Karma technology - what's its future?

[Kevin Nolan]

I realise this is not an OASYS only topic, but here is a good a place as any. Would welcome input from all Karma users on all Karma platforms

What to you think the future of Karma is /should be?

When you consider the truly gargantuan effort Stephen Kay has put into Karma; and when you consider how complicated it can be - and hence difficult to implement to it full potential but therefore truly awesome in scope; and when you consider the literally hundreds of pages of documentation that describe it; the conclusion must be that we have all only scratched the surface of what Karma can deliver.

I read somewhere about 7-8 years ago (not sure if its true) that it took 44 programmers 2 years or so to develop all the GE's and respective Combi's for the Korg Karma workstation. Think of all of that expertise in a mass of musical genres 'encoded' within GE's. You couldn't learn that in a life time. THAT is the untapped power of Karma for me.

While I hope to continue to learn and use Karma for the long term, I would like to see a bright future for Karma that continues to refine it, so that those hundreds of pages of documentation become ever cleverer interfaces, templates and configuration options to finally allow us to harness all that untapped power.

In light of the fact that Stephen Kay made big developments for Karma for Open Labs now seemingly sitting unused, I sincerely hope that Korg can re-invent an exciting future with Stephen. I'm not saying that he has left the Korg fold - perhaps he has but I've no knowledge of that - but I hope Korg realise that if they have discontinued to work with him that you let a talent like Stephen Kay go at your peril.

So I for one would love to see Korg re-embrace Karma for the future. For one thing you have a virtually free upgrade developed for the open-lab systems now at your disposal.


But imagine the iMS20 with Karmafied drum patterns, base lines and sequences; all manipulated in ways on the iPad in real time only dreamt of in the OASYS or M3. Or what about a Korg/Karma-Lab iPad 'Karma Synth Engine' app? (actually - having Karma documentation including the GE descriptions and E2J Combi Descriptions on iPad as PDF documents is a huge enhancement/ advantage in itself - you get to see vital info immediately and really enhance the way you use Karma).


So what do you think about the future of Karma and Korg and Karma??


One last thing Korg - though OASYS is discontinued - imagine the good will and broad intrigue you'd generate if the Open Labs Karma upgrade was made available to OASYS? (worth a try!!).


Kevin

[peter m. mahr]

Hi Kevin,

another interesting thread you started.

Although my guess is that you did not expect this kind of answer, but now that you asked for it and I like to be strait forward. In case KORG is launching an OASYS successor and in case I consider investing in it I personally would like to see KARMA as an option. If some of the EXis are optional why not make KARMA optional as well? I would always prefer more synth engines (virtual instruments) instead of KARMA. I never used it and doubt that I ever will.

Peter

[kenackr]

Kevin,

Another excellent idea to discuss. I too, marvel at the complexity of Karma. It boggles the mind to think about what it took Stephen to develop it.

I agree that it's development should continue and I'm sure that Stephen thinks so too. Since Korg has created 4 products with it included, it shows that they are aware of it's power also.

What I don't know is, what do the rest of the musicians out there (who have never had the opportunity to play with it) think about it? Do they even know about it or is that confined more to the Korg community?

Personally, it gives me great inspiration to create and go in new directions and if nothing else, it's a barrel of fun to play with.

If new interfaces could be developed that make it more like an instrument to play on in real time, I think that would go a long way to opening up the marketplace for it. As you point out, iPads are a definite possibility but there may be other tactile approaches that could be embedded in more of an "instrument" type device also.

IMO Korg should probably keep putting Karma in their products or make it an option as Peter suggests. It's definitely a bad deal for Stephen on the OL front, but I would certainly pay for an upgrade that could be utilized on the Oasys.

Ken

[Strider]

Big fan of Karma here. For example-

<a href="http://jimstrider.bandcamp.com/track/deepwater-horizon" target="new">Deepwater Horizon</a>

Mostly Oasys, lots of Karma.


Stephen recently wrote on his Karma-Lab forum that he and Korg are not done. (I wanted to link to his post, but don't have the time to search for it right now.)

Personally, I hope the future of Karma technology embraces "Karma Universal". That is, Karma not tied to hardware. Stephen has touched on this topic and stated that he felt Karma would be a hard sell without a complementary sound package to provide examples and for buyers to use in getting started. (He also wrote that he approached the maker of Sylenth1 about licensing, but received no response at all. Go figure.) I, for one, would buy "Karma Universal" to use with my existing VSTs. Currently, I'm forced to use a Korg synth as a "dongle" to do that. Heh.

[Sharp]

What to you think the future of Karma is /should be?

My 2 cents.....!!!
It needs to become a standalone application that has it's own sound engine. The day that happens I think Stephen will see world wide success on a massive level.

Forget KORG and Open Labs. Time to move on and release a universal program that everyone can use.

Regards
Sharp.

[Akos Janca]

It needs to become a standalone application that has it's own sound engine. The day that happens I think Stephen will see world wide success on a massive level.

It's not sure Stephen could just use KARMA like that - we don't know his agreement with Korg. I also think the sound engine is very important. Korg make premium quality sounds, so Stephen should have a similar quality engine for that in this case.

Anyhow, great idea, and Stephen deserves that success!

[Sharp]

It's not sure Stephen could just use KARMA like that - we don't know his agreement with Korg.

I believe Stephen is not tied to KORG at all and free to develop KARMA anyway he wants with whoever he wants.

I could be wrong but I thought I read that on the forums from Stephen himself.

I also think the sound engine is very important. Korg make premium quality sounds, so Stephen should have a similar quality engine for that in this case.

Sure very true, but the great thing there is that Stephen is the guy who voiced many sounds for KORG. He's also a perfectionist and I'd have do doubts he could achieve anything he sets his mind to.

Samples, sound engine, programming. It's not impossible.

Regards
Sharp.

[cello]

As someone trying to dig into Karma, it is clear there is much to learn about at all.

However I think I'm with Peter, above. Yes, I do use Karma but in a limited sense - within the realms of classical ictus and 'rolling' orchestral figures.

And I love what it does in this regard

Making it optional for 'boards sounds like a great idea - we've seen the consistent clamour for the EXB-Rad in the M3 platform... I guess it would be the same for Karma if it was a similar option (not as user-installed hardware obviously!).

And in the O world, it fits with the established modular approach - although as per other recent thread in the O forum (which I've decided not to respond to), there's so much negativity directed at Korg when anything remotely positive is suggested, I wouldn't be surprised if Korg don't do anything for the O again... let's face it; is Korg going to piss anyone off more than they already have? Probably not - so why bother trying to change it.

Shame really.

[vEddY]

My 2 cents.....!!!
It needs to become a standalone application that has it's own sound engine. The day that happens I think Stephen will see world wide success on a massive level.
Forget KORG and Open Labs. Time to move on and release a universal program that everyone can use.
Regards
Sharp.

Yeah, we've been saying that to Stephen for the past three-four years at least. And I hope he makes it happen, I'd love to see that. I'd also buy it in a heartbeat. And help with development, as well.

But first, I think Stephen needs to release more stuff related to synths. Karma for Motif would've been a good idea in the past couple of years (;)). Nope, I'm not saying that to piss off KORG. Just the way I see things.

Also, I feel that Karma would work just awesomely with NI's Kontakt, and quite a few other samplers and different products.

[mrteclas]

"Karma M50 software is a third party product of Karma-Lab. Korg does not support or sell this product directly. All support issues related to purchasing and using this software are handled by Karma-Lab"

My interpretation of this is that Stephen Kay licenses Karma to Korg, to use with their keyboards. Korg does not own Karma, so Stephen can do what he wants with it, without affecting the legal situation between him and Korg.

A Karma stand-alone application would be wonderful, with dedicated compatibility with some VSTis and DAWs.

Still, I don't know what Karma REALLY is.

[Strider]

Still, I don't know what Karma REALLY is.

Probably better if Stephen answers, but I'll take a crack at it...

In simplest terms, KARMA is a set of algorithms for generating musical phrases.

The output of KARMA is very broad and can be applied to anything from percussion, through traditional instrument sounds, to exotic synthetic sounds. The possible configurations of KARMA output are practically endless; a thousand monkeys at a thousand keyboards for a thousand years could not play out all the possible (and audibly different) configurations. And despite the intended humor of that statement, I do not consider it hyperbolic.

KARMA is integrated with Korg instruments in such a way that it can be used effectively for live performance. It's utility is not limited to "backing tracks" like an arranger instrument. It is very "playable" by way of the keyboard, knobs, and sliders.

Personally, I use it as a composition tool by working with GEs to find phrases that appeal to me, tweaking the settings to create related variants, and then hand-crafting the MIDI to suit my persnickety tastes. I can then apply the MIDI to whatever sounds I choose. For me, at least, the great advantage of composing this way is that it's very, very entertaining to do the work. It's gratifying to get the sound I was working toward, and exciting when a "happy accident" changes my mind!

While I'm quite sure there are many folks on this board who will disdain the foregoing, all I can say is... it's fun. I like it.

I'm grateful to Stephen for his work.

[Charlie]

Stephen keeps describing Karma as an "arpeggiator on steroids"!

Karma is fun AND offers very creative solutions for making music or shaping sounds and phrases. And the Oasys allows a very musical way of controlling it.

Karma's biggest obstacle IMHO is its complexity. One can get lost easily, even when using the Karma Oasys software. An easy way to get started is the "thin" manual giving a sort of step by step introduction. I worked my way through that and was very impressed although I just scratched the surface.