Any updates still coming, or was this all that they got?

[danatkorg]

...so, considering Kronos is a relatively small update to Oasys, or repackage actually, we might see next workstation soon...

Almost lost my tea through my nose with that one.

Sure, it's an evolution of the OASYS, just as most products evolve from previous work. But, "repackage?" Seriously? Multicore, SST, SGX-1, EP-1, virtual memory for samples, Set Lists, User Sample Banks, etc., etc...that's a lot of new stuff, and a whole lot of work, for a "repackage."

Yeah...sincerely sorry about that. That was a nasty thing to say, especially in some ones "home". I was in a bit of an irritating mood and wanted to be slightly provocative, but repackage went too far.

Thank you.

I think, that some of those bullet points are kind of small things and fattening the list of "why the Kronos is not an Oasys repackage" in vain though.

Really? Which ones? Each one was a whole lot of work, I can assure you, and each also makes a significant difference in real-world use. I deliberately left out the smaller points.

[Link]

Almost lost my tea through my nose with that one.

Sure, it's an evolution of the OASYS, just as most products evolve from previous work. But, "repackage?" Seriously? Multicore, SST, SGX-1, EP-1, virtual memory for samples, Set Lists, User Sample Banks, etc., etc...that's a lot of new stuff, and a whole lot of work, for a "repackage."

Yeah...sincerely sorry about that. That was a nasty thing to say, especially in some ones "home". I was in a bit of an irritating mood and wanted to be slightly provocative, but repackage went too far.

Thank you.

I think, that some of those bullet points are kind of small things and fattening the list of "why the Kronos is not an Oasys repackage" in vain though.

Really? Which ones? Each one was a whole lot of work, I can assure you, and each also makes a significant difference in real-world use. I deliberately left out the smaller points.

Set Lists, User Sample Banks. They are convenient, but I wouldn't say they are very revolutionary work.

Multicore is surely stretching it. Its not about girth or length, its about how you use it. If the Kronos is now complete and all we get, the multicore means nothing, its included in other bullet points.

For me the biggest things are SGX-1 and EP-1, but even they seem relatively small pimples next to a mountain.

[danatkorg]

I think, that some of those bullet points are kind of small things and fattening the list of "why the Kronos is not an Oasys repackage" in vain though.

Really? Which ones? Each one was a whole lot of work, I can assure you, and each also makes a significant difference in real-world use. I deliberately left out the smaller points.

Set Lists, User Sample Banks. They are convenient, but I wouldn't say they are very revolutionary work.

I didn't say they were revolutionary; I said that they involved a lot of work and made a significant difference. I'm glad that you find them convenient; that makes the man-years of work they required worthwhile!

Multicore is surely stretching it. Its not about girth or length, its about how you use it. If the Kronos is now complete and all we get, the multicore means nothing, its included in other bullet points.

Actually, multicore is a *huge* underlying architectural difference between the KRONOS and the OASYS. It's why, for instance, effects use on the OASYS reduced polyphony, while on the KRONOS it generally does not. Remember also that the KRONOS and OASYS dynamically allocate voices between synthesis models, while preventing overs - something that no other systems do - and extending that from a single core to multiple cores was non-trivial.

For me the biggest things are SGX-1 and EP-1, but even they seem relatively small pimples next to a mountain.

Really? A 400-voice engine using virtual memory sample playback and running on an Atom (SGX-1), and a new synthesis method (EP-1), are "small pimples?"

[SanderXpander]

User Sample banks, in effect sample streaming, in a competitively priced hardware workstation, is a HUGE revolution in hardware synths for me. Being able to sample any random piece of musical equipment with unlooped samples and multiple velocity layers, and bring it into the K with using very little RAM... I can't see how that is by any stretch of the imagination a small upgrade.

[QuiRobinez]

User Sample banks, in effect sample streaming, in a competitively priced hardware workstation, is a HUGE revolution in hardware synths for me. Being able to sample any random piece of musical equipment with unlooped samples and multiple velocity layers, and bring it into the K with using very little RAM... I can't see how that is by any stretch of the imagination a small upgrade.

+1 !

as far as i know there isn't a workstation on the market that has this possibility, also the fact that you can stream your own samples and combine several to a new wave sequence is in my opinion a revolutionary feature on a workstation.

[Link]

I think, that some of those bullet points are kind of small things and fattening the list of "why the Kronos is not an Oasys repackage" in vain though.

Really? Which ones? Each one was a whole lot of work, I can assure you, and each also makes a significant difference in real-world use. I deliberately left out the smaller points.

Set Lists, User Sample Banks. They are convenient, but I wouldn't say they are very revolutionary work.

I didn't say they were revolutionary; I said that they involved a lot of work and made a significant difference. I'm glad that you find them convenient; that makes the man-years of work they required worthwhile!

Multicore is surely stretching it. Its not about girth or length, its about how you use it. If the Kronos is now complete and all we get, the multicore means nothing, its included in other bullet points.

Actually, multicore is a *huge* underlying architectural difference between the KRONOS and the OASYS. It's why, for instance, effects use on the OASYS reduced polyphony, while on the KRONOS it generally does not. Remember also that the KRONOS and OASYS dynamically allocate voices between synthesis models, while preventing overs - something that no other systems do - and extending that from a single core to multiple cores was non-trivial.

For me the biggest things are SGX-1 and EP-1, but even they seem relatively small pimples next to a mountain.

Really? A 400-voice engine using virtual memory sample playback and running on an Atom (SGX-1), and a new synthesis method (EP-1), are "small pimples?"

I don't think we disagree as much, as this discussion is probably going to make it look like. We might just have somewhat different weight and importance in our words.

I am pursuing professional software developer career and do some programming, but it is difficult to estimate the work needed to step from Oasys -> Kronos. I'm sure it is a lot of work, but all those aforementioned features seem like what a small group of people could make.

Because the amount of the work is difficult to evaluate, I'm merely talking about the significance of the difference between them from the customers perspective, and their OS and end results surely look and sound very similar, and if the Oasys is a mountain, yes, I think that the differences are mole hills.

But! If the multicore has been a huge, Mount Everest of effort to implement, Kronos might have been a step in making them ready to use modern processors, and next iteration of Korg Work Station using next gen Intel processor is an intriguing thought.

[jimknopf]

+1 @Sander & Qui

Link, I must say I can't agree a bit with your evaluation concerning progress, .
I do regard the Kronos as something miles ahead(!) of the Oasys in everyday practical use.

User sample streaming is absolutely unique among hardware synths, and no other has comparable piano and epiano quality. Together with set lists and other things the Kronos is a synth like no other on the market already as it is now.

I do think that one more major update would make sense, since both the CX3-engine and the overdrive effect need an update IMHO. But that does not make the present Kronos an altogether uncomplete development. It is the most advanced and most useable hardware synth I know.

[Jan1]

I suppose since Kronos is computer based and modules are purely software based, it is not at the end of its possibilities, yet...!?

So is the Motif. And the Fantom.
There are other aspects to consider than technology alone.
Each project has a specified budget, and as such the product of a project is not just a technological package, but also an economic package which has to abide by economic rules.

I'm sure that many more engines could be developed for the Kronos from a technological point of view, but I doubt if the project managers would get the green light to do this.
You have to take into account what it costs to develop new engines vs. what you will receive in return.
Additionally, developing a new engine eats up resources which could be used to work on a new workstation or a new synth.
If you take this into consideration I don't think it is realistic to expect new engines for the KRONOS, especially since it was not promoted as an open architecture synth like the OASYS.

Considering the renewed interest in analog synths it would make more sense if KORG considered investing resources in making an affordable polyphonic analog synth.
Or a new workstation incorporating a true analog synth as part of the package, if that is technologically feasible. That would most certainly give KORG another premiere in the workstation category, 'the first workstation to feature a fully analog synth'.

[Vlad_77]

I am so glad that QuiRobininez and SanderXpander chimed in here! They read my mind but for those not so gifted with telepathy, here goes, and yes, I have my flame suit donned:

Come on folks, what is all this "want, want, want?!!"

Does the Kronos or the OASYS for that matter have "everything?" No, but name a workstation that does. The OP talked about little innovation in the two years since Kronos release. Let's see, do Roland, Yamaha, or Kurzweil offer user sample streaming? Nope. That right there workstation wise is insanely powerful. People want more "engines" but how many of us have mastered all of the possibilities of the nine we have? (Ten if you include the fact that Wavestation is present in HD-1). Maybe I am the village idiot here and the only one who hasn't mastered the virtually limitless possibilities of my humble NON X Kronos. This instrument is two years old and people are already wanting the "next gen" Kronos??!! Are you serious? Ask a Roland Fantom G user about ARX - the big selling point of that workstation. Ask a Fantom G user about the long awaited and never released OS update that musicians begged for. I am not saying Roland is a bad company. Look at my my sig and you'll see three Rolands listed and I am hoping to add another Kronos AND a V-Synth GT this autumn. Last bit about the Fantom G: I am not slamming it. It is a capable workstation, but let's not forget history. Read the earliest posts at Roland Clan and refresh your memory about what WASN'T included on the Fantom G such as muli-sampling among other things that WERE on its predecessor the Fantom X.

Yamaha: Flash RAM and 744 MB ROM. That's the "improvement" over the Yamaha XS. wow. If you want to talk "repackage" then seriously, compare the XF and XS and you have it.

Kurzweil hasn't released a full blown workstation since the end of the K2xxx series so I cannot comment there. We are waiting, albeit impatiently.

Soft synth users on other fora have incorrectly stated that Kronos is nothing more than a box with keys housing a Linux system. In some parts of America we had a saying for bad quality weed. We called it "Toledo Window box" and you folks have smoked an unhealthy dose of it if you think that is all Kronos is. I don't care how good a soft-synth is, and there are some good ones, there will always be one major difference: a soft-synth is an application, and really, most of them cannot approach even the workstations I have mentioned let alone Kronos and OASYS. Workstations are musical instruments. They are built for a specific purpose. PCs and Macs are built for many purposes.

Before Kronos, to get the kind of insane power in it, you had the OASYS at 8000USD. Before that? Well if you are an ex-Beatle, Alan Parsons, or Kate Bush, you could get a Fairlight. Of course there was the Lamborghini priced NED Synclavier. But, the Kronos is considerably more powerful; that's a fact.

I am already anticipating the argument that I am contradicting myself because I want to add a V-Synth. So I will clarify. I do not want one because I feel that Kronos is lacking. I want it because I want to explore; it's different, not better - it's a synth, not a workstation. But even then, I am holding out for a good deal because a "new" V-Synth GT costs MORE in most places than a truly new Kronos. Hell I might end up foregoing a V-Synth, get a Kronos and because I have never had a Waldorf, snag a Blofeld for a paltry 350 Euros and disappear until 3000 AD.

Link, that was cool of you to apologize to Dan. You admitted to having a bad day and we all have them. I wonder sometimes if we mistakenly think of companies like Korg in the same way we think of megacorporations like CitiBank, IBM, and General Foods. From what I have gathered about the Big Four, company size from fewest to most resources in terms of people is: Kurzweil, Korg, Roland, Yamaha. Of the four, Yamaha is the closest to a megacorporation; I have never seen a Korg motorcycle or a Kurzweil jet-ski I truly believe Dan when he talks about man hours in the development of Kronos. Korg doesn't have the person-power nor the virtually limitless financial resources of a megacorporation and Kronos is being marketed to a specific demographic, namely, musicians, and moreover, the target market for Kronos is much smaller than the target market for even Korg's own Krome and certainly more focused than the 5,427 models of Yamah PSRs or the 345 flavors of Juno [insert letter designation here].

Ok rant coming to an end soon. We keyboard players are spoiled. I am not talking about pianists, I mean synthesists. We can create soundscapes that other musicians could never do. I don't sense that Sir James Galway is complaining because his flute doesn't have PWM or can sound like a Les Paul. A lot of musicians have G.A.S., but, it seems to me that only keyboard players want the next big thing and toss around terms that that's obsolete as easily as saying "have a nice day." So, pianists, pure pianists, are much more in tune so to speak. They play an 88 note polyphony instrument with ONE "patch." But they work that one patch instrument an just blow me away with what they have done for 400 years. Heaven help us if something like Kronos is somehow inadequate for the prime purpose of creating and playing music and the same can be said for every synth and workstation out there.

/end rant.

Flame on sisters and brothers!

Best,
Vlad

[genehart]

I hope that Korg will update an SGX by adding the same piano realism technology as on the nord pianos

[Vlad_77]

I hope that Korg will update an SGX by adding the same piano realism technology as on the nord pianos

Hi Genehart,

Perhaps a counterpoint would be that Nord pianos are made to do one thing specifically - it's that 88 note polyphony, one patch instrument we love, except that you plug in a Nord. I am guessing from your post that you are primarily a pianist as opposed to a synthesist?

I never auditioned a Nord piano but I have auditioned Nord synths. In fact my dealer here in The Netherlands literally has two keyboard rooms - physically separated: one for Nords and the other for Korg, Kurzweil, Yamaha, and Roland! I had considered a Nord when I went into to audition a Jupiter 80. I think there is lots that Nords do well but, this is subjective of course, Nord synths just don't connect with me. They are easy to tweak and the sounds are great, but, how do I explain it? It's something that every musician tries to explain but can't. I call it the mind's ear and there was something - and still is - with the Jupiter 80 that just seduced my mind's ear - even when disabling that famous - or infamous Roland reverb - that made me buy the Jupiter instead.

What I really like about your post is that you aren't complaining about what Nords don't have but rather what they do have, and as such you stated more succinctly what I was trying to get across in my rant.

As far as the pianos on Kronos, they sound extremely realistic to my mind's ear and my real ears. Maybe because I am not a classically trained pianist I am missing some of the realism you are talking about. What I do know is that non-Kronos keyboard players have asked me to play "those beautiful pianos" again and again on Kronos.

At the end of the day, we're never ever going to find THE perfect workstation or synth, and frankly, that makes me happy. It would be like Michelangelo painting the Sistine Chapel with two colors on his palette.

Best,
Vlad

[genehart]

Hi Vlad_77 ,
Yes you are right , the pianos and rhodes are primary sounds for me ,
I love the SGX sounds ) it is truly amazing , but that feature will add little bit of piano resonance realism that are still missing to make sgx an ultimate piano emulation
you can hear the thing that I'm talking about on the following video , in the part he plays a jazz standard "Wave",non sustained phrases and staccato notes with the right hand, while the left hand notes are held
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3D1DkZxXfrw

it's even not for only classical types , but for phrasing itself
Nord pianos are about 500MB each , and that is the bad side of their stuff)
and it is very audible
Kronos pianos are realistic in tone , but still missing some piece of realism in action
it shouldn't be that hard to add this feature to SGX, because there are non hungry vsti that already have that (or almost that) effect (Toontrack EZKeys )

[Vlad_77]

Point well taken Genehart and I don't think that is asking a lot. You are wanting to augment a piano that in your words is amazing. My rant was more about people wanting all these new engines and a next gen Kronos when the nine (techniclly ten) synth engines are nowhere near being explored fully by most of us - QuiRobinez, KidNepro, Nedim (Basari Studios), Kevin Nolan, and a few others not included.

That said, I think Roland and Yamaha (especially Yamaha) should be thinking next gen. I sometimes wonder if by the time Halley's Comet returns if there will be a new Motif ESXSXFXLFDX7AN1SY77!

Thanks for the nice discussion!

Best,
Vlad

[NuSkoolTone]

Aside from the comments where the work for Kronos is under appreciated and the other end bordering on fanboi, I think we can all agree OF COURSE we'd like to see some more updates before Korg moves on, or to at least release an API so we can build onto it as a community.

I don't think the intent of the post was meant to be disrespectful, but who can't say they're curious to what's coming or IF things are coming?

At this point Korg knows what most of us want. CX-3/overdrive,sequencer updates more program banks and more Engines or VSTis seem to top the list amongst a lot of smaller functionality tweaks.

I love my Kronos and I get more from it every year. It's very deep! It takes a LOT of work to fully utilize its power. Though when you do, there's nothing close to it. That's why I'm hoping Korg REALLY takes the Kurzweil K series approach with this instrument and builds on it rather than releasing a whole new machine.

[Shakil]

Set Lists, User Sample Banks. They are convenient, but I wouldn't say they are very revolutionary work.

Really???? Do you know how the User Sample Banks work?