fdspeck wrote:It was stated several times that Korg should feel an obligation to update the sequencer. LaughingBear even said it should be "a matter of honour". That's what I think too, but it should not only be a matter of obligation of Korg to their customers but even more an obligation to themselves. When I first heard about how work was divided between the American and the Japanese development team I couldn't help the feeling that -basically- the innovative and critically acclaimed parts were done by the American team, while the Japanese team merely did the job (I refer to the software, not the hardware). With each update this impression grew deeper. I don't know for sure but I think we saw updates only in the part for which the US team is responsible and thus had an influence on.
At this moment nobody know that in a certain way. Since this forum is just a forum, and the last word always is for Mr. Katoh. Who knows if the hard work is from the japanese team??
fdspeck wrote:And that's what I don't understand. There is always some sort of internal competition. And if one team -again basically- did the parts which are much praised and another one those everybody is nagging about this should generate some pressure within this team "to do it right". Even more when you take into account that the team concerned is Japanese and certain aspects of the Japanese culture (which I very much appreciate) like high work ethos, the claim to do a good job and the liking for refined craftsmanship. But also not wanting to lag behind Westerners. So I would like to address Korg Japan: show us that the Japanese team could also do a good job on the Oasys. Even now as the Oasys is discontinued. You owe it to yourselves. Consider also that the Oasys is something like a legacy of Tsutomu Katoh, so it should remain without black spots on it. And some aspects of the sequencer are black spots.
The Oasys is a legacy not just of Mr. Katoh, but everybody involved into that project.
fdspeck wrote:Take for example the clock resolution. 192ppq maybe were a big deal when the T-series displaced the M1, but for years Korg was the last dinosaur sticking to that clock resolution. It's a mystery to me why Korg thought this was appropriate for a machine like the Oasys. When it came out it had the worst clock resolution on the market while it should have something in the region of software sequencers (my opinion). When the first specs came out I thought it was a typo. Even the fuss which was made when the M3 was updated to 480ppq is something I can't follow because let's face it, it is still the worst clock resolution on the market (at least Korg is now on par with some of their competitors). But of course nowadays I would be happy if the Oasys would be updated even to 480ppq.
How much resolution is needed to make good music????
fdspeck wrote:Honestly, if I were one of the developers of the Oasys's sequencer and I would read all the criticism in this forum I would offer to work on an update in my spare time if my employer won't let me do it. Just because I would be so ashamed that the result of my work would diminish an otherwise perfect product (I say that being a development engineer myself).
The sequencer is only a tool. The Oasys always shows it's strength in the synthesys field, that is the spirit of the open architechture. On the other side, what workstation offers 16 midi track with 16 audio tracks??? I don't see the shame. In no ways the sequencer eclipsate the sonically power of the Oasys
fdspeck wrote:Another reason why Korg should feel obligated to update the sequencer was the slogan which was used to advertise the update of the M3. Something like "once more, Korg listen and delivers". I won't go so far to imply that this was done intentionally but of course this was a slap in the face of every customer who demanded a similar update for the Oasys. An example of bad and insensitive marketing. I think an obligation should result from that bad marketing move.
Again, the last word is always of Mr Katoh.
fdspeck wrote:If, against my anticipation (irony), Korg Japan sees the obligation issue differently there is another thing I would like to suggest. I would disagree with Stephen who stated that a sequencer update cannot be justified in terms of costs. Let's make a simple calculation. Assume that 3 man months are needed to update the sequencer. We furthermore assume that the cost of a software developer is $120.000 per year (of course this is not what he gets, but what he costs the company, including overheads, insurance ect.). Thus the development cost for the update is $30.000. If Korg would go without profit and other overheads (argument: see above) and charge $250 for the update you would need 120 customers to cover the costs. That's not so much in my view. Thus I would like to suggest to Korg Japan: make an internal calculation of how much a certain sequencer update would cost you. Subtract from that sum what amount you are willing to contribute to calm angry customers, restore Korg's reputation, remove the black spots from an otherwise perfect product and so on. Define a price and calculate how much customers are needed to justify the residual costs. Maybe you have done all that in the past. But now release a spec sheet and ask how much customers are willing to definitely pre-order such an update. Let them pay upfront (every company appreciates upfront payment these days). If you reach the critical number do the update, if not let it be. Moog is doing a similar thing with the Taurus at the moment and I think that's a good move. Let the market decide what is needed.
That's an item that nobody except at Korg's financial department know.
fdspeck wrote:Any chance that a decider from Korg Japan will read that?
Probably you aren't a troll. But, please, stop trolling.
Don't read me in a agressive way. Welcome to the forum.
Desde Santiago de Chile.
Froilán
Though I might have acted spoil sports most of the time, what I'd like for the folks at Korg to know is that it is not my intention to let the good hearted folks down for the sake of criticism. Instead I was hoping for a straightforward, constructive communication from the get go to minimize the loss in my part. Some of you may recall that the topic of sequencer was a major stumbling block few years back not because it was not possible, but because at least I had an impression that the folks at Korg *knew* what was impending but decided to maintain "you have to pry the truth from my cold dead finger" policy. 
