9 engines, but 5 types of synthesis

[BasariStudios]

I dont know why people mix AL1, PS and MS20 as one thing when they
know that there is no way in hell they are the same, they never were
as hardware nor will ever be as Software and they sound NOTHING like each other.

[EvilDragon]

Because they're all subtractive synthesis in essence.

[jazlover]

This thread just gets funnier and funnier.

Lets leave a Kronos... and any Kurzweil in a room for the taking. If only one instrument could be taken, who thinks the Kronos would be left in the room?

In the final analysis the sound and functionality. That is all that that truely matters. With all respect to Kurzweil..they are going to get their butt kicked!

[EvilDragon]

Not in my opinion, because as I said above, there are some things that Kurzweil is still simply better at. Their Setup mode is much more flexible than Korg's Combi, for example. Not to mention chained DSP processing per program. And there's brilliant FX, too.


They are indeed quite different boards. And they compliment each other well. That's all.

[vEddY]

Not in my opinion, because as I said above, there are some things that Kurzweil is still simply better at. Their Setup mode is much more flexible than Korg's Combi, for example. Not to mention chained DSP processing per program. And there's brilliant FX, too.
They are indeed quite different boards. And they compliment each other well. That's all.

Agreed on most of the things you said, and adding something else - PC3K8 really RIPS with orchestral and quite a few acoustic-type sounds. Pianos are - to my ear - better then anything I could do on the OASYS, as well as a lot of string-brass-woodwinds type sounds.

As a overall package, as a live keyboard, as a synth, and a whole host of other stuff, PC3K8 is a child's play compard to OASYS. But they like each other's company and I can feel that every day Like best friends from alternate universes

[danatkorg]

Too bad the engines aren't 100% modular, so you can take filters from one to another, etc. Well, that kind of flexibility is only offered by Kurzweil, not to mention DSP patching on layer level, along with really wide array of DSP functions. It's a different mentality to Korg, most definitely, and both have their pros and cons.


That's why a serious synthesist should have both! I so far have 50%, with my Kurzweil PC3K8. Will be getting K61 when possible, definitely. I just wanted to debate over this subject a bit

I'm somewhat familiar with the K2xxx and PC3. Once you have an opportunity to get familiar with the MOD-7, I'd be interested to hear which things you commonly use in the Kurzweil instruments that aren't available in the MOD-7. I know that there will be some differences, and I know what at least some of them are, but I'd be interested to hear which ones are particularly important to you in your creative work.

One conceptual difference between the two architectures is that the KRONOS will often have fewer objects, but those objects may have greater internal functionality and/or flexibility. For instance, a single AMS Mixer would generally require several FUNs to accomplish. Instead of having different filter blocks, a single KRONOS filter generally has a number of different options; e.g. filter A in the MOD-7 can be HP, LP, BP, BR, or Multifilter, and the Resonance Bass parameter switches each of these between mini and P5 characteristics. Instead of having different SHAPER, DIST, CLIP, etc. blocks, each MOD-7 VPM Osc has a Waveshaper block with a large number of different tables. Etc.

I think that Kurzweil fans will find a lot to love in the MOD-7, and once you have a chance to play with it, I'm very interested to hear your feedback!

Best regards,

Dan

[EvilDragon]

I think that Kurzweil fans will find a lot to love in the MOD-7, and once you have a chance to play with it, I'm very interested to hear your feedback!

You betcha!



BTW I really hope nobody considers this as bashing or something. Just food for thought. I'm deeply in love with both Kurzweil and Korg instruments (and some Waldorf on the side ), and nothing can ever change that!

[synthguy]

BTW I really hope nobody considers this as bashing or something. Just food for thought. I'm deeply in love with both Kurzweil and Korg instruments (and some Waldorf on the side ), and nothing can ever change that!

Actually, this is where I'm coming from too. Except that I tend to drag everyone into my smorgasbord of sound. I guess there's a little too much Jarre in my blood.

In particular though, I'm a huge Kurz fan, along with KORG, and I have to say that it took Triton and the Z1 to really swing me over, with some Wavestation on the side. Once I got over the intimidation of the overly complicated VAST engine, I found it surprisingly easy to use. Yes, there are a lot of arcane elements to it that are even more hit-and-miss than FM, but that's part of the fun of exploring uncharted sonic territory.

However, Kronos is such a huge arena of synthesis in one box that I'm thinking I won't miss the PC3 all that much. Yes, saying that nine types of synthesis engines is a bit exaggerated, but KORG aren't saying that. It has nine instruments and a rack of effects, along with 16 track audio recording under one massive hood. WITH seamless transitions, which probably accounts for the reduced polyphony versus OASYS, for CPU/ram overhead. And I think that's a worthy trade-off for gigging musicians. I'm really looking forward to using AL-1 and MOD-7 most of all, and FM does things you just can't any other way - and by the way, there's your additive synth right there, with at least six harmonics with their own envelopes to play with.

Considering I'd probably need about six other separate instruments to replace Kronos - or OASYS - to the tune of perhaps $10,000, I call that a bargain. The best I ever had. Thank you Roger Daltrey.

[danatkorg]

However, Kronos is such a huge arena of synthesis in one box that I'm thinking I won't miss the PC3 all that much. Yes, saying that nine types of synthesis engines is a bit exaggerated, but KORG aren't saying that. It has nine instruments and a rack of effects, along with 16 track audio recording under one massive hood. WITH seamless transitions, which probably accounts for the reduced polyphony versus OASYS, for CPU/ram overhead.

A small point:

It's true that the max number of voices for some of the engines is lower than on the OASYS. (Some, on the other hand, are higher.) However, there's a compensating factor: with the KRONOS, effects typically do not impinge on polyphony. For instance, on the OASYS you can play a max of 172 voices of HD-1, but if you use effects, that number will be reduced. Use lots of effects, and it can go down significantly. On the KRONOS, on the other hand, our informal tests (insert normal disclaimers here: all specs subject to change, etc.) show that we can use 14 Overbs (the most computationally expensive effect) without affecting polyphony at all. The 15th and 16th Overbs start to reduce polyphony, but that's really an extreme case.

Overbs are by far the most CPU-intensive effects on the KRONOS, btw. The "normal" reverbs are next in line at around 70% of the Overb. 16 instances of most normal effects - I just looked at choruses, reverse delays, overdrives, vocoders - don't even go over 30-40% of the available effects resources, leaving plenty of room for two sets of effects to coexist during Seamless Sound Transitions. (Btw - note that even the "basic" Stereo Chorus effect is still pretty full-featured, with 24 parameters including modulation, 2 bands of dedicated EQ, LFO sync, etc.) You can view all of this resource usage info in real-time on the Performance Meters page.

[SpIdErWeB]

Seamless Sounds Transition is a very nice feature... really... for Live.

If with 12 effects the power stay under 40%, wouldn't you love to be able to have 24 IFX on "Studio Mod" with the sequencer? Having more FX is always nice for "Production".

If each part would have the 4band EQ (with 2 Param Mids), but also a Compressor/Limiter, it would already help a bit better than the 3 Band EQ "only".

Power is there anyway... any thoughts?

Phil

[Jon Lord]

Performance Meters page.

Sounds nice, any chance to get more screenshots of the kronos UI, and perhaps of this performance meter page, is it like a "cpu" meter etc that keeps track of % or perhaps even polyphony per engine?

[danatkorg]

Performance Meters page.

Sounds nice, any chance to get more screenshots of the kronos UI, and perhaps of this performance meter page, is it like a "cpu" meter etc that keeps track of % or perhaps even polyphony per engine?

When the manuals are available, they'll include screen-shots. There are meters for effects and voices CPU usage, voice-stealing, and so on. It should be useful for fine-tuning with sequences, sound programming (especially Combis, which can get very complex), etc.

[jemkeys25]

just make sure when evildragon gets his kronos that you remove two of the analog modelers, and three of the sample based engines so he'll truly have a kronos with four sound engines.(not sure he'll agree with that, i know i wouldn't),although i wouldn't have minded a brass modeling engine,

[EvilDragon]

Failed sacrasm, jemkeys25. Failed sarcasm.

[realkuhl]

I find this argument kind of amusing

After programming and making over 300 of the factory presets found in all of the various OASYS models, I can vouch that each model of "subtractive" synthesis has almost no relation to another included model of subtractive synthesis. OSC, Filtering, Routing and modulation options are very different between the engines.

Calling them the same is like calling a Ford Focus and a Ferrari 308GTB the same. Each model sounds totally different from another and can produce sounds that the other model types CAN'T.

That's why it's quite wonderful to have all of them in one machine....

La La La.....

I would say that AL-1 is subtractive synthesis, whilst MS-20 and PolySix are Analog Modelling.

There is a difference. AL-1 does not pretend to have anything to do with any actual analog synth. That doesn't mean that it can't posess characteristics relating to analog sounds.
Whereas MS-20 and PolySix are both Subtractive synthesizers (yes), but are modelled after specific analog counterparts.