Loading Patches from a Triton

[metl4evr]

So I have what may seem to be a dumb question.

I have a Triton rack that contains a MASS of patches that I made and tailored for live performance. Is it possible to simply save these banks, and then load them into the USER banks of the M3? If it's that simple i think I'm going to run thru a wall with glee.

I haven't tried it as of yet, but im just curious how I would go about doing this, if it's even possible.

[Synthoid]

if it's even possible.

It is not. The synthesis architecture of the M3 differs from the Triton...won't work.

[Gargamel314]

The PCG files are not at all compatible, but I found it is REALLY simple to take an Initialized M3 patch and copy Triton parameters over page by page. There are a few parameters in the M3 that don't exist on the Triton, but for the most part everything matched up.

I had a few favorites from my Triton Extreme I wanted to transfer to the M3 before I sold it to Fed Ex (another story entirely). It took maybe 10-20 minutes per program.

[metl4evr]

Oh... boy. Wow, looks like I got a bit of work on my hands. Yikes.

[GregC]

I had a Triton classic 61 and it wasn't a huge task to bring over combis
to the Extreme

And I will always keep my Extreme 76. I midi that to an M3M

Thats the way to go, IMO

[Gargamel314]

it would be great if someone could write a conversion program... i definitely would if i had ANY proficiency in ... uh.. programming stuff

[GregC]

1 or 2 folks said they could do it over the past 1 year or so

But it never happened ( from what I read )

[Gargamel314]

it looks very easy to accomplish, considering MOST of the parameters are exactly the same, and use the same scaling and everything. The things that are different are things like velocity layering (triton doesnt have), Keyboard tracking (M3 is a tad more specific than the triton), and + - 0 controls in the Amp EG and filter EG pages, which are the same, just in a slightly different format. Other than that, Triton has arpeggiator settings which could be left blank with generic Karma parameters in place. and then from there, probably the trickiest part is remapping multisamples, obviously the triton and m3 have very different sample sets. haha i got ideas, just no programming skills

[GregC]

it looks very easy to accomplish, considering MOST of the parameters are exactly the same, and use the same scaling and everything. The things that are different are things like velocity layering (triton doesnt have), Keyboard tracking (M3 is a tad more specific than the triton), and + - 0 controls in the Amp EG and filter EG pages, which are the same, just in a slightly different format. Other than that, Triton has arpeggiator settings which could be left blank with generic Karma parameters in place. haha i got ideas, just no programming skills

I recall there are substantive differences, as well. I don't recall them all since the conversation goes back over a year

Entirely different synth engine is 1. FX is another

[Gargamel314]

I shouldn't say "easy"... but doable.

i don't think the synth engine is really much different. Several of the pages were organized differently, but all of the parameters seem to act exactly the same on the M3 as the Tritons. And effects, sure the M3 has more of them, but aside from the Valve force effect in the Extreme, the M3 mostly has the exact same effect algorithms as in the triton (not counting all the new effects the M3 has). Some of the Triton's effects are different, and some don't even exist on the M3.

When i was converting the Korg Karma's Fusion Guitar to the M3 manually (it was a program I loaded up on the Triton Extreme), I kept all of the parameters the same, except for the multisamples. I left out the arpeggiator parameters. Then I entered all of the effects on it parameter by parameter, and the two progs sounded almost identical. What i noticed was that the M3 had many more OPTIONS in their parameters than the Triton had, but all of the options were still there.

I think what I'm trying to say is, the M3 should be for the most part backwards-compatible with the Triton series, the main difference being multisample sets.

[BasariStudios]

I dont think its that easy, first due to the Multisample differences and second
and most important the engines, trust me, they are VERY different.
M3s filter and pitch settings are like the whole Triton synth, not that it has
more opetions but it is a very different engine, its not called EDS for no reason.

[McHale]

I've been converting Triton patches to my M3 and M50 for a while and I'd call them related or similar. I haven't found anything that I couldn't get almost exact by just copying over the similar settings and effects. Some of the sounds have different names but if you are patient, you'll find it. I haven't found a sample that didn't get carried over yet.

-Mc

[foxymoron]

I have tried moving a Triton sound to the M3 and was wondering what you do about the multi-samples. The Triton has only the high and low multisample. The M3 has 4 different ones. I was wondering where the best place for each of the Triton's multisamples would be. I see that I can pick different sounds from the lists, but I don't know which to choose to create the sounds. If anyone could explain the procedure for this it would be much appreciated. Thanks, so much.

fm

[metl4evr]

Okay, we've establised that the M3 has a much different engine. It has different FX, but alot remain the same. Same thing with the samples.

We've ALSO establised that many of us (including myself) have had some success in converting these programs/combis over, albeit painstakingly, page by page. (It took me a good 2 hours for one combination, and I still can't get the arpeggiator right.

Based that it CAN be done manually, why couldn't there be some kind of macro or some kind of algorithm that can be programmed to examine the Triton patch, identify the CLOSEST MATCHES (like we've all been doing manually) parameter-wise, and program them automatically. This does NOT seem unrealistic at all.

Given the amount of Triton patches I want (and have made, and there are probably over a thousand) I know for a FACT I would pay HUNDREDS for something like this. It could be integrated in some future software update for the M3.

I know this for a fact too: I'm probably going to sell my beloved M3 simply because of this! I love the new patches so much, the action and EVERYTHING about it, but it's just not practical for me to have this machine that I'll only use here and there and NOT LIVE at all because I simply don't have the ability to move the patches over.

Every time I look at the thing I'm heart-broken But alas, I am only a single person, and I'm sure that Korg probably wouldn't want to help a brother out, understandably. heh

[GregC]

Okay, we've establised that the M3 has a much different engine. It has different FX, but alot remain the same. Same thing with the samples.

We've ALSO establised that many of us (including myself) have had some success in converting these programs/combis over, albeit painstakingly, page by page. (It took me a good 2 hours for one combination, and I still can't get the arpeggiator right.

Based that it CAN be done manually, why couldn't there be some kind of macro or some kind of algorithm that can be programmed to examine the Triton patch, identify the CLOSEST MATCHES (like we've all been doing manually) parameter-wise, and program them automatically. This does NOT seem unrealistic at all.

Given the amount of Triton patches I want (and have made, and there are probably over a thousand) I know for a FACT I would pay HUNDREDS for something like this. It could be integrated in some future software update for the M3.

h

if it could be done via a macro, and if there was a ' seller market '
( hundreds of $) as you say, it would have been done long ago