Korg Forums

I'm still surpriced that Korg manages to run something as complex as realtime synth calculations, sample playback, effects engines and wave file palyback on a Atom CPU. I also had problems understanding that the Oasys was running on only a Pentium IV.

I work with system devlopment, I know how code can be optimised, but doing a synth where even a few milliseconds of delay or hickup is noticed without using any kind of support processors is impressive.

You can't compare the Motif and Kronos, for example. Yamaha is big enough to develop their own VLSI circuits. Dedicated processors, not off the shelf computer parts.

I don't understand why Korg decided to use only one Intel processor to run the whole synth and not putting any extra processors for the effects engine, the filters, etc. But somehow they managed to pull it off.

Korg's software department is the bee's knees, obviously.

depulse wrote:I'm still surpriced that Korg manages to run something as complex as realtime synth calculations, sample playback, effects engines and wave file palyback on a Atom CPU. I also had problems understanding that the Oasys was running on only a Pentium IV.

I work with system devlopment, I know how code can be optimised, but doing a synth where even a few milliseconds of delay or hickup is noticed without using any kind of support processors is impressive.

You can't compare the Motif and Kronos, for example. Yamaha is big enough to develop their own VLSI circuits. Dedicated processors, not off the shelf computer parts.

I don't understand why Korg decided to use only one Intel processor to run the whole synth and not putting any extra processors for the effects engine, the filters, etc. But somehow they managed to pull it off.

Traditionally, Yamaha, Roland, Korg, Kurzweil, Emu, Ensoniq and others have all developed their own ASICs for synthesis. Korg still does so for some products. Within the current context of general-purpose computing hardware, and judging from various comments here and elsewhere, my guess is that some may overestimate both the processing power and the cost of these dedicated chips.

Intel chips make great signal processors - especially if you run tight code close to the metal (or silicon, as it were).

The OS they use is not something a complete OS like Windows or Linux, but a stripped down version, probably removing all kind of unwanted interrupts and signals. This results in a real time operating system.

Since creating a dedicated chip or a realtime OS is not the core business of Korg, and since Intel/Atom processors will be widely available in the future probably, it's only a benefit they use generic components.

I am glad they could do all calculations with an existing chip, so they can use all their engineering effort to make great synths and musical features.

depulse wrote:
I work with system devlopment, I know how code can be optimised, but doing a synth where even a few milliseconds of delay or hickup is noticed without using any kind of support processors is impressive.

You can't compare the Motif and Kronos, for example. Yamaha is big enough to develop their own VLSI circuits. Dedicated processors, not off the shelf computer parts.

I don't understand why Korg decided to use only one Intel processor to run the whole synth and not putting any extra processors for the effects engine, the filters, etc. But somehow they managed to pull it off.

There's nothing wrong with using "off the shelf" parts. In fact, I'd say it's preferred when possible. Generally it's cheaper, and easier to develop for with excellent portability and a built in upgrade path.

If they were able to manage the processes and get it all to run within their accepted Runtimes, Why not have it all run on one proc? Why manage a bunch of extra subsystems hardware wise? Why fragment the Code Base? One system makes it easier to make enhancements and bug fixes IMO.

Plus they can take whatever they do now and easily move forawrd with it. It often reduces lead times and the development cycle.
Imagine if eventually you could just snap in the next "Atom" processor and take advantage of new features the previous processor couldn't handle? Of course that's only one part of the equation, but IMO FRP are GOOD. Most likely Atom on the Kronos isn't socketed, but that's probably an implementation choice.


I know it's nice to be able to say "hey I've got CUSTOM CHIPS in my keyboard!" but General Purpose stuff is fast enough now where there's room for overhead. I don't see this changing in the future. As time goes on we're going to see more SOC and Computers will be just an electronic appliance like a DVD player. Only cutting edge will need custom implementations and those are always far beyond normal prices. So really, the only thing that's changed as far as the consumer is concerned is products to market faster with the side effect of disposable technology.

Now if only we could get the software side to clean up its act...

Too bad we can't overclock that Atom to get more voices squeezed out.

NuSkoolTone makes many excellent points. I wanted to chime in on one thing:

NuSkoolTone wrote:
I know it's nice to be able to say "hey I've got CUSTOM CHIPS in my keyboard!" but General Purpose stuff is fast enough now where there's room for overhead. I don't see this changing in the future. As time goes on we're going to see more SOC and Computers will be just an electronic appliance like a DVD player. Only cutting edge will need custom implementations and those are always far beyond normal prices.

Another common use of custom chips is to make things *cheaper,* by building hardware that does exactly what you need it to do and no more. I would guess that this is far more common than expensive cutting-edge implementations, in fact. Digital cameras, iPhones, and most mass-market digital synths all have this in common.

Jesus, I'm learning a lot on this forum o___o

Korg wouldn't make a keyboard that doesn't work. That would be silly. If the Atom works, that's what's important.

The points of price and energy consumption have been made, as has the point of necessity... So I guess I have nothing to contribute to the topic ^^ *shuts up*

I think Korg should sell the Kronos without any processor, but instead allow users to install the CPU of their choise. If they don't mind Fan noise, okay let's get a i7 in there. This way you could indrease the polyphony even further, if needed. But offcourse a certified Korg dealer would be needed to insert it so no mistakes are made. The Korg Software should support more then one type of CPU then.

That would need lots of changes in the OS, I presume. It's not a viable option at this point in time.

EvilDragon wrote:That would need lots of changes in the OS, I presume. It's not a viable option at this point in time.

Not to mention internal hardware design to compensate for the extra heat&power from the cpu

It works for a PC. Not sure how much change that would be needed to the OS, the OS allready supports multitasking. And a Slightly bigger PSU wouldn't be a problem. If it is a standard PC PSU, you could change that as well. As we know, the Kronos is a computer in a Workstation Box.

hi..!!

(sorry my english)

Always... when you buy the top hardware synth.... this machines dont have inside the top cpu , memory, etc...!!

The real question here is:

The kronos do all the job ..?
Sound amazing?? its for you??
the seq midi/audio work perfect??
the sampling section work 100%..??
the nine engines work perfect?
the integration of all engines in combi and seq work perfect??
the smooth transition ....100% perfect?
the system startup is faster??
never freeze..??
the touch screen is bigger, faster??
the keyboard (weight and semiweight) like you??
the controllers (buttoms, sliders, touchpad, joystick, etc) work like a king..?


If everything beacuse you select this machine work perfectly

the hardware inside its not your problem..!!
Remember.... is a musical intrument ...

for what.???
to do nuclear simulation?? NO
to launch a rocket to Mars..?? NO
to study the last viral problems in the world?? NO

IS MADE FOR MUSIC..!!
Compose, produce, live touch, and enjoy when touch it.!!
But Music Man... MUSIC

If inside have a pentium 450 mhz... and work like a bell..??
whats the problem???


Open a motif and search the main processor....
Open a kurz PC361 and seach the processor..

This keys have hardware (chips/processor) disign only for this machine...!!
in any pc/mac you find it..!!

Open and see....

This hardware are not for massive comsuption..!! is especific and more $$$...!!

You can find a PC with i7. but the sound quality is...... THE AUDIO CARD...!! because this card are made for audio work..!!

And remember...

the Kronos (and all keys casio, yamaha, korg, roland and manymore..)are made for music..!!

robinkle wrote:It works for a PC. Not sure how much change that would be needed to the OS, the OS allready supports multitasking. And a Slightly bigger PSU wouldn't be a problem. If it is a standard PC PSU, you could change that as well. As we know, the Kronos is a computer in a Workstation Box.

Whos says the OS is multitasking? It might be, but it's probably an assumption. I can imagine Korg has stripped down every part that may cause unwanted interruptions and use an OS that has not fancy things Windows had ... you rather have an Aero interface or more polyphony?

robinkle wrote:It works for a PC. Not sure how much change that would be needed to the OS, the OS allready supports multitasking. And a Slightly bigger PSU wouldn't be a problem. If it is a standard PC PSU, you could change that as well. As we know, the Kronos is a computer in a Workstation Box.

Multitasking has very little, if nothing, to do with CPU utilization. Korg has a very tight code which is fat-free, and doesn't do unnecessary stuff. One of those unnecessary things is "support for different models of CPUs".