Can anybody explain what is EDS all about in the REAL world?

[kikedeolivos]

How does it compares to Hi? Pros and cons.

Please, don't read Korg's ads or user manuals: just layman terms.

BTW, I know what the EDS acronym means.

Thank you.

[jacke]

Please, don't read Korg's ads or user manuals: just layman terms.

One is a sample-based synthesis engine, the other is a newer sample-based synthesis engine???

[X-Trade]

I haven't used EDS extensively because I don't own an M50 or M30, but i've had a good play around with them.
one thing I am sure of is that the filters in the EDS sound much more realistic and useable than those in HI. the EDS filters sound like an actual VA, the resonance is nice, plus you have two that can operate in a number of different modes, unlike in HI where you are stuck with low and hi pass non-resonant, or a resonant 12db lowpass. the resonance on the HI engine sounds like someone just programmed it to mix a sine wave in. its really nasty. and the filters themselves don't have such an edge in HI - they sound more like tone controls at best.

the other thing I noted not just in EDS but also in the Radias' MMT (basically all of Korg's current gen products) is the amount of high-end definition. it sounds completely realistic. the HI most of the time sounded like a synth trying to be an EP, a synth trying to be a piano. the M3 actually sounded like a recording of a miced up piano. just much more realism in general. I put this down to the four way velocity switching, and the new rom sounds - Korg stated themselves that they used less, longer samples, rather than in the triton and previous workstations where they tried to cram in as wide a variety of samples as possible by making really short loops etc. the pianos and basses benefit most from this I feel.

its a bit like the difference between a low-quality MP3, and a full bandwidth wave file. the hi-def sound in the EDS is much more modern. I can understand why some people prefer the warmer, darker, deeper sound of the HI engine, but it is mostly for nostalgic reasons. but as I stated above, the EDS instruments actually sounded and felt real, rather than like a synth trying to immitate them. IMO, HI was quite good at pads, and other synth sounds that didn't rely on a really amazing cutting filter.
EDS does real instruments a lot better, and is capable of creating much more realistic sounding VA synth sounds too (even without the EXB-Radias)

[kikedeolivos]

Hi all

I asked this question because I tested the M50 this week, through 2 PA systems:

1) Yamaha powered mixer, 2 big Yamaha speaker cabinets. (1x15" woofer and tweeter)

2) Mackie powered mixer, 2 big Yamaha speaker cabinets. (1x15" woofer and tweeter)

AND I was disspointed with the quality of the sound I was getting.

First of all, the lack of balance and volume differences of different Piano patches: I had to adjust several times the EQ's within the patches and couldn't get natural sounding piano patches.
Through my headphones and home monitors (Alesis, both flat response) the patches sounded somehow correct / pleasant to my ears.

Bottom line: the Pianos didn't cut through the mix with the other musicians in the band.

I'm worried about this issue because I can't be adjusting EQ's and volumes / balance within each PA available for gigs: How do you deal with this? (If you are experiencing the same issue)

I recall that with Korg Hi synths I didn't have this problem.

Thanks for your input.

[kanthos]

Get a rackmount EQ unit (or software equivalent, if you play with a laptop) and run your M50 through that.

[jacke]

I recall that with Korg Hi synths I didn't have this problem.

It sounds like you want an HI-based synth then... I don't think you're doing yourself any favours by sticking with the M50 if you're that uncertain about it. The TR61 is HI-based, is a known performer and it even has aftertouch, based on your previous posts, I'd say you should try it out.

Looking at your past gear list makes me wonder a bit why you didn't hang on to some of those boards...