Great Synth but Bad Sequencer?

[Daz]

But what happens when you do editing?

Nothing bad, no crashes or whatever, in my limited experience with it. It's just very poorly conceived (the event editor is very poor, even in comparison to similar gear like the XS). Speaking of the XS that is way better, with it's multi-part pattern system, pattern chaining, mixings that allow you to edit voices right in the song etc. It's much more polished.

The Mixing system lets you create/edit your own voices right in your song (when you can actually hear the music you're making - revolutionary !). Those edited voices are actually stored *into* the song. It's a brilliant implementation, with a synth engine that is merely a good rompler ... it's not some radically powerful synth like the Oasys. The Oasys needs that feature far more than the Motif XS. Controlling rich engines like the MS-20, AL-1 or STR-1 using Tone Adjust is hopeless ... for the MOD-7 it's even worse. It's such a waste. The MS20 UI is awesome and demands tweaking, but you can't unless you use the Oasys mono-timbrally.

Yeah, yeah, beating a dead horse here, again (!!!) ... I know ... I will give up one day

[Ultimate Dj]

Thnx Daz! I Appreciate it!
Could you possible get back to my other post?
thanks agian!


Pura Vida
DJ

[Derm]

Forgive me for repeating myself, but it's disappointing that neither of these things was addressed originally (or in the meantime) as both serve to rather defeat the point of the Oasys as a workstation and as a synthesizer.

Daz.

Amen. A little (?) more effort and who could criticise this machine?

[erikv]

To be honest, I actually am thinking of not buying an Oasys, only because of the sequencer. With Oasys current sequencer, I will need a sequencer in a DAW anyway (for easy editing, song / pattern creation). And if I am going to use a DAW; what is the point of having an all-in-one integrated workstation? OK the sounds are really outstanding, but my budget is not that big, that I can buy a good DAW, interfacing to it (which is still very old school in the Oasys compared to the M3), and all other stuff I will need linked to the DAW and also buy an Oasys.

The integrated "vision" of the Oasys really attracts me, but if I am going to use a lot of tools connected to it, it is not so integrated anymore, is it?

[ski]

To be honest, I actually am thinking of not buying an Oasys, only because of the sequencer. With Oasys current sequencer, I will need a sequencer in a DAW anyway (for easy editing, song / pattern creation). And if I am going to use a DAW; what is the point of having an all-in-one integrated workstation? OK the sounds are really outstanding, but my budget is not that big, that I can buy a good DAW, interfacing to it (which is still very old school in the Oasys compared to the M3), and all other stuff I will need linked to the DAW and also buy an Oasys.

The integrated "vision" of the Oasys really attracts me, but if I am going to use a lot of tools connected to it, it is not so integrated anymore, is it?

There's nothing "old school" about using outboard MIDI devices. Really, now, is the newness of "school" a matter of fashion or practicality? I can tell you that there is no "school", other than the school of marketeers who would have you believe that outboard synths are dead and that you're better off doing everything ITB (in-the-box). And of course I'm referring to DAW-based recording, using plugin instruments.

I can tell you that ITB is rife with problems that those same DAW marketeers don't reveal, as to do so would shatter the fallacy that they're trying to promote.

ITB systems (whether Mac or PC) are vulnerable to two major problems: latency, and, plugin incompatibilities. Look at what people are going through now with the update to Leopard on Macs. For one, ProTools isn't Leopard compatible. There are many staple 3rd party plugins that are buggy when working within Logic 8. Not even Apple's own Apogee drivers are compatible with Leopard and Logic 8, and Apple's supposed to be in tight technological partnership with Apogee! It's as ridiculous a situation as you could imagine.

And then there's latency. Whether it comes to recording virtual plugs or (especially) live instruments/vocals into a DAW, there is the latency problem to deal with. Nice how the marketing forces that advocate ITB DAW recording think it's OK for musicians to monitor their live signal LATE when trying to record to a track. Well, that's what latency is all about, and it's essentially unavoidable.

Unavoidable, that is, unless you have some kind of high-end audio interface (with truly low latency, on the order of .5ms or less), or, an outboard mixer. But of course, the marketeers want you to think that you can use their software-simulated monitoring system to make music. People buy into this crap, and as a result, the forums are filled to the rafter with people bitching about latency, i.e., "my singer complains that she hears herself late in the headphones." Yeah, it's no wonder guys... you bought into the ITB hype, and now it's biting you back.

Software updates. The forums are also filled to the gills with people complaining that this or that plugin doesn't work after they updated their operating system, etc. etc. etc. THIS is what you don't get with the Oasys. Integration, in this case, means that software updates won't render your plugs unusuable. It's always a stand-alone box that chugs along quite solidly. (Yes, there are occasional bugs, but NOTHING like what you will experience with a DAW).

So my advice to you is that if you like the sound of the O, get it for its sounds, Karma, etc. Now, some people do perfectly well on the O's sequencer. You may not. So just ignore it (it actually has some cool uses when sequencing using a Combi, that that's another matter). Use the O for its paramount assets: programs, combis, KARMA, as a sampler, and so on.

That's my 2-farthing's worth...

[Derm]

No ITB is not perfect either. I was not happy with the midi capabilities of my favoutite DAW (they have inmproved a lot now) and thats how I came to buy the Oasys. I really liked the idea of the integration also, not having to troubleshoot a lot of different components if things weren't working as expected.
About latency, I dont find that to be an issue at all. I use an RME Fireface and an M-Audio Delta 1010. I'm going to guess that anybody who is prepared to pay for an Oasys is serious about their music and would have a decent soundcard.
Software updates: All software from all manufacturers has problems for some users, I dont see that the Oasys has much of an an advantage in this regard as there are existing software difficulties for some and will always be. This is no sleight on Korg.
To Eric, I am not saying buy or dont buy, only your knowledge of your requirements can decide that.

[ski]

Software updates: All software from all manufacturers has problems for some users, I dont see that the Oasys has much of an an advantage in this regard as there are existing software difficulties for some and will always be. This is no sleight on Korg.

At least with the O you don't have to deal with 3 different manufacturers to solve any one problem, those three being the plugin developer, the computer manufacturer, and the DAW. In my experience, when problems come up with software incompatibilities it's rare that you'll ever get the straight story from any of them --- they'll all blame each other for the incompatibility.

About latency, I dont find that to be an issue at all. I use an RME Fireface and an M-Audio Delta 1010. I'm going to guess that anybody who is prepared to pay for an Oasys is serious about their music and would have a decent soundcard.

Derm, regarding latency, you've got a great interface with the RME. And I'll assume that you've done your homework and set your I/O Buffers to their optimal sizes. And with the RME you can do "straight-through" monitoring. But "quality" in a soundcard is not a measure of whether latency will be a problem or not. You can spend lots of money on a soundcard or audio interface and be plagued with latency problems because your computer isn't up to the task of processing audio at lower I/O Buffer sizes. So "quality" and latency have nothing to do with one another.

[Derm]

Derm, regarding latency, you've got a great interface with the RME. And I'll assume that you've done your homework and set your I/O Buffers to their optimal sizes. And with the RME you can do "straight-through" monitoring. But "quality" in a soundcard is not a measure of whether latency will be a problem or not. You can spend lots of money on a soundcard or audio interface and be plagued with latency problems because your computer isn't up to the task of processing audio at lower I/O Buffer sizes. So "quality" and latency have nothing to do with one another.

Well I think you know what I mean here Ski, most people prepared to shell out megabucks on a high end keyboard and interface are unlikely to then run it through their Commodore Vic 20.

[ski]

Well I think you know what I mean here Ski, most people prepared to shell out megabucks on a high end keyboard and interface are unlikely to then run it through their Commodore Vic 20.

Actually, I'm not entirely sure what you mean, but I'll say that I've read far to many posts (Logic forums, mostly) where people with high-end interfaces are trying to run a million tracks and plugs from a computer that's not powerful enough. Or they don't have enough RAM so their systems slow down to the point where they have to increase the size of their I/O buffer tremendously just to get things working.

Anyway, my main point was to say that integration in the O is, in my opinion, a great asset as compared with ITB DAW systems. My other main point was that "new school" doesn't necessarily mean "better".

[erikv]

Anyway, my main point was to say that integration in the O is, in my opinion, a great asset as compared with ITB DAW systems. My other main point was that "new school" doesn't necessarily mean "better".

Ski, I completely agree with you (and sorry about the old-school/new-school thing). I think that the integration is indeed a great selling point of the Oasys. And I am actually looking for a system that provides as much integration as possible. Therefore, I investigated all parts of the Oasys very carefully, and as I said this is a killer machine, however, I feel that it could be better for me if the sequencer would be improved a little.

I would rather not use an external DAW at all and do it all in the Oasys, but I don't see myself doing that with the current version of the sequencer (even my old Technics KN6000, although the sequencer was not that good either for pattern based music, had a piano roll editor). I was just slightly disappointed when I found out that such a great machine as the Oasys did not have that, and that I (with my requirements) would still have to go through the trouble of hooking up a computer. I hoped that could have been avoided.

Anyway, I am just hoping Korg will release an update on the sequencer in some point in time.

[Charlie]

@Eric: I came from Mac/Cubase + several synths and switched to Oasys only - that is, I don't use any other hard/software. I agree, the sequ-interface is years behind ... but the Oasys' all-in-one solution is better than any other workstation available right now and once you've made it through the rather harsh entry-phase it works stable and well. Of course I'd like to see improvements of the sequ-userinterface, but even without them I prefer this stand-alone solution to any messing around with computers, software, drivers, latency etc.

[erikv]

Charlie,

Nice to hear that you have such a good experience with the O's sequencer, and even prefer it over your Mac setup. I sure hope, I will work myself through the lurning curve and will have the same experience. I am still planning to get one at Christmas, as this is such a good looking and superb sounding synth, I just can't resist it...

[Kontrol49]

@Eric: I came from Mac/Cubase + several synths and switched to Oasys only - that is, I don't use any other hard/software. I agree, the sequ-interface is years behind ... but the Oasys' all-in-one solution is better than any other workstation available right now and once you've made it through the rather harsh entry-phase it works stable and well. Of course I'd like to see improvements of the sequ-userinterface, but even without them I prefer this stand-alone solution to any messing around with computers, software, drivers, latency etc.

I've totally turned my back on Computers for music,I started with a hardware setup in the mid 80s and then advanced onto the Atari and then all manner of PC and add ons and plug ins,with my studio growing so out of control I had the PC to just be able to control everything,I spent too much time fixing and upgrading the PC and my playing Skills suffered as a result.The trouble with a Computer is that your far more manipulated by the Visual aspect,the graphics look great but does it really make a difference to your music if you use a PC or hardware...In my case yes it does,

I've used the Triton/Trinity as the main sequencer for a few years ,but found them limited,I never actually found a workstation that serviced all my needs,so I turned to the software,and for a while it gave me what I needed

I wanted to return to my roots with a Hardware solution,for I was fed up with having to upgrade and alter the Computer when a new upgrade came or this or that was incompatible and I'd have to reconfigure everything whe na a new program was added,this really killed my inspiration and enthusiasm and so it was a hard decision but I had to do away with the Computer altogether,I was kind of hoping the Oasys would give me back some of that freedom and in a way it did,but again being used to the flexibility of the PC platform,the Oasys still fell short,so I utilised a combination of Hard disk recording and playing using more live techniques than sequencing all the time,this gave me more inspiration and an appetite for recording again,but I still needed some Hardware sequencer that had al lthe bells and whistles for editing

I looked at an Akai MPC solution and this sort of quenched my appetite,I now have the Roland MV8800 and I've not even turned my software sequencer on,infact Apart fro mthe Monitor to run on the MV8800 I have completely removed the PC from the studio,and I havent even missed it once

The MV is the centre piece of my studio and now I have returned to a Hardware only setup,its the most productive I've been for at least 3 years.

Computers are fine if thats your bag,but in my case the PC was the worse possible solution for utilising a studio setup,your sta behind a screen and mouse and use one or two fingers for composing,not my ideal situation and it sort of killed me off

It wasn't anything technical or too challenging I just never interacted with a Computer for music,in the same way I have with a traditional hardware setup,I never found that stability in a computer environment.

I'm now in a comfortable,happy zone again,rid of the Computer and all the instability and issues that go with it,I can't tell you how much the MV has regained my attention and given me back my Musical freedom to express exactly what I play directly and in realtime without all the technical crap that goes with the Computer which kills your inspiration with all the setting up and adjusting,I still use a large setup of hardware still and the MV runs all of it superbly and easily than my PC ever did.

This is the situation I would have liked to have gained from the Oasys sequencer,being the main centre piece,and being the sole workstation I would ever need,sadly its not,but I'm not gonna bash it,I found a wonderful sequencer that takes it place in the MV,and the Oasys intergrates wonderfully,maybe one day the Sequencer on the O could take its place,but not for a long time yet..But I sure as hell will never return to a PC setup.. No matter how stable a Computer setup maybe for everyone else it just doesn't give me the freedom to express my music.

[Charlie]

@Kontrol: thanks for sharing these thoughts - that was quite interesting. I have no experience with the MV but heard quite many good things about it. I guess for people like you and me a "simple but stable hardware-solution" is the better choice. I'm glad I dont have to worry about PC/Mac-Updates and drivers and soundcards and audio-interfaces etc. anymore. I suppose the MV offers a piano-roll?

@Erikv: If you plan to use the Oasys sequ as your "center-piece" I strongly suggest NOT to install 1.3 until Korg has fixed the new sequ-bugs. I run 1.2.3 and that one is very stable - 1.3 seems to come with a view unpleasent surprises regarding the sequ.

[Kontrol49]

@Kontrol: thanks for sharing these thoughts - that was quite interesting. I have no experience with the MV but heard quite many good things about it. I guess for people like you and me a "simple but stable hardware-solution" is the better choice. I'm glad I dont have to worry about PC/Mac-Updates and drivers and soundcards and audio-interfaces etc. anymore. I suppose the MV offers a piano-roll?

@Erikv: If you plan to use the Oasys sequ as your "center-piece" I strongly suggest NOT to install 1.3 until Korg has fixed the new sequ-bugs. I run 1.2.3 and that one is very stable - 1.3 seems to come with a view unpleasent surprises regarding the sequ.

I find a lot of people in todays music world that I have worked with tend to look down at you when you say you don't utilise a computer for a typical synthesizer laiden setup,I think many people think its part of the make up of an electronic studio.and when you say use a device such as the MV,they class you as that "Hiphop" or "Sample" vibe musician who lift a sample create a beat and add lyrics,and call it music.Infact I couldn't be far more away from that genre,after all its only a Tool that I use it doesn't mean its suited for only that sort of music,its no different to the onset of various computer programs that really force you to create in a certain way,nothing to stop someone creating classical on a computer,in the same way,but it would be considered unconventional to many people as they associatte that genre with say an orchestral setup and a room full of Musicians


I suppose it is the main staple of many studios,having a computer just not mine,I have a Hardware sequencer which gives me the same freedom as the Software,maybe in a more limited option form,but it certainly has all the relative tools I need to edit and create with,and it has removed the contraints by eliminating the problems I suffered with a Computer setup.I wouldn't say its a simple setup,I most certainly still have a rather complex studio with lots of gear the only simplistic value of it is only in the way it allows me to create my music "Simplistically" without all the Hiccups of software.


As for the Update on the Oasys,I have held off with doing mine simply as the issues people had I would rather wait till a newer update where all these problems have been ironed out,I'm quite happy with the O and how its running that I don't want to upset the apple cart,after all this was part of the problem with a computer setup,having to arse around with fixing things after upgrades or installs,I probably would have a hassle free upgrade but don't want to have to worry about it or be another hassle I have to rectify so I'll keep it at 1.2.3 for now...