Moderators: Sharp, X-Trade, Pepperpotty, karmathanever
you have your opinion.psionic311 wrote:Correction.GregC wrote: There has been no high level { Korg level} development of Mod-7, STR-1, The EP engine , AL-1. And Karma. Karma is dead in the water at a high level.
The level of development is high enough already.
It is the user / UI that is wanting.
Glen of ASM Hydrasynth has given similar wise advice.Mike Conway wrote: Again, I like the new Fantom. Maybe Roland will give it a ton of updates, but you would be wise to look at past trends. A poster made a point about buying it for what it is today. Damn right. I have that attitude with everything I buy. Even with the OASYS, but I was supremely rewarded with that product. Decades old or not, it is still relevant in my work today. In many ways, it has not been surpassed, even after the beating I have given it.
It's a snap to integrate new control surfaces into the Kronos!Scott wrote:It's easier to integrate new sounds and new sound engines to the Fantom (i.e. with an iPad or Surface Pro) than to integrate a new control surface into the Kronos.psionic311 wrote:Sure, you can supplement the missing tech with other tech.
That also applies to the Kronos.
Agreed, it is harder to make an existing great control surface better.Scott wrote:My point was that you can't do much to make the existing Kronos control surface better. Sure, you can add a class compliant control surface, but even then, it will require substantial programming, and will still be a somewhat compromised "generic" layout, and will be tricky to place ergonomically.
Yep, that's exactly what I do. I feel that if Neo can create a better leslie in a small box, Korg could do it as well.FB Music wrote: Play the Kronos through a Neo Ventilator or mini Vent 2 and I think you’ll be amazed at how the CX-3 comes alive!
laandodeman wrote:Yep, that's exactly what I do. I feel that if Neo can create a better leslie in a small box, Korg could do it as well.FB Music wrote: Play the Kronos through a Neo Ventilator or mini Vent 2 and I think you’ll be amazed at how the CX-3 comes alive!
And yet, also the neo is not good enough to mask the mediocre hammond engine in Kronos. It has no balls and it screams in a bad way.
I think thats at the nub of my gripes [ lack of high level development/programming].jimknopf wrote:Th
So overdrive is a huge issue in the Kronos, across many kinds of sounds, in an otherwise extremely well done synth workstation. I have no idea, if a Nutube, or rather much better software modelling than the actual, would be best to do the job.
The latter is probably impossible to handle on the very weak Intel Atom hardware of the present Kronos, besides many other jobs this engine already has there. I guess only a Kronos successor with a significantly stronger modern CPU would be able to get the job done in any acceptable way.
Let's take the endless knobs with LED indicators of their current positions, so knobs always show you how they're set and are always in the "right" place as soon as you start to move them. Yes, you can add a control surface to Kronos that has endless knobs with LED indicators. What additional programming will be required so that they do what you want on all your patches? (Is there even proper 2-way communication between the Kronos and the control surface such that its LED indicators are even capable of instantly reflecting new values when you select a new patch? I don't know.) Ergonomically, where do you place this new box of knobs, for the same kind of convenient access you get with built-in controls? Same with the LED indicators next to the faders. Fantom's controls here are more like OASYS (not sure OASYS knobs are endless though?). What's involved in bringing this kind of OASYS tech to Kronos, to the extent that you can do it at all?psionic311 wrote:Agreed, it is harder to make an existing great control surface better.Scott wrote:My point was that you can't do much to make the existing Kronos control surface better. Sure, you can add a class compliant control surface, but even then, it will require substantial programming, and will still be a somewhat compromised "generic" layout, and will be tricky to place ergonomically.
Maybe I'm missing the point.
How can you get easier than plug and play?
All of the plug and play control surfaces I listed have no ergonomic issues,
except nanopads.
What do Fantoms do better in their control surface?
The two variables here are the EASE of assigning multiple parameters from multiple sounds to a single control for simultaneous operation, and also, the fact that Yamaha provides an extra pedal jack for that foot control if that's the approach you prefer. On Kronos, more programming would be involved, and it would use up your one and only pedal. Plus Yamaha does provide the option to use a continuous controller instead of pedal, which has advantages of its own that you can't replicate on Kronos.psionic311 wrote:I thought the Yamaha Superknob was a load of hype.
Notice most of their demos showed you can use the foot pedal for Superknob stuff.
Guess what.
You can use a Kronos/ Oasys foot pedal for the same kinds of things.
For over a decade now.
See this video starting at about the 21 minute point, to see what this does in a Mainstage/Logic context that is beyond what you can do on a Kronos or Montage/MODX, or even a separate dedicated controller if you were willing to add another board for this purpose. (Though wouldn't you prefer not to have to anyway?)psionic311 wrote:It even integrates with Mainstage.
What's special about that, many MIDI controllers do that.
Two things: Different companies have different talents and technologies. Few people have figured out how to get a great Leslie sound. Saying so-and-so can do it, so someone else should be able to do it too (without infringing on possible IP besides!), is kind of like saying the Beatles could do something, so every other band should be able to do it too. There are unique talents involved. Second, even Neo only does what they do through a $500 chunk of dedicated hardware. If Korg could build in something similar, how much more would you be willing to pay? An interesting analogy here is the more advanced Leslie sim options in the Kurzweil workstations. They still aren't Vent quality, and they require SO MUCH of the board's effects resources that, once you put the Leslie effect on an organ sound, you often have almost no effects available for any of your other sounds (depending on which Kurz model you have). In fact, their most sophisticated Leslie effect doesn't even run on some of their older models, because some of those models only supported up to 10 fx units, and the Leslie effect alone required more than ten effects units to implement... and like I said, it still doesn't sound as good as a Vent.laandodeman wrote:I feel that if Neo can create a better leslie in a small box, Korg could do it as well.
A real tube really helps the SV1 and King Korg (and I assume Nutube would be the same, I haven't played the Vox Continental). An issue is that your entire sound goes through them (you can't send just one part of a split/layer on the KK/VC). I'm wondering whether something like putting the Ibanez Nutube pedal on a Kronos (where you send sounds to it as needed through an assignable out) might be a good solution for this. You wouldn't need to buy a new board, just pay for the tube device, and use it selectively on the sounds you want, when you want it.jimknopf wrote:I have no idea, if a Nutube, or rather much better software modelling than the actual, would be best to do the job.
While Fantom's dedicated 1-effect-per-part has its limitations compared to the flexibility Korg gives you, it does have the advantage that every intrsument automatically always sounds the same when you bring it into a sequence as it did when you played it alone, no matter how many tracks you use.GregC wrote:But in my Song/SEQ mix,...I have almost maxed out FX. [ keep in mind, specific instruments need their applicable FX to sound good]
The Kronos Control Surface has 9 sliders and 8 knobs.Scott wrote: Now look at the dedicated synth knobs.
Look how ADSR is switchable among pitch, filter, and amp. You would need 12 knobs instead of 4.
Press Tone Adjust.Similarly, how do you replicate the Parameter buttons to allow knobs to do different things?
The Control Surface is already ergonomically placed on the Kronos.How big will this control surface have to be, and ergonomically, where will you place it for comparably convenient access? How do you get the feedback of what you've selected (i.e. the filter type LEDs)?
Let's say you wanted to adjust decay rate on a sync lead, timbre #5.Then once you set up as much as you can, how do you control telling it which of perhaps multiple split/layered sounds you want your box to address at any given time (i.e. if wanting to use it in Combi mode rather than Program mode)?
These are apt descriptions for the existing Kronos Control Surface.And in the end, how do you get that clear, uncluttered, well-labeled, well differentiated, well placed control layout on a generic surface?
No tedious programming required for each knob, button, or slider.And how much programming will you have to do to get it to do what you want, even to the extent that it is actually possible?
And my point is, yes, you can indeed.So again, "My point was that you can't do much to make the existing Kronos control surface better.
How hard is it to assign a parameter to the Vector Joystick?The two variables here are the EASE of assigning multiple parameters from multiple sounds to a single control for simultaneous operation, and also, the fact that Yamaha provides an extra pedal jack for that foot control if that's the approach you prefer. On Kronos, more programming would be involved, and it would use up your one and only pedal. Plus Yamaha does provide the option to use a continuous controller instead of pedal, which has advantages of its own that you can't replicate on Kronos.
