Best Keyboard now?

[Shakil]

I have Fantom-G6 as the main workstation and M3 as a sound generator along KARMA.

I think Fantom-G is currently the best main workstation because it supports dedicated external MIDI parts. It's the best master keyboard as well, giving you 32 MIDI zones, 16 internal, and 16 external (both with key and velocity range). I haven't seen any other master keyboard with that capability.

The sequencer on Fantom-G is really transparent.. doesn't get in your way, lets you edit sounds, kits, right from the song, also allows you to keep recording on different channels, without stopping.... Works great for loops and beats production.

Also, the 128 MIDI tracks (although there is a lot of room of improvement for phrase based midi editing on Fantom G), is great for recording multiple takes....

M3 is also a great machine, specially if you add RADIAS exp. I don't use M3 sequencer dues to it's restriction on changing tracks while recording. But, I love the touch screen piano roll.... makes TR style beats programming possible. If you zoom in horizontally to 4 measures, and vertically so that each key and 1/4 notes are square, then you just click with a stylus to enter or remove notes....


rob... "Then a Combi can have up to 16 different Performances assigned. So in theory you could have 32 OSCs and 128 samples assigned to one note, the samples being triggered by velocity so that 32 are playing at any one time. "

You can get this on Motif XS for each Oscillator. 128 layers of velocity switching on each key.... because multisamples in Yamaha have both key-range and velocity-range.

[Shakil]

UCanDream...

One major issue with XS for me was it's effects routing, and how the Inserts are tied to the programs. M3's effects routing is much much more flexible, even though there are only 5 inserts....

On XS you can't share effects among different parts and can't route one IFX to IFX of other part... and as soon as you select a different program for a track, your tweaks are gone you made to IFX........ Fantom-G has the same flaw.

Other thing with XS was that it's dance and arab kits reminded my too much of my old PSR2000.

[Shakil]

Randalph: "Does anyone have a more in depth idea of the sonic advantages/disadavtages to Korgs 2 oscillators x 4 layers vs. the Motif's 8 elements? "

Yes, it can sure help if you are into this. Basically, you can get 'combi' sounds from Triton era at a program level.

With 8 layers, you can get more creative use of velocity switching... you can program a layer that only sounds when you release the keys... or press them really hard, or bring in some elements with mod wheel.... OR if you link all them to same velocity layer... there is option to switch among 8 elements in sequence or random... giving you wavestation kind of sounds......

But! most of this could be achieved by linking two programs in M3 to same MIDI channel.

[ksounds]

You can get this on Motif XS for each Oscillator. 128 layers of velocity switching on each key.... because multisamples in Yamaha have both key-range and velocity-range.

You could have 128 levels of velocity switching in a multisample only if you use mono samples and only one sample per velocity to cover the entire range of the keyboard. Yamaha lets you have a maximum of 128 mono samples or 64 stereo samples per multisample.

[Shakil]

ksounds... yes... then if you take the 128-layer multisamples and assign to each drum sound key..... Use two kits, you could get 128 stereo layers with two parts? or use stereo 64 layers with one part? I think it will work, right?

[Randelph]

Does anyone have a more in depth idea of the sonic advantages/disadavtages to Korgs 2 oscillators x 4 layers vs. the Motif's 8 elements?

When I asked that question I was wondering about the expressiveness of the M3 compared to the XS. I get a lot more playing satisfaction from the M3, many of its sounds respond more vividly, and was wondering if oscillator architecture contributed to that:

With the M3, even with just one oscillator, you're easily getting 4 way velocity switching if you want it, and everything about the page for assigning samples is set up for that. Whereas with the XS, you have that capability, but it looks and feels different to achieve that result, it's much more of a manual labor process. In digging around many patches on the XS, I didn't see all that many that took advantage of 4 way (or 8 way for that matter) velocity switching.

And something ksounds said seems to be part of this as well: it requires less key pressure on the M3 compared to the Motif to reach maximum velocity values. For me that would mean more expressive playing, I don't pound on the keys.

Not sure why some of you talking so much about the theoretical possibilities of stacking sounds and velocity layers- after 4 or 8 velocity layers, how much more would you need? But with only 1 or 2 velocity layers, the level of expressiveness and sublety is pretty obvious.

[sani]

The advantage in having 4 or even 8 oscilators in a single patch/program like on a motif or fantom is that you have more editing control for each single oscilator.
On the M3 you can have up to 8 multisamples which are velocity switched, but 4 of them have to share the same filter, amp and envelope settings because those settings are done for the whole oscilator.
This simply means that you can program more details if you want or have to.
The question "how much more would one need" is simply wrong. Some people need it and some don't.
I complained in the same way that the motif can only combine 4 patches into a performance and that is by far not enough for my live purposes. And of course, there were people on the yamaha forum asking my what kind of songs do I play if I need more than 4 patches at once in a combination!

[Randelph]

SANI wrote:

The advantage in having 4 or even 8 oscilators in a single patch/program like on a motif or fantom is that you have more editing control for each single oscilator.

Yes, but that doesn't answer my question: why do I experience more expressive satisfaction with the M3 vs. the XS?

Obviously, the samples could be different/better, but I'm not as inclined to believe that. Many people talk about a "Yamaha sound" or a "Korg sound", which I'm supposing is made up of lots of things like eq, modulation routings, envelopes, etc. I was hoping folks with in-depth programming experience with these boards could point to some things that would make a big difference in the overall sound.

The thing about velocity stacking was my best guess at that- at the very least, if you're taking advantage of 4 way velocity in building your patches, that's a lot of expressiveness right there. And if it's easier to hit maximum volume on the Korg keyboard, that would contribute to that experience.

My other guess is that Yamaha, overall, from board inception to sampling to creating patches, is going for a balanced sound, and Korg's philosophy runs to being more dynamically expressive. I'm left talking in broad generalities 'cause I'm not much of a synth programmer, but I am very curious.
Randy

[synthguy]

There are a lot of things which go into making a synth - and usually a synth line - sound distinctive, so there definitely is a Yamaha sound, a Korg sound, a Roland sound and a Kurzweil sound. Just about every synth workstation these days is as flexible as a modular, though not all are as good for that purpose. Roland is the worst because its filters sound thin, digital, even kind of "brittle." The Kurzweils are the best, because they have great filters and an astounding synth engine with lots of functions no other synth has.

Korg and Yamaha are happy mediums because they have good all round performance in every category, and aren't as arcane as a Kurzweil. They handle things differently. I can't remember what the XS calls its expressive system for providing legato layers and layers which respond dynamically to your playing. It works pretty well. However, it seems that where Yamaha falls down slightly is in the samples they use. Acoustic guitar samples are good but end up being kind of klunky, same for electric guitars, some saxes and other acoustic sounds like strings. Meanwhile, the drums and keyboards are fantastic and very expressive. It almost seems like the engineers creating the samples are mostly keyboard players and drummers, because these are always superb. Rolands samples in just about every area are much more useful for expressive playing, where the filters are lacking for synth patches work well to shape acoustic sounds.

Korg seems to put a lot of thought, like Roland, into how the samples will play well. Guitars, brass, winds and strings seem to work better on a Korg. Synth samples also have a certain amount of size and meat in them, so to speak. You can make a bigger synth patch with a Korg using fewer layers or voices. Another factor which is very useful, is that in the oscillators, you can shave off some of the sample start for softer sounds, and I can't recall if you can do that at all in the Yamahas. Ensoniq and Emu were the best in this regard, because you could use velocity to control where the sample started playing, making them some of the most expressive synths ever. I still use my Ensoniq TS-10 for many sounds because of this, as no other synth can touch how it plays certain sounds like electric guitar.

There is also the art of programming, and Korg has the best team among the synth makers, headed by Jack Hotop I believe. The patches they create are among the best of any synth s on the market, and only Kurzweil comes close because of its amazing synth engine. Somehow, they make all these patches come alive when you play them, Karma or no Karma.

[Gradius]

Well, for Korg M4, I expect that between 2011~2012 to comes out.

Look at the table:

Code: Select all

Korg M1      (1988~1994): 6 years
Korg Trinity (1996~1999): 3 years
Korg Triton  (1999~2007): 8 years
Korg Oasys   (2005~2009): 4 years
Korg M3      (2007~201?): ? years (going to be 3 years)

Yamaha
Motif   : 2001
Motif ES: 2003
Motif XS: 2007

My bet is it going to be announced on NAMM 2012.

I'm still waiting when it will accept at least 8GB RAM (battery option would be great too), or even better, just to use a 32GB SDD on it (you can get a 32GB for just $94 today, imagine in 2012).

Now imagine a M4 with SSD, lets hope Korg read this one.

[magikroom]

There have been more people buy and return Fantom G's than any other other workstation since the Alesis Fusion.

Wow.....it's that bad?

Hey, as a Fusion owner, I take great offense...lol...was a pile of crap when it came out, Hollow Sun sorted it out...anyway, back to the topic. I have an M3 with Radias board fitted and have had the fantom x6 (but still have the Xa)...didn't go for the G because it was just sample based with no ability to do VA or physical mod. In terms of Yamaha stuff, I still have the an1x and had an ex5...that's where Yamaha lost out...the ex5 was a nod in the right direction of where modern synths/workstations should go.

Of course, sound is subjective...can one machine do all? I can only say...not for me. The M3 is beautiful, inspirational, but also infuriating at the same time. The display of the yamaha hasn't changed for years and roland re-hash the same samples over and over again.

But through all the synths i've owned (there has been a lot) i would love for a new gen ex5, with the display and control of the G and the va from korg. .alesis were on the right track with the fusion...but time will tell.

[gnbutt]

My M3-73 does everything I want it to do, plain and simple. I can easily afford an OASYS 88 but this keyboard was more of a myriad of complexities for me, I am a player, not a programmer. The M3-73 is a pleasure to play and for a simpleton like myself, it''s the best keyboard I have had so far. There are many on this forum far more into music, programming, sequencing, recording etc. I thoroughly enjoy playing the M3 and all of it's features. It rates A1 in my books !
GNB