3 more months till winter NAMM, half a year till Frankfurter messe..
How big is the chance that we will see a PA4x at either of them?
What are or expectations for PA4x?
And what are or needs for PA4x?
3 more months
Moderators: Sharp, X-Trade, Pepperpotty, karmathanever
-
karmathanever
- Platinum Member
- Posts: 10482
- Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2004 5:07 am
I need (my wife needs) it to be very very very cheapAnd what are or needs for PA4x?
But seriously, I can't think of anything other than a decent tonewheel organ with rotary FX and NO preset "V-organs"
Improved drums would be nice but that applies to every keyboard I've played or heard so far....
Other than that, PA3X is pretty cool for me as it is...
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
------------------------------------------------------------------
Improved drums,
bigger screen like an tyros.
Bigger memory atleast 1gig, streaming from HD.
Som nice wah wah / crybaby efx. and guitars
Hope santa will be good.
bigger screen like an tyros.
Bigger memory atleast 1gig, streaming from HD.
Som nice wah wah / crybaby efx. and guitars
Hope santa will be good.
Last edited by fResH_ on Fri Oct 17, 2014 10:00 am, edited 1 time in total.
// Matthew
"Its not how good you are, its the impression you leave behind."
"Its not how good you are, its the impression you leave behind."
Well this just means that they need to add something sensational to pa4x if they want to sell many of them..karmathanever wrote:I need (my wife needs) it to be very very very cheapAnd what are or needs for PA4x?
But seriously, I can't think of anything other than a decent tonewheel organ with rotary FX and NO preset "V-organs"
Improved drums would be nice but that applies to every keyboard I've played or heard so far....
Other than that, PA3X is pretty cool for me as it is...
Pete
ec5
pa3x need to be able to save a new ec5 pedalboard with each Performance and sts setting.....
bigger screen
and take 20lb off of it .. and put speaker in it
and read , PDF files
bigger screen
and take 20lb off of it .. and put speaker in it
and read , PDF files
Pa4X, Pa 1000, Pa3x, Pa800, Pa80, i3
-
karmathanever
- Platinum Member
- Posts: 10482
- Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2004 5:07 am
Maybe....usaraiya wrote:As they say, "Unleash The Kracken!" which could be the almighty Kronos with Arranger functions, wouldn't that be way cool?
But i dont think its going to happen... But maybe the Kronos 2 will have the same formfactor as the M3 and.... You could just set it behind your Pa4x... And have some software on them both to have perfect interaction..
I dont think many arranger players are wayting for all those Kronos synth engines...
Personally i just hope for a hugely upgraded Pa3x sound engine..
-
karmathanever
- Platinum Member
- Posts: 10482
- Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2004 5:07 am
......Oh!! and I forgot......
PLEASE Korg, can we have the "Backing Sequencer" returned in the PA4X OS?
(The brilliant i-series feature that was removed)
Pete
PLEASE Korg, can we have the "Backing Sequencer" returned in the PA4X OS?
(The brilliant i-series feature that was removed)
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
------------------------------------------------------------------
-
karmathanever
- Platinum Member
- Posts: 10482
- Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2004 5:07 am
Hi Sam
It was a separate "sequencer" with which you could create and manage sequences straight from styles - designed specifically for sequencing STYLEs - also you could add 8 additional tracks (as regular sequencer tracks). Korg tried to "keep" this in the PA1X (and later) but a lot of the editing features were removed. Any BS you created and "played" would directly and correctly work with the "ih" vocal harmonizer. So, if it was there today, you could play back any of your BS's and guaranteed your VH would work perfectly based on the BS chord track. All style elements used could be "track-edited" also you could take a BS and export it as an SMF. It was saved as a ".BSQ" file only for the i-series.
I questioned Korg as to why it was "removed" and they said that they didn't believe that it was used or wanted much - maybe so, but I loved it and used it a lot. If you're interested, this is an MP3 example of a pure BSQ using a mix of STYLEs, digital drum kit punched in, tempo changes and some additional solo instruments - please bear in mind that this was a work-in-progress and the sounds from the Korg i3:-
http://www.mediafire.com/listen/w7runak ... igBand.mp3
Cheers
Pete
It was a separate "sequencer" with which you could create and manage sequences straight from styles - designed specifically for sequencing STYLEs - also you could add 8 additional tracks (as regular sequencer tracks). Korg tried to "keep" this in the PA1X (and later) but a lot of the editing features were removed. Any BS you created and "played" would directly and correctly work with the "ih" vocal harmonizer. So, if it was there today, you could play back any of your BS's and guaranteed your VH would work perfectly based on the BS chord track. All style elements used could be "track-edited" also you could take a BS and export it as an SMF. It was saved as a ".BSQ" file only for the i-series.
I questioned Korg as to why it was "removed" and they said that they didn't believe that it was used or wanted much - maybe so, but I loved it and used it a lot. If you're interested, this is an MP3 example of a pure BSQ using a mix of STYLEs, digital drum kit punched in, tempo changes and some additional solo instruments - please bear in mind that this was a work-in-progress and the sounds from the Korg i3:-
http://www.mediafire.com/listen/w7runak ... igBand.mp3
Cheers
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
------------------------------------------------------------------
-
Dikikeys
That's the problem, isn't it? What little market research any of these arranger makers do is focused on their core demographic, which, to put it kindly, really only want to switch the damn thing on and noodle around! The power users, while being the ones that push for innovation, are a small fraction of the sales...
The trouble is, you can add features, you can take them away... if the demographic you actually ARE poling doesn't really care one way or the other (and probably doesn't even know the feature exists, so they don't miss it when it's gone!), how do they stay relevant to the power users?
Let's be honest... few outright amateurs and bedroom noodlers ever spend much time here, and probably make no effort to contact Korg (or any other manufacturer) about anything unless the thing won't power up. So, where do any of the manufacturers go for decent feedback about the product?
To be frank, I have a feeling it's not here (or the other arranger forums) very often! Honestly, when was the last time an arranger manufacturer contacted YOU (they have your name and address and email!) and asked you about YOUR needs? Did any of them, after bringing out a new model, come to their loyal customers and ask 'How are we doing?'.
I honestly believe that few of those designing these wonder-machines actually PLAY them at all, it's pretty obvious when core features get left off they simply don't have a clue about what we use and what we DON'T use, what we want and what we DON'T want. I'll happily put up a week's wages that the vast majority on the design team, if they play anything at all, it's synths and workstations.
That's worked out fairly well for certain areas of the Korg OS... you certainly get a more WS-like ability to create and edit voices, and have a full normal sampler experience than any other arranger, but it sure seems that the core ARRANGER functions often get slapped on or jerked off in a seemingly random progression.
It's time that the power ARRANGER users concentrated their efforts less on voices, and more on arranger features. After all, what's the point in the world's best acoustic piano simulation, if you can't play pianistically on an arranger without the chord recognition freaking out?!
Why do features get dropped? Could it be that you are not fulsome enough in your praise of the little things that turn an average arranger into a GREAT one? Maybe you don't even realize which ones they are... But take a close look at your arranger, at each of the things you like it to do. Now imagine them taking those features away. Which are the little ones that make all the difference, but might slide under the radar..?
Now write a post or two praising them! Write a post or two showing WHY they are so good. Post some music that demos that capability in a way that shows its superiority over other modes.
Maybe THAT will wake up the morons at R&D who obviously don't USE an arranger..!
Would you trust yourself in a car that was designed by someone who didn't drive?
That's what it so often appears like when it comes to each new generation of arrangers. I hate to say it, but I think I have to give props to Yamaha, who seem to mostly be able to stay out of the trap of dropping stuff to make room for the new. Most of the time, they seem to have the sensible solution of only adding stuff, without taking anything away.
For starters, this makes for a nice smooth transition going from an older one to the latest, and you rarely see the kind of angst generated by other manufacturer loyalists when a long-treasured (but unsung) feature suddenly, for no apparent reason, disappears after being on for years...
There's a lesson to be learned here, Korg.
DON'T DROP ANYTHING UNLESS SOMETHING BETTER REPLACES IT
And make sure you check here about whether WE think it's better, not those weenies in R&D! It's a little late doing it, THEN asking us whether we want it done. How about asking us FIRST? I guarantee, had you asked all here whether the MOTL arrangers didn't need Fingered3 mode any more, the answer would have saved you a TON of trouble!
The trouble is, you can add features, you can take them away... if the demographic you actually ARE poling doesn't really care one way or the other (and probably doesn't even know the feature exists, so they don't miss it when it's gone!), how do they stay relevant to the power users?
Let's be honest... few outright amateurs and bedroom noodlers ever spend much time here, and probably make no effort to contact Korg (or any other manufacturer) about anything unless the thing won't power up. So, where do any of the manufacturers go for decent feedback about the product?
To be frank, I have a feeling it's not here (or the other arranger forums) very often! Honestly, when was the last time an arranger manufacturer contacted YOU (they have your name and address and email!) and asked you about YOUR needs? Did any of them, after bringing out a new model, come to their loyal customers and ask 'How are we doing?'.
I honestly believe that few of those designing these wonder-machines actually PLAY them at all, it's pretty obvious when core features get left off they simply don't have a clue about what we use and what we DON'T use, what we want and what we DON'T want. I'll happily put up a week's wages that the vast majority on the design team, if they play anything at all, it's synths and workstations.
That's worked out fairly well for certain areas of the Korg OS... you certainly get a more WS-like ability to create and edit voices, and have a full normal sampler experience than any other arranger, but it sure seems that the core ARRANGER functions often get slapped on or jerked off in a seemingly random progression.
It's time that the power ARRANGER users concentrated their efforts less on voices, and more on arranger features. After all, what's the point in the world's best acoustic piano simulation, if you can't play pianistically on an arranger without the chord recognition freaking out?!
Why do features get dropped? Could it be that you are not fulsome enough in your praise of the little things that turn an average arranger into a GREAT one? Maybe you don't even realize which ones they are... But take a close look at your arranger, at each of the things you like it to do. Now imagine them taking those features away. Which are the little ones that make all the difference, but might slide under the radar..?
Now write a post or two praising them! Write a post or two showing WHY they are so good. Post some music that demos that capability in a way that shows its superiority over other modes.
Maybe THAT will wake up the morons at R&D who obviously don't USE an arranger..!
Would you trust yourself in a car that was designed by someone who didn't drive?
That's what it so often appears like when it comes to each new generation of arrangers. I hate to say it, but I think I have to give props to Yamaha, who seem to mostly be able to stay out of the trap of dropping stuff to make room for the new. Most of the time, they seem to have the sensible solution of only adding stuff, without taking anything away.For starters, this makes for a nice smooth transition going from an older one to the latest, and you rarely see the kind of angst generated by other manufacturer loyalists when a long-treasured (but unsung) feature suddenly, for no apparent reason, disappears after being on for years...
There's a lesson to be learned here, Korg.
DON'T DROP ANYTHING UNLESS SOMETHING BETTER REPLACES IT
And make sure you check here about whether WE think it's better, not those weenies in R&D! It's a little late doing it, THEN asking us whether we want it done. How about asking us FIRST? I guarantee, had you asked all here whether the MOTL arrangers didn't need Fingered3 mode any more, the answer would have saved you a TON of trouble!
karmathanever wrote:Hi Sam
It was a separate "sequencer" with which you could create and manage sequences straight from styles - designed specifically for sequencing STYLEs - also you could add 8 additional tracks (as regular sequencer tracks). Korg tried to "keep" this in the PA1X (and later) but a lot of the editing features were removed. Any BS you created and "played" would directly and correctly work with the "ih" vocal harmonizer. So, if it was there today, you could play back any of your BS's and guaranteed your VH would work perfectly based on the BS chord track. All style elements used could be "track-edited" also you could take a BS and export it as an SMF. It was saved as a ".BSQ" file only for the i-series.
I questioned Korg as to why it was "removed" and they said that they didn't believe that it was used or wanted much - maybe so, but I loved it and used it a lot. If you're interested, this is an MP3 example of a pure BSQ using a mix of STYLEs, digital drum kit punched in, tempo changes and some additional solo instruments - please bear in mind that this was a work-in-progress and the sounds from the Korg i3:-
http://www.mediafire.com/listen/w7runak ... igBand.mp3
Cheers
Pete
I see! Nothing I would use, but I'm sure it could've been a popular feature for those who didn't want to use external sequencers.
Sam
