 |
Korg Forums
A forum for Korg product users and musicians around the world.
Moderated Independently.
Owned by Irish Acts Recording Studio & hosted by KORG USA
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
psionic311
Platinum Member
Joined: 14 Nov 2014
Posts: 1046
Location: Orlando, Florida USA
|
 Posted: Sun Sep 15, 2019 5:01 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| GregC wrote: |
There has been no high level { Korg level} development of Mod-7, STR-1, The EP engine , AL-1. And Karma. Karma is dead in the water at a high level.
|
Correction.
The level of development is high enough already.
It is the user / UI that is wanting. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
GregC
Platinum Member
Joined: 15 May 2002
Posts: 9451
Location: Discovery Bay (San Francisco Bay Area)
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 15, 2019 5:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
| psionic311 wrote: | | GregC wrote: |
There has been no high level { Korg level} development of Mod-7, STR-1, The EP engine , AL-1. And Karma. Karma is dead in the water at a high level.
|
Correction.
The level of development is high enough already.
It is the user / UI that is wanting. |
you have your opinion.
I stand behind mine. The authors/deveoplers don't need to rely on the UI for turther work
_________________
Kronos 88. MODX8
Achieve your musical dreams 
https://soundcloud.com/user-898236994 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Scott
Platinum Member
Joined: 16 Oct 2009
Posts: 1015
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 15, 2019 5:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
| psionic311 wrote: | Sure, you can supplement the missing tech with other tech.
That also applies to the Kronos. |
It's easier to integrate new sounds and new sound engines to the Fantom (i.e. with an iPad or Surface Pro) than to integrate a new control surface into the Kronos. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
psionic311
Platinum Member
Joined: 14 Nov 2014
Posts: 1046
Location: Orlando, Florida USA
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 15, 2019 5:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Mike Conway wrote: |
Again, I like the new Fantom. Maybe Roland will give it a ton of updates, but you would be wise to look at past trends. A poster made a point about buying it for what it is today. Damn right. I have that attitude with everything I buy. Even with the OASYS, but I was supremely rewarded with that product. Decades old or not, it is still relevant in my work today. In many ways, it has not been surpassed, even after the beating I have given it.
|
Glen of ASM Hydrasynth has given similar wise advice.
Buy a product for what it is, not what it promises to be.
Roland may deliver, but their history here is fact, not opinion.
I think Roland did great with the sequencer workflows.
Other areas, like price and engines and portability, not so much. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
psionic311
Platinum Member
Joined: 14 Nov 2014
Posts: 1046
Location: Orlando, Florida USA
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 15, 2019 5:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Scott wrote: | | psionic311 wrote: | Sure, you can supplement the missing tech with other tech.
That also applies to the Kronos. |
It's easier to integrate new sounds and new sound engines to the Fantom (i.e. with an iPad or Surface Pro) than to integrate a new control surface into the Kronos. |
It's a snap to integrate new control surfaces into the Kronos!
Plug and play --
nanopads
Wireless key tar
Usb breath controller
Usb powered MIDI keyboards
Any class compliant control surface
iPad
MIDI foot pedals to control the pads
Roland is just now catching up on integrating control surfaces.
Kronos and Oasys have had this for decades now? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Scott
Platinum Member
Joined: 16 Oct 2009
Posts: 1015
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 15, 2019 6:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
| My point was that you can't do much to make the existing Kronos control surface better. Sure, you can add a class compliant control surface, but even then, it will require substantial programming, and will still be a somewhat compromised "generic" layout, and will be tricky to place ergonomically. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
psionic311
Platinum Member
Joined: 14 Nov 2014
Posts: 1046
Location: Orlando, Florida USA
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 15, 2019 6:10 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Scott wrote: | | My point was that you can't do much to make the existing Kronos control surface better. Sure, you can add a class compliant control surface, but even then, it will require substantial programming, and will still be a somewhat compromised "generic" layout, and will be tricky to place ergonomically. |
Agreed, it is harder to make an existing great control surface better.
Maybe I'm missing the point.
How can you get easier than plug and play?
All of the plug and play control surfaces I listed have no ergonomic issues,
except nanopads.
What do Fantoms do better in their control surface?
Bear in mind, I've already acknowledged their sequencer workflow is great. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
psionic311
Platinum Member
Joined: 14 Nov 2014
Posts: 1046
Location: Orlando, Florida USA
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 15, 2019 6:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
I thought the Yamaha Superknob was a load of hype.
Notice most of their demos showed you can use the foot pedal for Superknob stuff.
Guess what.
You can use a Kronos/ Oasys foot pedal for the same kinds of things.
For over a decade now.
This is why I'm wary of the hype.
Integra offers more in many areas compared to Fantom.
Yes, the Fantom sequencer workflow is great.
It even integrates with Mainstage.
What's special about that, many MIDI controllers do that.
And if you're in a studio anyway, integration is not an issue.
Live on stage, it may be.
But if you're bringing a laptop, you've already sussed that out anyway.
I'm nitpicking, and I can see the allure of the new shiny on the block.
But based on my Kronos past, present, and future performance,
I can see past the novelty, price, size, and hype.
Still, I have an open mind.
I just need to see sufficient evidence and a moving argument first. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
laandodeman
Senior Member
Joined: 07 Jul 2011
Posts: 417
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 15, 2019 7:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
| FB Music wrote: |
Play the Kronos through a Neo Ventilator or mini Vent 2 and I think you’ll be amazed at how the CX-3 comes alive! |
Yep, that's exactly what I do. I feel that if Neo can create a better leslie in a small box, Korg could do it as well.
And yet, also the neo is not good enough to mask the mediocre hammond engine in Kronos. It has no balls and it screams in a bad way.
_________________
www.silhouetteband.nl |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
FB Music
Joined: 24 Feb 2019
Posts: 24
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 15, 2019 9:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
| laandodeman wrote: | | FB Music wrote: |
Play the Kronos through a Neo Ventilator or mini Vent 2 and I think you’ll be amazed at how the CX-3 comes alive! |
Yep, that's exactly what I do. I feel that if Neo can create a better leslie in a small box, Korg could do it as well.
And yet, also the neo is not good enough to mask the mediocre hammond engine in Kronos. It has no balls and it screams in a bad way. |
In my own experience the CX-3 engine does a pretty good tonewheel emulation!
In fact, comparing it to the Hammond XK3C that I once owned, it does a much better job. And that thing I had hooked up to a Leslie 3300!
The CX-3 has power in the highest octave, XK3C sounds plasticky and week in that range. Also the C/V in the CX-3 is way better!
To sum it up: The CX-3 through a mini Vent 2 sounds more like my 1958 Hammond C3 + Leslie 145 (that I sold about a year ago) than the Hammond XK3C through a Leslie 3300 ever did...
One thing you do have to be aware about when using the Vent is that you don’t want to clip the input. That will sound nasty, and not in a good way. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jimknopf
Platinum Member
Joined: 17 Jan 2011
Posts: 3374
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 15, 2019 12:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The updated CX3 engine belongs to the best B3 emulation out there.
The only thing that is wrong with it has nothing to do with the basic engine at all. It has to do with totally missing well sounding overdrive in the Kronos. This is one of the very few really bad spots in this great synth, and never has been adressed by Korg.
This Kronos weakness of missing well done tube overdrive/emulation has a HUGE negative impact in many sound areas. While the basic clean Kronos sound engine sounds first class and pristine, on a par with any other much later synth/workstation out there, the overdrive is lame, and sounds simply dreadfully artificial, with heavily unwelcome digital harshness all over the place.
A well sounding overdrive/overdrive modelling would have a massive positive impact in many areas, especially concerning
- B3 sounds: it's the main thing, which could put the B3 on a par with anything else out there (maybe the Leslie might also profit from some minor improvement, but it is quite well done already).
- EP sound engine: the Kronos drive both within the EP engine and in the effects section don't remotely povide, what could make a Kronos EP sound like going through a Fender Twin or Fender Reverb amps. Natural sounding slight tube overdrive is nowhere in reach in the Kronos.
- VA synth sounds: they all would profit massively from well done overdrive, especially leads and basses
- EGuitar sounds: they all sound more or less really miserable in the Kronos, not just due to old small sample quality of the Kronos onboard EGuitar sounds, but mainly due to a complete miss, concerning proper amp/overdrive modelling. There is nothing at all in the Kronos which would remotely remind of the sound quality of many(!) actual software packages (like BIAS etc).
- even bass sounds would profit a lot from that
So overdrive is a huge issue in the Kronos, across many kinds of sounds, in an otherwise extremely well done synth workstation. I have no idea, if a Nutube, or rather much better software modelling than the actual, would be best to do the job. The latter is probably impossible to handle on the very weak Intel Atom hardware of the present Kronos, besides many other jobs this engine already has there. I guess only a Kronos successor with a significantly stronger modern CPU would be able to get the job done in any acceptable way.
_________________
Kronos 73 - Moog Voyager RME - Moog LP TE - Behringer Model D - Prophet 6 - Roland Jupiter Xm - Rhodes Stage 73 Mk I - Elektron Analog Rytm MkII - Roland TR-6s - Cubase 12 Pro + Groove Agent 5 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
GregC
Platinum Member
Joined: 15 May 2002
Posts: 9451
Location: Discovery Bay (San Francisco Bay Area)
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 15, 2019 12:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| jimknopf wrote: | Th
So overdrive is a huge issue in the Kronos, across many kinds of sounds, in an otherwise extremely well done synth workstation. I have no idea, if a Nutube, or rather much better software modelling than the actual, would be best to do the job.
The latter is probably impossible to handle on the very weak Intel Atom hardware of the present Kronos, besides many other jobs this engine already has there. I guess only a Kronos successor with a significantly stronger modern CPU would be able to get the job done in any acceptable way. |
I think thats at the nub of my gripes [ lack of high level development/programming].
There is only so far we can go with Kronos and the Atom might be the limiting factor.
For example, I started a new song. Coming along nicely with guitar , 2 pianos, 2 different drum kits/patterns and a good bass guitar. Some embellishment with vocal/airy program. All midi tracks.
Muse says then says " organ ". I try an HD-1 organ. Meh, adequate, but not spicy enough.
I dial in a CX-3 Program , to perform/record in 12 bars/measures.
Standalone, sounds really nice.
But in my Song/SEQ mix, as in adding this new multi track, adding the CX-3 breaks the voice limit.. And I have almost maxed out FX. [ keep in mind, specific instruments need their applicable FX to sound good]
Click click pop pop clickkety click pop pop.
I work around this , as I often do. Not hitting a brick wall, as I solve problems like this. Having the FA also helps solve polyphony issues when recording.
Anyway, the current Kronos polyphony [ 172 voices ?] plus the Fantoms 256 [recollection] should create a musical monster.
I also agree, the Kronos FX, while debatably adequate- good, there are ' not enough ' of them. Another current project- purchase external FX.
Possibly, my FX experience is related to processing power. There could be a ceiling which might explain why Korg has not added more powerful FX to Kronos. Quite a long Kronos wish list , if you take a step back.
_________________
Kronos 88. MODX8
Achieve your musical dreams
https://soundcloud.com/user-898236994 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Scott
Platinum Member
Joined: 16 Oct 2009
Posts: 1015
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 15, 2019 3:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| psionic311 wrote: | | Scott wrote: | | My point was that you can't do much to make the existing Kronos control surface better. Sure, you can add a class compliant control surface, but even then, it will require substantial programming, and will still be a somewhat compromised "generic" layout, and will be tricky to place ergonomically. |
Agreed, it is harder to make an existing great control surface better.
Maybe I'm missing the point.
How can you get easier than plug and play?
All of the plug and play control surfaces I listed have no ergonomic issues,
except nanopads.
What do Fantoms do better in their control surface? |
Let's take the endless knobs with LED indicators of their current positions, so knobs always show you how they're set and are always in the "right" place as soon as you start to move them. Yes, you can add a control surface to Kronos that has endless knobs with LED indicators. What additional programming will be required so that they do what you want on all your patches? (Is there even proper 2-way communication between the Kronos and the control surface such that its LED indicators are even capable of instantly reflecting new values when you select a new patch? I don't know.) Ergonomically, where do you place this new box of knobs, for the same kind of convenient access you get with built-in controls? Same with the LED indicators next to the faders. Fantom's controls here are more like OASYS (not sure OASYS knobs are endless though?). What's involved in bringing this kind of OASYS tech to Kronos, to the extent that you can do it at all?
Similarly, OASYS had a screen that was pretty well-sized for its interface; with Kronos, they took the same interface and put it on a smaller screen, leading to controls that can be difficult to read and operate.The Fantom interface was designed for its screen size from the start, so that's an advantage in operational ergonomics as well. The Kronos Remote app is a great addition, but it doesn't nearly cover all functions, and again, you particularly if you have a 61, you may find it awkward to place.
Now look at the dedicated synth knobs.
Yes, you can get a box of knobs and program them for synth functions, but how do we really add equivalent functionality and ergonomics? Look how ADSR is switchable among pitch, filter, and amp. You would need 12 knobs instead of 4, unless you can program in some mode-switching buttons (assuming that's even do-able), with light-up indicators. Similarly, how do you replicate the Parameter buttons to allow knobs to do different things, or do you again need a box with a lot more knobs to provide equivalent control functionality? How big will this control surface have to be, and ergonomically, where will you place it for comparably convenient access? How do you get the feedback of what you've selected (i.e. the filter type LEDs)? Then once you set up as much as you can, how do you control telling it which of perhaps multiple split/layered sounds you want your box to address at any given time (i.e. if wanting to use it in Combi mode rather than Program mode, an operational distinction the Fantom is not based on)? And in the end, how do you get that clear, uncluttered, well-labeled, well differentiated, well placed control layout on a generic surface? And how much programming will you have to do to get it to do what you want, even to the extent that it is actually possible? So again, "My point was that you can't do much to make the existing Kronos control surface better. Sure, you can add a class compliant control surface, but even then, it will require substantial programming, and will still be a somewhat compromised "generic" layout, and will be tricky to place ergonomically." Even if you can get it to do all the things the Roland control surface does, which is a questionable proposition to begin with.
OTOH, adding new sounds or sound engines to a Fantom is easy by attaching a Windows tablet or iPad... its MIDI facilities to integrate and control sounds from external sources are strong. So that's what I mean... easier to add missing sounds to Fantom than to add missing control features to Kronos.
| psionic311 wrote: | I thought the Yamaha Superknob was a load of hype.
Notice most of their demos showed you can use the foot pedal for Superknob stuff.
Guess what.
You can use a Kronos/ Oasys foot pedal for the same kinds of things.
For over a decade now.
|
The two variables here are the EASE of assigning multiple parameters from multiple sounds to a single control for simultaneous operation, and also, the fact that Yamaha provides an extra pedal jack for that foot control if that's the approach you prefer. On Kronos, more programming would be involved, and it would use up your one and only pedal. Plus Yamaha does provide the option to use a continuous controller instead of pedal, which has advantages of its own that you can't replicate on Kronos.
| psionic311 wrote: | It even integrates with Mainstage.
What's special about that, many MIDI controllers do that.
|
See this video starting at about the 21 minute point, to see what this does in a Mainstage/Logic context that is beyond what you can do on a Kronos or Montage/MODX, or even a separate dedicated controller if you were willing to add another board for this purpose. (Though wouldn't you prefer not to have to anyway?)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ELYQKUdIayg
| laandodeman wrote: | | I feel that if Neo can create a better leslie in a small box, Korg could do it as well. |
Two things: Different companies have different talents and technologies. Few people have figured out how to get a great Leslie sound. Saying so-and-so can do it, so someone else should be able to do it too (without infringing on possible IP besides!), is kind of like saying the Beatles could do something, so every other band should be able to do it too. There are unique talents involved. Second, even Neo only does what they do through a $500 chunk of dedicated hardware. If Korg could build in something similar, how much more would you be willing to pay? An interesting analogy here is the more advanced Leslie sim options in the Kurzweil workstations. They still aren't Vent quality, and they require SO MUCH of the board's effects resources that, once you put the Leslie effect on an organ sound, you often have almost no effects available for any of your other sounds (depending on which Kurz model you have). In fact, their most sophisticated Leslie effect doesn't even run on some of their older models, because some of those models only supported up to 10 fx units, and the Leslie effect alone required more than ten effects units to implement... and like I said, it still doesn't sound as good as a Vent.
| jimknopf wrote: | | I have no idea, if a Nutube, or rather much better software modelling than the actual, would be best to do the job. |
A real tube really helps the SV1 and King Korg (and I assume Nutube would be the same, I haven't played the Vox Continental). An issue is that your entire sound goes through them (you can't send just one part of a split/layer on the KK/VC). I'm wondering whether something like putting the Ibanez Nutube pedal on a Kronos (where you send sounds to it as needed through an assignable out) might be a good solution for this. You wouldn't need to buy a new board, just pay for the tube device, and use it selectively on the sounds you want, when you want it.
| GregC wrote: | | But in my Song/SEQ mix,...I have almost maxed out FX. [ keep in mind, specific instruments need their applicable FX to sound good] |
While Fantom's dedicated 1-effect-per-part has its limitations compared to the flexibility Korg gives you, it does have the advantage that every intrsument automatically always sounds the same when you bring it into a sequence as it did when you played it alone, no matter how many tracks you use. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kronoSphere
Platinum Member
Joined: 04 Jan 2012
Posts: 697
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 15, 2019 6:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Scott has written : "While Fantom's dedicated 1-effect-per-part has its limitations compared to the flexibility Korg gives you, it does have the advantage that every instrument automatically always sounds the same when you bring it into a sequence as it did when you played it alone, no matter how many tracks you use."
ABSOLUTELY : and it is one of the amazing things that I regret from my G8 I have sold years ago.
_________________
trees are going fast.
https://www.lairdeparis.fr
Current Gear : Kronos 88 / Seaboard Rise / Triton Extreme / Sequoia / Motif Rack XS / TC Helicon voicelive rack /Awave 11 / Audio & VSTi plug-ins connected /wide touchscreen / iPad Pro 512. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
psionic311
Platinum Member
Joined: 14 Nov 2014
Posts: 1046
Location: Orlando, Florida USA
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 15, 2019 7:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Scott wrote: |
Now look at the dedicated synth knobs.
Look how ADSR is switchable among pitch, filter, and amp. You would need 12 knobs instead of 4. |
The Kronos Control Surface has 9 sliders and 8 knobs.
Plenty for immediate, hands-on control all 3 envelope types.
| Quote: |
Similarly, how do you replicate the Parameter buttons to allow knobs to do different things? |
Press Tone Adjust.
Touch the drop down arrow under your button of choice.
Choose your whatever parameter you like.
Save.
| Quote: |
How big will this control surface have to be, and ergonomically, where will you place it for comparably convenient access? How do you get the feedback of what you've selected (i.e. the filter type LEDs)? |
The Control Surface is already ergonomically placed on the Kronos.
Every single knob, button, and slider gives you live feedback.
This is like having 33 dedicated scribble strips.
| Quote: |
Then once you set up as much as you can, how do you control telling it which of perhaps multiple split/layered sounds you want your box to address at any given time (i.e. if wanting to use it in Combi mode rather than Program mode)? |
Let's say you wanted to adjust decay rate on a sync lead, timbre #5.
You pull up the Control Surface screen, and scratch your head.
Easy combi mode access to what you describe above:
Tone Adjust button + button 5
Boom. You now have access to 33 dedicated controls for your Sync Lead.
Of course, there is a big gotcha.
The template Korg provided for the Sync Lead patch may not be to your liking.
This is where using templates is beneficial.
Roll your own template. Make one for VA sounds, one for HD1, etc.
This customizable Control Surface is very powerful, and pretty easy actually.
It takes a little preparation, but less time that it takes to make a new sound from scratch.
Once you make a Control Surface template, you've made a mini-synth surface.
This is one reason why the Kronos is the best knobby FM synth on the market.
It's more fun and instructional to move sliders and knobs to hear changes right away.
The other reason is because MOD7 tech is yet to be outdone in hardware.
| Quote: |
And in the end, how do you get that clear, uncluttered, well-labeled, well differentiated, well placed control layout on a generic surface? |
These are apt descriptions for the existing Kronos Control Surface.
| Quote: | | And how much programming will you have to do to get it to do what you want, even to the extent that it is actually possible? |
No tedious programming required for each knob, button, or slider.
Simply touch the drop down arrow. Choose your parameter. Save.
| Quote: | | So again, "My point was that you can't do much to make the existing Kronos control surface better. |
And my point is, yes, you can indeed.
I think most Kronos owners just didn't know the capability was already there.
| Quote: |
The two variables here are the EASE of assigning multiple parameters from multiple sounds to a single control for simultaneous operation, and also, the fact that Yamaha provides an extra pedal jack for that foot control if that's the approach you prefer. On Kronos, more programming would be involved, and it would use up your one and only pedal. Plus Yamaha does provide the option to use a continuous controller instead of pedal, which has advantages of its own that you can't replicate on Kronos. |
How hard is it to assign a parameter to the Vector Joystick?
You go to the parameter you want to control,
touch the AMS dropdown arrow, and pick Vector JS.
Rinse and repeat for any number of parameters you want to pile onto the Vector JS.
I'd say it's about the same difficulty as assigning parameters to the SuperKnob. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
