Comparing PA3x and Tyros 4 learning process

[Beemer]

I have read several "PA3x versus Tyros 4" posts where the writer says that the learning process is more difficult on the PA3x. Could someone with experience of both say if and why this might be is true?

"Tyros 4 is easier out-of-the-box" was one comment but without explanation.

Ian

[karmathanever]

It has really all been said many times before but I find it hard to "compare" these (having owned both) as they are really in different leagues and markets.

Yamaha just can't ever seem to get out of the "home keyboard" market - if they did, then we'd have a 76-note Tyros option plus all the features of a PA3X.

Hey - that's just my personal experience and opinion.

Tyros is a great arranger keyboard in the home keyboard market.

Pete

P.S.... the PA3X is very very playable straight out of the box.

[Sharp]

My experience from talking with users here in my home country is that the initial experience is the same with regards to quickly getting going for the first time, calling up styles, sounds, and playing the keyboard.

So the in-store experience is much the same. It's not until you start exploring and digging in deeper do people make the decision of which keyboard they end up buying, or in some cases, people have already bought it and are not happy.

The main factor in their decision, unknowing to them, is their own ability.

Think of Alice going down the Rabbit hole. For the Tyros, you can very quickly find the bottom and go no further. For the PA3X, it's a question of where does the Rabbit hole end because the keyboard is so deep.

Some people prefer the easier option, some people prefer the challenge and opportunity to go deeper.

So bottom line, from a learning curve, the Tyros is easier but greatly limited, where the PaX3 is just as easy initially, but as you grow and dig deeper and deeper into more advanced functions, it gets harder and harder. But your learning and doing new things which is very exciting.

Regards
Sharp.

[Shahin]

Its simple Ian !

Pa3x has more features so mastering the keyboard takes longer, just look at the size of the user manual between the two, judge it yourself

[DonM]

I have extensive experience with both systems, and AFTER you learn the operating systems, Korg is way better, in my opinion. There are certain things you just can't save globally on Yamaha, particularly when it comes to the vocal processing.
Both systems have their good and bad points, but overall Korg lets you do more, and do it easier.
However, it is far easier to audition styles on the Yamaha, because they play directly from a USB stick. Of course with Korg, you have to load them into User spots to even try them.
DonM

[Beemer]

My thanks to all that replied. Its strange how reading about, seeing or hearing a single feature can sway a purchase decision. Its first one way then its the other!

I'm still focussed on the PA3x but no doubt I will post more questions hear and do appreciate all your replies.

Ian

[Dikikeys]

Korg make the initial stuff a lot harder than most. Just getting your head around the system can be baffling to users of simpler arrangers.

That nearly everything can be overwritten to a bewildering range of options also makes for a confusing first few weeks with a Korg. There's no ROM to speak of. One errant write operation, and all the factory Performances might sound wrong because you overwrote a Factory sound with an edit without knowing it..!

Yes, the rabbit hole goes deeper than most. But not everyone wants to hit bottom! A lot buy the arranger simply for the great styles and sounds. It's a shame Korg can't figure out a two tier OS, making basic stuff as easy as the others, while still allowing power users all the options they want.

A simple 'Beginner/Advanced' switch on the Main page, restricting users to simple non-ROM saves, and barebones operation in Simple Mode might go a long way to taking the initial sting out of getting around on a PA3X...

[pippuzzo]

Hi,

sorry to disagree with Dikikeys: factory styles, factory pad and factory sounds are all protected by default at every start-up.

So "one errant write operation" cannot do any damage as long as you do not unprotect your factory data.
The time you unprotect it, and you do this unchecking a very clear "factory xxx protect" parameter, than it is obvious that you can do damages with errant write operations. The manual clearly says that's for expert only.

A convenient internal factory reset utility has been also added to fix any trouble.

This only to clarify that it's not easy to make such a mistake and that the basic protection it is granted for non experts. Expert on their side, must knowingly unprotect and act as ... expert, right?

Going back to the topic: the Pa3X has much more features than Tyros so it is quite obvious that it is more difficult too. It is a price to pay, even if I'm sure that some issues, that looks unnaturally complex, can be addressed with simpler/straighforward solutions, as we can see in Pa600 for example.
We hope Korg planning soon to add them also in Pa3X, that's by far the flagship but can greatly benefit from such simplification, very usable for non-expert (typical pa600 user) and expert (typical pa3x user)...

Just my 0,001%.

Cheers

[RC]

.

A simple 'Beginner/Advanced' switch on the Main page, restricting users to simple non-ROM saves, and barebones operation in Simple Mode might go a long way to taking the initial sting out of getting around on a PA3X...

I would ditto that.

[karmathanever]

The first 70 or so pages of the manual and also the video manual is the best quick start guide for those who really want out-of-the-box fast action.
Just switch on the keyboard and work through those pages - you will become familiar with the keyboard and its related terminology - I would be surprised if it takes more than an hour.

The PA3X is really simple enough to anyone who knows the concepts of an arranger keyboard.
However, I will say that if you are totally new to arranger keyboards then you will need to cover the basics first and that would apply to Korg, Yamaha, Casio or whatever.

I have a close friend in his 80's who plays his PA as a home keyboard and mostly "out-of-the-box" - he has never indicated that he needed a "simpler" interface and manages it brilliantly - even shown me some things!!

If anyone REALLY finds the PA3X daunting then they really have the wrong keyboard and a more basic keyboard would probably suit.

It seems that some do not "plan" or research before buying these keyboards. If you don't think you should have to research then you should accept the so-called complexities and learning curve required to get the most out of your purchase.

Korg PA3X is a PROFESSIONAL arranger - it has to have the flexibility and complexities to be in that market.

Patience is essential in experimenting and learning the PA3X - but the rewards are outstanding.

Pete

[Thoraldus]

The first 70 or so pages of the manual and also the video manual is the best quick start guide for those who really want out-of-the-box fast action.
Just switch on the keyboard and work through those pages - you will become familiar with the keyboard and its related terminology - I would be surprised if it takes more than an hour.

The PA3X is really simple enough to anyone who knows the concepts of an arranger keyboard.
However, I will say that if you are totally new to arranger keyboards then you will need to cover the basics first and that would apply to Korg, Yamaha, Casio or whatever.

I have a close friend in his 80's who plays his PA as a home keyboard and mostly "out-of-the-box" - he has never indicated that he needed a "simpler" interface and manages it brilliantly - even shown me some things!!

If anyone REALLY finds the PA3X daunting then they really have the wrong keyboard and a more basic keyboard would probably suit.

It seems that some do not "plan" or research before buying these keyboards. If you don't think you should have to research then you should accept the so-called complexities and learning curve required to get the most out of your purchase.

Korg PA3X is a PROFESSIONAL arranger - it has to have the flexibility and complexities to be in that market.

Patience is essential in experimenting and learning the PA3X - but the rewards are outstanding.

Pete

+1000 !!!

[RC]

[



If anyone REALLY finds the PA3X daunting then they really have the wrong keyboard and a more basic keyboard would probably suit.

It seems that some do not "plan" or research before buying these keyboards. If you don't think you should have to research then you should accept the so-called complexities and learning curve required to get the most out of your purchase.

Pete.
Let me say this in response to your statements. I am 71 yrs old and have owned technics keyboards since they first came out and I venture to say that I owned at least six of them over the years. I was very familiar with these keyboards as I imagine you are with Korg. Because Technics quit making keyboards I did do research. From the research done I thought the Pa3x was the closest to the Technics. I did read the quick reference guide and did play this keyboard out of the box. Also in the quick reference guide there is a section on sequencing. If you think that sequencing is easy on the korg you apparently have never used a technics. I could go on and explain why the technics is easier and more friendly than the Korg. Since we are expressing our opinions I would say this with the Korg you are constantly pressing buttons. If you sequence a song and put it song book you cannot tell what style you are using because it does not light up. If you want the keyboard to auto play the chords when you press them you can't.
As in my other posts I have had trouble with this keyboard. My 63 songs that I did sequence have diappeared . I don't know where they went but now I have to do them over again. I know I should have backed then up and it is my fault.
I am sure you and all of the owners of any keyboard can find fault with some of thier functions as the posts in this forum and other forums indicate,

I would say that I could do almost everything the technics was designed to do,but I would never insinuate to another member because they bought one they were not experienced enough to own.

I don't want to get in any Peeing contests but I find it highly insulting that you can say people who have problems did not research before buying.

Rc Bellotti



Pete :D[/quote]

[Fransman]

have owned technics keyboards since they first came out and I venture to say that I owned at least six of them over the years. I was very familiar with these keyboards [...]
I could go on and explain why the technics is easier and more friendly than the Korg.

Not really a fair comparison; you're an expert in Technics & a newbee in Korg.
Take your time and you will definitely start appreciating (loving!) the Korg.

I do! (and I've played Technics also for about 15 years).

[Beemer]

I see that my original post has sparked some lively discussion

I'll describe my own experience not with Technics, Korg or Yamaha but with my Kurzweil K1200 Pro 88 synth/master keyboard:

I live in Scotland and when in 1988 I wanted something more exciting than my piano I read about Kurzweil synthesisers in Sound On Sound magazine. I pestered the UK importer to sell to me the first available K1200. As I was 450 miles from the imported I wanted to at least read the manual and trust that according to the seller "if its good enough for Stevie Wonder it should be more than enough for me!"

So then I studied the manual that was sent to me and found it logical and apparently simple to absorb. I duly ordered the synth and was pleased with its physical design although its 35kG weight shocked me!

So after connecting to my Marantz Class A Hi-Fi amp and Acoustic Research Speakers I marvelled at the 162 multitimbral sampled sounds and programmable wavetable sounds.

At first I enjoyed making new sounds by layering up to four sounds after altering each waveshape using the Oscilators, amplitude envelope, amplitude modulator and frequency modulator. Then there was velocity adjustment, and aftertouch pressure settings.

Now if this was to be done then it had to be done using 13 buttons and a two line 32-character LCD. Although the 152 page manual was good to describe each function, multiple depth menu system was not intuitive to use. Every time I made a new programming change I had to refer back to the paper manual otherwise I would get lost in the depth of the menus.

To sequence I bought a Roland MC50 sequencer which had a floppy disk. Unfortunately the Kurzweil sound program numbers (not GM) are one digit less than Roland so I needed to alter each sound number when editing a sequence.

Soon I became lazy and gave up any programming. The fact that their was no accompaniment made me buy an Alesis drum machine. However this was a pain to program and it did not have any brush sounds.

One funny incident was when I was playing around with the synth's wave shapes and after playing some of the lowest notes of the 88 keys I saw white smoke rising from my expensive Marantz Special Edition Hi-FI amp! The power level of some of the waveshapes I was trying fried the output transistors.

So then I hope the above gives an insight as to my interest in "learning curves" (I don't actually like that term) of the PA3x and Tyros4. Its not always the initial study and out-of-the-box experience, but how happy the user is long term using and programming the keyboard.

Of course I still have the K1200 and being 88 keys with Lower, Middle and Upper regions, this I feel will be an excellent Master Keyboard for midi connection to a PA3x. I'll talk about this in another thread.

If you got this far thanks for reading!

Ian

[Dikikeys]

You have to take into consideration that most arranger buyers aren't power users! Just because the power users tend to hang out here, doesn't mean that the vast number that buy any brand of arranger, let alone Korg, are!

And, I still maintain, the large majority of arranger users have very little time in the store to find out whether something is easy to use in the long term or not. They buy them because of the styles and sounds they can quickly get to. I dare say most of even the power users here, who may have found some operational problem or a plain bug, or something they would prefer done differently DIDN'T find that out until long after they had bought it and taken it home!

And I also feel you are being a bit elitist to simply say... Don't buy one UNLESS you are a power user! Just because the rabbit hole goes down a long way shouldn't mean that those who simply want to hang out at the top of the hole (as most arranger users do) should have to come to grips with an OS that makes doing even the simplest of things rather more complicated than the average arranger.

This is where I feel Korg could do a much better job in making the BASIC day to day operations a lot simpler, easier, and more intuitive. Don't make anything you can do today missing, just put it out of sight, away from harm and inadvertent use. Things like the default safeties... You should REALLY have to go through some sort of 'Advanced' dialog before those are even accessible.

Guys, I'm not coming at this from a noob perspective. I'm trying to articulate this from the viewpoint of the average user. I don't find large complicated OS's threatening (my K2500S makes the PA3X look like a tinker toy!), but I think I'm good at figuring out what the average guy can grok, and what he can't. Sometimes it's hard for the 'experts' to look at things from a less experienced viewpoint. I only know what my friends call me up and ask me about!

Trust me, those ROM 'safeties' aren't that safe! The average user, coming to a Korg from far simpler arrangers, doesn't have your expertize and experience to fall back on. From his perspective, he just walked into a NASA briefing!

I simply feel Korg could make a two tier OS and better serve the less experienced user, who may love the sounds and styles, but faces a long climb uphill to achieve the level of competence he had with his other brands...

My phone would be ringing a lot less!