PA4X BAD LCD OPTIMIZATION (TOO BAD FROM A DEVELOPMENT TEAM)

karmathanever · Post by **karmathanever** » Sun Sep 05, 2021 3:41 am

In view of "time since release" there is obviously room for improvement with newer hardware technology (even if it's not the latest).

Personally I have no issues at all with the PA4X screen and in fact I prefer my PA4X screen to my Kronos.
There's too much packed onto the Kronos screen and also it is resistive compared to the PA4X's capacitive screen.

OK, so it's all subjective and personal I guess....

Pete

Korghelper · Post by **Korghelper** » Sun Sep 05, 2021 4:03 pm

I think the issue is, there’s no more resolution where you’d want it. Lists, graphics, shading etc. just can’t really get any better with the current hardware. But the problem isn’t the display, it’s the OS and CPU driving the display. Yes, the Kronos has a few pages that could be better designed, but that’s not the hardware’s fault, and could be fixed if Korg (or their customers) cared enough.

But this is as good as it can get on the arrangers. This far and no further.

And when you compare to screens like the SX and Genos, lovely high def screens, or even to the old Roland G70/E80 (which predated the PA4X) you always get the impression of a hugely dated piece of kit. Sure, visuals SHOULDN’T matter, everything should be functionality first last and everything in between, but I think especially with those old Roland’s or the new Yamaha’s, it’s possible to have it all.

And to sell to people perhaps not as focused on hardcore functionality as some of us, a bit of eye candy goes a long way. Sales drives profits, profits drive R&D and progress. And Korg don’t seem to care about this.

taichi · Post by **taichi** » Sun Sep 05, 2021 5:21 pm

Some time ago I posted a topic "Love your Pa4X". Since then I love it even more. SONGBOOK is the way to go. I edit and improve the hundreds of songs already in songbook. Choose and edit STYLES and save as a song. Latest project is converting MIDI FILES into styles and saving into Songbook. Add to SET LIST and I and everyone else listening are more than happy.

The point here is the SCREEN is not a problem, it does its job. It enables one to do whatever they want. Look down the list of contents in the User Manual, the SCREEN will allow you to do whatever you want.

Just keep playing and love your Pa4X.

musiccankill · Post by **musiccankill** » Mon Sep 06, 2021 12:10 am

Korghelper wrote:I think the issue is, there’s no more resolution where you’d want it. Lists, graphics, shading etc. just can’t really get any better with the current hardware. But the problem isn’t the display, it’s the OS and CPU driving the display.

That's not quite right!!
The cpu can even handle full hd video playback on full hd screens and it is even easier to understand that it could handle a higher resolution menu from the fact that the update mode is running at full 800x480 resolution and it is even running in QT framework which is way heavier than the PEG library used in pa since pa1x...
When in normal running mode they have used the 320x240 resolution on the 800x480 screen which is not even the same aspect ratio and that why everything is stretched..It actually is the same menu/graphics framework with the pa1x because there was no need to change it as it is fully functional and easy to work with for the end user.
I m not sure if this framework can run at higher than 320x240 resolution as it is old now and back when the library/framework was developed, higher resolution lcds weren't common for embedded systems..
All these being said , i m fine with how the 4x and 700/1000 look and have no issue..It is not a video machine and it provides all the useful info i need to know each moment in a very effective way (unlike other brands and even korg kronos which are too crowded most of the time when higher res screens are utilized in their full potential)

Korghelper · Post by **Korghelper** » Sun Sep 12, 2021 4:38 pm

I think you aren’t thinking about all the other stuff the CPU is doing while dealing with screen display. Sure, maybe it can do a high res video if it wasn’t primarily running an arranger, generating the sounds, effects and figuring out the chords, but without a major bump in speed and capacity it looks like we’ve hit the ceiling.

And yes, like I said, the current system is adequate to the task, but pretty graphics sell arrangers the way they sell workstations, and I think Korg are shooting themselves in the foot stubbornly clinging to legacy hardware with a more than legacy look. Not everyone appreciates the minutiae of the Korg’s capabilities, the market segment is driven by mostly amateur players. And while those players may not realize what’s under the hood, the first thing they see is the GUI.

Pretty sells. And better sales mean better R&D. And that benefits those of us that don’t care how pretty it is!

musiccankill · Post by **musiccankill** » Sun Sep 12, 2021 6:42 pm

I said it could handle it as currently the cpu is max at 85% from my measurements. Also a static gui no matter the resolution does not need any big amount of cpu power to be processed especially at that high cpu speed..
Also the central controller has separate dsp and cpu so audio processing etc are not in the same processor as gui, chords etc... i have managed realtime chord recognition from midi on an 8bit 16Mhz mcu (arduino) so that doesn’t need anything special too.
Also pa1x did almost the same cpu tasks with a waaaaaay slower cpu and had no issue with that...
Anyway! The thing is that the gui could have got an update through the years..

karmathanever · Post by **karmathanever** » Mon Sep 13, 2021 6:51 am

PA1X screen=resistive
PA4X screen=capacitive

There will be differences in CPU load here too plus PA1X was nowhere near as "CPU-loaded" compared to PA4X

I don't have access to benchmark software or results on these keyboards so it is all guesswork and speculation.

I am sure Korg could allocate more CPU to the PA4X's GUI to boost resolution, but not at the expense of latency in other areas.

New models (if there ever are any) will address this I am sure.
In the meantime, the PA4X is what it is - take it or leave it I guess.

Just enjoy it for now....

musiccankill · Post by **musiccankill** » Mon Sep 13, 2021 8:49 am

There is no point arguing and i m not blaming korg or anybody. I like the pa4x as it is and there were other things that could be fixed before we can think of the gui resolution as a problem (which is not for me).
To answer to your post though, 1x had a way slower cpu doing almost the same load (almost all non dsp functions are the same like same gui library, same info on screen, same chords recognized, same number of midi tracks to process etc).
Also resistive vs capacitive has no measurable impact on cpu load. Most probably capacitive needs less cpu time as it doesnt require analog to digital conversion on the cpu side (cpu communicates digitally with the capacitive touch controller).
The dsp functions on the other hand differ a lot but these are not running on the cpu, they are running on the dsp.
To conclude, redesigning the gui to higher resolution was/is possible on the current hardware without any performance impact but it is not worth the effort needed by the team and may impact the users a lot if the new gui differs from what we know.

Korghelper · Post by **Korghelper** » Tue Sep 14, 2021 3:48 pm

I think the deeper problem is, Korg have had the Kronos architecture up and running for over ten YEARS now, with still no sign of any of its architecture being used to run an arranger. Putting aside any graphical consideration, the CPU power of the Kronos allows for multiple synthesis types and a huge bump in effects architecture, and is an obvious candidate to take the PA series to the next level.

And for it to sit unused for a decade while Yamaha leap forward in polyphony, GUI and especially effects architecture shows a complacency by Korg that I’m a bit concerned about. By now, we should have an arranger with a proper analog synth model, a far improved Hammond model, and twelve insert effects. Chuck in some advanced arpeggiators and its faster data loading, you’ve got a serious contender…

And, have faith, guys! A bump in GUI resolution isn’t necessarily the death knell for usability. They are two completely different things, and I’m pretty sure the team that made the PA’s low res GUI wouldn’t allow a high res one to be any less ergonomic! But it would be a damn sight prettier, a damn sight easier to read and a damn sight more in line with every other device we use nowadays with a touchscreen!

D575 · Post by **D575** » Wed Sep 15, 2021 9:37 am

[quote="Korghelper"]
Yamaha leap forward in polyphony, GUI and especially effects architecture shows a complacency by Korg that I’m a bit concerned about. By now, we should have an arranger with a proper analog synth model, a far improved Hammond model, and twelve insert effects. Chuck in some advanced arpeggiators and its faster data loading, you’ve got a serious contender…

((((+1))))

Biggles · Post by **Biggles** » Thu Sep 16, 2021 11:07 am

Korg’s total lack of significant OS updates for any arranger since the Next OS was released sort of indicates that they are working on something new.

Sad that Korg are now way behind Yamaha who have released four new arrangers since Korg released the 700 & 1000 over four years ago.

pawlikp100 · Post by **pawlikp100** » Fri Sep 17, 2021 2:26 pm

Biggles wrote:Korg’s total lack of significant OS updates for any arranger since the Next OS was released sort of indicates that they are working on something new.

It is a good sign.