Official statement on the status and future of the OASYS

[zolhof]

Thanks Jerry, I really apreciate it and can imagine how hard is to drop such project

But they also say, that it makes them sad to have to annouce that the Oasys project is stopped by Korg until further notice

I will always hope and pray for a triumphal comback of the mighty Oasys.. aflterall, the Open Architecture thing might just be "closed" waiting for better days

[vortex]

It does start to sound like there has been no small amount of soul searching in the Oasys team at Korg. So there it is a human answer to a corporate decision.

Probably time to move on and revel in the rather exclusive club that is ownership of the Oasys. Life's not so bad is it!

If Korg had said several years ago that what we have now would be the end point I would definitely still have made the purchase. No false promises were necessary.

I'm still very very happy with my Korg and still only just off the flat bit at the bottom of the learning curve. There are plenty of musical and intellectual challenges left to keep me entertained, probably for a lifetime.

[Synergy]

I say the sequencer update is still possible as long as the officials at so called Korg R&D are willing to go along with half of what they've earned for the past five years. Of course it'll be natural for them to say sorry than to say hold on to your breath. Korg won't go bankrupt for at least another decade and certainly the Oasys won't cause it to happen. Probably it's just a matter of how much funds Korg is willing to suppliment the salaries for those who are involved in the Oasys project. The real economic crisis happened last year and Korg had plenty of time for the past five years. The new manufacturing process won't be necessary to improve the sequencer update unless the touch screen is different from that of the M3.

As an owner of Oasys, I'd like to know what portion of the Oasys' price tag was reserved for the term *Open Architect* in a *legal* sense. It is unfortunate for me to say that what Korg advertised was the bait and switch tactic especially after reading the statement saying 'the Oasys project was carried out more by the enthusiasm than the economic thoughts ..' To put it another way, how much did I *really* pay for that *enthusiasm* premium out of the $8,000 price tag? I must confess that I was held on *captive* of the term *Open* for the past four years knowing that no major hardware change would be necessary any sooner than *none-Open* architect synthesizers like the M3. Am I the only one who is exhibiting the abnormal behavioral symptom of Stockholm Syndrome?

[danatkorg]

I say the sequencer update is still possible as long as the officials at so called Korg R&D are willing to go along with half of what they've earned for the past five years.

Korg R&D (which I'm part of) is a small engineering group based in California. As most here already know, the OASYS was co-developed between Korg R&D and Korg Inc. in Japan. (Korg Inc. is also the parent company, and as such makes all final business decisions.)

At various points over the years, we've talked about how development was shared between the two groups. Here's a brief recap: Korg R&D was primarily responsible for the underlying system and the internal workings of audio-rate processes (synthesis and effects engines, hard-disk recording, mixing, etc.); we also did the user interfaces for the LAC-1 and MOD-7. Korg Inc. was primarily responsible for the user interface, sampling, the sequencer, disk mode, etc., and hardware (as well as all other aspects of the product: sound design, production, etc.).

As an owner of Oasys, I'd like to know what portion of the Oasys' price tag was reserved for the term *Open Architect* in a *legal* sense.

The OASYS was priced the same as all other professional Korg workstations (Triton, M3, etc.), using standard formulas based primarily on the hardware cost (which in the case of the OASYS was quite expensive). This is why options (LAC-1, MOD-7, EXs3) were priced separately.

after reading the statement saying 'the Oasys project was carried out more by the enthusiasm than the economic thoughts ..'

If I understand correctly, this was a statement from Musik Meyer, the distributors of Korg (and many other brands) in Germany. They are a separate business from Korg; the official Korg statement is the one posted by Jerry.

Best regards,

Dan

[EJ2]

This is how I lusted for my OASYS - ONE AWESOME SYNTHESIS SYSTEM. Period. I never have bought into the future with anything at all, regardless of what the manufacturers say. Remember when the Atari 512 came out...LOL. I have been around in this business too long to realise that it's what the device can do now, not tomorrow. In the case of my beloved OASYS, I knew what I was getting - the best damn synth workstation as it was and is. The rest that was delivered in the many tomorrows for us - and you have to admit that there was quite a bit provided to us, yes even without a sequencer update - was simply icing on the cake for me.

I consider myself fortunate to have snagged an OASYS when I did. Nothing in my studio can even come close to it; and I expect that's the way it will remain for some time to come.

Thank you Jerry. Thank you Dan, Brandon, and the rest of the R n D team. Thank you Jack and the voicing team. Thank you Stephen for Karma 2. And finally, thank you to the Beta testing team. It was a priviledge working with you.

If Korg ever decides at some point in the future, to introduce another piece of kit, the likes of which I have experienced with my OASYS, but better, you can count me in because I will be buying into it just as it is.
Cheers,
Eric

[danatkorg]

...many of us on the front lines are still here. Have always been here and will continue to be here.

We have been living through a very difficult and emotional time coming to these decisions, and a very difficult and emotional time "steeling ourselves up" for the ensuing reactions from you all. Stepping outside of the corporate formalities for a moment...

Do you not think that this pains us, as the architects of the project? No one who dreams of, develops, births and supports a product likes to see its path change. We certainly know the feelings of everyone here and we knew what we were heading into... To be perfectly blunt I've dreaded logging in each day to see what would ensue.

This doesn't mean for a moment that I question, or disagree with the decisions that were made, because I don't. But I surely regret that they had to be made. As does everyone who works on the project - there are no callous, or uncaring members of the team. We're all human, we're all musicians who care about the gear we make and use, and we all feel a great responsibility to our customers and friends.

But the situation "is what it is".

OK, that's about as far as I should step out of my "role/job" for now. But please don't think for a moment that we are insensitive to how you all feel.

Regards,

Jerry

Jerry has articulated this perfectly. I have little to add, but this: As with most of the engineering group, I've been working on the OASYS more or less full-time since sometime in the year 2000. (That's almost half of my adult life - and it doesn't include the previous OASYS products.) I care *deeply* about the instrument, as does everyone else involved in the OASYS development, and I hope that this shows in my involvement here in this forum.

Best regards,

Dan

[StephenKay]

It does start to sound like there has been no small amount of soul searching in the Oasys team at Korg.

You have no idea!

[billysynth1]

Have a lot to say...but wont bother. I'll accept the Japanese decision.

I wish you owned the company Stephen

Billy

[MrT-Man]

I'm also bummed out, but I don't regret having purchased my Oasys. It sounds great and I really enjoy playing it, & that's good enough for me... and as others have mentioned, it's still the best workstation out there, discontinued or not. My SY99 cost me a lot of money too, back in the day, & I've gotten a good 18 years (& counting) use from it. I'm sure I'll be using my Oasys for a long time to come, as well. I'm thrilled with all the new sounds I got just this week alone (the new Korg sounds, the new Karo sounds, and the Dream Theater combis).

I do wish I had a few million bucks to buy the Oasys intellectual property from Korg, & to put Jerry, Dan and Stephen in charge of continuing to develop it.

I guess one thing that I *am* a bit peeved about is the pricing strategy, throughout, as the Oasys's price is obviously what killed it, in the end. I know that Dan mentioned it was priced based on standard formulas in relation to hardware cost -- but that's not the right way to price something, as it completely ignores the concept of demand elasticity. Maybe if it had been, say, $2000 less, the incremental sales that might have generated would have more than offset the reduced margin.

Ultimately Korg needs a software platform to compete head-on against the likes of Native Instruments, as that's where things are headed, but I'd hoped that the R&D for the Oasys could have been levereged for that. -- i.e. maybe the market for an Oasys synth is too small to justify the ongoing R&D, but if that can be recycled into an awesome Oasys VST... that's why I wouldn't have expected Oasys development to come to a dead halt, although it sounds like it effectively has (at least for now).

[Synergy]

The OASYS was priced the same as all other professional Korg workstations (Triton, M3, etc.), using standard formulas based primarily on the hardware cost (which in the case of the OASYS was quite expensive). This is why options (LAC-1, MOD-7, EXs3) were priced separately.

I've read your statement in the past but tried not to get into deep because again I was held captive for the sake of the term Open. I find it hard to believe that the pure hardware cost for the Oasys alone is worth $8,000 unless there has to be some kind of hidden cost behind it-- the software development cost.
I’m pondering whether to draw a conclusion from your statement that no extra cost was incurred for Korg, Inc from legally needing to bind the term *Open architecture* aside from the standard formulas for the hardware cost Korg insists on using on the Oasys. What I'm trying to do is to redefine the term Open (*the software term*) out of the hardware cost formulas you mentioned.
We can't put an equal weight on the software and the hardware when it comes to the development cost as software has a spill over effect. Also, the ratio of time to recover the fixed cost and the duration of marginal profit on the software might be quite different from the hardware side. Hence the *true* hardware cost really is the net profit margin needed to cover up the marginal cost of the each unit.
One implicit implication I’m getting from your statement is that the net profit margin gained from the sales of Oasys was never added to the software development cost for the M3 so to lower the overall marginal cost of the M3 instead of Oasys. That is, the software developments for the M3 and the Oasys were never a mutually dependent but a completely exclusive projects from one another. Another is that either mutual dependency or exclusiveness between the Korg R&D and the Korg Japan somehow impinged on one another as the Oasys project became rather *costly* (hidden cost) to *collaborate* (so called Open). I was getting an impression that Korg, Inc was somehow engaged in *Openly* blaming (hidden cost) on one another saying ‘we did our part but they didn’t’ so the ultimate hostage is you the customer unless the ransom (major hidden cost) is given. Unfortunately, the ransom has already been given.
If the Korg R&D claims they took no part in the development of none-open architect instrument such as the M3, the real blame or all the credit would fall on the Korg, Japan. This only goes to prove that the term Open Architect not only added the capital loss (true hidden cost) for the customers but also the discord (benign hidden cost) among the Korg, inc themselves.
I’m curious to know what the marginal cost for the software development (aside from the hardware) of the M3 might be so that Korg was willing to give out the major dream upgrade for the M3 free of charge in a hurry. On the other hand, was the marginal cost for the Oasys prohibitly costly compared to the M3 to warrant the extra charge for each lackluster upgrades on top of already prohibitive price?
I think it is sufficient to say that the marginal profit for the Oasys has come to a point of the marginal cost and that the Korg has already recovered the fixed cost associated with the production of the Oasys hence the decision to pull the plug. But the bottom line is that the term Open is here to stay with us for a while. I was the one that invented the term *Big O* for the Oasys.

[StephenKay]

wish you owned the company Stephen

Thanks Billy, for that sentiment.

But really, Jerry or Dan would be a better choice to run Korg if there was actually a choice between the three of us.

We all love Korg, and we all love OASYS, but they actually work for Korg and have some relationship to the parent company.

Me, I just develop KARMA independently, and have this "interesting" relationship with Korg, which I hope can some how continue to flourish.

But I don't think any of the three of us have the background and/or experience to "run the company". Jerry might be the closest, with his experience in the management arm, but Dan and I are closer to the engineering arm. In any case, I'm extremely happy to be associated with them, and to continue to work with them.

Bottom line: I'll say it even if they can't; we're all sorry that it has come to this. BUT: (this is me speaking) you still have an awesome keyboard that few own.

[spalding12]

Well, the corporation is a bit formal, being Japanese and such. But I helped craft the message, to be in the spirit and personality of the company and our leaders.

What you all may be missing is that many of us on the front lines are still here. Have always been here and will continue to be here.

We have been living through a very difficult and emotional time coming to these decisions, and a very difficult and emotional time "steeling ourselves up" for the ensuing reactions from you all. Stepping outside of the corporate formalities for a moment...

Do you not think that this pains us, as the architects of the project? No one who dreams of, develops, births and supports a product likes to see its path change. We certainly know the feelings of everyone here and we knew what we were heading into... To be perfectly blunt I've dreaded logging in each day to see what would ensue.

This doesn't mean for a moment that I question, or disagree with the decisions that were made, because I don't. But I surely regret that they had to be made. As does everyone who works on the project - there are no callous, or uncaring members of the team. We're all human, we're all musicians who care about the gear we make and use, and we all feel a great responsibility to our customers and friends.

But the situation "is what it is".

OK, that's about as far as I should step out of my "role/job" for now. But please don't think for a moment that we are insensitive to how you all feel.

Regards,

Jerry

in all my years of reading and posting on internet-based forums
i've NEVER read such "from-the-heart" words...
especially from someone in YOUR position, Jerry

thank you
from the bottom of MY heart

[spalding12]

and, a word for Stephen,
i really appreciate your continued presence here
and your words are comforting to us, as well

your skills are idling now...
with this recent "slow down" at Korg
and the (at least at THIS moment) lack of agreement with Open Labs makes me a bit sad

i really hope that your continued efforts "show" themselves in this industry soon

i hope that you will be involved with whatever Korg does next
i hope that they can RIGHT THEIR SHIP, even if the economy doesn't suggest that for some time to come

in the end...
i suppose that if the Oasys hadn't been TWICE THE PRICE of the next most expensive board... folks wouldn't feel quite as "violated" by the CLOSED nature of the operating system, as things sit for the moment

[iksrazal]

I'm happy I purchased the Oasys and always will be - its the best thing I've ever played. I myself am not upset by the lack of a decent sequencer on the O, as I gave up years ago and bought an MPC4K, and furthermore there are lots of other options from other companies for hardware sequencers. I'm also not upset on its openness - which is important to me as someone who has GPL code released for embedded systems I've worked on - but I never had expectations for korg in this regard.

The most disappointing thing to me is the future of korg. The O as a platform - high end workstation based on PC hardware running linux - seems to be dead. If it were to be continued in some way - any way - korg would have made a smooth transition, instead of letting all these rumors for the last year or so linger. I myself was really hoping for an Oasys 2 with updated hardware, like 64bit OS / 16GB of ram, etc. I know hardware and something like that is more common every day on PC's - as was a 2GB system 5 years ago.

In short, I've always been a korg first guy - and I see that changing now. Other companies just seem to be going in directions more interesting to me - pick any single one and to me their direction is more attractive than the M3 or Radias. I'm thinking about buying a Korg Zero but its suffering much of the same rumor mongering that been going on with the O.

I just don't see Korg still leading, and that's the most disappointing part. As for using the economic crisis as an excuse, I don't see how that justifies letting down your most loyal and vocal customers this way.

Now that's off my chest, time to load some of the new combi's that have been coming out - I see that happening for a while still .

[Mike Conway]

Someone asked me what I thought about discontinued production. I answered that even in 2005, Korg only had so many motherboards of the type used in the OASYS. It never seemed that Korg themselves had any intention of going over 3 - 4 thousand units, because they have to keep a certain amount in reserve.

This day has been coming and I am not surprised. I am not angry. I don't buy anything, and I mean anything, based on hints/promises of development. I buy what something is for what it is the day I get it. In 2005, that was a non-polyunison workstation that only had HD-1, CX-3 and AL-1 engines. I was sold on the sound quality.

Of course, polyunison and the STR-1, PolySix, MS20 and MOD-7 engines were added, with a whole bunch of programs and samples. I have 4 Karo libraries on top of that, so my plate is full.

The sequencer is workable and though I probably won't see my top requested conveniences, like Velocity/Gate percentage and Move Clock, the depths of it still astound me, such as 20 track recording, in one pass, moving events/audio between 200 song locations, sysex automation and a bus system without a rival.

I do agree with Sharp that "silence" on this kind of product's future is not policy I approve of, but other than that, the Korg guys get nothing but accolades from me.

Probably time to move on and revel in the rather exclusive club that is ownership of the Oasys. Life's not so bad is it!

This part is so true. I knew the OASYS was Korg's "experiment in indulgence", never meant to compete with gear that normal customers are used to. I saw this as a unique/elite base to be a part of and that's how I feel, more than ever.