Q for Dan. The Sequencer - I don't get it.

domc · Post by **domc** » Mon Dec 05, 2011 1:01 pm

Let me start by stating what this thread is NOT about.

Opinions on the sequencer on the Oasys and now Kronos generally fall into three categories
a) group A. Would like to use an onboard sequencer more - thinks it's way below par for an instrument of this calibre
b) group B. Use the sequencer on board - think it's workable - would probably welcome any upgrades
c) group C. Aren't that fussed about the sequencer, often use the instrument more for performance or in conjunction with software/other sequencers. Would rather future development time spent on new ExIs etc.

This thread is not to start another war between these groups - with someone stating how they fall into such group and why it is the most relevant. There are plenty of those threads around if one does a search.

Nor is it please for people to point out that they don't fall nicely into these groups.

*******************************************

The reason for my questions below is I've owned an Oasys since 2006 and am considering getting a Kronos. The new engines, hard disk streaming, ongoing support

, drum track and computer link up (eventually), probably outweigh the loss of the great adjustable screen and drum pads. I'll never sell my Oasys - as it's given immense joy and in years to come I think it will be hailed a classic - but the world has moved on and Korg's energy is now in this new beast.

I 'get' most of the Kronos new design. The new unadjustable screen probably makes sense for the new price point. The pads were probably a hard design decision, but given the support now for nanopad, there's a good equivalent workaround. The size and weight all make sense. Hard disk streaming, two new engines - it's all good stuff.

But no progress on the sequencer in 6 years (aside from the resolution)- I just don't get it. In fact - a backwards step compared to what functionality the M3 now offers. What is the Korg philosophy on the sequencer topic?

Beginning over 5 years ago there are literally hundreds of posts with suggestions from the simple to the radical on how the sequencer might be improved with the great new touch screen real estate.

I seem to remember you (Dan) agreeing with a couple and saying you also would like to see that particular suggestion implemented. I also seem to remember vague hints that somethings may be improved in the future.

There was also a distinction raised somewhere of Korg Japan being responsible for the architecture around the sequencer (and I guess the Sampler which shares the same fate) with your team focusing on the engines. Is this still the case and part of the explanation?

I just don't understand how so much progress can be made on the engines over the past 5 years, and how none of the many good (and some probably relatively easy to accomplish) ideas for the sequencer never came through.

I would believe you if you told me that group C of my groups above is probably the largest, and carries the most sway - [and perhaps that it is sounds/engines/performance that are the largest factor in selling these workstations]. But there have still been enough voices raised from group's A and B about these sequencer aspects - that it clearly is a topic of interest to a considerable sized group of customers (and by extrapolation potential customers) and I just don't get at all why with that feedback from customers, it wouldn't be something that made business sense to improve rather than the back step that has been taken. There's such a great opportunity being missed of putting a much better sequencer with the great sounds. I can categorically say that I would have already bought the new Kronos if it's sequencer matched it's sound engines - rather than doing the extended period of research that I'm doing at the moment. There is still a market IMHO for a workstation product being able to do a lot of stuff (easily) in the same box.

Any thoughts you can share on the design philosophy here would be appreciated.

Kind regards, Dominic

runningman67 · Post by **runningman67** » Mon Dec 05, 2011 1:31 pm

i like the sequencer.

I come from an old cassette, TASCAM porta studio background and I think the sequencer is a dream. I use it virtually everyday. Put a piano track down. add, then add again. Take away, put a pattern down. Change the sounds, the effects and panning, start again...........

I know alot don't rate it, but I love it.

So I must be a B in your catagories.

jimknopf · Post by **jimknopf** » Mon Dec 05, 2011 1:57 pm

I just would like to confirm Dominics question. That's not meant reproachful.
I'm just interested to hear any kind of answer or explanation from Korg's side.
Why doesn't the sequencer develop in years?
This topic can't be a taboo, can it?

Kontrol49 · Post by **Kontrol49** » Mon Dec 05, 2011 3:42 pm

Well you can trace its lack of development to even further back...the sequencer is based on the Trinity days,and hasn't evolved much since then,they revamped it a little with the Triton series and included things like the Cue list and RPPR(although this was present in N series)Cue list was then dropped in Oasys???...

The Oasys merely has an Audio Recorder option over the Trinity/Triton...

I'd be interested to hear why they feel it doesn't need revamping or developing from the Triton or the lack of since those days,I cannot see after all these years how anyone at Korg uses these sequencers to great extent or are aware of other Workstation brands sequencers or why they feel a 16 track midi sequencer is acceptable in this day and age.(even the addition of 16 int and 16 Ext tracks rather than a compromise,would be a start)I'm kind of hoping they might have seen an evolution of the Sequencer with the Kronos...

curvebender · Post by **curvebender** » Mon Dec 05, 2011 4:13 pm

I am sure Dan has an opinion on this topic, but if I'm not mistaken, it's Korg Japan that handles the development of the sequencer, whereas Korg USA is responsible for sound design and EXi development, among other things.

jerrythek · Post by **jerrythek** » Mon Dec 05, 2011 4:45 pm

Kontrol49 wrote:Well you can trace its lack of development to even further back...the sequencer is based on the Trinity days,and hasn't evolved much since then,they revamped it a little with the Triton series and included things like the Cue list and RPPR(although this was present in N series)Cue list was then dropped in Oasys???...

Well... I don't "speak" for Korg anymore, but when I see incomplete information posted like this I still feel a need to correct them.

Coming up from the Trinity the sequencer added more than you list, and these were important/needed additions. Since I drove some of that spec after joining Korg maybe I'm just being defensive here. So be it.

- Editing moved from bar line-only edit points to bar/beat/clock resolution
- resolution moved up to 480 PPQ
- Individual track looping added
- many voice-related enhancements like improved Force OSC Mode, MIDI-clock based track delay
- swing quantization
- Sys. Ex. recording
<limiting>

I'm not looking to argue the points/questions raised in the thread, but just correcting this info, since "if it's on the Internet it must be true."

Thanks.

Jerry

edited to add the <xxx> disclaimer

Shakil · Post by **Shakil** » Mon Dec 05, 2011 4:45 pm

Kontrol.... I wouldn't say the sequencer didn't improve much since Trinity or Triton.. There were major improvements jnder the hood.. the most significant was ability to record sysex events... then came swing quantize...

And the audio recorder is huge too...

But, I do agree that KRONOS screams and deserves a more capable seqeencer....

ajarink · Post by **ajarink** » Mon Dec 05, 2011 5:12 pm

I have worked with sequencers on Yamaha Motif, Roland Fantom and now on Kronos. I end up using these on-board sequencers as sketch pads only (when inspiration (in my case rarely) hits).
For on stage use I find the interface of all on-board sequencers too fiddly. Roland Fantom now has a mouse connection, which helps (but still no prizes won on ergonomics). Kronos is nano-fiddly (if that exists...). You have to use your finger nails to edit.

As long as it keeps working (the company is no longer with us), I use my Miditemp MSX. It also works with a touch screen even smaller than the Kronos real estate. It also has lit buttons you can't miss on a dark stage, and pedals you can assign functions to. I use it also to set the right presets on synthesizers, voice processing and mixing. It is a MIDI-guys wet dream and works quick with function keys.

For argument's sake: let's say I would have only the Kronos to do a gig with. In that case I would like to have:
1. All my songs autoload that are in the set list
2. Have a better view on channel names and instruments
3. A "global setting" for the click out channel that "just works" (so I can feed the drummer with it). Now sometimes the click-settings to a separate channel resets to internal. Again, this requires fiddling after the load of songs (something you tend to forget when you're shivering with stage fright).
4. Midi messaging to external systems (probably with SysEx, as you only have one MIDI out at your disposal), so you can set up your outboard gear.

EXer · Post by **EXer** » Mon Dec 05, 2011 5:29 pm

I would just like to quote

in the [url=http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/jul07/articles/korgm3.htm]SOS review of the Korg M3 [/url]Gordon Reid wrote:The sequencer within the M3 is very similar to that of the OASYS
[...]
the jumps to the OASYS-style sequencer [...] are too large for the M3 to be considered merely 'son of Triton'.

and

in the [url=http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/jul07/articles/korgm3.htm]SOS review of the M3 Xpanded [/url]Gordon Reid wrote:The sequencer
Korg have added three new screens to the sequencer, and call their facilities ‘DAW-Derived Sequencer Editing’. The most significant of these are the Piano Roll and Track View screens.
[...]
pros
The new sequencer sets the standard to which other manufacturers must aspire.

I could not agree more, and IMHO the Kronos would meet the requirements of most of the users of an on-board sequencer if Korg brought those improvements to its sequencer.

Btw I belong to the category of those who think that a well thought-out onboard sequencer remains a valuable tool, though I'm aware it cannot and it should not have to compete with a DAW.

Kontrol49 · Post by **Kontrol49** » Mon Dec 05, 2011 5:51 pm

Shakil wrote:Kontrol.... I wouldn't say the sequencer didn't improve much since Trinity or Triton.. There were major improvements jnder the hood.. the most significant was ability to record sysex events... then came swing quantize...

And the audio recorder is huge too...

But, I do agree that KRONOS screams and deserves a more capable seqeencer....

This is my point,when you look at the basic shell of the sequencer it hasn't improved much past the Triton Trinity days,all the quantize/resolution/Looping are basic tools which should grace even the most basic of decent hardware workstations,even The ability to handle System exclusive,NOT just internal parameters and has no provision to allow you to write and create your own for external gear

I've been using those workstations,sequencing in the box since Trinity(infact only stopped using the Triton since using MPC/MVs),one of the bugs bears in Oasys was that they did away with cue list,that was a hige lifeline for the way i and and lot of others work in a kind of pattern/Section fashion for composing beleive me I would like nothing more than to use a Korg workstation to sequence on nowadays but they are so not designed to be a all in one solution for anyone with a fair sized midi rig,all these features that Jerry mentioned are simply basic parameters that should be staple on any workstation

There is far too much flip flopping between screens that its workflow is poor for anything more than simply getting ideas down from an initial spark from a groove or sound with easy setup recording parameters to get a combi or sinlge sound into an idea straight away

Audio recording in the Oasys was a nice addition,but it still lacks basic Sync options,no MTC /SMPTE or even the ability to have a decent song/Time position pointers other than bars and beats and Midi clock syncing....Why is this acceptable for a Professional workstation at that price which is aimed for Pro audio recording inside a workstation

Look you can debate the whys and wherefore of what they have been given since Trinity,but sorry its not acceptable,these are simple tools featured on many basic sequencers it needs reworking from the ground up.

If you want anyone to create on a workstation which people would envy then fill it up with Loads of engines like the kronos but give it a sequencer to match its capabilities for those who WOULD happily sequence inside it and nothing more and for those who prefer not to rely on software programs too,if I buy a hardware workstation I expect it to give me access to those types of environment for serious midi sequencing not force me to work the way those who designed it intended or choose to opt for software for more flexibility

I'm not asking for it to compete with software,I would ask that it competes with other Hardware sequencers like MPC or MV or even Fantom G,or at least give them a run for their money!

Or at the most basic level ask,why was the Cue List dropped which was a valuable aid in composition and why did the M3 see editing tools that the Oasys never and will the sequencer in the Kronos be updated or ravamped!!!there doesn't seem to be any consistency or evolution of the sequencers to a more decent level,I'm not bothered about extra looping or quantize parameters I would like more composer friendly options that don't slowdown the workflow,like being able to switch tracks whilst still in record mode or ability to have multi channel/Track patterns on a single key on RPPR

I'm interested to see what sequencers Dan and Jerry actually use to create music from composition to finished product!!!These sequencers are simply only good for those who aren't into serious midi programming of other gear externally or a minimal setup which probably only consist of a single workstation or any purpose other than getting ideas down quickly or playback of files for gig purposes

Would be interested to hear from the korg employees how many of the onboard demo sequences featured in these machines were created using the onboard sequencers only!!!I'm sure you can probably guess the answer!

Lou · Post by **Lou** » Mon Dec 05, 2011 6:44 pm

Kontrol49 wrote: Would be interested to hear from the korg employees how many of the onboard demo sequences featured in these machines were created using the onboard sequencers only!!!I'm sure you can probably guess the answer!

I'm not disagreeing with you and these demos are not full blown sequences, but..

A Quote from the Korg web page of demos:

Kronos synthesis demonstrations by Jack Hotop, Senior Voicing Manager. Each demo was recorded in the Kronos sequencer, using the One-Touch Record function (ENTER + REC/WRITE). In some cases, the onboard Stereo Tube Pre-Amp Modeling & Stereo Mastering Limiter effects were added, and some reverb levels were modified. Each WAV was recorded to the Kronos SSD at 24-bit, 48kHz.

jimknopf · Post by **jimknopf** » Mon Dec 05, 2011 7:43 pm

jerrythek wrote:
Kontrol49 wrote:Well you can trace its lack of development to even further back...the sequencer is based on the Trinity days,and hasn't evolved much since then,they revamped it a little with the Triton series and included things like the Cue list and RPPR(although this was present in N series)Cue list was then dropped in Oasys???...
Well... I don't "speak" for Korg anymore, but when I see incomplete information posted like this I still feel a need to correct them.

Coming up from the Trinity the sequencer added more than you list, and these were important/needed additions. Since I drove some of that spec after joining Korg maybe I'm just being defensive here. So be it.

- Editing moved from bar line-only edit points to bar/beat/clock resolution
- resolution moved up to 480 PPQ
- Individual track looping added
- many voice-related enhancements like improved Force OSC Mode, MIDI-clock based track delay
- swing quantization
- Sys. Ex. recording
<limiting>

I'm not looking to argue the points/questions raised in the thread, but just correcting this info, since "if it's on the Internet it must be true."

Thanks.

Jerry

edited to add the <xxx> disclaimer

Not defensive at all, facts are always welcome, Jerry. Your posts always contain valuable information.
So what's the bottom line?
Korg updated some important things in the sequencer, but never put it even to M3 level.

The interesting part for us is of course, if we see the last version on the Kronos sequencer, or not.

In the first case I would not bother to do anything but some sketches directly on the Kronos and concentrate on my software DAW, hoping that the long overdue plugin finally might make recording the Kronos more comfortable.

jerrythek · Post by **jerrythek** » Tue Dec 06, 2011 3:46 pm

Hi Jim:

What's the bottom line? I didn't post to make a "final" point regarding the state of the sequencer, as you are looking for. I just wanted to correct the information posted, which was incomplete, and therefore inaccurate. No 'dis to Kontrol49 - he was just making his point and "skimmed" the facts to get to his desired conclusion. And after years of living on forums I too often see people reading these brief synopsis as fact, and that's how misinformation grows. It's a pet peeve of mine. That's all.

But this is my view - Your observation is accurate - the sequencer in the OASYS/Kronos does not have all of Korg's current technology "assets". No one would argue that. As to how, and whether it will grow in the future is not something I can comment on.

Best regards,

Jerry

Kontrol49 · Post by **Kontrol49** » Wed Dec 07, 2011 2:53 am

So if the sequencer doesn't have all of Korgs "assets" of the technology that is
Available does that mean that there is or has been further developments of the sequencer OS beyond the extras the M3 was given.....I'm sure of which even though you no longer have that connection with Korg you'd not disclose that info anyway nor would we want to misinform people skimming the facts....whether its a pet peeve or sheer irritant to you jerry those who use and own those respective workstations can see the significant changes and how little has really altered in the Kronos/Oasys

I'm sure you have a personal connection to the development,I'm not skimping facts or misinforming.merely pointing out the obvious of how little it's changed and when I say change I talk of those things that have a massive impact to the workflow or compositional tools not just a few things that should be there as standard after all the real lack of development is why the thread started in the first place

aron · Post by **aron** » Wed Dec 07, 2011 3:51 am

I have no idea how they designed the Kronos, but a lot of it seems modular. Hopefully the sequencer might be an upgrade in the form of a module or expansion. I wish they had decoupled the drum track completely as another independent module so I could switch modes etc... with it.