Should Songwriters plan on keeping a ' Kronos ' forever ?

[GregC]

Actually, another way that I use to preserve my compositions is to write them down on a sheet of "paper", with the help of a music notation software on a computer. OK, not every single detail, but at least a lead sheet, and optionally some voices that are to be part of the composition.

I do this, because I mainly play an acoustic instrument, and KRONOS is my tool to arrange the music. At that point, of course, the advices posted above to save a good recording and the MIDI tracks etc. are still fully valid, if you want to recall the arrangement.

And with the arrangement, the biggest concern for me is, that at some point of time it might not be straightforwardly possible to recreate the arrangement -- to apply some slight modifications, without having to put a lot of efforts into this, because KRONOS would not be working any more.

Still, my compositions as such are not really lost by this

I do something like this- grab notation paper and scribble out the chord changes.

I suppose if I have a midi file on every Song, I can reprint in Finale or similar software.

I use to rely on my memory some decades back. But thats not realistic as I age
.

Its not enough to have a WAV file of my Songs. I need to be able to recall them and play them live. I know keyboardists, musicians have uncanny memory skills. But this gift is not the same at 64.

When I was 34 I had no concern about most of the above.

So you young whippersnappers- stay off my lawn

[burningbusch]

All I can say is stems. It's how pros lock down and transfer their sessions and so should you. I've never understood the idea that everything needs to be kept in a MIDI work state long after the idea has finalized. Keep the MIDI as backup, but bounce it and move on.

I've been using DAWs before they were DAWs, e.g. MOTU Performer, and have learned the hard way it's a dynamic environment. Plugins stop working because the developer has stopped updating them. Apple or the DAW developer makes some "improvement" that now screws up compatibility. Something gets inadvertently deleted.

Even recently, out of laziness, I made this mistake. I had a piece I wrote that I thought was done. But after many listening's and good bit of time, I determined the B section came in too loud. I went back to the original session in the DAW, started playback only to find it was a mess. The problem track had not been locked down (bounced to audio). Instead I had FM8 on a track with it's output being sent to Stutter Edit. Stutter Edit makes changes to the audio based on it's settings and MIDI trigger points on its track. FM8 has its own MIDI track which it needs to produce the notes plus of course FM8 needed to be set exactly as I had it originally. Plus there was track automation in play. Something was amiss but I simply couldn't figure out how to get it to sound exactly, or even closely to the original track. Too many dependencies and variables.

Anyhow, software isn't going to future proof anything.

Busch.

[amit]

Saving Stems is the way to go, and that is how I Do it however with Kronos its not as obvious how to go about that for everyone.

I had written a kind of Automation script that generated a midi file for the DAW, It sends sysex messages to kronos sequencer depending on parameters and soloed 1 track at a time and recorded it then next track etc. : http://www.korgforums.com/forum/phpBB2/ ... 920#693920

However it's windows only.

Having said that,
If there is interest I can explain the manual procedure on how to record stems from Kronos into the DAW's, that you can save later as wav files (OS independent).

I have done this countless times and it does make for a better workflow as you can have different mixes for A/B testing etc.

[GregC]

All I can say is stems. It's how pros lock down and transfer their sessions and so should you. I've never understood the idea that everything needs to be kept in a MIDI work state long after the idea has finalized. Keep the MIDI as backup, but bounce it and move on.

I've been using DAWs before they were DAWs, e.g. MOTU Performer, and have learned the hard way it's a dynamic environment. Plugins stop working because the developer has stopped updating them. Apple or the DAW developer makes some "improvement" that now screws up compatibility. Something gets inadvertently deleted.

Even recently, out of laziness, I made this mistake. I had a piece I wrote that I thought was done. But after many listening's and good bit of time, I determined the B section came in too loud. I went back to the original session in the DAW, started playback only to find it was a mess. The problem track had not been locked down (bounced to audio). Instead I had FM8 on a track with it's output being sent to Stutter Edit. Stutter Edit makes changes to the audio based on it's settings and MIDI trigger points on its track. FM8 has its own MIDI track which it needs to produce the notes plus of course FM8 needed to be set exactly as I had it originally. Plus there was track automation in play. Something was amiss but I simply couldn't figure out how to get it to sound exactly, or even closely to the original track. Too many dependencies and variables.

Anyhow, software isn't going to future proof anything.

Busch.

Thats the kind of big picture experience and opinion I was looking for.

I thought/assumed recording software had the 20 year longevity I was looking for to preserve SONGS.

I am going to attempt to paraphrase a few points:

Mac user here and I am somewhat aware of the havoc the frequent OS updates
have on Software publishers/developers. I also figured if the Publisher was stable enough, they would eventually suck it up , and code their product to conform to the latest OS Apple pushes on us.

And I believe there is more to it ? Users might get challenged by the updated Software on their Mac, etc, etc, etc. features don't work, old files don't load, etc.

If this is close to the truth, software is not future proof. And the many posts above feel we should stick with our Kronos , our Work stations, etc.

I don't object to having 2 Kronos. Its actually not about the $$$ for me.

Its about the time and reliability . And stability over the next 20 years.

And when I reach my late 70's, 80's, its possible I won't be very interested in hacking around in Apples latest OS and whatever Software. I don't enjoy wasting my time with quirky software- or hardware, either.

I simply want to continue creating music and preserve my material without all the Bull s**t file problem, etc. For a long time.

[timbukktwo]

This thread has wings; I knew it!

[timbukktwo]

Mike Conway wrote:
Nice of you to say, Greg. Thanks!

GregC wrote:
I will try to replace my skepticism with your +15 year Kronos platform prediction.


I'm just going by how long I've had various gear, especially the OASYS, which is 12 years old, now. With all the generations of Kronos boards, up to this point, it shouldn't be hard to find a replacement for the next several years.



GregC-

This really is my sentiment as well. The Oasys/Kronos platform, while maybe not perfectly future-proof, is still viable for a long time coming. I truly think there's comfort for us, brothers! Like I've said earlier, I hope Korg continues to support this platform with a few more updates, maybe an additional engine (yea!) before (moving on-?) to something new (whatever that is)!

[GregC]

This topic i have given much thought.
KRONOS backup plan.
In about a year, i will be able to invest around $3000 for new gear.
I thought about the KOMPLETE 11 but, it just didnt do it for me.
I mean sure alot of the guitar and orchestra loops sounded great but they were loops of actual instruments bieng played, of course they are gonna sound realistic.
I searched all of tube to try and find video demos of keyboard players actually playing KONTACT 11 instrument sounds as keys, and not already written mini songs (loops) but, i could only find a few.


So i think i will probably get a K2 61 as a backup plan.
KRONOS is still one bada** machine.
In a way KRONOS is future proof.
Eventually PC drivers become outdated and wont work when alot of synths get older.
but KRONOS will always be able to stand outside of that and still be an all in one.
Basicaly because it doesnt need a computer to do its thing.

You made solid points. we also have similar plans for (another) K2.

I would much prefer another high end W/s from Korg by Jan NAMM 2018, but
if nada, I am good for the K2.

I am starting to augment my Kronos with Spectrasonics VI stuff.
These instruments are just too good and with the Kronos, I am expecting
to super charge my Songs with them.

Since I am skeptical of large corps, I can't help but air out concerns for longevity. But all the positive posts have been reassuring.
I have been a friend of Korg for a very long time.

That trust has to be earned every year. I just think thats the way the world turns. But I don't mind being the only worry wart

[GregC]

There is an ineffable freshness at the precise moment of the creation of a song. Then months after, years after, many of that is definitely lost. That's why I am not so aware for a way back to songs that have been done and finished. But more important : I always, now, tend to find a singer for my songs, beacause I know that in the years to come these song will be always alive and well due to the fact that they are sung and here is a charm to hear them back after all these years.
But I will be very pleased (that is the word) if the next workstation from Korg will be able to play simply and precisely the sng files created by the Kronos. The midifile process has too much limitations. I have bought a Triton Extreme just for one song (!!!!) just because the Kronos could not play the Triton file song format. And I remember the good old days of the Irish Acts forum. This Kronos forum is just perfectly fine too

i really like what you said about the fleeting arrival of the Muse for our Songs.

It has to be captured immediately. It won't come back- you have to nail that creative part or Song in the SEQ before it departs from the brain or synapse.

Its a gift to have original music ideas, to live out our imagination with the most tangible form of expression.

We are all lucky to have the time to talk about it and create every day on the Kronos. My creative process inexplicably is tied to the Kronos.

[SanderXpander]

Software is definitely not future proof, as I also tried to say, badly I suppose. Hard drives die, updates break compatibility, etc. etc.

The best long-term bet, as was pointed out numerous times now, is WAVs of every track. Store them in a few places too. WAV files have been universal for decades and will hopefully remain so for our lifetime.

It's interesting to hear you really keep revisiting old work. It's very different from how I work but I suppose it's also different if you're producing music purely at your leisure, next to (I suppose?) a regular job/life. I do have projects that last a while (sometimes quite long) but once the thing is "done" I always move on. It makes little sense for me to revisit something that has been sent off to be mastered and possibly released. Truth be told it helps me to have deadlines like those.

Trying to think of it in terms of your workflow, I do think the software route will be safer in the long run, but that is mostly because it's a lot easier to bounce midi parts to audio. You'll obviously have the midi of everything you make but I would consider it a bonus if it works five years and two OS/DAW updates later. In Logic, you can either bounce to disk all tracks individually with a single command (leaving your project otherwise unaffected), or "bounce-and-replace" all tracks in place, meaning every softsynth and audio track with plugin fx will be transformed into a regular audio track. Do a "save as" after this but then you'll have a perfect replica of your song at that moment in time. Your project audio folder will have all the WAVs if you ever arrive at a time where even the Logic project won't open. This way you may need to rerecord parts you want to adapt significantly but you will have all your sounds and you would be able to make simple audio cuts and pastes, and you can mute parts and remix everything as much as you like.

[GregC]

1)It's interesting to hear you really keep revisiting old work. It's very different from how I work but I suppose it's also different if you're producing music purely at your leisure, next to (I suppose?) a regular job/life. I do have projects that last a while (sometimes quite long) but once the thing is "done" I always move on. It makes little sense for me to revisit something that has been sent off to be mastered and possibly released. Truth be told it helps me to have deadlines like those.

2)Trying to think of it in terms of your workflow, I do think the software route will be safer in the long run, but that is mostly because it's a lot easier to bounce midi parts to audio. You'll obviously have the midi of everything you make but I would consider it a bonus if it works five years and two OS/DAW updates later. In Logic, you can either bounce to disk all tracks individually with a single command (leaving your project otherwise unaffected), or "bounce-and-replace" all tracks in place, meaning every softsynth and audio track with plugin fx will be transformed into a regular audio track. Do a "save as" after this but then you'll have a perfect replica of your song at that moment in time. Your project audio folder will have all the WAVs if you ever arrive at a time where even the Logic project won't open. This way you may need to rerecord parts you want to adapt significantly but you will have all your sounds and you would be able to make simple audio cuts and pastes, and you can mute parts and remix everything as much as you like.

1) I noticed that you are still wondering why we have different attitudes towards ' finished work ' or ' old work'.
Therein might be your answer.
Songs are not work for me. They are fun, personal creations.

I would not play in a band - playing the same old tunes every week end. I would find that boring. To me, that would be ' work '.

Here's an example. I wrote a song named Acoustic Naturale 15 years ago.
In passing it around , a friend noticed the rhythm is a little off. I can't hear that
but I am objective. I am all for improvement. So the tune goes back to my ' refinement' group of music projects.

and I got Omnis 2 and Keyscape, 1000's of great new instruments. what if I hear something that I want to insert in my old tune ? Why Not ? There is nothing stopping me.

I do have an overall game plan. To complete and finalize 25/30 songs by end of 2017. A combination of originals and favorite covers. I know there is value
in having this locked down. I don't care if I don't make $$ off this once I go
into wider distribution.

2) I do want to work efficiently to preserve my material. Which is why I was thinking of another software solution for recording. I don't believe the Kronos is the end to end answer for this aspect.

[Gunnar]

This is a really tricky one, because at the end of the day there isn't any option that will give you 100% what you need.

Like you, I don't gig and I don't play in a band, I just play for fun. Music is not my profession either, I write software for a living. I do tend to think of my songs as reflection of me at a given time, though. So when I start presenting my music to friends and family, I usually go a few more iterations based on things I notice and feedback I get, but then leave it at that and move on. That means that for me, a .wav file is sufficient. If I were to pick up a song later on, then I can always do those takes again. The time consuming part for me is to get the structure of the song. Back on topic..

I have pretty good confidence that .wav files will be readable in my lifetime. It is a dead-solid, loss-less format which is trivial to write a loader for (from a programmer's perspective), so this is something I can trust for a long time. mp3 on the other hand, I would not trust beyond 10 years... It has been present a while, but compression is lossy (which is bad on its own), but a better compression file format might come and replace it at any time and players might lose support for it as usage dwindles. It might be available in 2030 or it might be something we look back on with a frown.

Same thing with any software solution. Software rots fast, we call it "bitrot". That doesn't mean that the code itself change and deteriorate over time, but the conditions under which software was written change. There are OS updates, there are hardware updates, there are changes to dependent libraries, config files etc... All of these end up with a highly dynamic system which is why software updates always break something. I'm a software developer myself, so I don't mean this as disrespect to other software developers, I'm just stating how the life of software tends to be :)

A laptop has an average lifespan of 3 years. A desktop computer, perhaps 5-6 years. After that, you're on borrowed time. With frequent updates due to increasing security concerns, hacker attacks and general bug fixing and the desire for more features that some times leaves old features behind, the software ends up changing to a large degree. The implication for DAWs is that while you can be pretty sure your future computer with a future version of your favourite DAW can load your old projects, you can also be pretty sure that you're going to have a hard time getting all of your plugins to load. This means your projects won't sound the same, and if you're a bit unlucky, they'll be just broken. Again, this isn't because plugin manufacturers are bad people, but things change, they might replace plugins with new versions which are slightly different, move to a different plugin set and leave old ones behind, go out of business or become incompatible for some other reason.

If I compare that to my trusty old Korg X3 which I bought back in 1994, it still loads the 3.5inch floppy disk projects I created back then and it still runs solid as anything. I'm not saying that those projects sound awesome, but at least they load and sound the same :) No computer I have from that area will even boot, so there is something to be said for the stable harware synth over the more fluctuating computer market. The Kronos is a lot more complex than my old X3, so I doubt that it will last me 20+ years.. Hell, mine already has a dodgy joystick after 1.5 years, but I still have more faith in its long term compatibility because it only gets a minor full-os update every now and then, and I can trust that Korg did some end-to-end testing of the update prior to shipping (or that they'll bring an update within a reasonable amount of time when something slips through). Full end-to-end testing of a computer is in practice not possible as every laptop has a unique set of updates, files, applications and configurations. I expect my Kronos to outlive any software or Mac I currently have in my possession by at least a generation or two, simply because the computer side is so unstable.

So what am I really saying here. If you want to go back to a project absolutely as is, you will have to trust that the computer or hardware you produced it on is still alive when you choose to do that, or something quite similar to it. At this point, I realize I'm sounding quite grim, which was not what I intended :) My main point was to emphasis the focus on transition paths which are sustainable long term. Mike pointed out a few transition paths that has worked for him which sound pretty amazing and those are based on hardware rather than software. Like SanderXpander, I've put my faith in stereo mixdowns because once my songs are done, they are done. If I were to go back, it would be a new version and I can start that over again.

If you do go for a software/PC/Mac solution, then along your DAW projects, I would save stereo mixdowns of the (currently considered) finished thing as .wav files, each individual track as a .wav files, and MIDI dumps as well. I would also limit my use of esoteric VST/AU plugins simply because I wouldn't trust those to be around and compatible for 10+ years. For the more fancy VST synths, bump those to audio tracks so you capture the sound, not just the notes. That gives you a reasonable chance of being to load something that looks and sounds like what you were working on x years past.

I hope you find a solution that works for you!

[amit]

Its nice to see how each of us has a different perception on what a Song is to them. There are no Rights or Wrongs in here.

I ain't a musician by professions either (Software/tech Consultant). So Most of the music that I do is for fun and Sanity

I mostly play improvisational music etc, but at times do record songs or pieces.

For me the song usually is based off the current state of things,mind, mood or the current feelings about ?, So changing that later in future is usually no go for me, as I am not in that state anymore, so any change I do will only take away from what that song is reminiscent of , like a snapshot of that moment in time.

Yet there are songs/music that I have done purely for non-self purposes (jingles/demos/presentation /for friends or other commercials) those unless already consumed by the use case , always have or may have the scope of improvement so keeping options open has always been a good idea.

on an another analogy, consider your-self an artist, say a painter , or a sculptor or any else, the most important thing here is the Art-Piece itself, not the tools you used,or the paint you used or the brushes etc. Yes they impart their own character to a certain degree, yet you being the sole creator do have the say in what makes that art piece what it is, That's your expression, you get to decide when it's final or done (though the hardest part). Thing to note here is You and Your Art, with times to come you'll learn the new tools and will be able to express yourself with them as you have been able to learn and express yourself with current generation of tools. Software or Hardware should not matter today or tomorrow, but what you do with that.

As has been advised earlier, Saving Stems has always been the choice of professionals because that removed a lot of the intricate dependencies.
A lot of this has to do with the use of multi track recorders and how that helped shape the things,
If for a moment you forget you have midi recording, then what all are you left with: Just Audio. Use and Keep that and you'd be future proof for most of the things. You could replace synth bass with a real player or guitars etc, yet keeping everything else intact, need different overheads, perhaps a different kick etc,.
You could have different mixes, or Master Setups, those who have been recording for some time would immediately realize how these hings have changed over time to time and come back etc (especially the Dynamic Range).
With the Advent of auto tune systems like Melodyne etc, you can even edit your instruments audio take and correct timing and pitch of played notes if need be.

All of these use cases and many more require that you at the least have stems (different audio track for each instrument). You can save some work if you store Midi but that is not future proof because although some things are standard like note numbers , a midi will contain automation cc parameters or worse SYSEX. If you play that midi with any other synth engine you are more than likely bound to find it troublesome unless the new synth also uses exact same parameters and cc mappings (very unlikely).

The Midi at best can serve you as a reference unless it's utterly simple (but if it's simple enough you should have no problems recording that again in the first place) , so do remember that.

The above has been my experience over the years (maybe it can be helpful to someone),

If I write anything on Kronos Seq as a Song that I might need to revisit, I save the AUDIO Stems in my PC). I stopped saving my final projects as midi, as that served me no purpose when the need arose. Though I do Use Midi extensively while working on the Project.

For me it would be counterproductive to worry about the tools, of today as I don't know what the future holds for me or my tool, the Only constant that matters to me is my RAW references (Tracks/Stems, that I Know will be the same, with the least dependencies).

[GregC]

This is a really tricky one, because at the end of the day there isn't any option that will give you 100% what you need.

Like you, I don't gig and I don't play in a band, I just play for fun. Music is not my profession either, I write software for a living. I do tend to think of my songs as reflection of me at a given time, though. So when I start presenting my music to friends and family, I usually go a few more iterations based on things I notice and feedback I get, but then leave it at that and move on. That means that for me, a .wav file is sufficient. If I were to pick up a song later on, then I can always do those takes again. The time consuming part for me is to get the structure of the song. Back on topic..

I have pretty good confidence that .wav files will be readable in my lifetime. It is a dead-solid, loss-less format which is trivial to write a loader for (from a programmer's perspective), so this is something I can trust for a long time. mp3 on the other hand, I would not trust beyond 10 years... It has been present a while, but compression is lossy (which is bad on its own), but a better compression file format might come and replace it at any time and players might lose support for it as usage dwindles. It might be available in 2030 or it might be something we look back on with a frown.

Same thing with any software solution. Software rots fast, we call it "bitrot". That doesn't mean that the code itself change and deteriorate over time, but the conditions under which software was written change. There are OS updates, there are hardware updates, there are changes to dependent libraries, config files etc... All of these end up with a highly dynamic system which is why software updates always break something. I'm a software developer myself, so I don't mean this as disrespect to other software developers, I'm just stating how the life of software tends to be

A laptop has an average lifespan of 3 years. A desktop computer, perhaps 5-6 years. After that, you're on borrowed time. With frequent updates due to increasing security concerns, hacker attacks and general bug fixing and the desire for more features that some times leaves old features behind, the software ends up changing to a large degree. The implication for DAWs is that while you can be pretty sure your future computer with a future version of your favourite DAW can load your old projects, you can also be pretty sure that you're going to have a hard time getting all of your plugins to load. This means your projects won't sound the same, and if you're a bit unlucky, they'll be just broken. Again, this isn't because plugin manufacturers are bad people, but things change, they might replace plugins with new versions which are slightly different, move to a different plugin set and leave old ones behind, go out of business or become incompatible for some other reason.

If I compare that to my trusty old Korg X3 which I bought back in 1994, it still loads the 3.5inch floppy disk projects I created back then and it still runs solid as anything. I'm not saying that those projects sound awesome, but at least they load and sound the same No computer I have from that area will even boot, so there is something to be said for the stable harware synth over the more fluctuating computer market. The Kronos is a lot more complex than my old X3, so I doubt that it will last me 20+ years.. Hell, mine already has a dodgy joystick after 1.5 years, but I still have more faith in its long term compatibility because it only gets a minor full-os update every now and then, and I can trust that Korg did some end-to-end testing of the update prior to shipping (or that they'll bring an update within a reasonable amount of time when something slips through). Full end-to-end testing of a computer is in practice not possible as every laptop has a unique set of updates, files, applications and configurations. I expect my Kronos to outlive any software or Mac I currently have in my possession by at least a generation or two, simply because the computer side is so unstable.

So what am I really saying here. If you want to go back to a project absolutely as is, you will have to trust that the computer or hardware you produced it on is still alive when you choose to do that, or something quite similar to it. At this point, I realize I'm sounding quite grim, which was not what I intended My main point was to emphasis the focus on transition paths which are sustainable long term. Mike pointed out a few transition paths that has worked for him which sound pretty amazing and those are based on hardware rather than software. Like SanderXpander, I've put my faith in stereo mixdowns because once my songs are done, they are done. If I were to go back, it would be a new version and I can start that over again.

If you do go for a software/PC/Mac solution, then along your DAW projects, I would save stereo mixdowns of the (currently considered) finished thing as .wav files, each individual track as a .wav files, and MIDI dumps as well. I would also limit my use of esoteric VST/AU plugins simply because I wouldn't trust those to be around and compatible for 10+ years. For the more fancy VST synths, bump those to audio tracks so you capture the sound, not just the notes. That gives you a reasonable chance of being to load something that looks and sounds like what you were working on x years past.

I hope you find a solution that works for you!

Gunnar, you hit it out of the park in every way.

Thanks !

[spaceman3]

When i get my hands on 3 grand, i am getting a backup KRONOS.
The more i read about pc software, the more i do not like it.
That is just my personal preference.
I am sticking with KRONOS till the day i die.
As a songwriter, KRONOS offers me everything.
Personaly i think KRONOS sounds as good, and in some cases better than pc software synths.
Sound development has sort of hit a brick wall anyway.
I do not hear anything new that is blowing KRONOS out of the water, but thats just my opinion.
Great sounds are timeless, and KRONOS will still sound amazing long into the future.
Again, just my preference and opinion.
Afterall, i am obsessed with KRONOS.

[timbukktwo]

I may be coming in at a wrong tangent here with what's being said regarding using .wav files being used for either permanent storage or revisiting a completed project, but please let me explain.

When I was looking for a good recorder to store finished projects, I came across Korg's MR series of 1-bit recorders. Completely new to the idea of dsd, I researched everything about it and ended up getting the now unavailable MR-1000, which I still have. I'm presuming you guys probably know about the dsd format, how it came about and everything.

You see, when I was building my studio, I wanted to know anything and everything about every piece I was getting. No stone unturned. Also, nothing was worse to me than buying just to buy, or redundancy, etc., and I wanted what I felt to be the best for my proposes and uses- no more and no less. I think a lot of people buy things without knowing the potential in the tools they're purchasing. I wanted a very refined music system, with the best quality (I could afford at the time); the most basic, simplistic, flexible and complete (minor contradictions) studio I could put together. I say all this to elaborate the mentality that I absolutely had to put my best foot forward with these goals. I just had to, because I just love music so much.

So when I came across the dsd format and, specifically with Korg's implementation, I was blown away with what it was and how I could use it! Because of the goals I mentioned in the previous paragraph took presedance, workflow took a second seat. It was because I wanted the sound quality Korg's implementation in the MR series gave. I bought it for the converters; I could use it for using future-proofed 1-bit saved stems, files, or finished songs; I could even use it as an expensive, fantastic sounding ipod! Make no mistake, though- it is a mastering-quality, mix-down device that serves one well in that area, as well. In a portable, stereo, even optional battery-operated location recorder!

I do understand to the high-end recording elite guru's; there will be the purist ideals regarding this, that, and the other regarding the dsd format in comparison to high-end pcm (I'm NOT going there). We need ideals to strive for, surely! There are somewhat legitimate conversations to be had there, but for all other intents and purposes, it didn't prevent me from coming to my own conclusions. Using the Korg MR-1000 may not have the best workflow for some (it does have some limitations), but the SOUND did it all for me! This device is just so useful! An absolutely flat-out joy to listen to that doesn't take away what you put into it!