Korg Forums

Hi guys

Interesting topic….. almost puzzling…:?

siebenhirter wrote:Korg SHOULD TRY TO HOLD THE LEVEL OF FUNCTIONS THAT ALREADY WHERE PRESENT - since more then 10 years and even in small MicroArranger and Pa500.
... comes without fingered3-mode and without selectable Fill-Modes - that seems to be a step backward in development of its styleplayer.

Sorry but I don't get this - the PA3XLe is a "lite edition" = "cut down" = "reduced functionality" = "Less Expensive".
Korg made the decision how to "produce" a "reduced" PA3X and that results in the PA3XLe. It cannot be a step backward because it is "missing" features from other models - that just happens to be "the "PA3XLe model design".

Can't understand the problem here - everything is clearly laid out in the documentation (Page 135) which is more than can be said for Tyros… I will never buy a Tyros until their AI fingering works (same as Korg's "Fingering 1") and Tyros manual actually, and incorrectly says it "does" work!!!!! I found out the hard way "$$$!!"

Kim wrote:Is it not the case that the PA3X LE is missing a desirable chord recognition feature?
Is it not the case that this was intentional on KORG's part?
Does this not make the purchase of a PA3X a necessity in some users' minds?
I am talking about intentional model design to establish its place in the lineup.
I am simply saying that features establish a model's superiority in the model lineup.

And to quote Forrest Gump, "That's all I have to say about that."

+100

OK - so what have we got:-
"One finger" - yep got that - every arranger has that.
"Fingered" - this is PA3X "Fingered 1" in style play and "Fingered 3" in "Full keyboard" mode
"Expert" is PA3X "Fingered 3" less one mandatory note in style play.

When do "inverted" chords become a problem?
(Just trying to understand the issue re the options, and not Korgs decision to change the features slightly)

Cheers

Pete

By the way, Keith - SO NICE to have you around again - always valued your experiences and views - take care….

karmathanever wrote: Korgs decision to change the features slightly

If changing features slightly it also would be no problem for next keyboard-generation to omit extended Styleplay functions for somebody - such as DrumEdit, Family Select, EasyEdit, Drum Mapping var1-4, Kick & Snare designation, wraparound, cue mode, FillModeSelection, Fingered3 mode ....

A regressive keyboard concept (Pa300/600/900/3Xle) is no welcome decision, and as Keith, I suspect it would be easy to add "forgottens" back into the software.

Inverted chords are not an issue I've had yet.

Despite our protests here and on PA900 board, I don't believe that anyone from Korg is listening to us. After all, we are only the people that buy and use their products. Why should they?
The missing chord mode will certainly prevent my buying more Korg arranger products and is quickly reaching the point where I will jump ship to a company who is more interested in addressing the needs of its customers.
DonM

karmathanever wrote:"One finger" - yep got that - every arranger has that.
"Fingered" - this is PA3X "Fingered 1" in style play and "Fingered 3" in "Full keyboard" mode
"Expert" is PA3X "Fingered 3" less one mandatory note in style play.

When do "inverted" chords become a problem?
(Just trying to understand the issue re the options, and not Korgs decision to change the features slightly)

Well Pete , you do not own Pa600/900/Le to see in realtime what exactly the issue is for an skilled Musician with those
models , it really blown my mind while I was developing commercial packs for those arrangers and admit that I can't play with
them in gigs , so there is no matter of limited edition but the elimination philosophy of the most important fingered 3 recognition
mode that exist since i-series !
I copied a post part example from the extensive analysis we had made for Pa3XLe
http://www.korgforums.com/forum/phpBB2/ ... c&start=60
to see what exactly is that issue :

Fingered recognition mode option in Pa600/900/Pa3XLe without fingered 3

- A skilled arranger user always uses chord memory in order to release his left hand due to use controller like Y/X/Sw 1-3 or Fill/Var.
If the only acceptable "expert" chord recognition mode of Pa900/LE is used then when playing for instance a complex chord like A7-9 ( A-Bd-C#-E )
and release your hand by math accuracy the last released notes will re-trigger scanning mode and result to a totally different chord & Bass
since the last released note (in mS) will be the Bb that will trigger A# unison harmony in expert mode and A#major in fingered mode !!!
- Some will happen when you want to use rhythmic patterns with an el.piano by your left hand , changing all time chord or chord root in split mode.
- Also we can't play unison octaves or duets using left-right hands using for instance a spited piano sound in split mode , since any latest
recognition mode will interfere in our playing , changing chords !

I always use all above playing methods and those modes really "kill" me , forcing me playing like an amateur , precisely releasing my left hand
fingers only in next chord change in order to avoid chord misleading , this is totally unacceptable !

Thanks Antony for the very accurate quote and description of the problem with the Chord recognition that we have to put up with. I couldn't have explained it as well as you have and as I said previously, let's hope Korg put this right. After all it does say 'professional Arranger' on the keyboard and at £2000 I would expect it to be. At the moment it is not.

A regressive keyboard concept (Pa300/600/900/3Xle) is no welcome decision, and as Keith, I suspect it would be easy to add "forgottens" back into the software.

I hear what you are saying…

i3/i30/PA1XPro/PA2XPro/PA3X are the flagships, all top-of the-range in their day.
Korg have simply produced a economical range of the "current" top model PA3X - it isn't going to have everything and features/options will be omitted - that's the whole idea.

I too would not want to be without personally preferred "fingering" options as they have been in their top end arrangers - so I wouldn't buy one of these cheaper models.
If PA3X is too expensive/heavy or whatever, then careful choices are to be made to ensure that the "cheaper" range models will meet requirements - if not, then alternative brands perhaps.

Just the way I see it. There were no surprises here - everything documented.

I hope Korg makes some changes for you…..

Pete

Just a simple change Pete. Not asking for the moon here. It's just a software thing that I would imagine to be very simple to do...

Thanks for the welcome back. Although here I am causing trouble already

edit: Pa500 and 588 had Advanced fingering modes

You still don't get my point ... Fingered 3 mode is translated in a few lines of code in OS that were extracted on purpose from
main source code , can be applied to any PaSeries at anytime with a simple update , this is not a feature that could reasonably
be omitted in a cheaper model , but a deeper silly commercial movement that might be applied in all future models
(judging from 3 model in line), that's my main concern !!! and if so ...
then GoodBye Korg arrangers brand for my future development !!!

Personally, I think you are giving Korg altogether too much credit for being Machiavellian!

I really honestly doubt that there was any deliberate intent on Korg's behalf to deliberately nerf the lower models to force users that know how to form a proper chord to buy ONLY the TOTL model. Particularly as this mode has been on lower models for quite a while (you'd think that if that was their tactics, it would never have been on a MOTL arranger in the first place!).

You see, I think that's the point some here are missing... This 'feature' has been on lower models for YEARS. Not to mention, all their competition has this kind of mode on their MOTL arrangers (in fact, Roland have improved it, not removed it). You can't honestly be telling me that Korg sat around and decided that, despite their competition's MOTL arrangers having this feature, that they would remove it and trust that everyone with a Korg MOTL arranger would suddenly fork out thousands extra for ONE needed function, rather than run off to their competitors' products?

There's a far more plausible explanation... Incompetence! As I so often think, the people DESIGNING these things really don't play them! I doubt that anyone in the design department realized how much this feature is used, or how important it is to more advanced players - remember, advanced player doesn't necessarily mean advanced bank balance!

And I really doubt that Korg is going to be willing to abandon all these loyal users to their competition, when simply returning the code THEY ALREADY HAVE USED IN MOTL ARRANGERS will calm everything down.

So, all of you struggling with this issue, keep up the pressure! Contact Korg directly, tell them that you will NOT be buying a PA3X simply to get a feature back you have had for years on the MOTL line. Tell them that your NEXT arranger will be a Yamaha, or a Roland, or a Ketron if they don't return it.

And watch how fast they patch the OS!

nitecrawler wrote:Excellent points Kim. I bought the Pa3Xle for its 76 keys and metal construction. The fact that it's missing a chord mod has not become and issue yet. I am a piano player so left handed full chords are not a big deal. What's important is 76 keys and metal wood construction. I play out a lot and plastic makes me a little squeamish. Being a $1000.00 cheaper is a big plus as well.

One of the best investments one can make is in a hardshell road case like SKB or similar. With 6+ in and out moves per week I find the price of one far less money and down time in the end!

You're right Diki. I have told them several times that I will no longer be a customer, but I'm only one person. We ALL need to raise hell with them!
DonM

Dikikeys wrote:Personally, I think you are giving Korg altogether too much credit for being Machiavellian!

Contrary we give credits to our consumer rights and "shouting at their face" since they dared to put in circulation a Pa900 model demanding 2000 $ ,
without the 15 years most significant PaSeries functions like fills & chord modes that even Pa500 toy was equipped with !
They just muddied the waters with "Pa3X features" while we definitely can't play this keyboard any more the way we were used to !

Be sure they're silently watching , we managed to convince them for fills lacking failure and my duty is to lead you all realizing
this Colosseum programming failure in Chord scanning and as they'll realize the potential of users reaction then , they certainly know the solution !

One more thing , I'm not a single customer representation for KorgPa products , I also represent hundreds of my products customers and fans
of my developments that will follow me in any Arranger Brand I'll turn to ! Just for the story ...

Please understand, I was not arguing here nor "supporting" Korg but merely pointing out that this is how they actually specified these models.

I do sincerely hope this happens for you guys.
Has anyone contacted Korg directly?

(see if you can get them to resurrect the "Backing Sequencer" - a unique and brilliant feature in the i3/i30 )

I emailed Korg regarding this months ago. I also have a considerable degree of influence on some of the largest arranger keyboard fora in the world. Just as I have sung the praises of Korg, so I will also bring these shortcomings to light.
Do I have enough influence to actually hurt Korg? No, not all, but if enough of us are dissatisfied over something that could be addressed in a matter of minutes with a simple software upgrade, it will certainly not be GOOD for Korg.
I want to see Korg do well and continue to develop great arrangers! They should listen to us.
DonM