New Kronos KRS-02 Str-1/Mod7 Phase II Sounds for the OASYS?

[Kevin Nolan]

The sad part is , Oasys users have to beg Korg to do right buy Oasys .

The Oasys was built for theses new expansions . Wasn't it ?

Anybody remember the term Open Architecture .

This is the main reason the Oasys cost $ 8000 .

I can't believe Korg would do this to Oasys owners .

Korg please do the right thing and support the Oasys with new technologies as they become available like you promised .

I have to agree in this one instance - given the STR-1 and MOD-7 engines were developed for OASYS; it is a great pity that the new libraries were not released for both.

I can only imagine it's because of two reasons:

- OASYS is declared as discontinued and hence Korg won't roll back on that

- There's no actual way to port them over to OASYS (if they were developed on Kronos then they are saved in a format not readable by OASYS). If only they had developed the sounds on OASYS they would have been readable by both instruments.

I usually do not gripe about OASYS updates - but given that in this instance the sound libraries are developed for synth engines common to both, I feel it's a bit stingy of Krog not to release them for OASYS too.

Kevin.

[cello]

[... but given that in this instance the sound libraries are developed for synth engines common to both, I feel it's a bit stingy of Korg not to release them for OASYS too.

Well said Kevin!

[Dany]

...given the STR-1 and MOD-7 engines were developed for OASYS; it is a great pity that the new libraries were not released for both...

...but given that in this instance the sound libraries are developed for synth engines common to both, I feel it's a bit stingy of Krog not to release them for OASYS too...

Kevin.

...which was exactly the core of my primary statement, opening this thread, which I admittedly should have phrased less provocative, in a more diplomatic and elegant way and thereby preventing the dramatic and irrational escalation of this thread (and of myself )

But isn't it funny, that just for the sake of entertainment, readers seem to highly enjoy exactly these kind of escalations, considering the quite high viewing number of this thread. (3000+)

Happy holidays!

-

[Kevin Nolan]

I don't own a Kronos (yet)

- but - perhaps as an interesting project - those who own both could manually program the OASYS with the same parameters as the Kronos new MOD-7 and STR-1 programs - parameter by parameter. If, say, 13 people took 10 programs each, an entire bank could be achieved / translated in a matter of weeks.

We could then post the PGC files on the Korgforums web site for all OASYS owners to download - and given this is a manual programming of the OASYS (and given the abandonment of OASYS by Korg) - there can be surely be no complaint by Korg and no consequences to having such freely available libraries [for OASYS owners]

There would of course be the unfortunate side effect that Korg could loose all subsequent revenues on these libraries because Kronos owners could download them too - so we'd need to post a statement to indicate to Kronos only users NOT to download them - that they are for OASYS owners only.

(If Korg are a bit worried about this, they could circumvent such a potential negative hit by the release the libraries for OASYS - with the added side effect that they would make revenues on upwards of another 3000 sales).


What do you think OASYS + Kronos owners - is this a viable option?


Kevin.

[Dany]

Kevin, your thoughts are indeed very interesting. But I guess it will be quite hard to find about 13 people owning both instruments, who are willing to do the hard work.

It's also an interesting legal question. If KORG could legaly claim the copyright on the idea for each of those new MOD-7/STR-1 sounds, your theoretical procedure would probably violate those copyrights.

Furthermore, Kronos users could just ignore any statement, that the download was just for OASYS owners and download the sounds anyway, which would produce a potential financial loss for KORG, probably allowing them to legaly claim compensation for loss...I am just guessing and the legal opinion of an expert in this field of law would be very interesting...

-

[razzaq1]

...If only they had developed the sounds on OASYS they would have been readable by both instruments.

Kevin.

So, since KORG already have the technology to develop sound libraries for OASYS, and KRONOS can load OASYS files......

Why dont KORG continue developing sound libraries for OASYS knowing that it will keep BOTH camps happy?

[Kevin Nolan]

Well -

OASYS is discontinued! That means a lot, internally to Korg. It means no resources can be pushed towards OASYS. Remember - it's not just about putting a bunch of sounds together - there's promotion, logistics, documentation ...

I realise these are in place for Kronos, but from my time in the computer industry I learnt that companies work incredibly tightly and formally on all releases - Korg can't just add OASYS to the release in an ad-hoc manner. If they did that across all their products there would be chaos internally.

Secondly, these sounds were not developed in-house but by sound designers external to Korg - who probably don't own an OASYS - and once developed in Kronos, there's no backward compatibility in file format - OASYS simply can't read Kronos files and even Korg can't make that happen.


So the reasons why Korg did not release these sounds for OASYS are understandable - it's just a great pity because OASYS and Kronos are SO similar and the only two instruments with these synth engines (to date); and - OASYS was the origin of these synth engines through a lot of sweat and tears - it'd surely be fitting to see these supposed top-notch sounds playable on this wonderful instrument.

Kevin.

[shawnhar]

those who own both could manually program the OASYS with the same parameters as the Kronos new MOD-7 and STR-1 programs - parameter by parameter.

[snip]

and given this is a manual programming of the OASYS (and given the abandonment of OASYS by Korg) - there can be surely be no complaint by Korg and no consequences to having such freely available libraries [for OASYS owners]

Whoah, whoah...

That's not how copyright works.

It makes no difference whether you copy something by loading a file from a memory stick, or by looking at the value of every parameter and then manually entering that same value into a different instrument. You are still making a copy of the source work (just that second way of making the copy is much more time consuming!) and if that source work is copyrighted by someone else, this is still illegal.

It's the same as if you copied a book using a photocopier vs. by manually typing the whole thing out while reading the original. Copyright law does not care what mechanism you used to make your copy...

[Dany]

Official KORG demo of the new KRS-02 Str-1/Mod7 Phase II Sounds. Watch the video from 02:50 to 06:25 :

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5aQq3KVbXCk

Listening to this demo, I have to admit, that I wouldn't even think of purchasing those sounds, even if I had a Kronos or if they were available for the OASYS.

With the great UI of the OASYS, one can easily create similar textures and sounds.

The OASYS really invites the user to create new and personal sounds, which nobody else has, while it's quite the contrary situation sitting in front of a Kronos, whose UI really begs for a software editor.

Case closed...

-

[razzaq1]

Thank you for the explanation Kevin.
My hope was a bit naive in retrospect.
It won't happen, I know, but they could market the sets as KRONOS sets - to 'keep their house in order' - but they could really be OASYS sets.
They needn't say so if they didn't want to.

Thanks Dany for your observations.
I was mulling the idea of KRONOS - particularly for the EP and Drums, but when I actually saw one in a shop, it looked so plasticky.

I guess, soon, people will have no point of comparison.

I remember being thrilled when I saw an M1 for the first time.

[chansensturm]

Well -

OASYS is discontinued! That means a lot, internally to Korg. It means no resources can be pushed towards OASYS. Remember - it's not just about putting a bunch of sounds together - there's promotion, logistics, documentation ...

I realise these are in place for Kronos, but from my time in the computer industry I learnt that companies work incredibly tightly and formally on all releases - Korg can't just add OASYS to the release in an ad-hoc manner. If they did that across all their products there would be chaos internally.

Secondly, these sounds were not developed in-house but by sound designers external to Korg - who probably don't own an OASYS - and once developed in Kronos, there's no backward compatibility in file format - OASYS simply can't read Kronos files and even Korg can't make that happen.


So the reasons why Korg did not release these sounds for OASYS are understandable - it's just a great pity because OASYS and Kronos are SO similar and the only two instruments with these synth engines (to date); and - OASYS was the origin of these synth engines through a lot of sweat and tears - it'd surely be fitting to see these supposed top-notch sounds playable on this wonderful instrument.

Kevin.

Hi Kevin,

Yes, it is discontinued, but Korg could invest a few bucks on a contractor to build patch conversion tools for us -or- better yet, supply us with an editor/librarian and let Oasys users worry about the conversion process. I'll bet the SYSEX implementations for both the Oasys are close to 100% the same. Hmm....why don't we have an editor ?

I just don't think *that* much promotion, logistics, ... etc... is required for small projects like this. Hire an intern to sit in a backroom in korg r&d to map the new mod7 Kronos patches onto Oasys. It ain't rocket science, it is a marketing decision that can be partially undone if enough of us make rational requests - as a group.

As you are suggesting, I think there is a lot of smaller "low hanging fruit" fixes they can implement at very little cost which would greatly extend our investment significantly. I think we have a right to ask (and we should ask because promises have been made). They can say no.

--craig

[seapad]

>as an interesting project - those who own both could manually program the
>OASYS with the same parameters as the Kronos new MOD-7 and STR-1 >programs - parameter by parameter. If, say, 13 people took 10 programs
>each, an entire bank could be achieved / translated in a matter of weeks.

Kevin,
Is there a way that the parameters of the programs could be listed in a text file? If so, then any OASYS users could build their own 'copies' or variants based on the Kronos parameters.
The variants (no matter how small the changes) could be upload for all Oasys users - no copyright issue there.

Best
Roger

[EvilDragon]

If KORG could legaly claim the copyright on the idea for each of those new MOD-7/STR-1 sounds, your theoretical procedure would probably violate those copyrights.

You cannot copyright the idea. You can patent them, but I've never heard anybody patented a sound!

[shawnhar]

You cannot copyright the idea.

True, but any concrete implementation of an idea comes under copyright.

If you listen to someone else's sound, are inspired by it, and program your own version of a similar sound from scratch, that's fine and not breaking any copyright, as you just copied the idea but not the implementation.

But if you take someone else's sound, look at the parameter values which make it up, and copy each of these values into your own sound, now you have copied the implementation so you are violating copyright.

This gets fuzzy if you copy just some parameter values while changing others, similar to if you stole the tune from the chorus of someone else's song while changing the lyrics and verse. That's the kind of situation that keeps copyright lawyers busy for years, and ultimately comes down to a judge deciding whether the amount of stuff you copied was sufficiently large and/or important to the end result.

You can patent them, but I've never heard anybody patented a sound!

I don't think you would be able to patent a specific sound, actually. Patents law is rather odd and specifically protects a process rather than a concrete work, so you cannot patent eg. a book or a song.

You could patent something like "the process of using one sine wave oscillator to modulate the frequency of another, creating harmonic sidebands" (ie. FM synthesis). Or you could get very specific and try to patent something like "the process of using an EG to modulate the rate of a very low frequency LFO, which in turn controls the rate of a second higher frequency LFO which in turn modulates the pitch ratio between two synced saw oscillators". Which is getting quite specific, but still describes a process that can create a broad category of sounds, not just one specific sound. This is obviously more powerful than copyright, but also much harder to get as you need to prove the process is an original idea, sufficiently unique, etc.

You would not be able to patent the specific settings of parameters that make up a particular sound, but those settings are automatically covered by copyright.

[LFCMusic]

Man... that was a loooong thread though it changed towards the end about copyright issues.

I don't own an OASYS though I almost did back in 2005 and I don't own a Kronos either.

After reading this forum and seeing how many OASYS owners are upset about the O being "Open" for only a short period of time, I have come to this conclusion.

From an O users point of view, its horrible that it was only for a short amount of time. I agree if I owned one.

From a Korg business perspective, it wasn't cost effective for them. They had to move on. I agree if I owned Korg.

It it fair? No.

Is either side happy? Not O users and I doubt Korg was happy to stop development for the O.

They only way I see for O users to get more of their money spent on the O is to sue korg for false advertising.

Just as Korg made the business decision that it wasn't cost effective or whatever X decision it was that made them stop, O users can sue for false advertising.

This is the only way I think to hold Korg accountable to keeping the O "Open" for a longer period of time thatn what O users were given.

Both sides can make plead their cases before a Judge and have him settle it.

Whomever wins, Wins. Whomever loses, Loses.

Case closed.

Thread Closed.

Again these are my just my thoughts...