Ciao
Claudio
New PA3X Styles
Moderators: Sharp, X-Trade, Pepperpotty, karmathanever
-
karmathanever
- Platinum Member
- Posts: 10488
- Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2004 5:07 am
This is great Korg - thanks - can't wait to try them out.
(By the way - have you seen all the free styles for the Tyros from Yamaha???
No, neither have I.... )
We are lucky...
Pete
(By the way - have you seen all the free styles for the Tyros from Yamaha???
No, neither have I.... )
We are lucky...
Pete
PA4X-76, Karma, WaveDrum GE, Fantom 8 EX
------------------------------------------------------------------
## Please stay safe ##
...and play lots of music
------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------
## Please stay safe ##
...and play lots of music
------------------------------------------------------------------
I think it is wonderful that Korg supplies us with free styles every once in a while. I have never received any free styles with my previous keyboards. They had to all be purchased or made. I would imagine that Korg is trying to appeal to the younger crowd with the last 3 releases. I myself am considered to be a old fart and would like to see some country and Doo Woop and Rock styles from the late 50's. I would imagine there is a lot of us out there. The Last 3releases I did not use any,as I do not play that type of music. Korg has to do what it has to do and I appreciate it. This is not intended as a slam just a suggestion .RC
Thanks for posting the link.
The style "Classic Rock" from this bank seems odd. Is it meant to go to a particular song?
In general, which songs are these styles meant to go with? It might be useful if people would post them.
For instance, "Final Rock" is clearly Europe's "Final Countdown" and "Alabama Rock" is "Sweet Home Alabama".
Thanks!
The style "Classic Rock" from this bank seems odd. Is it meant to go to a particular song?
In general, which songs are these styles meant to go with? It might be useful if people would post them.
For instance, "Final Rock" is clearly Europe's "Final Countdown" and "Alabama Rock" is "Sweet Home Alabama".
Thanks!
Hi,
again great stuff from Korg. Thanks for those free styles.
@RC: in vol.22 I see a lot of old stuff (Elton John, Beatles, old rock classics).
Are you sure this will appeal only to young generation?
Making everyone happy is difficult, I would like to have myself 10/12
styles for personal use, but honestly I see in the last releases
a good variety o different genres, don't you?
@Dmkeys: I think it is a style to play two (quite very) different songs.
This makes it a little strange. My idea is:
Smoke on the water (Deep Purple)
Satisfaction (Rolling Stones)
but if everyone has a better idea please advise, thanks.
again great stuff from Korg. Thanks for those free styles.
@RC: in vol.22 I see a lot of old stuff (Elton John, Beatles, old rock classics).
Are you sure this will appeal only to young generation?
Making everyone happy is difficult, I would like to have myself 10/12
styles for personal use, but honestly I see in the last releases
a good variety o different genres, don't you?
@Dmkeys: I think it is a style to play two (quite very) different songs.
This makes it a little strange. My idea is:
Smoke on the water (Deep Purple)
Satisfaction (Rolling Stones)
but if everyone has a better idea please advise, thanks.
Hi Pippuzzo. As I said before I am happy that Korg supplies us with these styles. In my post I said I would like to see more styles from the 1950's era, This would have been as rock was starting. The Beatles did not break out until 1963 and Elton John was not around in the 50's.I would consider that latest releases to be more of a hard rock. Again I want to say I am happy with Korg and my post was only a suggestion. As I see and hear it there were no 50's styles or 50's country styles in the last 3 releases.
-
karmathanever
- Platinum Member
- Posts: 10488
- Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2004 5:07 am
Hi Guys
Please don't interpret this as an "argument" - just my point of view and suggestion.
A "style" is exactly that - designed for use with a "style" of music.
I (personally) can't see the point in having styles to create exact authentic backings for specific songs - they are so hard to create and get right and mostly a single style will not be enough as most songs have many variations, breaks, accents, verse/chorus/bridge/drum fills, some tempo change and groove change - IMHO, MIDI or audio is the best solution for completely authentic backings (copies) of originals and all that can be set up in the PA3X!!!
As an example, I love that Korg have designed some of their styles to suit "Beatles" style of music and that some have clever intros/endings that are subtly changed but not enough that you could not use it for specific songs.
Unless you are playing songs like "Achy Breaky Heart" requiring hardly any variation in backing, no bridge, a chorus and verse which are almost the same (and only 2 chords!! ) then it is near impossible to have a style which will enable authentic backing of specific songs.
Suggestion (i.e. perform your own arrangements of originals - so much more fun)
Try simple modifications to existing styles - even just tempo changes e.g. some of the fast jazz styles are absolutely fantastic when slowed down. Even just changing the instrumentation (or muting all/some of) the ACCs, changing the drum mapping or the kit.
These are so super simple to do and can open up a world of style variations you hadn't realised you had.
Double pressing FILLs to give you a new "VAR" - this can also work with INTROs and ENDINGs depending on how the style is created.
Just some thoughts - that's all.
Pete
Please don't interpret this as an "argument" - just my point of view and suggestion.
A "style" is exactly that - designed for use with a "style" of music.
I (personally) can't see the point in having styles to create exact authentic backings for specific songs - they are so hard to create and get right and mostly a single style will not be enough as most songs have many variations, breaks, accents, verse/chorus/bridge/drum fills, some tempo change and groove change - IMHO, MIDI or audio is the best solution for completely authentic backings (copies) of originals and all that can be set up in the PA3X!!!
As an example, I love that Korg have designed some of their styles to suit "Beatles" style of music and that some have clever intros/endings that are subtly changed but not enough that you could not use it for specific songs.
Unless you are playing songs like "Achy Breaky Heart" requiring hardly any variation in backing, no bridge, a chorus and verse which are almost the same (and only 2 chords!!
) then it is near impossible to have a style which will enable authentic backing of specific songs.Suggestion (i.e. perform your own arrangements of originals - so much more fun)
Try simple modifications to existing styles - even just tempo changes e.g. some of the fast jazz styles are absolutely fantastic when slowed down. Even just changing the instrumentation (or muting all/some of) the ACCs, changing the drum mapping or the kit.
These are so super simple to do and can open up a world of style variations you hadn't realised you had.
Double pressing FILLs to give you a new "VAR" - this can also work with INTROs and ENDINGs depending on how the style is created.
Just some thoughts - that's all.
Pete
Last edited by karmathanever on Tue Aug 12, 2014 4:13 am, edited 1 time in total.
PA4X-76, Karma, WaveDrum GE, Fantom 8 EX
------------------------------------------------------------------
## Please stay safe ##
...and play lots of music
------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------
## Please stay safe ##
...and play lots of music
------------------------------------------------------------------
Pete,
I see your point... On the flip side, some of these styles are clearly based on specific songs. Knowing that helps, both so that one doesn't choose a style that's obviously a specific song, to use as a more generic style. Secondly, knowing which songs these are based off of, enables me to learn those tunes and offer those as options for wedding clients who want some contemporary songs. For example, I'd never use Happy or Gangnam Style (from Vols. 18 and 20) for any songs other than the originals, as they are too song specific.
If anyone can ID the pop songs covered in Vo.l 21, I'd appreciate it.
Thanks!
I see your point... On the flip side, some of these styles are clearly based on specific songs. Knowing that helps, both so that one doesn't choose a style that's obviously a specific song, to use as a more generic style. Secondly, knowing which songs these are based off of, enables me to learn those tunes and offer those as options for wedding clients who want some contemporary songs. For example, I'd never use Happy or Gangnam Style (from Vols. 18 and 20) for any songs other than the originals, as they are too song specific.
If anyone can ID the pop songs covered in Vo.l 21, I'd appreciate it.
Thanks!
-
Dikikeys
As long as your arranger has a Mark/Jump system for the SMF's, I'd say there really isn't any particular advantage to doing the song they are based on with a 'songstyle'.
Essentially, most of us that use songstyles do so so we have a fair degree of control over the song structure... If we want an extra chorus, or another solo, or skip a section, or repeat back to the first verse because our crowd didn't get up to dance until the last chorus, whatever.
But the Marker system in SMF's allows you to do exactly that, and frees up your LH to play keyboards in a more traditional live band style. Not only that, but you gain the far more complex leading basslines (I hate arranger basslines... they never move TOWARDS the next chord, because they don't know it until you play it!) and passing chords and leading chords that SMF's can do.
If you are doing arranger play when you might be better served with an SMF, simply so you can jack around with the structure, take a long hard look at the Marker system for SMF's...
Essentially, most of us that use songstyles do so so we have a fair degree of control over the song structure... If we want an extra chorus, or another solo, or skip a section, or repeat back to the first verse because our crowd didn't get up to dance until the last chorus, whatever.
But the Marker system in SMF's allows you to do exactly that, and frees up your LH to play keyboards in a more traditional live band style. Not only that, but you gain the far more complex leading basslines (I hate arranger basslines... they never move TOWARDS the next chord, because they don't know it until you play it!) and passing chords and leading chords that SMF's can do.
If you are doing arranger play when you might be better served with an SMF, simply so you can jack around with the structure, take a long hard look at the Marker system for SMF's...
Hi,
have to say that I like song styles.
When I have one I always prefere use them instead of SMF.
That's why also I decided to buy an arranger instead of a simple song player ...
Playing over SMF or MP3 is not of big interest to me (even if of course I do this when needed), since I don't have full control over harmony, changes, fills and the like. It's more demanding but repay giving more satisfaction. In this respect I really like the unique feature of Chord Sequencer, since allow me to free hands for improvvisations or save me to play fast or repetitive chord progressions. This feature is really great (apart that the progression cannot be saved) and was the step to get me into Pa3X after my beloved Pa1X and one Tyros.
So even if I perfectly agree about some limitations (especially for bass lines and complex arrangements) of styles posted above, this is my point.
It coule be nice everyone commenting about this with each own experience.
Cheers.
have to say that I like song styles.
When I have one I always prefere use them instead of SMF.
That's why also I decided to buy an arranger instead of a simple song player ...
Playing over SMF or MP3 is not of big interest to me (even if of course I do this when needed), since I don't have full control over harmony, changes, fills and the like. It's more demanding but repay giving more satisfaction. In this respect I really like the unique feature of Chord Sequencer, since allow me to free hands for improvvisations or save me to play fast or repetitive chord progressions. This feature is really great (apart that the progression cannot be saved) and was the step to get me into Pa3X after my beloved Pa1X and one Tyros.
So even if I perfectly agree about some limitations (especially for bass lines and complex arrangements) of styles posted above, this is my point.
It coule be nice everyone commenting about this with each own experience.
Cheers.
-
MadrasGiaguari
- Full Member
- Posts: 200
- Joined: Sun Aug 28, 2005 3:28 pm
- Location: Italy
Hi Pete,
I personally agree 100% with your concept.
To say even little more, every time we get a new style we get a new chanche to make or modify a style.
In facts the simplest and pleasant way to do this is what you suggested, wich I'm doing since the old i3 (and then with i30, Pa1x, and now Pa3x).
Another easy way, little more creative, is to make a new style starting
from an existing one and CHANGING some of the track by using the style edit functions (copy from one style to another; deleting a track; ecc).
More, to silent a track in one or two variation (or 3 if you want) only (and not the track in all variation = mute), sometimes gives interesting results.
To do that, just go in style edit mode and work with the Expression knob in the variation where you want to mute (or lower, or boost) that particular track.
Sometimes from a "fast" style, with minor changes one can get to a complete different result. And with Korg you do not need to know how to real time or step by step edit.
Thank you
I personally agree 100% with your concept.
To say even little more, every time we get a new style we get a new chanche to make or modify a style.
In facts the simplest and pleasant way to do this is what you suggested, wich I'm doing since the old i3 (and then with i30, Pa1x, and now Pa3x).
Another easy way, little more creative, is to make a new style starting
from an existing one and CHANGING some of the track by using the style edit functions (copy from one style to another; deleting a track; ecc).
More, to silent a track in one or two variation (or 3 if you want) only (and not the track in all variation = mute), sometimes gives interesting results.
To do that, just go in style edit mode and work with the Expression knob in the variation where you want to mute (or lower, or boost) that particular track.
Sometimes from a "fast" style, with minor changes one can get to a complete different result. And with Korg you do not need to know how to real time or step by step edit.
Thank you
-
Dikikeys
I'd say that, if you are the kind of player that DOES have the skills and chops to reharmonize a piece (deliberately! accidents don't count! 
) every time you play it, sure, a songstyle gives you a lot more flexibility.
But, let's face it, the song itself usually defines the chords, and the style has only a mere 4 fills to chose from, whereas an SMF, every fill can be different in some way. And most arranger players are happy enough just to get the changes right in the first place, let alone throw in a bunch of tasty (or not!) altered chords and substitutions...
Perhaps for jazz, the songstyle is a better solution, mind you, jazz players will want to get as far away from a rote playback of the record version, so a songstyle wouldn't really be of much use. Not to mention that most songstyles are for well-known pop and dance hits, and your audience isn't really going to want you to go all Keith Jarrett on it!
Overall, I don't think I use a single songstyle in my song list. If I need something close to the record groove and feel, I'll use an SMF every time. But that doesn't, thanks to the Mark/Jump feature, mean I'm giving up on structural control of the song, and, just like a REAL keyboard player, I now have two independent hands that can substitute all I want to (or can get away with!) and my rhythm section won't go crazy weird trying to follow it!
A lot of substitution in real music doesn't involve EVERYONE in the entire band all following the substitutions slavishly. Sadly, an arranger's does... Truth is, in real life, it's often just one or two of you. I personally feel the SMF, if well programmed, gives you MORE playing flexibility than a songstyle.
But that's just me... everybody has a different style!
) every time you play it, sure, a songstyle gives you a lot more flexibility.But, let's face it, the song itself usually defines the chords, and the style has only a mere 4 fills to chose from, whereas an SMF, every fill can be different in some way. And most arranger players are happy enough just to get the changes right in the first place, let alone throw in a bunch of tasty (or not!) altered chords and substitutions...
Perhaps for jazz, the songstyle is a better solution, mind you, jazz players will want to get as far away from a rote playback of the record version, so a songstyle wouldn't really be of much use. Not to mention that most songstyles are for well-known pop and dance hits, and your audience isn't really going to want you to go all Keith Jarrett on it!
Overall, I don't think I use a single songstyle in my song list. If I need something close to the record groove and feel, I'll use an SMF every time. But that doesn't, thanks to the Mark/Jump feature, mean I'm giving up on structural control of the song, and, just like a REAL keyboard player, I now have two independent hands that can substitute all I want to (or can get away with!) and my rhythm section won't go crazy weird trying to follow it!
A lot of substitution in real music doesn't involve EVERYONE in the entire band all following the substitutions slavishly. Sadly, an arranger's does... Truth is, in real life, it's often just one or two of you. I personally feel the SMF, if well programmed, gives you MORE playing flexibility than a songstyle.
But that's just me... everybody has a different style!