Korg Forums

Not sure why anyone would even bother asking this question

Billy

SpIdErWeB wrote: 4) Nonetheless, Motif XF is based on old 10+ years AMW2 technology (with improvements), the Fantom-G is based on old 10+ years technology found on the JV serie (with improvements)...
The Kronos is using technology developed partially on the Oasys (HD-1, CX3, AL-1...) in 2005 which is already more modern, but also using technology such SSD drive for Streaming which is actually not available anywhere yet. It's really a 2011 technology which should lead the next 10 years.

It's more than clear that the Kronos wins hands down, but your sound engine comparison is not quite accurate. First, you should compare similar engines, meaning only the sample based ones, because the motif and fantom doesn't offer any other. And when you compare the engine from the Oasys (HD-1) with either Yamahas AWM2 or the engine from Roland, you can see that all of them are nothing more than improvements of earlier versions.
The M3 for example has a stripped down sample set from the Oasys and you can find some acoustic samples which are identical to those on the Triton (probably even from the Trinity). There is probably not anything new and unheard compared to older models. I doubt that Korg has resampled every single instrument new and exclusively just for the Oasys.
Now, if we're talking about the sampling technology or the sampling engine (HD1, AWM2, ...), I don't think that either the Motif or the Fantom G are in any behind what you'll see on the Kronos.
For the beginning, the Yamaha offers 8 oscillators, while the Fantom G offers 4. The Kronos still offers just two. Yes, you can have up to 4 velocity controlled samples in each oscillator, but just two layered multisamples at once. The Motif/Fantom offer 8/4 separate oscillators with independent filters, envelopes and so on.
Also, such a basic thing like controlling the oscillator level with midi was at least on the M3 not possible and I doubt that it's different on the HD1 of the Kronos or Oasys respectively. It means, on the Fantom G (not sure about the Motif) I can crossfade with a controller (expression pedal, knob or slider) between different oscillators. The possibilities are endless. I can either control different articulations or variations of the sampled instrument, or I can control/make louder/quieter some parts of the sound, for example, the string part in a Piano&String patch. All those things are/were not possible on the M3 without some clever and heavy programming.

We can discuss about the quality of the samples in either the Motif or the Fantom, but the engine itself is certainly neither bad nor dated in any way compared to what Kronos offers in that regard. After all, a lot of people will still mainly play sounds which are sample based. And I never heard that the Motif for example can't compare to the sample based sounds on the Oasys. All we heard so far were some strings and a orchestra combination. Don't know about others, but to me, it didn't sound any better than a similar patch or combination on a Motif, PC3 or some other instrument currently on the market.

EXer wrote:Let's not forget that a Fantom is based on the XV engine, which is nothing more than an enhanced JV engine.

Nevertheless, Roland synths have a character of their own and I can understand that some musicians or producers want that sound (personnally I still happen to use the Orchestral JV card built in my XP30 ). If you're one of those people I would suggest to buy a used XV-5080 and SRX expansion cards to complement your setup.

Exactly my thoughts.. I love the tonal character of XV series. I would buy XV-5080 plus KRONOS.

billysynth1 wrote:Not sure why anyone would even bother asking this question

Billy

I agree. I'd take a Triton Classic over a Fantom.

McHale wrote:

billysynth1 wrote:Not sure why anyone would even bother asking this question

Billy

I agree. I'd take a Triton Classic over a Fantom.

Hehe..or the Extreme for me.

Having been a long time user of Roland synths, I like their sound and programming structures more than Korg, however, when comparing Kronos to Fantom, the answer would shortly be, get the Kronos.
(I have the Oasys - which is essentially a Kronos minus the updates)

Because the synth power and your potential to "do what you want" is ranks higher. The audio quality is extremely high. There may be a few things about the Fantom that you like better, or some small features that do things a little easier or better than an Oasys/Kronos, but ultimately, the Kronos wins out.

Unless of course Roland bring out something of their own in the next short while.......

sani wrote:

SpIdErWeB wrote: 4) Nonetheless, Motif XF is based on old 10+ years AMW2 technology (with improvements), the Fantom-G is based on old 10+ years technology found on the JV serie (with improvements)...
The Kronos is using technology developed partially on the Oasys (HD-1, CX3, AL-1...) in 2005 which is already more modern, but also using technology such SSD drive for Streaming which is actually not available anywhere yet. It's really a 2011 technology which should lead the next 10 years.

It's more than clear that the Kronos wins hands down, but your sound engine comparison is not quite accurate. First, you should compare similar engines, meaning only the sample based ones, because the motif and fantom doesn't offer any other. And when you compare the engine from the Oasys (HD-1) with either Yamahas AWM2 or the engine from Roland, you can see that all of them are nothing more than improvements of earlier versions.
The M3 for example has a stripped down sample set from the Oasys and you can find some acoustic samples which are identical to those on the Triton (probably even from the Trinity). There is probably not anything new and unheard compared to older models. I doubt that Korg has resampled every single instrument new and exclusively just for the Oasys.
Now, if we're talking about the sampling technology or the sampling engine (HD1, AWM2, ...), I don't think that either the Motif or the Fantom G are in any behind what you'll see on the Kronos.
For the beginning, the Yamaha offers 8 oscillators, while the Fantom G offers 4. The Kronos still offers just two. Yes, you can have up to 4 velocity controlled samples in each oscillator, but just two layered multisamples at once. The Motif/Fantom offer 8/4 separate oscillators with independent filters, envelopes and so on.
Also, such a basic thing like controlling the oscillator level with midi was at least on the M3 not possible and I doubt that it's different on the HD1 of the Kronos or Oasys respectively. It means, on the Fantom G (not sure about the Motif) I can crossfade with a controller (expression pedal, knob or slider) between different oscillators. The possibilities are endless. I can either control different articulations or variations of the sampled instrument, or I can control/make louder/quieter some parts of the sound, for example, the string part in a Piano&String patch. All those things are/were not possible on the M3 without some clever and heavy programming.

We can discuss about the quality of the samples in either the Motif or the Fantom, but the engine itself is certainly neither bad nor dated in any way compared to what Kronos offers in that regard. After all, a lot of people will still mainly play sounds which are sample based. And I never heard that the Motif for example can't compare to the sample based sounds on the Oasys. All we heard so far were some strings and a orchestra combination. Don't know about others, but to me, it didn't sound any better than a similar patch or combination on a Motif, PC3 or some other instrument currently on the market.

Sani´s post is corret in all details he provides.
Very well explained and very acurate.

On the other hand, and thechnical detils apart, there is the "sound charater" aspect, as on any other instrument.

And on this particular department the OASYS wins hands down, IMHO.

Hedegaard wrote:...Unless of course Roland bring out something of their own in the next short while

I don't want to bash Roland (among other things I own Roland gear that I'm satisfied with), but I really don't know how they could bring out something new in a short time that would allow them to compete with Yamaha or Korg on the workstation market.

They have not invested in the developement of a new sample based synth engine for 20 years. All they have been doing since they released the JV-80 is making 2 updates on the JV engine (JV -> super JV -> XV) and enlarging their sample libraries (you can still find waves from 10+ years old Roland sample CDs in the Fantom G ROM...).

The only interesting concept they have brought out is Variphrase, and the V-Synth/XT/GT is a groundbreaking synth and a sound designer's dream, although it has a typical Roland taste of not-completely-baked when it comes to sample management, patch management, 'project' upload, etc.

It did not take any special prophetic gift to be able to figure out that when the OASYS was released it would be just a matter of time before that platform could be released at a much lower price.

In that light I'm a bit surprised to see Yamaha release a Motif XF.

To what extent Roland has been blessed with enough foresight to anticipate the release of the KRONOS I don't know.
But, since 2012 will be 4 years after the release of their previous flagship it's safe to assume that they have been working on a successor for the Fantom G quite some time now.

Neither Yamaha or Roland have something comparable to the KRONOS at the time of writing.

EXer wrote:

Hedegaard wrote:...Unless of course Roland bring out something of their own in the next short while

I don't want to bash Roland (among other things I own Roland gear that I'm satisfied with), but I really don't know how they could bring out something new in a short time that would allow them to compete with Yamaha or Korg on the workstation market.

Who says that they have to release something new. Who knows what they are planing. The Fantom G was released a whole year after the Motif XS and the M3. So, if they work on something, it should be due later this year, probably somewhere in late summer or even autumn. But their biggest problem with the Fantom G is actually that they supported it very badly and released that workstation with some unbelievable shortcomings. Add to this the absolute silence in the communication with their customers and after all that, it's questionable how successful a future Fantom G successor can be.

EXer wrote:They have not invested in the developement of a new sample based synth engine for 20 years. All they have been doing since they released the JV-80 is making 2 updates on the JV engine (JV -> super JV -> XV) and enlarging their sample libraries (you can still find waves from 10+ years old Roland sample CDs in the Fantom G ROM...).

I'll say it again. There is no reason to complain about Rolands sample based engine because it was by far more advanced compared to what Korg offered before the M3. That's simply a fact. When it comes to the samples, there are samples on Korgs keyboards going also back to the early nineties. Personally, I don't mind how old the samples are, but how they sound. I guess it's not an unknown fact, for how long Korg struggled with a halfway acceptable piano sound. They almost become famous for their not so great sounding piano, regardless how often they update it. [/quote]