Roland and Yamaha are on notice!!! after Namm 2013

[chilly7]

You are indeed wrong, so I'll correct you. The new iPad Air has 1GB RAM. The Surface Pro 2, on the other hand, has >8GB.

I can only assume you're confusing 3GB with 3G, the latter being mobile telecommunications technology, or 3GB being a download data plan of a mobile contract.

i see, maby u are right.

Not maybe.... He is right..

Because he did not show me evidences of that, and i do not have evidences that he is wrong, i seid maby he is right...

[Bachus]

i see, maby u are right.

Not maybe.... He is right..

Because he did not show me evidences of that, and i do not have evidences that he is wrong, i seid maby he is right...

Really? So you never checked the applewebsite or ipad air on the wikipedia?

Now stop poluting every thread with your apple promotion campaign and leave this discussion to people that actually care about hardware keyboards

[michelkeijzers]

I think the ideal future of workstations would be:
- a master keyboard with a controller like the Oasys (i.e. good keyboard, sliders, big display etc).
- no internal sound processing.

The sound processing would be done with a laptop or in a far future a smartphone or other generic small device. The connection between these two would be wireless.

The sound output should be handled with another small device, giving 2 or more XLR (or better) output possibilities.

[chilly7]

Not maybe.... He is right..

Because he did not show me evidences of that, and i do not have evidences that he is wrong, i seid maby he is right...

Really? So you never checked the applewebsite or ipad air on the wikipedia?

Now stop poluting every thread with your apple promotion campaign and leave this discussion to people that actually care about hardware keyboards

Apple web site does not tell how much memory iPad has.
I have heared that it has 3GB, Timo seid me 1 GB.
I do not know who is right.

Ok. let's stop this discussion!

[chilly7]

I think the ideal future of workstations would be:
- a master keyboard with a controller like the Oasys (i.e. good keyboard, sliders, big display etc).
- no internal sound processing.

The sound processing would be done with a laptop or in a far future a smartphone or other generic small device. The connection between these two would be wireless.

The sound output should be handled with another small device, giving 2 or more XLR (or better) output possibilities.

And that's what i am basicly saying and that's why i think Korg is shiftin their main focus on music computer software and their might not be next Kronos.

[vEddY]

I think the ideal future of workstations would be:
- a master keyboard with a controller like the Oasys (i.e. good keyboard, sliders, big display etc).
- no internal sound processing.

The sound processing would be done with a laptop or in a far future a smartphone or other generic small device. The connection between these two would be wireless.

The sound output should be handled with another small device, giving 2 or more XLR (or better) output possibilities.

Agreed, but it should have a touchscreen and a COMBI-like mode only. It should also have at least four MIDI OUTs and two MIDI INs. It should absolutely have something like 16 polyphonic pads, nanoPad style. If it had some motorized faders and sliders and knobs, all the better. But the basic thing should be easy-to-use COMBI-like mode, lots of connectivity and a touchscreen.

[michelkeijzers]

I think the ideal future of workstations would be:
- a master keyboard with a controller like the Oasys (i.e. good keyboard, sliders, big display etc).
- no internal sound processing.

The sound processing would be done with a laptop or in a far future a smartphone or other generic small device. The connection between these two would be wireless.

The sound output should be handled with another small device, giving 2 or more XLR (or better) output possibilities.

Agreed, but it should have a touchscreen and a COMBI-like mode only. It should also have at least four MIDI OUTs and two MIDI INs. It should absolutely have something like 16 polyphonic pads, nanoPad style. If it had some motorized faders and sliders and knobs, all the better. But the basic thing should be easy-to-use COMBI-like mode, lots of connectivity and a touchscreen.

I agree at all your things ... especially the touch screen; I think that's a very big plus for Korg synths. The rest I don't need so often but would be nice.

About the COMBI like mode ... you mean you don't like the individual programs? To be honest, I like them, however, I would have the best of both worlds:

- Having a combi MODE where you can OVERRIDE all program parameters. However, by default those will be set to INHERITED, meaning the original program values (either a number or on/off etc) will be used.

And also there should be batch editing functions, like e.g. setting the volume of a range of combis lower.

[Bertotti]

I love program mode where I ca mix and match two engines. I would be thrilled if I could mix and match four in a program mode! Or five or six! Lol

[vEddY]

About the COMBI like mode ... you mean you don't like the individual programs? To be honest, I like them, however, I would have the best of both worlds:

- Having a combi MODE where you can OVERRIDE all program parameters. However, by default those will be set to INHERITED, meaning the original program values (either a number or on/off etc) will be used.

And also there should be batch editing functions, like e.g. setting the volume of a range of combis lower.

Nope, it's not that. I went from the basic assumption that a master keyboard shouldn't have any internal sound processing (agreeing with ya). Then, one step further, if you only have a Combi mode, then if you want to have only one Program inside that (VST, rack, whatever), that's ok, you can do that. But, if you want to have a Combi with 10 sounds, and let's say, one of them is going from MIDI CH#1 from Mainstage/Forte/whatnot and you're using 5 VST synths from there, and you have 5 outboard MIDI devices that you want to use - you should be able to use that. Have a touchscreen to configure everything, and just set up the sound as easy as possible both for VST's and rack keyboards. That's where I was going

In order for this to work, you would have to have an advanced MIDI learn function and/or basic SysEx editor inside the keyboard (so that you can switch sounds as easy as 1-2-3). Just so that you can punch in some SysEx data that would - for example - be able to switch Bank A on your Synth X to Bank B, and sound #14 to sound #54, for example.

All of today's controllers absolutely suck in situations like that. And that suckitude includes VST hosts, as well (Mainstages, Fortes, bloXpanders etc).

[Kevin Nolan]

There are three significant advantages to owning either OASYS and Kronos over all other synthesizers or workstations, or Plugins, in the DAW age:

1. Multiple full-featured synth engines across a range of synthesis types. This provides for wide and complete coverage in the 'creativity' department when it comes to electronic music. Virtual Analogue (and multiple types), Plucked String Model, FM, Virtual Tone Wheel Organ, Sample & Synthesis, Vector Synthesis, Wavesequencing - all under the one hood; all fully featured. this competes with the likes of NI, Artutia and Spectrasonics, still. And their tight integration into the hardware package is a SIGNIFICANT bonus over DAW based plugins and poorly configured generic controller.


As an aside, if there is one thing that puzzles me about Korg on this front is that they do not complete the job; which in my view involved delivering a more versatile Virtual Acoustic Syntheis engine; and then Drum-Sequencing framework like Ultrabeat or RMX-Stylus (surely achievable with a GUI adaptation/simplification of Karma?). Incorporate those into Kronos and you have, IMO, a complete package to rival the best. It could then be regarded as a complete package perhaps to be ultimately sold as software only.

I also feel that Korg need to take a better approach to producing new programs and combinations. Most of OASYS and Kronos' synth engines remain hugely under explored and programmed; while the presets on the OASYS and Kronos are just not good. For example, the AL-1 presets are useless to users and arguably only configured for the factory Combi's - so they are laden with LFOs and Step Sequencers all over the place and these are virtually impossible to deconstruct and use in ones own work. IMO Korg need to take a far more mature approach to commercial releases on a regular base of program libraries for each synth engine and for mixed programs. Look how popular Omnisphere is. And it's that way because of the factory supplied sophisticated and instantly usable library. the underlying synth engine is no more advanced than say HD-1 and AL-1 combined (if that). Korg make these amazing synth engines, and then abandon them. People by and large do not have the tome to program, and many don't have the skills - so these amazing synth engines lie there unused, abandoned; and ultimately forgotten and noncommercial entities for Korg.

So Korg based (or managed) synth libraries are needed - on the Omnisphere level (and KARO do not do that for me and are far too expensive).

Never the less - to get back to my original point - both OASYS and Kronos deliver top end synt engines across most synth engine types; and this becomes a significant and important feature when you consider the next two points:

2) Latency. Both OASYS and Kronos deliver all of these synth engines at 100+ note polyphony (in many cases) with essentially zero latency. this bestows them with an advantage which even top end computers can't. I own a MBP quad iCore 7 with 16GB RAM and 512GB SSD and it can't compete with my OASYS, at the same note count, latency wise. No where near.

3) Longevity. Any job composed using an OASYS and Kronos can be returned to as long as the hardware lasts - decades from now you look after your instrument. Conversely, software based synths of today will surely be gone in a decade from now. If you want to re-mix a job done on Omnisphere in 15 years from now, chances are you will not be able to do it. The life time and longevity of DAW / Plugin based work is far less that for hardware based work - and this issue is increasingly of concern even to museums holding digital art from only a few decades ago. I realise everything has a life time, even hardware, but the longevity of your work will be increased if done using hardware.

[Hugo]

Good points there, Kevin.

[michelkeijzers]

About the COMBI like mode ... you mean you don't like the individual programs? To be honest, I like them, however, I would have the best of both worlds:

- Having a combi MODE where you can OVERRIDE all program parameters. However, by default those will be set to INHERITED, meaning the original program values (either a number or on/off etc) will be used.

And also there should be batch editing functions, like e.g. setting the volume of a range of combis lower.

Nope, it's not that. I went from the basic assumption that a master keyboard shouldn't have any internal sound processing (agreeing with ya). Then, one step further, if you only have a Combi mode, then if you want to have only one Program inside that (VST, rack, whatever), that's ok, you can do that. But, if you want to have a Combi with 10 sounds, and let's say, one of them is going from MIDI CH#1 from Mainstage/Forte/whatnot and you're using 5 VST synths from there, and you have 5 outboard MIDI devices that you want to use - you should be able to use that. Have a touchscreen to configure everything, and just set up the sound as easy as possible both for VST's and rack keyboards. That's where I was going

In order for this to work, you would have to have an advanced MIDI learn function and/or basic SysEx editor inside the keyboard (so that you can switch sounds as easy as 1-2-3). Just so that you can punch in some SysEx data that would - for example - be able to switch Bank A on your Synth X to Bank B, and sound #14 to sound #54, for example.

All of today's controllers absolutely suck in situations like that. And that suckitude includes VST hosts, as well (Mainstages, Fortes, bloXpanders etc).

Actually ... I almost never use sequencers, so I haven't encountered this problem (yet).

[michelkeijzers]

Good points there, Kevin.

+1

... Probably in the long term software will take over, but I hope there will always be hardware keyboards with a good controller + some dedicated software working together well on it.

[jwillis35]

Right now Roland and Yamaha look so bad compared to Korg's offerings
they need to go home and re invent themselves

I would also say the workstation market is not what it once was. Mobile devices have been much more popular, soft synths have been the rage for a while, and analog is making a comeback.

Additionally, the Motif XF is certainly a monster workstation, as is the Roland Fantom G. They may not fit the bill for everyone, but they are pretty good. Roland's new board is clearly built to bring Integra sounds to a keyboard with some sequencing. It seems to compete with Krome and the like. Yamaha's workstations still have plenty of life.

When these manufacturers make a new workstation they have to decide what market they wish to be in (low end, mid range, high end). The high end market is expensive and can come at a price. How many will you sell? What will the cost be to build and mass produce? Will the board compete with Kronos or a Motif XF?

[Bald Eagle]

There are three significant advantages to owning either OASYS and Kronos over all other synthesizers or workstations, or Plugins, in the DAW age:

3) Longevity. Any job composed using an OASYS and Kronos can be returned to as long as the hardware lasts - decades from now you look after your instrument. Conversely, software based synths of today will surely be gone in a decade from now. If you want to re-mix a job done on Omnisphere in 15 years from now, chances are you will not be able to do it. The life time and longevity of DAW / Plugin based work is far less that for hardware based work - and this issue is increasingly of concern even to museums holding digital art from only a few decades ago. I realise everything has a life time, even hardware, but the longevity of your work will be increased if done using hardware.

Well, yes and no. if you replace your PC and upgrade the OS your soft synth may no longer function. But if you keep an old PC with an older OS for the sole purpose of running your soft synths then you're good. In fact you may be better off than an OASYS. If the hardware fails it is more likely that you can find a cheap PC that can run your old software than you will find parts for the OASYS.

I had considered this strategy for iPad based synths but in this case you are probably correct. It's unlikely that Apple with support older iOS versions on newer hardware so you may be out of luck at some point.