15 Years later.... and …

[Akos Janca]

Interesting and very good questions and thoughts, thank you all. (Partially discussed already elsewhere.) I agree many of them. Some additions:

Players (= musical side) and instrument manufacturers, technicians, programmers (= technical side) should be separated - and it's not always easy. Digital technology and synths gave us new possibilities. If I turn a knob, change a filter, etc. and make a totally new sound that can be used differently from that moment: am I a kind of "instrument maker" then? From one point of view: no. From another: yes.
This possibility is very interesting. Some users are specialized for programming sounds, few of them are particularly good. But they are the rare musical-technical minded talents. A bit more than a musician but often also less than a musician (who can only play ).

I think *musicians* don't have to understand all functions of OASYS (or whatever) in details and they neither should be ashamed of it. For sure, it's better if they deeply know the instrument, but they still can use it well without that knowledge: thank to the very good and valuable default settings (of sounds, effects, controllers etc.) from the factory.

I feel Korg proudly put every possible function (even if not or rarely used) in OASYS considering this instrument as "Noah's ark" or "The Legacy" - the ultimate workstation. Not only for customers but also for themselves. OASYS is an artwork itself.

It would be very interesting to know - also for Korg - a bit more about the 3 thousand customers: who they are and how they use the OASYS in reality. We don't know but guess it seems only a minority will use certain functions in a creative/innovative way that leads special results above the average. Even if only few guys are interested I don't think it's a problem. They have the chance and that is important.

Cello's proposal is a wonderful off topic idea! Ozy is right! Conclusion: Talk is too much. We are discussing about a tool instead of using it.

[peter m. mahr]

@ Peter - great! I deleted the reference to combis because units like the Radias doesn't use progs and combis but multiple timbres. Don't want to exlude any Korg model so that everyone can join in if they want to..

Great, as all my self programmed combis, with one exception, do not use sequences or Karma. Disadvantage, I have quite a lot of self programmed sounds, either as programs or as combis, which I cannot use at all. But ok...

Point of factory sounds is that we all start from the same point (or can do) should anyone want to re-create the sound for themselves, supporting Kevin's fine point above about working imaginatively (one of many he made) - we all share the same starting point when we buy our keyboard. For O users, out of respect for Kevin, his AL-1 sounds can be considered 'factory'.

.. that's a bit unfair [just kidding]

Considering the fact that the sound developers invested a lot of time into using the controllers even factory sounds can be "changed" on the fly. But I better stop here and wait for the new thread. So that this one is no longer hijacked.

Peter

[peter m. mahr]

Joe Zawinul once said, that for him the synthesizer (which for him as a jazz musician was his main instrument) is an acoustic instrument...

Not only for him. Every instrument one hears is an acoustic instrument. But I guess I know from where that was coming. Reminds me on a discussion I once had with a musician of the Viennase Philharmonic or Symphonic Orchestra. He was talking elitist about music and about real... about acoustic instruments, but not realising that he was talking about mechanic and electronical instruments. At the end it is the music and the musicians way to "talk". This needs the ability to express.....

Dany, do you have some examples of your MOD-7 and STR-1 sounds. I am curious to hear them.

Peter

[Dany]

Hallo Peter

...werde Dir gerne bei Gelegenheit einige Müsterchen per E-Mail zukommen lassen...

Ich traf Zawinul einmal persönlich nach einem Konzert in Zürich, als er mir und meinen Bandkumpels erklärte, wie oft - gerade in seinen Pionierzeiten, wo das Publikum kaum an den Klang eines Synthesizers gewohnt war - selbst Musikkritiker, den Synthesizer nicht als "wirkliches" und vollwertiges, resp. ernstzunehmendes Instrument betrachteten. Er benutzte dann jeweils die von mir vorhin erwähnte Argumentation, um die Trennwand zwischen akustisch-traditionellen Instrumenten und elektronischen Instrumenten in den Köpfen der Zuhörer und Musikkritiker zu durchbrechen und den Ignoranten auf die Sprünge zu helfen...

Grüsse aus der Schweiz

[peter m. mahr]

Hi Dany,

.. great. Curious and looking forward.

That is what I meant and there are still people like that. But not that much anymore.

Best regards from Vienna to our neighbours
Peter

[ozy]

Joe Zawinul once said, that for him the synthesizer is an acoustic instrument. We just have to follow his footprints...

Trying. Trying hard, for years. Boots became even a bit heavier in the past three years and a month. But trying.

And I may say, since I'm working exactly in that direction, that I'd rather have my synths interact in the acoustic (hence analog) domain, than being absorbed in one big software melting pot.

There's no way, no matter how good a software is, that the "alto sax" sample fed into a "vocoder" ins effect, sounds like a VL fed into a real vocoder whose mic you leave open for feedback games when not chattering in it.

You play a vocoded sax, but you also end "playing" room-generated filter spikes. Try planning that in a combi!

In the analog/acoustic domain things just happen, which don't happen when everything is calculated by a software routine,

That goes a bit against the whole "workstation" concept, which indeed I don't dig (did I mention it? I think I did. Yes, but did I mention it in the past few minutes? I probably didn't. So, here it is again ).

btw: Zawinul meant that with reference both to sound programming AND the playing technique.

A whole new thread would have to be started about keybeds and controllers.

I love playing orchestral VL sounds on a weighted keybed, because that gives me more control on nuances (top note sax playing mf while bottom-note trombone goes p, etc). And I also like a nice and long aftertouch. I'd like poly aftertouch even more (no poly aftertouch on a 6000 eur keyboard?!? you kidding, Korg...)

But is it a PIANO-like weighting I need? Dunno.

I currently play synths on piano-like keys, but I'd have some ideas about improving them.

[peter m. mahr]

But is it a PIANO-like weighting I need? Dunno.

If you do not know, who will know?

Since the days of the T-1 I always decided for 88 weighted keys. So far I did not regret. Although there is one exception. For me it is impossible to play B3 like sounds on a weighted keyboard. But for synthesizer sounds it is really working fine and one could use the dynamics much more efficiently. As mentioned elsewhere here, the CP1 to me has the best keybed. But Oasys has lots of controllers helping one to bring some life into the sounds. And Korg's programmers did an excellent job to make use of them. I like to use the ribbon, pitch bending stick (nice ergonomics by the way) and the joystick. But still VL is a different league and needs a much more experienced player / musician.

Peter

[Kevin Nolan]

Hi Dany -

While I totally accept there are individuals such as you who do programming, my point was a general one. By and large, the OASYS synth engines go very much unexplored.

Forward of me to ask Dany I know - and no problem at all if you're not inclined - but I'd dearly love to acquire some of your SY99 conversions for OASYS. The SY99 is central ot my setup but honestly am struggling to convert sounds (I'm slowly getting there - very slowly! - I've tried some that are available at http://www.knect.ie/OASYS.html - see the MOD-7 sound bank); and I'd really love to study yours and learn from them as the SY99 is so important (to me). As said - no problem at all if that feels uncomfortable - I totally understand the personal nature of one’s own sounds but thought I'd ask.


And to Akos - while it's a free for all of course and there is absolutely no requirement that any given musician should get into programming or sound design, I think my point is still valid in the context of Sharps post. The OASYS offers incredible possibilities that are not largely explored while at the same time there have been many cries for more 'stuff' from Korg for the OASYS. So my point is that there have been advances over the 15 years in this articular regard, but they go largely ignored. As an aside, I also very much feel that, as with the best players of acoustic instruments, the better you know and understand your instrument the more original and innovative you will be in music making; and that applies to synthesizers too. the OASYS is far more than a rompler and surely its reasonable to argue that if all of those features are on board, they warrant some interest if you've gone to the bother of purchasing one?


Cheers,
Kevin.

[ozy]

[quote="peter m. mahrIf you do not know, who will know? [/quote]

smart boy...

Of course I know. It was a figure of speech.

I meant to say that I realize that the "piano" form of the weighted keys is not why I ultimately want. Even if it is the best I can get now.

I'd rather use piano-weighted keys than unmaterial "synth action" keys, especially the recent computer-oriented masters (I recently bought a 20-years old Roland mkb-200 AND a brand new cakewalk a800, and tested them A/B. Well, the mkb-200's "light" keys still have something to say. I'll definitely keep that over the new one),

but "heavy synth" is not the same as "piano".

Try setting the RH3 at its hardest, its aftertouch at its most deep range, and try playing a slow theme [e.g.: Doctor HC] on VLs, ranging from ppp (just breath coming out) to ff.

You need weight, but you don't really need the piano's bounce.

But again: this would be a different thread.

[peter m. mahr]

Now I understand what you meant.

Peter

[vEddY]

The big synth companies are fully aware of where software synths are going and they are acting (IMHO) like the record industry did when MP3's started getting popular. They are closing their eyes and going about business as usual.

Yeah, while the record industry is doing their outmost to stop digital distribution if it's illegal. They also had a lot of grudges when there were companies that wanted to do that in a legal way. Apple's iTunes helped with that, a lot. Although it wasn't without a huge fight. How freakin' ridiculous is that?

This all points out to one thing, and that thing is true in almost everything in the world today. There are too many old farts who want the world to be "as it was" without letting the younger and more progressive people "take over" and "invent something new". This is one of many reasons why the world is in such a f***ed-up state it is today.

Korg has gone to the dark side and released some very excellent VSTi's - e.g. the Analog and Digital Legacy collection. Hell, if they released a good controller with a ton of knobs, buttons, and sliders (I know, I've been harping about this for a while now) and put the digital and analog collection in ROM, I'd buy it. Tack on the ability to load additional VSTi's and they'd have a winner. Who wouldn't pay a grand or two for some of their best synths in an all in one package? If they allowed mixing and matching to make combi's out of any of the emulated synths it'd be amazing. Tack on a couple analog filters and it would be phenominal.
Then again, it could also fail miserably because people will buy the software synths they want, provide their own hardware and have more flexibility.

They did, but they haven't followed that up in years. And quite frankly, they might have just missed the boat with that. There are many, many interesting and really forward-thinking in Korg's products in terms of overall packages. Trinity VST would be my personal favorite, closely followed by Z1 and Triton.

Having a great master keyboard is another issue. Vax77 is pretty cool. There are others that are also pretty good. But I can't for the life of me figure out why Korg - a company that has such legacy in synth world that all the music people respect - can't do a keyboard exactly like you said - a good master keyboard preloaded with their older synths in software and also do those synths as VSTi's on a side.

What Sharp's saying is basically all true. Trinity - for me - sounded a hell of a lot better then the Triton. Don't get me started on the number of controllers, pedal inputs and other stuff. I've been bitchin' and moanin' about stuff like this since forever on this forum. But companies just seem to - as opposed to "adding things up" - be doing "taking things down". Added value brings customers, not diminished value.

Right now, world is - in terms of technology - shifting at a much faster pace then before. Think about it - for some 15 years, desktop computers were "tha thing". Then came laptops, but their time is coming to an end, as well. The interesting part of that is the fact that super-popularity of laptops has lasted for some 5 years, which is a much shorter lifespan then desktop computers. It's all moving towards the "tablet meets smartphone meets cloud computing" vibe. Distributing software has changed also - from 3.5" floppies to CD's to DVD's to - nothing, actually. USB sticks and download directly from the 'net. Next gen Apple OS (Lion) will have AppStore integrated which probably means that in the future, you'll buy software completely by downloading it. New Mac's come with USB stick as a restore medium.

I'm just astonished that - in practice - none of these great synth companies - Korg, Yamaha and Roland - are really ready for all of this and are just "going on about their business" as if that business will go forever.

Business that will go forever is a business that can accept changing and emerging markets, adapt quickly and agressively pursue that market with its strong points. For KORG, that is and always be their synths and some other extremely cool concepts that they developed and/or used over the years. Wavesequencing is just freakin' great. KARMA just shifts your universe if you know how to use it. And if for no other reason, that should be the one to do everything in VSTi's. Or whatever. Or develop a super-high-performance VST host to do it. Nobody would have a problem with that.

What I can honestly say that I do respect about the way KORG has done things is the fact that they tried to push themselves forward with each new generation in terms of technology (think synth engines - ACCESS, HI, ...). This also means that you can't use sounds from your previous generation on the new one, which is freakin' frustrating. On the other hand, Yamaha and their AWM(2) is just silly. Unlike Kurz's VAST. If you have a good premise to start with (and technology, of course), I see no reason why you shouldn't build on that for many years. Kurz definitely did that. And, as a side effect - their sound library is enormous and re-usable (given the right "environment") - from generation to generation. Which way is the right way to go? Take your pick. Here's my side to it.

A couple of weeks ago my friend came to me and said "hey, bud, you've played Dire Straits for what, four-five years as a part of the tribute band... we're gonna do that and I remember that your sounds were superb, come and play with us". I had to say no. You know why? I could play DS all day and night long, I love their music. But I just can't go through the whole "let's make all of the sounds from scratch" thing again, because I made those sounds on Triton Studio and can't use them on the OASYS or M3. And I just won't buy TS again because of that. Or Triton Rack and re-work those sounds.

I hope we'll see someone from the Big Three make a move, finally. I just hope it's gonna be KORG.