going and they are acting (IMHO) like the record industry did when MP3's started getting popular. They are closing their eyes and going about business as usual.

BUT

Korg has gone to the dark side and released some very excellent VSTi's - e.g. the Analog and Digital Legacy collection. Hell, if they released a good controller with a ton of knobs, buttons, and sliders (I know, I've been harping about this for a while now) and put the digital and analog collection in ROM, I'd buy it. Tack on the ability to load additional VSTi's and they'd have a winner. Who wouldn't pay a grand or two for some of their best synths in an all in one package? If they allowed mixing and matching to make combi's out of any of the emulated synths it'd be amazing. Tack on a couple analog filters and it would be phenominal.

Then again, it could also fail miserably because people will buy the software synths they want, provide their own hardware and have more flexibility.

-Mc

[Dany]

I don't see any future for Roland, Yamaha and Korg if they continue without a fundamental and complete change. Spectrasonics and others are already the future. It is just a question of time till you can run a DAW with plenty of plugins on an iPad (or something similar) with high-end sound quality and zero latency, without having to use an external soundcard.... and if we are lucky, we will see the "Complete Virtual Vintage OASYS iPad App" in the coming years...

[billysynth1]

Yes, 15yrs later and still more of the same...but if people object so much why are these companies still in business?? Because we just keep going back for more of this 'same' crapola time after time after time. Thats why!

STOP BUYING THE SH...IT LOL

By the way have you guys seen this video? See below for url. Its a bit off topic, but sort of on-topic. Its a tour of Kurzwiel R&D. Notice three quarters of the way through the tour an M3 at Kurzwiel R&D, you will also notice at the begining of the tour a Roland Fantom G. So much for advancements in technology...riff off the competitions concepts lol

http://www.keyboardmag.com/GearVideo.as ... 7965002001[url]

Billy

[Jan1]

Well, let's go back 5 more years to the days of my beloved T-1, or even the days of the M-1, and compare them to the current range of workstations on the market.

The first thing anyone would notice is how little anything has changed over the passed 20 years or so in the workstation market.

Occasionally new shoots appear, but no sooner have they materialized, or they already are pruned away and show themselves to be a one shot deal and a 'deviation from the traditional workstation market' which continues on the same path as it always has.

There's a good kind of conservatism, and a bad kind, and in the case of the workstations I'm sorry to say that there's a bad kind of conservatism stifling new developments (out of fear of the possible negative financial consequences, or because development cost is too high or takes too long?).

And so we see a Motif XF appearing after the Motif XS, Roland puts out another Juno or Fantom, and Korg adds yet another letter from the alphabet to their arsenal (although I have to say that Korg deserves praise for incorporating other synthesis methods in the form of expansions, plus I have always had a very warm place in my heart for the company).

The music software for computers currently is way ahead of the hardware music workstations of the big three.

It does not automatically follow that hardware workstations are a thing of the past, though.
One thing which always appealed me in hardware workstations is that they are reliable and feature an intuitive user interface so that you can record an idea or a song focusing your attention on the music instead of having to worry about whether or not you have set things up correctly, why some instrument won't respond, which articulations to use and how to paste them in, etc. It's tedious and uninspiring to work that way.

But software is catching up, and if you look at for instance the instruments of Sample Modeling: they are very intuitive and easy to use in a musical way, and their quality leaves all workstations biting the dust in terms of the emulation of acoustic instruments.

And this is just one company; other companies also are working on exploring new avenues of either physical modeling or a hybrid combination of sampling and MIDI-scripting/physical modeling technology.

A very good idea of Korg was their software legacy series, which I enjoy very much to this very day.
It's a great idea and concept to bring the old legends of the past back to life in a new and performance-wise superior hardware environment.

But unfortunately it seems that Korg have abandoned development in this series since nothing new has been forthcoming for years (even though there still are so many great KORG synths patiently awaiting their resurrection).

The only trump current hardware workstations have (or, at least MOST of them have) is the fact that they are reliable and have an intuitive user interface, and when playing live there is no way that I would bring a computer along.

I'm very aware that it's easy for me to complain about what workstations ought to be when I am not the company responsible for developing a workstation, which is a big project and involves financial risks.
As such this reply is not to put down Korg or any other company, but rather to present my own view in the matter of hardware workstations and their development over the years vs. software designed to work on a computer.

I know the past years have been leaning heavily on companies.
With a financial crisis happening it's risky to release a $7000+ kind of workstation.

Still, at the time I thought that the OASYS was at least a major step forward with Korg releasing its own software platform.
It's a pity that OASYS now turns out to be another one shot deal, pruned away in favour of the current design of workstations as it always has been: a little more PCM ROM, a few more tracks, a little more RAM, two more insert effects that can be processed simultaneously.

I still have my Proteus 2000 module dating from over 10 years ago,128 notes polyphony, sample based with 32 MB ROM, great filter types.
Compare it to what's on the market right now, and it looks as if time stood still.

Although some of the criticism at the Motif forum is presented in a very rude and obnoxious way, I have to say that I have to agree with the fact that in terms of new workstations the Motif XF is just another example of the bad kind of conservatism, an incarnate tweedledee, and I find it absolutely not interesting.
What's next, a Motif XT for 2013 featuring a whopping 200 MB extra PCM ROM, plus an expanded Flash expansion? Who will want to buy it?

I'm hoping that perhaps Korg will be able to pull off something different in the future.
I am convinced there still is a market for workstations, but companies need to step off the conservative treadmill and dare to turn into new avenues.
Stop pruning away the good branches and develop them further would be my advice.

[ozy]

STOP BUYING THE SH...IT LOL

exactamundo

Didn't you buy enough?

I certainly did. Too much of it.

Selling is so exhilarating!

Try it: it's almost as intoxicating as shopping!

Plus the money.