HELP! Held notes cut off at patch change

[max-power]

I'm fairly new to the R3 and Korg synths in general, so I'm wondering if it is possible to prevent the notes from cutting off when switching patches.

Ie. You change patches while holding a key, and the note continues until the next key is played.

Any help would be appreciated!
Thanks!

[Bald Eagle]

This is a general problem with various synths. The Kronos has a feature called Smooth Sound Transition (SST) so it doesn't have this problem. There are limited workarounds on some other synths but I don't know of any for the R3.

[Synthoid]

This is a general problem with various synths.

Actually it's an issue with most synths. It's annoying... but we live with it.

[xmlguy]

To enable that capability, the synth has to essentially have double the capability, leaving half in reserve at all times to be able to continue the last program after switching to the new program. That would increase the cost of the synth substantially. However, if you really want to be able to do that, you can buy another R3. That will let you continue a program on one R3 while being free to switch programs on the second R3. I know that's not very practical, but that's exactly what the manufacturer has to do to implement that feature - have double the synth capability. The synths that do have this capability, such as the Fantom G, are much more expensive.

[Synthoid]

The synths that do have this capability, such as the Fantom G, are much more expensive.

And surprisingly... many of the (lesser expensive) Yamaha PSR and YPG keyboards. I find that somewhat confusing.

[Bald Eagle]

The synths that do have this capability, such as the Fantom G, are much more expensive.

And surprisingly... many of the (lesser expensive) Yamaha PSR and YPG keyboards. I find that somewhat confusing.

I would guess that there is a lot less going on in the engines of the cheap synths. With less processing power needed some type of SST implementaion wouldn't be as much of a drain on the available resources.

[xmlguy]

The synths that do have this capability, such as the Fantom G, are much more expensive.

And surprisingly... many of the (lesser expensive) Yamaha PSR and YPG keyboards. I find that somewhat confusing.

You're comparing apples and oranges. The PSR and YPG keyboards aren't virtual analog synths: they are ROMplers and their sample synthesis is very limited. The tradeoff for losing that synthesis capability is that they can more easily do multiple timbres with higher polyphony. Which specific models of PSR and YPG keyboards do you think can do this?

[Synthoid]

You're comparing apples and oranges. The PSR and YPG keyboards aren't virtual analog synths: they are ROMplers and their sample synthesis is very limited.... Which specific models of PSR and YPG keyboards do you think can do this?

Since you brought up the Fantom G--that's also a Rompler--I figured the Yamaha keyboards I mentioned above could slide into that category, simple as they are.

Specific model would be the Yamaha YPG 535. I was at a local music store and they had a used one for sale. I was stepping through the patches and found it easily held the previous patch while I played the next. Really sounded cool when I used the sustain pedal.

My old Ensoniq could hold one synth patch while I selected another. Since it had no effects (maybe chorus?), that was rather a simple operation.

If memory serves, some Casio synths have "patch remain" as well.

[xmlguy]

You're comparing apples and oranges. The PSR and YPG keyboards aren't virtual analog synths: they are ROMplers and their sample synthesis is very limited.... Which specific models of PSR and YPG keyboards do you think can do this?

Since you brought up the Fantom G--that's also a Rompler--I figured the Yamaha keyboards I mentioned above could slide into that category, simple as they are.

Specific model would be the Yamaha YPG 535. I was at a local music store and they had a used one for sale. I was stepping through the patches and found it easily held the previous patch while I played the next. Really sounded cool when I used the sustain pedal.

My old Ensoniq could hold one synth patch while I selected another. Since it had no effects (maybe chorus?), that was rather a simple operation.

If memory serves, some Casio synths have "patch remain" as well.

The Fantom G is a sampler workstation with rather advanced sample synthesis. It's not a ROMpler. The Fantom X was also a powerful sampler workstation, much more powerful than any of the PSR and YPG ROMplers, yet it didn't have a patch remain function. Roland bumped up the price quite a bit when it released the G series.

To do patch remain, the PSR and YPG ROMplers merely have to continue playing the ROM waveforms that are currently playing - without any need to dynamically regenerate or process the waveforms. All they can do with the samples is basically apply envelopes and filters to them: but nothing very advanced. They aren't really doing "patch" remain because they don't have "patches" in the same sense as virtual analog engines. They can't do much dynamic synthesis at all. The Fantoms have very sophisticated synth engines, so it's a higher order of difficulty to keep playing their patches with effects, because they can't just simply "play" the waveforms without also doing the processing defined for the sound. Even though the Fantom X was very powerful, it couldn't do it. The X and G both could do 128 notes of polyphony, but Roland more than doubled the number of multitimbral parts from 16 on the X to 32 on the G. That extra power is what allowed them to do part remain.

A true virtual analog synth like the R3 require a higher order of processing than the sampler synths because the patches can be much more sophisticated, particularly with the flexibility of virtual patches and the various modulation and cross modulation capabilities. This requires a lot more DSP power, which reduces the polyphony considerably. Thus the R3 has 8 poly for 2 timbres. If the DSP merely had to play samples, then the 32 poly for 2 timbres of that YPG is rather easy to do without increasing the processing demand - because there is so little processing required. A virtual analog patch is a completely different fruit. You would need to double the DSP power to continue to keep 8 poly with 2 timbres and FX going while selecting a different program for the new notes that are played. Apples and oranges.

I use these as examples because I own a Fantom X6, R3, and a PSR-S900 (much more powerful than the YPGs and home PSRs), and I know them well. I didn't upgrade to the Fantom G because I didn't want to pay the higher price for patch remain or the ARX voices.

The Casios you're referring to aren't synths. They're ROMplers. The Casio XW-P1 and XW-G1 are synths, but they don't have patch remain.

[X-Trade]

Quite often even in Korg's workstation synths the capability exists for the voices from two different programs to continue sounding, because each voice has the same DSP structure with just a different set of parameters.

The problem mainly comes into play with the effects section.

[Synthoid]

The problem mainly comes into play with the effects section.

Precisely!

[xmlguy]

I agree that on a ROMpler or simple sampler, the problem with patch remain is mostly in the effect section.

On a VA synth, any modulation of the oscillators requires a lot more than effects to keep the dynamic sound playing. On the R3, the IFX are defined within the timbre and MFX on the program. This is very different than a combi which defines the FX externally with FX busses shared by all the programs. A simple example would be a timbre with ring mod between OSC1 and OSC2, with an LFO, mod sequencer, or other source that modulates the tuning of OSC2. The whole sound changes, not just the effects. This doesn't happen when you are just playing a sample with no options to modulate it other than filtering and envelopes.

[X-Trade]

Absolutely. But actually even on some VAs the voice structures between programs aren't so different.

You can tell which parts of the synthesizer require DSP algorithm changes - they are related to the parameters that stop notes from sounding whilst you change them.

Often the modulation matrix isn't so much a problem as the audio routing or systems with various different modeled filters, drive circuits, or oscillators.

[xmlguy]

Korg doesn't make any VA synths with patch remain, so the argument is moot. (and by argument I mean the good discussion we're having about it, not argument as in heated debate, since I think it's good to talk about these details.) They aren't likely to do so anytime soon, since the KingKorg was just released and doesn't have it. The only Korg product to have this is the Kronos, which is the Smooth Sound Transition feature. So if you want this feature, it's going to cost you a lot more than an R3.

My solution is more synths, usually being a mix of them from different manufacturers to get a wider range of options. That's one main reason why I have synths and workstations from Korg, Yamaha, Roland, Novation, Akai, and more, not including softsynths. They all bring something unique to the table. Sometimes I'll design a sound that I implement on many different synths. There's a lot of sounds that can be done on any synth, one way or another.

[Synthoid]

The Casio XW-P1 and XW-G1 are synths, but they don't have patch remain.

I have an XW-P1 and it does have patch remain in the PERFORM mode.

Looks nice in gold, btw: