Korg Forums

Hi All!

OK, so please bear with me, I am NOT talking about sound quality, lossy compression, sample set size, or anything like that. Just wanted to know if the basic architecture is the same with respect to patch structure, elements, etc.

Basically if that part of an M3 user's knowledge can be trasfered or if there is something to adjust. I do understand the manual of both the M3 and OASYS are available, but I figured I would ask you guys for a general overview.

Just to give you some background, I bought an M3 a little less than 2 years ago but I have barely touched it due to health issues that I am still struggling with (with vast improvements, but still not there yet). Because of this my M3 is sitting there, largely undiscovered... I know I´m selling it and getting a KRONOS, and just wondering if I could start studying its engine a bit or if it will be a waste of time.

I also understand the sequencer is largely the same (albeit the M3 has piano roll...), and I would think the sampling capabilities are somewhat different, taking the audio tracks in the sequencer as an example.

So, I already know what is largely different (namely, 8 out of 9 engines, set list mode, etc.), just wondering how similar they are in the aspects where it makes any sense to compare them, and just for trying to learn a bit more ahead of time (not to start a flame war about differences in quality, or the fact that you can learn about the newest flagship by downloading a 5 year old manual, or... you get the idea)

Thanks in advance for your time and expertise,
Juan Miguel

...

Sina172 wrote: But yes, the parameters in HD-1 and EDS-1 are the same. HD-1 adds quite a few other elements but I won't spoil that for you so you can be surprised.

Have fun!

Sina

So, I got what I wanted, to learn beforehand, and I also have a new sparkled interest for surprises. Nice!

Thanks, Sina!

Sina172 wrote: ... But yes, the parameters in HD-1 and EDS-1 are the same. HD-1 adds quite a few other elements but I won't spoil that for you so you can be surprised.

Have fun!

Sina

Well that gets interesting! If parameters of both engines are the same why it is not possible convert programs - which obviously in general must be set of parameters? Is this a restriction set by korg to avoid program sharing between different price range instruments?

gjvti wrote:

Sina172 wrote: ... But yes, the parameters in HD-1 and EDS-1 are the same. HD-1 adds quite a few other elements but I won't spoil that for you so you can be surprised.

Have fun!

Sina

Well that gets interesting! If parameters of both engines are the same why it is not possible convert programs - which obviously in general must be set of parameters? Is this a restriction set by korg to avoid program sharing between different price range instruments?

I think the problem is that the Oasys/Kronos PCG files also contains data from EXi:s etc thats not compatible with M3 and the second minor problem is that none of the actual samples inside the machines are the same., so even if you could perhaps someway convert them, none of them would sound anywhere near the original sound. Not to mention the effect architecture is different. just my guess

...

Well, I know the M3 samples are compressed while the Oasys are not, they are still the same samples. Especially with the expanded version of the M3, most if not all of the HD-1 samples are present in the M3 in a compressed form. With the exception of the pianos, of course. I also read on this forum (don't know if it's true) if you use the digital outs from the M3 the sound quality is on par with the Oasys. Don't want to start anything here, just gathering info.

drama1 wrote:Well, I know the M3 samples are compressed while the Oasys are not, they are still the same samples. Especially with the expanded version of the M3, most if not all of the HD-1 samples are present in the M3 in a compressed form.

This can't be right? i know some are but all? Any comment from korg?

Well if you look at the two Brass & Woodwind libraries for the M3 (EX-USB-PCM01/02) they are 256MB total when EXPANDED to 16-bit. The EX3 Brass & Woodwind on the OASYS is > 700MB, so it's nearly 3 times the size.

From the manual on the EX3: For each instrument, long samples were taken at a great number of points, giving you extremely nuanced and realistic sounds. Individually played notes can be richly expressive, thanks to the included samples of idiomatic dynamics, trills, falls, growls, and staccato articulations.

The M3 library has to be compromised in some way(s).

Also, there's a basic Rhodes on the OASYS that I always liked as it's tone was good and it was very playable. That same sound on the M3 never sounded nor was as playable. I never understood why that should be, but came to sense there were more differences under the hood between the two engines.

Busch.

drama1 wrote:Well, I know the M3 samples are compressed while the Oasys are not, they are still the same samples. Especially with the expanded version of the M3, most if not all of the HD-1 samples are present in the M3 in a compressed form.

The M3's ROM samples are similar to the OASYS ROM samples; looking at the "Voice Name Lists" for both instruments should confirm this. (Note that I'm talking about the ROM only, not any EXs.) There are probably a few sounds which are different; I don't have time to check right now. As previously noted, the M3 uses compression, wheras the OASYS uses only lossless compression. IIRC, some of the similar samples were also edited to fit within the smaller memory size of the M3.

drama1 wrote:I also read on this forum (don't know if it's true) if you use the digital outs from the M3 the sound quality is on par with the Oasys.

The M3's sound quality is quite good, but I don't see how using the digital outputs would affect the differences in sample compression, internal bit depth, interpolation, etc.

Hope this helps,

Dan

danatkorg wrote:The M3's ROM samples are similar to the OASYS ROM samples; looking at the "Voice Name Lists" for both instruments should confirm this. (Note that I'm talking about the ROM only, not any EXs.) There are probably a few sounds which are different; I don't have time to check right now. As previously noted, the M3 uses compression, wheras the OASYS uses only lossless compression. IIRC, some of the similar samples were also edited to fit within the smaller memory size of the M3.

If the OASYS/Kronos contain all (or nearly all) the same multisamples that are in the M3 (and then presumably also all the multisamples that are in the M50 and Microstation, which I believe are subsets of the M3 multisamples), then is there any way for M3/M50/Microstation owners to transfer programs and combis (or even just programs) from their units into a Kronos? I understand they would not sound identical, since the versions of the multisamples in the M3/M50/Microstation are "lower end" versions of the multisamples in the OASYS/Kronos (compressed, and possibly with more stretching and looping), but it would be a nice shortcut to quickly get the same basic sounds you like to use if you upgrade from one of those to a Kronos.

Scott wrote:If the OASYS/Kronos contain all (or nearly all) the same multisamples that are in the M3 (and then presumably also all the multisamples that are in the M50 and Microstation, which I believe are subsets of the M3 multisamples), then is there any way for M3/M50/Microstation owners to transfer programs and combis (or even just programs) from their units into a Kronos? I understand they would not sound identical, since the versions of the multisamples in the M3/M50/Microstation are "lower end" versions of the multisamples in the OASYS/Kronos (compressed, and possibly with more stretching and looping), but it would be a nice shortcut to quickly get the same basic sounds you like to use if you upgrade from one of those to a Kronos.

That would be a great feature, I agree! I'd like to see more support for importing sounds in general. Currently, OASYS, Akai S1000, DX7, and SoundFont2 sounds can be imported.