Official statement on the status and future of the OASYS

[minnkorg]

Actuall the installed base is probably less than 3000 for 4-5 span of O's active life.
I did a crude spreadsheet for ROI for Korgs Oasys Project.
Main problem for Korg was to sustain sales at the high price tag on a consistence basis and hence the stop in production. So we can't blame the Korg management for stopping the bleeding. No stimulus packages forthcoming from either Tokyo or Washington. It was just a smart business decision period.


Installed Base 3000
Years taken to build this base 5
Sell Price to User $8,000.00
Dealer Discount 30%

Sell Price to Dealer $5,600.00

Cost to Produce $2,240.00

Profit Per Unit $3,360.00

Gross Profit over 5 years $10,080,000.00

R&D,Marketing,Service Expense
Assuming 5 Engineers 1 Manager
For 5 years shared IP from M3,Radias…etc
and overhead…. $3,250,000.00

Net profit per year if Korq continued to sell approximately 600 O's per year $1,366,000.00

Breakeven Keyboard Sales per year to 200
Stay in the black

The sales must have been good initially but with the global economy and all someone at Korg had to pull the trigger.

Its in everyones interest to wish Korg a long life so lets not bash them for doing what ensures their future.

[Synergy]

A lot of folks are confused with a fact that it wasn't AMG that made Mercedes famous but the other way around. AMG was an after market add on company. They would modify the engines to run more powerful and put bigger brakes and suspensions for the cars to hold on to the road better. A lot of people seem to be blaming on Korg, Japan for no reason but I'm sure they have a handful of capable engineers just like the Korg R&D but they DID *listened* and *delivered* to the customers. I have a strong feeling that it was the American counterpart that demanded Korg, Japan to accomodate their venture. We've heard this time and time again from early on that the American team had to rewrite the code according to the Japanese guideline from the scratch. So the answer was why couldn't they? No pay no go. I don't know how many engineers are working on the American side but there has got to be a bad apple that caused all these mayhem. We know some of the users have been acted like a teenage groupy only to feed them their egos to end up to a show like this.
I bet the management teams for AIG and GM said the same thing saying 'it was painful and the most difficult decision we had to make.' That's how K-mart, Enron and Lehman Brothers file bankruptcy to protect top dollars that they deserve and yet the common stockholders would receive blank pieces of paper instead. What's the point of having boutique brushes and oil paint pastes when you don't have a quality canvas to make it happened.

[danatkorg]

Re minnkorg's ROI estimate:

As always, I won't comment on any of the assumptions re costs and profits.

However, in re the number of people who worked on the project, see:

http://www.keyboardmag.com/article/the- ... pr-05/7504

Note that most of the participants in this discussion hold senior positions; there are people from Korg Inc. software engineering, Korg R&D, and the sound design department, and also Stephen Kay. The hardware and mechanical engineering departments were not represented, unfortunately. Suffice it to say that it involved considerably more than 6 people.

[danatkorg]

We've heard this time and time again from early on that the American team had to rewrite the code according to the Japanese guideline from the scratch.

The bulk of the code certainly was written from scratch - but that was because it was a new system, both in terms of software and hardware. I don't recall any discussions of any other reasons; this sounds like a misunderstanding.

- Dan

[Synergy]

The bulk of the code certainly was written from scratch - but that was because it was a new system, both in terms of software and hardware. I don't recall any discussions of any other reasons; this sounds like a misunderstanding.

- Dan

One of the conversations I recalled few years back was that upgrading the sequencer meant not only the modification of the Karma but other major codes that were already existed to the kernel level.

It would be cool if (for example) I could release an update to KARMA for the OASYS myself, at any time - but impossible. Any modifications requiring changes to the interface has to fully involve the Korg engineering team, and their proprietary in-house development tools. So sadly, those kinds of third party things are just not going to happen, the way I see it.

But this is one I could find so far. His implication tells me that the redesigned sequencer codes can't simply be added onto what's already been existed but rather needing to rewrite the code in a larger scale.
But the gist I'm trying to convey is not how the codes ought to be written, but why can't they be written when the economy was better off than now.

[StephenKay]

It would be cool if (for example) I could release an update to KARMA for the OASYS myself, at any time - but impossible. Any modifications requiring changes to the interface has to fully involve the Korg engineering team, and their proprietary in-house development tools. So sadly, those kinds of third party things are just not going to happen, the way I see it.

But this is one I could find so far. His implication tells me that the redesigned sequencer codes can't simply be added onto what's already been existed but rather needing to rewrite the code in a larger scale.

Hi, I don't know what you're "getting" from what I wrote, but I didn't say anything about the sequencer. All I said was, that let's say I decided to add a new "fill mode" such as I am doing for the Open Labs version. It requires several on-screen parameters for each module. Where do they go? How can the user edit them? I myself cannot modify the interface (GUI) screens of the OASYS. That requires Korg Japan's engineering department (and their proprietary interface creation tools) to do any modifications. Hence, I cannot just modify the KARMA part by myself. That is what I was saying.

[MrT-Man]

but with a 5,000+ installed base of Oasyses I would think they'd be able to sell enough to make it very worthwhile.

It wasn't even close to that many.

My bad, I was mis-remembering the serial number list on KLF...

Still hard to believe that out of almost 7 billion people on the planet, there were only 3,000 or so of us that wanted to (& were able to) buy this awesome instrument! (& I guess that some of the 3,000 are probably still in inventory with some distributors etc).

I would also be happy to pay upfront for updates, but I don't know if that model can really work. What % of us would actually pay upfront? Would Korg want to assume the potential liability that comes with selling something they haven't developed yet? etc.

Given what the Oasys cost, there's probably some affluent people amongst us -- is there no one here that can front Korg a million bucks or so to fund ongoing development??

[Synergy]

Hi, I don't know what you're "getting" from what I wrote, but I didn't say anything about the sequencer.
.
Hence, I cannot just modify the KARMA part by myself. That is what I was saying.

I wasn't trying to take your words out of context. As I stated above, one of the conversation I remember few years back was that just as you can't modify the KARMA part by yourself, the modification on the sequencer cannot simply be added by Korg, Japan unless all the components related must be rewritten over again.

I'm no software engineer so I could only speculate to a certain degree. But what I do see is that years of feedbacks and wishlists have been given to the M3 exclusively but almost none for the owners of Oasys. Was it because the M3 was never designed to be "Open"?

http://www.korgforums.com/forum/phpBB2/ ... c&start=30

Now that the M3 Expanded is delivered with all the wishlist implemented, my suspicion only compounds what it means to have many captains over a boat.

I was sold on the idea of workstation called the Oasys that I won't be dealing with midi interfaces, cablings, the OMS, the librarian, pc, etc. Again, the hefty price tag, the word Open and the bigger touch screen gave me that idea. And yes, I read about your stance on the term Open.

Probably we can go on and on about the topic as we did so for the past five years, but now I'm speaking as a common stockholder not an elite social club member as many have pointed out. As we've seen on the AIG case, the common stockholders and the tax payers have everything to lose.

[StephenKay]

I wasn't trying to take your words out of context. As I stated above, one of the conversation I remember few years back was that just as you can't modify the KARMA part by yourself, the modification on the sequencer cannot simply be added by Korg, Japan unless all the components related must be rewritten over again.

Not true, really, these are two different things. I was speaking of myself as a third party programmer who does not have access to Korg's proprietary engineering tools and code. Korg can certainly rewrite the sequencer anytime they wish to devote the requisite time to it, without rewriting all the other components. Of course, some interaction between various components is natural. If Korg changed the sequencer resolution to 480 ppq, then things like KARMA which must synchronize with the sequencer also must have additional changes made. But if I understand what you are saying correctly, your basic idea is not correct - or at least not expressed correctly. Sorry, I don't mean anything personal by that.

Now that the M3 Expanded is delivered with all the wishlist implemented, my suspicion only compounds what it means to have many captains over a boat.

Oh, I would say that there's still a lengthy M3 wishlist that is unimplemented, and always will be - with every product. You forget that there were some OASYS wishlists earlier on that said things like "I wish we had FM synthesis", or "I wish we had more synth engines" or "I wish we had better brass sounds..." Some things will always be addressed, some will not.

but now I'm speaking as a common stockholder not an elite social club member as many have pointed out. As we've seen on the AIG case, the common stockholders and the tax payers have everything to lose.

You actually own stock on the Japanese stock market in Korg Inc.? Or do you just mean that owning an OASYS makes you a stock holder? Somehow I don't think my owning a GE microwave makes me a stock holder in GE. I don't mean that to sound flippant, but please - buying a product, any kind of product, does not make you a stock holder. It makes you a customer.

Anyway, sorry, I don't know why I am particularly defending the OASYS here, I'm as sad as everyone, but part of me wants to see more fairness to Korg about this situation, and a better grasp on the reality of the global economic situation at the moment, and a better grasp of some of the underlying issues involved with producing this product...

[Tiger789]

I'm as sad as everyone, but part of me wants to see more fairness to Korg about this situation, and a better grasp on the reality of the global economic situation at the moment, and a better grasp of some of the underlying issues involved with producing this product...

I wish that Korg Inc. (Japan) would rather put the Oasys and software updates on "hold" for a longer period if nessecary instead of just giving up the whole "Open Architecture" project. It's maybe the right thing to do here and now due to the economic situation, but it remains to be seen how wise that decision is in a longer perspective. I guess both Yamaha, Roland, Open Labs etc. are all pretty satisfied with Korg's decision and wish it most welcome as it means more focus and increased sales of their workstations, even though none of them can match the Oasys on the most important areas at present time. It feels ironic that when the DX7 came out in the summer of 1983 in Norway, one could still buy a brand new one i 1987. And the Jupiter 8 from 1981 was also available as new for a long period.

-Tiger

Guitarist / Classical pianist
Oslo, Norway
--------------------------------

Korg Oasys 88 - # 002113 + Karo Philh. Strings
Roland Fantom G6 + ARX-01
Yamaha Clavinova CVP-309PE

[spalding12]

i think that one rather obvious point is that when and IF Korg makes a "comeback" that they'll HAVE to come out with a whole new keyboard/workstation

because there will be no really money to be made by just updating the "O."

their dilemma... how to make their customer base "trust" them enough to plunk down a large sum of money to buy it

my met, a great number won't

[fdspeck]

Perhaps since Japan was responsible for the sequencer, I can speculate that they did formulate an update and it was put to shame compared to the Roland G.

My assumption is that the Japanese Oasys development team was dissolved the moment the Oasys went into production. It was not planned to do enhancements from the Japanese side because there was seen no need for it. The further development should happen for the EXi, EXs and EXf which fell in the responsibility of Korg R&D. Maybe some adaptation was needed from Korg Japan to get the things developed by Korg R&D running, but this was done by single individuals, the team as a team had ceased to exist.

So when Korg R&D eventually approached Korg Japan saying "you know, there is some criticism concerning the sequencer and people are constantly nagging us to improve it, but this is something you have to do, we can't solve it on the part of Korg R&D" they said "why, it's perfect (means: good enough)". And being Japanese, they don't say "no, we don't want to do it" but "ah, it's complicated" or "maybe we'll do it after we finished our work on the M3". And nothing happened.

Of course this dialogue is completely fictional But it shows were the problem lies. You have to convince Korg Japan and not Korg R&D. Unfortunately I don't think that members from Korg Japan read this forum and therefore what was said or demanded here has little effect. We can only hope that Dan or Jerry will report the essence of the discussion from this thread in some way to Korg Japan. Maybe there is some management attention to see how people would react to Korg's announcement.

[pandel]

You forget that there were some OASYS wishlists earlier on that said things like "I wish we had FM synthesis", or "I wish we had more synth engines" or "I wish we had better brass sounds..." Some things will always be addressed, some will not.

....

Anyway, sorry, I don't know why I am particularly defending the OASYS here, I'm as sad as everyone, but part of me wants to see more fairness to Korg about this situation, and a better grasp on the reality of the global economic situation at the moment, and a better grasp of some of the underlying issues involved with producing this product...

I haven't been here for a long time and didn't want to say anything to this whole discussion but I think, this needs some comment:

At first, Stephen, you're right. There are many things on the wishlist, which were taken into account and some which were not. That's ok, no one can expect Korg to let every little dream come true.

But if you're talking about fairness, I see things a little bit different. As we all know, the biggest part of all OS upgrades were synth engines or sample libs, respectively. What about Korgs update policy fairness towards customers who didn't buy the O mainly because of the synth aspect but because of the workstation/integration aspect?

Synth/sample lib upgrade wishes have been on the wishlist as long as wishes regarding the sequencer. Well, synth engines have been developed, sample libraries been made, and the rest? Oh, sorry, economy doesn't allow us to work any further - sorry, if there's someone out there who, unforeseeable, bought the O because of its sequencer integration or even the EXf, your wishes can't be integrated any more... And in the same time we see a M3 sequencer, which would have calm down many threads if it only had been implemented as an OS upgrade for the OASYS. And as you said, it should have been much easier for Korg to update it, than it is for you as 3rd party dev to have them integrate your stuff - if they don't break the 16 track limit, it should be even more easy (taken into account, that I think, the whole system is based on a strictly modular design). Or what about one (!) single, empty page to write down some textual info regarding a prog or a combi. No one can tell me that a massive dev effort is necessary to accomplish that - would have been a little but nice addition, a sign of good will, during the long period of time between 1.3.1 and 1.3.3 where nothing happened.

Sorry for being a little ironic, but it seems that only this synth engine bling-bling aspects of the O, with which it is easy to show off, has been taken into account when it comes to upgrades. And KARMA of course, because it is an absolutely unique feature on the market, that is truely amazing and inspiring. Many thanks, for that kind of bling-bling , by the way...

I understand, that devs can only start working if someone from "above" told them to do so. But I really can't understand those guys "above", which seem to act like politicians: very impressive marketing proposals at first, some bling-bling second to compete with their competitors and calm down the masses, and when it comes to the end no concept but deep sorrow for those who have been gone over. Fairness? Mmmhh...

Just to be exact, I do appreciate every member of the development team, because they did an exceptional work on this one, I very much appreciate the great amount of support we got from all of you and I definitely understand that this has been sad news for all of you!

I'd be on the $250 sequencer update list, too, but let's face it: it's over! Sad but true...

My2c

PS: Stephen, I *really* wish you all the best with your new partner OpenLabs. May KARMA be with all the Neko-ists !

BTW, they won't have this seq issue. Just download the new reaper version ... and perhaps open the notepad to write down some ideas... *scnr*

[jerrythek]

My assumption is that the Japanese Oasys development team was dissolved the moment the Oasys went into production. It was not planned to do enhancements from the Japanese side because there was seen no need for it. The further development should happen for the EXi, EXs and EXf which fell in the responsibility of Korg R&D. Maybe some adaptation was needed from Korg Japan to get the things developed by Korg R&D running, but this was done by single individuals, the team as a team had ceased to exist.

So when Korg R&D eventually approached Korg Japan saying "you know, there is some criticism concerning the sequencer and people are constantly nagging us to improve it, but this is something you have to do, we can't solve it on the part of Korg R&D" they said "why, it's perfect (means: good enough)". And being Japanese, they don't say "no, we don't want to do it" but "ah, it's complicated" or "maybe we'll do it after we finished our work on the M3". And nothing happened.

Of course this dialogue is completely fictional But it shows were the problem lies. You have to convince Korg Japan and not Korg R&D. Unfortunately I don't think that members from Korg Japan read this forum and therefore what was said or demanded here has little effect. We can only hope that Dan or Jerry will report the essence of the discussion from this thread in some way to Korg Japan. Maybe there is some management attention to see how people would react to Korg's announcement.

Well, it's not only fictional, it's completely wrong, I can assure you. Korg Inc. did not abandon the OASYS to Korg R&D resources after release, and they were involved in all the decisions, planning and execution as needed. And members of the team, from strategic planning on downward do see the forums from time to time.

Regards,

Jerry

[Bigs]

[..] if there's someone out there who, unforeseeable, bought the O because of its sequencer integration or even the EXf, your wishes can't be integrated any more... [..]

I'm sorry, but if you spend $ 8,000 on a product that *might* contain some feature in the future you're a bit naïve and unreasonable.

Reading this thread I can only conclude that the Oasys is a great product and that it's users are generally very happy with it. It just got axed a bit earlier then intended due to global economic situation. That's a shame, but as many in this and other threads said, the Oasys will rule their studio/live rig/whatever for a long period to come. No single product can match the Oasys in sound quality and versatility. So I guess the Oasys is good enough, no, great as it is already