Oasys update 1.3, cant believe it!

[EJ2]

THOSE OF YOU THAT HAVE A SEQUENCER ALREADY AND/OR ARE MORE FOCUSED ON EXi'S, STAY OUT OF IT! THIS DOESN"T APPLY TO YOU!!!!!

Sorry, Sina. All OASYS threads apply to all OASYS owners. It doesn't matter whether some of us record to an external sequencer, or whether some of us record live to an external hard disk recorder, or whether we use a combination of recording to OASYS sequencer, thence to OASYS hard disk recorder, thence to external gear or software, etc., etc.

I don't find the OASYS sequencer and hard disk recording all that difficult to work with. So, I fully concur with Korg's direction for the OASYS in rolling out sounds. Isn't that what an instrument is for - sounds. Frankly, I'd rather Korg continue in this manner and I really don't care how long it takes to see a top of the line sequencer in the O, if ever. Give me tools for sonic creation and creativity a la STR-1, LAC-1, and now MOD-7.

Cheers,
Eric

I never said the OASYS Sequencer is difficult to use or not usable. The Sequencer is there, but its lacking in almost EVERY aspect, it's REALLY outdated and its getting old REALLY fast!

The OASYS Sequencer is pretty much the same as whats in the Triton, but with a bigger color touchscreen, and the 16-Track Audio Recorder, minus the Cue-List Editor. The OASYS is an AMAZING Instrument overall, but that Sequencer is FAR behind and that is my ONLY gripe with it. This is THE biggest issue with the OASYS today, minus the lack of Program and Combi Banks. You can't edit ANYTHING on the fly and whle Ive grown accustomed to that, it's very frustrating at times as it disrupts my workflow now. It's a fully blown-sequencer, but the fact that there are no graphical editors (as of yet) to view everything in a graph or grid that would be MUCH less time consuming, given that you'd be able to do all this on the fly is VERY frustrating.

The MV-8800 in comparison has several graphical editors in which you can edit each individual track on the fly. Change tracks while the sequencer is playing, quantize, move notes around and transpose an entire series of notes simultaneously, and more all in a VERY intuitive graphical environment.

What does the OASYS lack? ALL of them! Your not even getting a very high resolution (its ONLY 192 PPQN!) and I've said that many times. Using KARMA which is capable of 480 PPQN Resolution is very frustrating with that resolution! The ONLY thing the OASYS has is an Event List editor which makes editing a VERY time consuming task and a chore. The lack of ANY graphical editors is a REAL let-down right now, given the HUGE Screen, and the STUDIO part of OASYS hasn't even happened, yet! That's kind of a waste if you ask me!

I'm able to put up with it because I've been doing it on the Triton in the 7 years I had it, prior to upgrading to an OASYS 88. Sequencing has ALWAYS been a HUUUGE center piece for creation for me. I don't care how incredible the Synth Engines are, if the Sequencer is lacking like the OASYS is, it's INFURIATING, given the DEEEP Synthesis capabilities of the OASYS! I REFUSE to work with that Event List Editor again!

This is why I'm in desparate need of a Roland MV-8800 where I can sequence everything there and use the OASYS as my main axe for sounds while the Roland MV will be my sequencer.

The sound quality of the OASYS ALONE is worth the price tag and I am THRILLED to have one, but that Sequencer is a HUGE let-down which ruins the whole "studio in a box" approach and I HATE that!

Thats my take.

To Jerry:

THANK YOU for replying here! The fact that you confirmed once again you guys are listening ALONE is just as exciting as getting new updates. I knew you wouldn't reply when it would happen, but I KNEW you guys were listening and that to me is priceless!

Sina

Hi Sina,
I never said that you said the sequencer was "difficult to use or not usable". My point is that this thread applies to ALL OASYS users. As Jerry pointed out, Korg does listen. Now, it is for this reason that I put my opinions forward when it comes to a debate over the pros and cons of dedicating R&D time and effort to improving the sequencer vs delivering new EXis or EXs. I will conitinue to speak up for those of us who prefer the latter. I really don't want Korg to feel that ALL of us ONLY want a new sequencer instead of new sounds. That's why I objected to your telling us to keep out of the debate. We of the latter group need to be heard too. OK.
Cheers,
Eric

[peter m. mahr]

We of the latter group need to be heard too. OK.
Cheers,
Eric

p

[Arend Groot]

The MIDI Event Editor now stays open, while you play your song and make edits (note duration, moving, velocity, etc.). No more making a single change and having to exit the window to see if your edit works. This litttle 1.3. add on seems to be getting ignored, but it is huge for workflow.

Thanks Mike for the info. Does it mean that the tracks in the event editor are changing when you change them in the Song mode ( when the event editor is open of course)?

Arend

[davidfastolfe]

Maybe Korg should establish a partnership with Sonar or any other PC based audio/video software sequencer developers. I'm not used to the Open Architecture SYStem, I used to play on a Kurzweil. I just started to look for a workstation so I read a lot here and there. I went to the music store to try out the OASYS, M3, XS8 and the fantom X.

In the sound department, the OASYS is by far and away the best instrument I have ever played. Regarding the sequencer... the worse (remember... it's just my personal opinion)

I love the OASYS, but the all-integrated workstation concept is what I'm looking for as a part time musician and composer. In that perspective, Yamaha is a well balanced instrument with a good sequencer, good sounds, etc. as well as the Korg OASYS and the M3. With a better sequencer the OASYS would have been my first choice, I would have bought it right away. The Korg OASYS has a lot of features, but nothing is perfect.

I think, based on what I've heard and read, Korg is far from having a good sequencer for handling midi and audio. I know it's not that important for some. But unfortunately it is for me.

But Korg brings new technologies and they really try to make it more user friendly. the touchscrren, the pads and the list goes on.

[billysynth1]

Wouldnt it be cheaper and easier to employ some s/w sequencer guru to develop a new sequencer from the ground up - if not for the current O then at least for the next generation of Korg workstations?

Billy

[Sina172]

..........

[Davidb]

There are, as noted, a huge number of threads about the Oasys Sequencer and almost the 90% of the Oasys users comments come to the same point, in a way or another:
The Sequencer need some inprovement.

Davidb,

One other point to consider is that the total number of people who post here and at Karma Lab probably represents a minority number of OASYS owners. I would guess that there are no more than 100 OASYS owners who post (just a wild guess) and there are at least 3,000 OASYS owners (if the "my OASYS twin" thread at Karma Lab is even somewhat accurate). I have always assumed that Korg collects product feedback from a number of sources.

Hello again Martin.

Of course the 200 users here in Korg Forums and the other over 200 in Karma Lab does not represent the whole Oasys universe, but as Daz and others have pointed out, it is an important glipsy/ sample of users representing the current product needs and public perception of it on the market.
This is something clear for Korg and for the general public, as most of the Oasys crowd will remain unseen.

And when theres some polls where more than the 60% of votes casted point to some kind of sequencer upgrade, and when theres still "Sequencer threads" coming out from time to time, posted by different people, must mean something meaningful, even when not every user ask for it.
I know you are aware of it, Martin.

I think it would be great if the Sequencer had some modifications. At the same time, I don't think people should get their hopes up for a "complete re-write" since electronic music manufacturers don't seem to operate that way. From my perspective, the majority of a product's functionality appears to be determined at product launch, with moderate modifications following over a few years' period.

Correct and perfectly true, dear friend.

Thats why I and some others said in previous posts that people has to realize that a overhaul or a re-write of the sequencer its not feasible nor possible, but it would be, for example, to add some new features to it to improve the workflow, like Korg have done in OS 1.3 with the new button to hear selected measures wihtout leaving the event edit window, a very useful feature that will increase the workflow of us who use the oasys senquecer and will make our life easier. (Thanx Korg, by the way keep them coming)
This is the way to follow, and this is what most of us are requesting (more edit windows, etc. anything) Theres things that can be done to upgrade the sequencer functionality without an overhaul, as noted.

I will conitinue to speak up for those of us who prefer the latter. I really don't want Korg to feel that ALL of us ONLY want a new sequencer instead of new sounds. That's why I objected to your telling us to keep out of the debate. We of the latter group need to be heard too. OK.

Ok, Eric.
Understood.

But, see, we all want new EXis, EXs, EFx, etc
We all want new sounds and new capabilities. ...
We would like as well, some atention to the weakest part of the Oasys sistem, the sequencer.
*If it can be impruved* alongside the rest of the Oasys, as Korg did with this little new sequencer function in 1.3 OS, that makes the Sequencer better. Thats what we are requesting.

Its not a matter of one thing or another, IMHO.

Thanx and regards.

[tritex4]

<a href="http://photobucket.com" target="_blank"><img src="http://i180.photobucket.com/albums/x87/p5bdkw/1.jpg" border="0" alt="Photo Sharing and Video Hosting at Photobucket"></a>

Oh my God, I can't believe the length of some of these!!

[billysynth1]

Hey, i seen that fellow somewhere before - but just cant remember where?? mmmmm

Billy

[Kontrol49]

<a href="http://photobucket.com" target="_blank"><img src="http://i180.photobucket.com/albums/x87/p5bdkw/1.jpg" border="0" alt="Photo Sharing and Video Hosting at Photobucket"></a>

"You want me to what........ try and write a song on the Oasys internal sequencer???? "

[universal1]

Hi

Wow, I didn’t realise my post about this new 1.3 upgrade would have so many replies and long ones at that!

I just wanted to articulate and express my feelings. To cut along story short, like many users I feel the Sequencer should be an integral part of a Workstation, especially one that is top of the range and one that is the most expensive. Korg oasys being a software based synth and for that reason alone should’ve had a great sequencer. Unfortunately this was not the case.

I personally believe that the korg team didn’t need to just concentrate on the exi’s alone at this time. Why? Coz we all know the oasys sounds good as it is and there’s plenty of time to have new synthesis, sounds etc… I just felt that everyone would’ve been somewhat happy knowing the oasys has a new powerful sequencer in this upgrade now even more alluring to buy. The trade off against other workstations would be better. Korg can introduce many new synthesis and create more new good sounds till the cows come home and again and again people will say the same ole things, “wow have you heard korg oasys new exi’s blah blah blah… but the underlying big problem will still be there unless someone steps up and fixes it quite soon.

Who would not want a seamless workflow in their oasys? Who would not want a fantastic sequencer in their oasys and not always have to connect to a PC or a Mac?? I don’t think there would be many users arguing about this right? As it stands, IMHO the KO is not a well balanced instrument. Yes on paper it looks good but in reality there’s no equilibrium. I feel korg seriously needs to address the balance of this instrument and not just concentrate on having more good sounds. There is a lot of scope and potential for this to happen. By having top of the range sounds and then throw in an old korg triton sequencer is beyond me.

As I stated before, this was one of the reasons why I had to sell my oasys. There was no real smooth workflow like I had on the roland, Yamaha sequencers. On the oasys I had too many weird things happening when recording many audio parts along with the midi tracks. Now I don’t know if this just happened to mine but this was very annoying and frustrating and I don’t think the power of the hardware can cut it. I see a lot of hardware limitations with this board and especially as it has no real computer integration..

With today’s fast moving technology and the power of Cpu’s, Pc's and Macs I feel soon enough there would be a need to bring out an oasys2 just to play catch up but I now this is not going to happen for a very long time.

However, what jerry said in an earlier post, its good to know these issues will be addressed but until then, many users will have to be very very patient indeed.

[Kontrol49]

As I stated before, this was one of the reasons why I had to sell my oasys. There was no real smooth workflow like I had on the roland, Yamaha sequencers. On the oasys I had too many weird things happening when recording many audio parts along with the midi tracks. Now I don’t know if this just happened to mine but this was very annoying and frustrating and I don’t think the power of the hardware can cut it. I see a lot of hardware limitations with this board and especially as it has no real computer integration..

However, what jerry said in an earlier post, its good to know these issues will be addressed but until then, many users will have to be very very patient indeed.

I have to agree that I was tempted to part with my Oasys,for the sheer Dissapointment in the sequencer,because I wanted t odo away with my Computer and have a super Workstation as the main toolSadly I didn't want to lose money on it, and decided to keep it and rather invested a little extra in a better Hardware seq,plus the Sound Quality is second to none on the Oasys,so for the time Being I'll Bypass the Internal seq.
I don't see Korg doing anything about the Seq for a long time,I just find it so demeaning that the R+D team are aware of our concerns yet are more invested in bringing out further Exis that to behonest are nothing new anyway the technology has been filtered out in past Synths including their own ones,I just feel that its become a smokescreen to the resounding issues.Is it a workstation or simply just a Host Sound Module???

I appreciatte that Korg employees do spend time in here and thats valuable to developments,I mean its been a couple of years since the Oasys was released,yet they are only just aware of issues with the Users of the Sequencers???In terms of the competition,Korg are light years behind in those stakes and I think unless something radical is done,there gonna lose a lot of interest in Oasys prospective future sales....I don't see how they can hang on to just adding a couple of extra Exis,I know it takes time,but this is a seqeucner platform that in its concept is over 10 years old now...

I'd like some of them who developed the Sequencer Platform to come on and justify it and actually represent the Functions so much that they ustilise the Sequencer themselves on a regular basis.It would be nice to know the People who designed it DO use it and not only for research purposes,and how they think it stands up to other Sequencers both hardware and software.
Something else that I find arrogant to users is that they never have a Cross Platform format,like some Korg own format with regards to the Sequencer files,the Trinity,Triton,Oasys pretty much work on the same parameters in terms of the overall operations,yet none of them have a cross platfrom ability to exchange seq data in the proper Korg format unless you save the sequences as .Mid Files,now soundwise I can understand no compatibility,but sequence data???

[sparkie]

I 100% agree with Universal1 on the sequencer comments..as I am glad I had the priveldge to have owned an Oasys for a while, but was impatient and sold my Oasys thinking that nothing was going to happen after waiting 2 years. The spring loaded CD-Rom drive kept getting stuck or hung and not what I call a quality drive to use for writing/reading CDs anyway. Since a revision is still on the burner, an in-depth instruction video on "how to use and understand the sequencer to its fullest extent" would have been a nice addition to the update. The M3 turned out to be a much smarter investment for me at 1/3rd the price...and you still have pads, a touch screen and Karma. ..3 main ingredients...plus a few extras such as drum track and computer integration.
Sparkie

[MarkF786]

I wonder if the internal demos were recorded on the Oasys' sequencer I think we all know the answer to that question, but you get the point.

[MartinHines]

I just find it so demeaning that the R+D team are aware of our concerns yet are more invested in bringing out further Exis

Kontrol49,

Jerry K's post states there are two Korg groups who "own" the OASYS:
-- Korg R&D: they are the ones developing new instruments
-- Korg Japan: they work on the sequencer, but also on other Korg keyboard products

I mean its been a couple of years since the Oasys was released,yet they are only just aware of issues with the Users of the Sequencers???

What leads you to believe Korg is "only just aware" regarding some users desires for changes with the OASYS sequencer?

Korg monitors this board and they have "been aware" the whole time, not just recently.

Something else that I find arrogant to users is that they never have a Cross Platform format,like some Korg own format with regards to the Sequencer files,the Trinity,Triton,Oasys pretty much work on the same parameters in terms of the overall operations,yet none of them have a cross platfrom ability to exchange seq data in the proper Korg format

Files, whether they are .pcg files or .sng files have content and data that is specific to that instrument. Perhaps it would have been nice for Korg to provide some type of "forward conversion program", but I don't think it is that hard to use .mid files.