Korg Kronos?

[Pepperpotty]

Hiya,

Loving Ozy's bare all post and inspired by Akos Janca's comments about not really knowing people that well, I've started a getting to know you thread on the off topic board. Ive started with myself (funny pic included!) and would love to get to know all of you. So please feel free to share!

Emma

[synthguy]

Hey, wasn't the OP about Korg Kronos? I'm interested to learn more about it from anyone at NAMM or from reviewers etc

Rob, I have a feeling that this is just an open ring for us to tussle over, which I'm about to do. But the new Kronos section of the board is probably where you should hang out from now on. Anyhow...

Ha.ha..don't make me.....
Just invest in a Macbook pro...Buy Spectrasonics instruments..and enjoy!
Thousants of patches and multies..>> programs and combies <<
All..* for free * as opposed to the greedy bunch.
Ther's nothing like Spectrasonics care of customers in the world.
Also.. a great software update is just around the corner.
For FREE for registered users..glad I'm one of them.
Now..compare all that with that great Korg support through the years.
And..for just a fraction of the money of a workstation.
A decent machine to drive it all..that's were the money goes.
And even then..the setup is cheaper compared to buying some Kronos
or whatever hardware machine.
Even M3..which I own.

As I mentioned before, the PC/softsynth crowd have their place in the musical universe, and contribute to the ever growing library of music and creative synthesis which I love.

However, I'm not fond of soft instruments and all-in-one software myself. I find them to be lacking in character after a bit, rather like the albums done completely on Synclavier by people like Eddie Jobson. One instrument does tend to have a certain amount of "sameness" to the sound, and it seems even more typical in the softsynth/PC recording world, where you do everything in the computer. Yes, very clean, but I think that's the real problem. Digital signals being channeled solely through computer memory, handled and processed by pieces of software separated by a few bytes of computer memory.

In the old days, instruments were discreet hunks of hardware. They had unique panels and keyboard components, and you tended to play each instrument uniquely. Go from a Steinway to a Hammond C3 to an Oberheim Matrix 12, and you approach them differently. The music you make with each is different. There are different techniques for each. Each instrument sounds and behaves completely different.

Yes, unless you have an actual analog synth, these digital instruments are essentially just software running in proprietary hardware. However, they have one thing which differentiates them from real softsynths: they produce their sounds through unique electrical circuits and converters, and almost all of them are recorded by running physical cables to analog recording consoles.

Yes, this is all very last millennium, clunky and cluttered and messy. And this is what I like about them.

There's something which makes these instruments more alive when those digital signals are converted to electricity, which oscillate through different electronics with different impedances and frequency response curves, have to run through cables into more discreet electronics. Getting equalized with physical old school equalizers, treated by reverbs, delays and other effects in racks with their own sonic character. Mixed down through pricey summing amps to most likely be recorded into digital form on some hard drive.

But this is a process which is very different from everything in a box digital recording, when the sound is a stream of numbers being added to other numbers, with treatments being made with algorithms using more numbers... the whole thing is nothing but a huge equation. The only sonic signature imparted is from the instruments and effect algorithms.

With old school recording using cables and outboard effects, you have some added distortion, but you also have the sound of instruments being handled by high quality electronics with actual headroom and compression signatures, possibly some tube stuff with its own warm character, not a stream of numbers pretending to be tubes and faking a measure of warmth and even order distortion.

My Ensoniq TS-10 has an electric 12 string patch I created that sounds somehow like a guitar being played through a high quality clean amp, even though it only uses a light chorus and reverb effect. No other instrument or sample library has been able to sound like it, or likely ever will. In fact, none of my digital instruments sound like each other running through my Studiomaster console, or like any softsynth anyone can name.

These instruments define my sound, the way instruments used to distinguish keyboardists before patch and sample libraries overwhelmed us with tons of useful instant gratification at the push of a button. And I try my best to resist using their presets, even though these days they are excellent, especially on KORGs and Kurzweils. I roll my own, and do the same with my effects processors, so I'm not using someone else's reverb chambers as heard on countless songs. So hopefully, I'll be following in the footsteps of pioneers like Keith Emerson and Tomita, who got a sound out of their Moogs because they darn well had to create it from scratch.

Oh, one caveat I forgot to mention. While I prefer having a bunch of synths on hand, I'm enamored with the notion of doing an album solely with the Kronos, like Jordan Rudess has done with his Kurzweils. I doubt I will, maybe a few songs at the most, because I have patches strewn across my synths which are begging to be used, and I want to let them sing in my crazy synthesized orchestrations.

Essay complete.

[cello]

Hiya,

Loving Ozy's bare all post and inspired by Akos Janca's comments about not really knowing people that well, I've started a getting to know you thread on the off topic board. Ive started with myself (funny pic included!) and would love to get to know all of you. So please feel free to share!

Emma

Have just made my contribution Pp...

To all - this is a great idea so please chime in. It's at http://www.korgforums.com/forum/phpBB2/ ... hp?t=58498

[Akos Janca]

Hi Emma and cello,

Thank you for starting this Emma! I don't think it's a girly thing, simply no guy was brave enough to try it. Shame on us.

You are very welcome here, I think these crazy chaps need a smart and sober girl who trim them sometimes!

I will post something soon - it's just too late now for me. (I clicked on your Facebook.)

Best regards,
Akos

[Randelph]

Synthguy,
That's awesome that you've got the synth collection, the interest, and the aptitude to relate to synth/sound technology from the 70's and 80s. I consider the 70's, which my Nord Stage does such a bang up job of re-creating, to be some of my fav sounds: killer organs, EPs, synths, fx.

I get your point about 1s and 0s and at some point the detached sterility of it all. This is a reason I don't do music using the computer (in addition to its unreliable live use). Relating to a computer to make music feels too much like being an engineer.

I felt the same way with the Motif XS: beneath the easy to use surface layer there were so many bullshit workarounds that I got tired of constantly learning, setting things up, GETTING READY to make music.

I've found a better modern musical workstation partner in the M3, and while I appreciate the workflow a lot more, I have to work so hard to find the good sounds on that board. So having engines and not just rompler playback is major, 'cause ultimately for me its about sound quality. Whether I'm playing my flute, hand drums or keyboard, I've found over the years that everything that drives it for me is the quality of sound.

I suspect that the Kronos will be a more integrated experience than getting the sound quality that you've experienced with computers. For one thing, it'll be 1 board that has the potential to express most of your sounds, which is a really big deal in terms of time invested finding the right sounds, tweaking them, and then being able to schleep it to a gig. It's also a different experience than computers 'cause there's no latency, and the controllers are numerous and the whole UI optimized more than any controller board I've seen.

Personally, while I admire people who created great music with the old synths, I also know that it was their full time job, they often had help creating the patches, and that the amount of work dealing with the first stage of technology (synths in particular) is rather onerous. That would be a lot of time taming various boards, which of course takes away from time composing/sequencing/etc. And then there's the weight- while a Rhodes and Wurli are not always reproduced well, it's worth looking for a modern replacement: the weight alone is a killer!

For myself, it's such a task already dealing with the always-more-to-understand technology, that I'm glad that something that's built from the ground up to be a musical instrument (Kronos) finally has multiple synthesis engines at an affordable, reasonable weight and high sound quality all around- it's a first as far as I can see.

But more power to you- it's guys like you that are still working with the old gear that make excellent programmers for the boards many of us have never played. That's why it takes me so long to audition sounds, 'cause I'm aware that I don't necessarily know what kind of sound quality potential it can have, and have to do a ton of compare and contrast. It was a real eye opener getting the Nord Stage and finding so much satisfaction with the Wurli (some nights I could play that all night long), the organ, the Synth section (which has a "real" VA, my first, big difference compared to rompler synths).

That was cool that you took the time to share your thoughts- please, share on!

Randelph

[John Hendry]

I just spent a little time on an ATOM powered Dell Latitude 2100 looking at info on the Atom CPU. It's slow....seems slower than my very old Celeron 1.3 lap top and too slow for a desk top replacement. I don't know what chip set Korg used but the Dell 2100 runs really cool so has some great features....just not horse power. Don't take this wrong... IMO Korg hit another home run with the Kronos, M50 then Kronos, 2 for the dollar packed machines that beat the competition hands down, but I do not believe it is the OASYS2.

Read about the OASYS PCI and why a computer could not do the work needed and then tell me the Atom is for a flagship. Nope, IMO Korg has a monster hidden in a cage waiting to let it out with Poly AT.

John^^

[Randelph]

Pepperpotty,
Interesting nicname- where did it come from?

It's great, if a bit strange, to have a female hanging out. As a musician I get sick of having such an overwhelming number of guys around all the time, but at least there tends to be a lot of female dancers to liven things up.

If you were in San Francisco I would encourage you to come to the drum circle in Golden Gate park and and weekly jam session I go to- great for getting over shyness! I think shyness is very overrated- that's the beauty of music and dance, it can be a group art form, and with enough enthusiasm thrown in, no one needs to hold back! If you're not sure what to play, look for the bass line and most elemental rhythms.

Thanks for calling out the bickering boys- I get so sick of unnecessary nastiness in forums! I do understand it though in my own way- I had a period of "coming into my power" (California speak here) where I was very challenging and divisive around everyone. Lost a lot of people during that time!

Sounds like you're a guitar person- I'd say off hand to avoid keyboard workstations, they typically involve a lot of fussing with the technology, and stick to a something like Nord Stage: much better if you want to actually learn to play keyboard! But the workstations are seductive- the Kronos is a dream come true for many of us.

Randy the Randelph

[Pepperpotty]

Hi Randelph,

My nickname came from school. We used to read these books called Mrs Pepperpot. It was about a woman who used to shrink to the size of a pepperpot. As I was so short when I was at primary school, they used to call me pepperpot. Lol

I am a guitar girl, but I was a keyboard girl first. But you're right, I don't think I want a workstation. I've got my eye on the pa3x, but I suspect that it will be a little out of my price range and I'll have to settle for the pa2x.

Emma

[Naviára]

I just spent a little time on an ATOM powered Dell Latitude 2100 looking at info on the Atom CPU. It's slow....seems slower than my very old Celeron 1.3 lap top and too slow for a desk top replacement. I don't know what chip set Korg used but the Dell 2100 runs really cool so has some great features....just not horse power. Don't take this wrong... IMO Korg hit another home run with the Kronos, M50 then Kronos, 2 for the dollar packed machines that beat the competition hands down, but I do not believe it is the OASYS2.

Read about the OASYS PCI and why a computer could not do the work needed and then tell me the Atom is for a flagship. Nope, IMO Korg has a monster hidden in a cage waiting to let it out with Poly AT.

John^^

It's right, dualcore Atom isn't the fastest processor, it's overall equal to a P4 2.0-3.0 Ghz (in some points faster, in some points slower - look at the CPU chart at tomshardware). It's fast enough to run all the softsynth engines. You can't compare that with a Windows PC and a DAW using VST-Instruments / effects wich consumes more power from the CPU.

Please keep in mind that:

1) On (Kr)oasys no windows brake is running in the background - On this custom Linux you get more power from the CPU

2) The max. polyphony for each engine can only be reached if you use this engine alone in a single program, that means the max polyphony from all other engines will also drop if you use too much voices from the stronger engines. For example - if you use 10 voices from the MS20 engine, you can't use the full 120 voices from the HD1 the same time... the polyphony will be reduced by 25% on all other engines you also want to use.

On a single program you can combine 2 engines, so it's not a big problem - the problems begin when you combine many programs in Combi mode - in this way you can easy max out the entire polyphony..

A.

[Bachus]

I just spent a little time on an ATOM powered Dell Latitude 2100 looking at info on the Atom CPU. It's slow....seems slower than my very old Celeron 1.3 lap top and too slow for a desk top replacement. I don't know what chip set Korg used but the Dell 2100 runs really cool so has some great features....just not horse power. Don't take this wrong... IMO Korg hit another home run with the Kronos, M50 then Kronos, 2 for the dollar packed machines that beat the competition hands down, but I do not believe it is the OASYS2.

Read about the OASYS PCI and why a computer could not do the work needed and then tell me the Atom is for a flagship. Nope, IMO Korg has a monster hidden in a cage waiting to let it out with Poly AT.

John^^

Tough i seriously think they could have opted for a faster CPU at not much extra costs (Every laptop CPU even i5 and i7 would function without problems and not much coolfan noise)

But you can't seriously compare something running on a resource hogging Windows OS with a minimalistic Linux OS with real time processing embedded intoo the Kernel....

Next to that i am pretty sure this processor is fast enough to keep up with the Specs and perform at any given polyphony without much problems. Its way faster then the Oasys CPU, just check some floating point benchmarks and you'll know what i am talking about. Hell yes, my Iphone CPU is faster then the OAsys CPU.

The beast will perform just fine, the CPU only limmits the possibilities for expansions, but then its not an open system....

[Synthmandan]

Why the heck do they still list Oasys on their website in the current product offerings??

The last question is an interesting one.

Maybe that means something to us OASYS users! Are we getting software update after all?

Same with M3..just forget it.
You are dumped..that's it.
What does it take for you to realise truth?
You're gone.
Oasys is gone..M3 is gone..Open labs instruments are gone.
But hey..now there is Kronos and Stephen sold his softie to Yamaha users.
Them probably get dropped in time as well.
Don't you see the trick?
How many more times does it take to realize for people they are used
just for money?
Money..always money..everywhere..and they don't give a chit about you.
Sick of it.

Hey anybody aware of the gear from this company? Reasonable prices.
I believe it is run and owned by the guy that started Open Labs. ?
http://www.musiccomputing.com/
I know it's not Korg so please don't yell... Btw, I too own and love my Oasys 88, Z1, Prophecy, and M1rex. I would love updates for my Oasys... but I have been check out other options for other gear in the future.

[Naviára]

I just spent a little time on an ATOM powered Dell Latitude 2100 looking at info on the Atom CPU. It's slow....seems slower than my very old Celeron 1.3 lap top and too slow for a desk top replacement. I don't know what chip set Korg used but the Dell 2100 runs really cool so has some great features....just not horse power. Don't take this wrong... IMO Korg hit another home run with the Kronos, M50 then Kronos, 2 for the dollar packed machines that beat the competition hands down, but I do not believe it is the OASYS2.

Read about the OASYS PCI and why a computer could not do the work needed and then tell me the Atom is for a flagship. Nope, IMO Korg has a monster hidden in a cage waiting to let it out with Poly AT.

John^^

Tough i seriously think they could have opted for a faster CPU at not much extra costs (Every laptop CPU even i5 and i7 would function without problems and not much coolfan noise)

But you can't seriously compare something running on a resource hogging Windows OS with a minimalistic Linux OS with real time processing embedded intoo the Kernel....

Next to that i am pretty sure this processor is fast enough to keep up with the Specs and perform at any given polyphony without much problems. Its way faster then the Oasys CPU, just check some floating point benchmarks and you'll know what i am talking about. Hell yes, my Iphone CPU is faster then the OAsys CPU.

The beast will perform just fine, the CPU only limmits the possibilities for expansions, but then its not an open system....

Got this from the Korg page:

Oasys polyphony:

HD-1: 172 voices
AL-1: 96 voices
CX-3: 172 voices
STR-1: 48 voices
MS-20EX: 48 voices
PolysixEX: 172 voices
MOD-7: 52 voices

Kronos polyphony:

SGX-1: 100 voices
EP-1: 104 voices
HD-1: 140 voices
AL-1: 80 voices
CX-3: 200 voices
STR-1: 40 voices
MOD-7: 52 voices
MS-20EX: 40 voices
PolysixEX: 180 voices

If you look on the strongest VA engines (AL-1, STR-1, MOD7, MS20EX - not the sample based ones) seems like Oasys has a little bit more power. Maybe the Kronos needs some extra power for the diskstreaming, switching programs without loosing voices.... or the ATOM simply isn't faster then the Oasys CPU.

[Bachus]

I just spent a little time on an ATOM powered Dell Latitude 2100 looking at info on the Atom CPU. It's slow....seems slower than my very old Celeron 1.3 lap top and too slow for a desk top replacement. I don't know what chip set Korg used but the Dell 2100 runs really cool so has some great features....just not horse power. Don't take this wrong... IMO Korg hit another home run with the Kronos, M50 then Kronos, 2 for the dollar packed machines that beat the competition hands down, but I do not believe it is the OASYS2.

Read about the OASYS PCI and why a computer could not do the work needed and then tell me the Atom is for a flagship. Nope, IMO Korg has a monster hidden in a cage waiting to let it out with Poly AT.

John^^

Tough i seriously think they could have opted for a faster CPU at not much extra costs (Every laptop CPU even i5 and i7 would function without problems and not much coolfan noise)

But you can't seriously compare something running on a resource hogging Windows OS with a minimalistic Linux OS with real time processing embedded intoo the Kernel....

Next to that i am pretty sure this processor is fast enough to keep up with the Specs and perform at any given polyphony without much problems. Its way faster then the Oasys CPU, just check some floating point benchmarks and you'll know what i am talking about. Hell yes, my Iphone CPU is faster then the OAsys CPU.

The beast will perform just fine, the CPU only limmits the possibilities for expansions, but then its not an open system....

Got this from the Korg page:

Oasys polyphony:

HD-1: 172 voices
AL-1: 96 voices
CX-3: 172 voices
STR-1: 48 voices
MS-20EX: 48 voices
PolysixEX: 172 voices
MOD-7: 52 voices

Kronos polyphony:

SGX-1: 100 voices
EP-1: 104 voices
HD-1: 140 voices
AL-1: 80 voices
CX-3: 200 voices
STR-1: 40 voices
MOD-7: 52 voices
MS-20EX: 40 voices
PolysixEX: 180 voices

If you look on the strongest VA engines (AL-1, STR-1, MOD7, MS20EX - not the sample based ones) seems like Oasys has a little bit more power. Maybe the Kronos needs some extra power for the diskstreaming, switching programs without loosing voices.... or the ATOM simply isn't faster then the Oasys CPU.

In the Kronos you cacn use all these engines at the same time and still have this polyphony for every single synth, can't do that at the OASYS.... (to my understanding)

[Naviára]

Tough i seriously think they could have opted for a faster CPU at not much extra costs (Every laptop CPU even i5 and i7 would function without problems and not much coolfan noise)

But you can't seriously compare something running on a resource hogging Windows OS with a minimalistic Linux OS with real time processing embedded intoo the Kernel....

Next to that i am pretty sure this processor is fast enough to keep up with the Specs and perform at any given polyphony without much problems. Its way faster then the Oasys CPU, just check some floating point benchmarks and you'll know what i am talking about. Hell yes, my Iphone CPU is faster then the OAsys CPU.

The beast will perform just fine, the CPU only limmits the possibilities for expansions, but then its not an open system....

Got this from the Korg page:

Oasys polyphony:

HD-1: 172 voices
AL-1: 96 voices
CX-3: 172 voices
STR-1: 48 voices
MS-20EX: 48 voices
PolysixEX: 172 voices
MOD-7: 52 voices

Kronos polyphony:

SGX-1: 100 voices
EP-1: 104 voices
HD-1: 140 voices
AL-1: 80 voices
CX-3: 200 voices
STR-1: 40 voices
MOD-7: 52 voices
MS-20EX: 40 voices
PolysixEX: 180 voices

If you look on the strongest VA engines (AL-1, STR-1, MOD7, MS20EX - not the sample based ones) seems like Oasys has a little bit more power. Maybe the Kronos needs some extra power for the diskstreaming, switching programs without loosing voices.... or the ATOM simply isn't faster then the Oasys CPU.

In the Kronos you cacn use all these engines at the same time and still have this polyphony for every single synth, can't do that at the OASYS.... (to my understanding)

That's not right:

the polyphony is shared between the engines and it depends on how many voices are played the same time - from the Kronos specs:

*1 Maximum polyphony depends on the kind of synthesis engines and the number of effects being used.
*2 KRONOS dynamically allocates voices to multiple synthesis engines when they are used simultaneously

Example:

MS-20 can use a maximum of 40 voices - if you play 10 MS-20 voices at the same time the maximum polyphony on all other engines will drop by 25% - even more if effects are applied (IFX/MFX/TFX) - That sounds much, but most times, you don't hold more then 10 voices (in program mode) at the same time (20 if you layer 2 MS20 patches in 1 program) - so it's still enough reserve for the other engines.

In combination mode it's possible to run out of voices if you add too many programs that uses the stronger engines...

It doesn't matter how many synthengines are installed - it's only a question of how many voices are played at the same time.

Sample playback uses lesser CPU power - so the Kronos is able to play up to 140 voices (Oasys: 172 voices) - It doesn't matter how many velocity switches a HD-1 can use (4 on Oasys / up to ?16? on Kronos) since only different (stereo) samples are triggered not raising polyphony count or processor usage. It could be possible that some more processing power is needed for diskstreaming. VA uses far more CPU power. See what I mean??

greetings
A.

[Hedegaard]

I just spent a little time on an ATOM powered Dell Latitude 2100 looking at info on the Atom CPU. It's slow....seems slower than my very old Celeron 1.3 lap top and too slow for a desk top replacement. I don't know what chip set Korg used but the Dell 2100 runs really cool so has some great features....just not horse power. Don't take this wrong... IMO Korg hit another home run with the Kronos, M50 then Kronos, 2 for the dollar packed machines that beat the competition hands down, but I do not believe it is the OASYS2.

Read about the OASYS PCI and why a computer could not do the work needed and then tell me the Atom is for a flagship. Nope, IMO Korg has a monster hidden in a cage waiting to let it out with Poly AT.

John^^

Tough i seriously think they could have opted for a faster CPU at not much extra costs (Every laptop CPU even i5 and i7 would function without problems and not much coolfan noise)

But you can't seriously compare something running on a resource hogging Windows OS with a minimalistic Linux OS with real time processing embedded intoo the Kernel....

Next to that i am pretty sure this processor is fast enough to keep up with the Specs and perform at any given polyphony without much problems. Its way faster then the Oasys CPU, just check some floating point benchmarks and you'll know what i am talking about. Hell yes, my Iphone CPU is faster then the OAsys CPU.

The beast will perform just fine, the CPU only limmits the possibilities for expansions, but then its not an open system....

Got this from the Korg page:

Oasys polyphony:

HD-1: 172 voices
AL-1: 96 voices
CX-3: 172 voices
STR-1: 48 voices
MS-20EX: 48 voices
PolysixEX: 172 voices
MOD-7: 52 voices

Kronos polyphony:

SGX-1: 100 voices
EP-1: 104 voices
HD-1: 140 voices
AL-1: 80 voices
CX-3: 200 voices
STR-1: 40 voices
MOD-7: 52 voices
MS-20EX: 40 voices
PolysixEX: 180 voices

If you look on the strongest VA engines (AL-1, STR-1, MOD7, MS20EX - not the sample based ones) seems like Oasys has a little bit more power. Maybe the Kronos needs some extra power for the diskstreaming, switching programs without loosing voices.... or the ATOM simply isn't faster then the Oasys CPU.

no, its because the Kronos has deeper quality, 8 velocity layers contra Oasys 4 layers, so its virtually DOUBLE that of Oasys!!!