KARO announces the upcoming release of the KSL library

[franzlp]

Kevin,

Thankyou for your posting but your commentary or rather criticizm is rather broad as is relates to the new KSL. Can you be more highly specific as this will help us other understand the mechanics of your argument.

Thanks

[Kevin Nolan]

Hi Franzlp,

Sorry - I should have been clearer in my points. I'll try to clarify:

I own Karo Philharmonic Strings and all of their Acoustic and Electric Piano packages.

My first point is that I feel there is a genuine concern to flag. It is this. While the sample quality of Karo Packages is absolutely exquisite; there are some issues with the programming of some of their programs in some of their packages; rendering these programs unplayable.

The two packages that suffer the most are the Karo Philharmonic Strings and the Karo electric Piano I Fender Rhodes pianos. In the case of the Philharmonic Strings, I find many of the programs to be of significantly poorer quality than the stock OASYS strings programs. Often different types of samples are merged in an individual program that simply do not work together and these programs sound terrible.

In the case of the Fender Rhodes Pianos the situation is also pretty poor. On numerous (if not all - its been a while since I checked) Fender Rhodes programs with several velocity switched layers, the individual layer samples are so different as to make it sound like there are four different pianos sounding, depending on the velocity you hit the key.

This is not surprising - the dynamic changes to a Fender Rhodes sound are incredibly wide and simply impossible to render with just 4 layers. This is why most work stations do not attempt what Karo attempted. Rather, they provide a suite of different programs, with each program representing a narrow 'velocity' range or setup of a Fender Rhodes - yielding the typical 'soft' and 'hard' programs we're all familiar with.

While many of the KARO Piano packages work very well indeed programming wise - with Steinway and Bosendorfer standing out - there are other, similar programming issues with velocity switching with even some of the acoustic piano programs and other electric pianos, including some of the programs on the otherwise fabulously sampled CP80.


So my central point is this - while KARO are no doubt masters of sampling - I think we'd be hard pressed to find finer samples anywhere, I believe that their projects are too ambitious for the OASYs's four velocity layers AND I believe KARO need to spend far more time fine-tuning their programming of the OASYS.

I personally find that there are too many programs that are simply unusable - especially the Philharmonic Strings and the Fender Rhodes - yet these packages are not cheap - hey rival or are more expensive than many of the finest dedicated sample libraries. Even the K-Sound pianos for the K2500/2600 are far superior in their programming.


So I'm pointing out that I believe KARO could - and should - service their existing customers by fixing what are actually unfinished / broken programs in previous packages; before they concentrate on selling new packages such as the current one which I can only assume suffer from the same sort of programming issues.


I don't want to be too harsh - as said Karo do sampling amazingly well and many of their acoustic pianos are wonderful - but I have flagged the issues outlined above both publically on this forum and by email to them; but alas I am very disappointed indeed to see no developments in this regard whatsoever. for that reason I feel it important to echo this caution; and also to indicate that as things stand I would be unwilling to purchase further KARO packages. to boot, I personally think their 'program packages' are a tad too expensive and should be brought down a notch or two.

Finally, in defence of KARO , even KORGs SV-1 Fender Rhodes sounds suffer the same velocity issue. It is extremely evident from their on-line demos that the velocity switching between a comparatively few (7?) layers is not adequate to accurately represent the dynamics of the Fender Rhodes; and I suspect that this will fast become a recognised problem given the target market of this (otherwise) excellent keyboard.

You just have to compare the SV-1 or KARO's Fender Rhodes to Logic Pro's Virtual Fender Rhodes to realise how much better this instrument can be emulated with virtual acoustic modelling.

So my hope and recommendation to Karo is to commit time to reprogramming the Philharmonic Strings (significantly) and offer it as a free upgrade to existing customers; and then toi revisit their electric pianos in particular and offer a new set of programs with only one velocity layer per program and use the OASYS amplitude and filter velocity response, as well as insert amp models, to make these programs actually usable in real playing scenarios. Otherwise, as said, I'd be very sceptical as to the actual programming quality of the presently promoted product.

Cheers,
Kevin.

[PeterJung-IKT]

Hi Franzlp,

Sorry - I should have been clearer in my points. I'll try to clarify:

I own Karo Philharmonic Strings and all of their Acoustic and Electric Piano packages.

My first point is that I feel there is a genuine concern to flag. It is this. While the sample quality of Karo Packages is absolutely exquisite; there are some issues with the programming of some of their programs in some of their packages; rendering these programs unplayable.

The two packages that suffer the most are the Karo Philharmonic Strings and the Karo electric Piano I Fender Rhodes pianos. In the case of the Philharmonic Strings, I find many of the programs to be of significantly poorer quality than the stock OASYS strings programs. Often different types of samples are merged in an individual program that simply do not work together and these programs sound terrible.

In the case of the Fender Rhodes Pianos the situation is also pretty poor. On numerous (if not all - its been a while since I checked) Fender Rhodes programs with several velocity switched layers, the individual layer samples are so different as to make it sound like there are four different pianos sounding, depending on the velocity you hit the key.

This is not surprising - the dynamic changes to a Fender Rhodes sound are incredibly wide and simply impossible to render with just 4 layers. This is why most work stations do not attempt what Karo attempted. Rather, they provide a suite of different programs, with each program representing a narrow 'velocity' range or setup of a Fender Rhodes - yielding the typical 'soft' and 'hard' programs we're all familiar with.

While many of the KARO Piano packages work very well indeed programming wise - with Steinway and Bosendorfer standing out - there are other, similar programming issues with velocity switching with even some of the acoustic piano programs and other electric pianos, including some of the programs on the otherwise fabulously sampled CP80.


So my central point is this - while KARO are no doubt masters of sampling - I think we'd be hard pressed to find finer samples anywhere, I believe that their projects are too ambitious for the OASYs's four velocity layers AND I believe KARO need to spend far more time fine-tuning their programming of the OASYS.

I personally find that there are too many programs that are simply unusable - especially the Philharmonic Strings and the Fender Rhodes - yet these packages are not cheap - hey rival or are more expensive than many of the finest dedicated sample libraries. Even the K-Sound pianos for the K2500/2600 are far superior in their programming.


So I'm pointing out that I believe KARO could - and should - service their existing customers by fixing what are actually unfinished / broken programs in previous packages; before they concentrate on selling new packages such as the current one which I can only assume suffer from the same sort of programming issues.


I don't want to be too harsh - as said Karo do sampling amazingly well and many of their acoustic pianos are wonderful - but I have flagged the issues outlined above both publically on this forum and by email to them; but alas I am very disappointed indeed to see no developments in this regard whatsoever. for that reason I feel it important to echo this caution; and also to indicate that as things stand I would be unwilling to purchase further KARO packages. to boot, I personally think their 'program packages' are a tad too expensive and should be brought down a notch or two.

Finally, in defence of KARO , even KORGs SV-1 Fender Rhodes sounds suffer the same velocity issue. It is extremely evident from their on-line demos that the velocity switching between a comparatively few (7?) layers is not adequate to accurately represent the dynamics of the Fender Rhodes; and I suspect that this will fast become a recognised problem given the target market of this (otherwise) excellent keyboard.

You just have to compare the SV-1 or KARO's Fender Rhodes to Logic Pro's Virtual Fender Rhodes to realise how much better this instrument can be emulated with virtual acoustic modelling.

So my hope and recommendation to Karo is to commit time to reprogramming the Philharmonic Strings (significantly) and offer it as a free upgrade to existing customers; and then toi revisit their electric pianos in particular and offer a new set of programs with only one velocity layer per program and use the OASYS amplitude and filter velocity response, as well as insert amp models, to make these programs actually usable in real playing scenarios. Otherwise, as said, I'd be very sceptical as to the actual programming quality of the presently promoted product.

Cheers,
Kevin.

Dear Kevin,

I deeply regret you disappointment. Admittedly, it is difficult to perfectly match the playing style of everybody in all cases when programming sounds, needless to mention that you have made this experience yourself, I am sure. So, usually, I keep adapting the sounds to the scores I want to play all the time. Of course, this is somewhat annoying, however, I am afraid that there is no real solution like a "Mädchen für alles".

Having said this, which in general will not alleviate your problem at all but I felt it necessary to say, I think it is about time to make a suggestion how to overcome your disappointment. Although our resources here are quite limited, I would like to suggest that you visit us in Duisburg for a one-day meeting to discuss your concerns and possible solutions. I will unfortunately not be able to make this offer to everyone in general. But I guess that it will be in everyone's interest if an expert like you could bring in your know-how in the update of the PCG files. What do you think?

Best wishes,
Peter

[PeterJung-IKT]

Hello KARO `s,

what we would have done without you? Thank you for the many great sounds! We love your libraries and respect your great work. Thank you KARO and Korg for supporting our Oasys

Cheers,

Oasys76

Dear Oasys76, dear all,

I am grateful to your very positive response. and I do hope that we will be able to get Kevin back in the league of our supporters.

Best wishes,
Peter

[Kevin Nolan]

Dear Kevin,

I deeply regret you disappointment. Admittedly, it is difficult to perfectly match the playing style of everybody in all cases when programming sounds, needless to mention that you have made this experience yourself, I am sure. So, usually, I keep adapting the sounds to the scores I want to play all the time. Of course, this is somewhat annoying, however, I am afraid that there is no real solution like a "Mädchen für alles".

Having said this, which in general will not alleviate your problem at all but I felt it necessary to say, I think it is about time to make a suggestion how to overcome your disappointment. Although our resources here are quite limited, I would like to suggest that you visit us in Duisburg for a one-day meeting to discuss your concerns and possible solutions. I will unfortunately not be able to make this offer to everyone in general. But I guess that it will be in everyone's interest if an expert like you could bring in your know-how in the update of the PCG files. What do you think?

Best wishes,
Peter

Hi Peter -

Thanks for your reply. Firstly I need to re-emphasise to anyone who does not already own KARO packages - the sample quality in KARO packages is genuinely exquisite - I'm no guru - but the quality of your sampling is really of extremely high standard to me.

Secondly - most of your sample packages programs are bang on. Especially the acoustic pianos - they are really great.

My quibble is with the Philharmonic String (programs only - again samples are great); and the Fender-Rhodes Piano (again – sampled wonderfully – but programs are a struggle).

So over all I want to be honest in my appraisal and as said, while most of what you do is exquisite, two packages (instruments) are IMO in need of a PCG upgrade.

I appreciate your offer of a meeting - I know you are sincere about that. Alas it's not something I can do anytime soon. I'm also definitely NOT an expert - I've been around synths for a long time but I can promise you I would not do a better job that you.

That said, what I would like at some stage over the coming months to take a look at some of the Fender Rhodes programs and try reduce the number of layers and see how that works. As said, its just that with only 4 layers available on OASYS the difference in sample-sound across the velocity layers is too stark and renders those programs unusable. But if I come up with any new programs I'll be sure to forward them your way for appraisal and I never have a problem with OASYS stuff I do being used widely. But again - I'm no expert and as said in my last post I would like KARO to re-examine both KPS and Fender Rhodes programs in particular at some stage to see if these can be improved. And as I also said in your defence - while the problems persist, the Korg SV-1 also suffers in this regard (to an extent) so I recognise how hard it is to manage the Fender Rhodes in particular.

I'll have a look at the Fender Rhodes over the coming few months, and if there's anything worth flagging you about I'll forward you an email on it.

Thanks once again for your offer - appreciate your engagement.

Kevin.

[PeterJung-IKT]

Dear Kevin,

I deeply regret you disappointment. Admittedly, it is difficult to perfectly match the playing style of everybody in all cases when programming sounds, needless to mention that you have made this experience yourself, I am sure. So, usually, I keep adapting the sounds to the scores I want to play all the time. Of course, this is somewhat annoying, however, I am afraid that there is no real solution like a "Mädchen für alles".

Having said this, which in general will not alleviate your problem at all but I felt it necessary to say, I think it is about time to make a suggestion how to overcome your disappointment. Although our resources here are quite limited, I would like to suggest that you visit us in Duisburg for a one-day meeting to discuss your concerns and possible solutions. I will unfortunately not be able to make this offer to everyone in general. But I guess that it will be in everyone's interest if an expert like you could bring in your know-how in the update of the PCG files. What do you think?

Best wishes,
Peter

Hi Peter -

Thanks for your reply. Firstly I need to re-emphasise to anyone who does not already own KARO packages - the sample quality in KARO packages is genuinely exquisite - I'm no guru - but the quality of your sampling is really of extremely high standard to me.

Secondly - most of your sample packages programs are bang on. Especially the acoustic pianos - they are really great.

My quibble is with the Philharmonic String (programs only - again samples are great); and the Fender-Rhodes Piano (again – sampled wonderfully – but programs are a struggle).

So over all I want to be honest in my appraisal and as said, while most of what you do is exquisite, two packages (instruments) are IMO in need of a PCG upgrade.

I appreciate your offer of a meeting - I know you are sincere about that. Alas it's not something I can do anytime soon. I'm also definitely NOT an expert - I've been around synths for a long time but I can promise you I would not do a better job that you.

That said, what I would like at some stage over the coming months to take a look at some of the Fender Rhodes programs and try reduce the number of layers and see how that works. As said, its just that with only 4 layers available on OASYS the difference in sample-sound across the velocity layers is too stark and renders those programs unusable. But if I come up with any new programs I'll be sure to forward them your way for appraisal and I never have a problem with OASYS stuff I do being used widely. But again - I'm no expert and as said in my last post I would like KARO to re-examine both KPS and Fender Rhodes programs in particular at some stage to see if these can be improved. And as I also said in your defence - while the problems persist, the Korg SV-1 also suffers in this regard (to an extent) so I recognise how hard it is to manage the Fender Rhodes in particular.

I'll have a look at the Fender Rhodes over the coming few months, and if there's anything worth flagging you about I'll forward you an email on it.

Thanks once again for your offer - appreciate your engagement.

Kevin.

Dear Kevin,

Thank you so much for your kind reply. Of course, you will also be welcome in the future. In any case, I will be more than happy to receive any support from your side of whatever kind, be it PCG files or suggestions.

It might take a bit of time, also, but we will definitely look into the Rhodes sounds. In fact, I started playing them again, yesterday. I hope that we will come across a few additional good creations.

We will let you know about the progress.

Take care and hope to meet you in the future.

Bests,
Peter

[Arend Groot]

Hi,

Apologize for my English.

I do own the complete piano lib, the philharmonic and Granular. I think the quality of the samples are superb.....I do agree of some of the comments by Kevin. Not about the philharmonic or the Granular.

But that said, I also experience the velocity switched layers with the piano libs. Not with all the pianos's. But with the Fazioli they are obvious, also some strange panning. The individual samples are beautiful. The steinway is great. I love the Bechstein. The Bosendorfer I think is a bit thin but that’s about taste, it is very well programmed. I like the Schimmel, well programmed. The woody character of the Steinweg is beautiful but the different sample layers are too obvious.
I do use the progs in a combi with timbre 2 with damper resonance. I am using the EQ settings Kevin mentioned in an earlier post.

With the the Fender Rhodes presets from KARO the velocity switch problem occurs again, but I edit the progs. First made them mono with the second oscillator a rhodes key off sample used from the xtra korg hd 1 progs. And I did a bit more decay to amp EG. I also used the cross fade function with the multisamples, this helps, and I think they are far better then the factory elpianos imho. Though I like A16 very much, and no different sounding velocity layers…….

With the cp 80 the layers also occur and the left right thing. It’s not my intention to compare but I will in this case: the cp 80 on sharps dvd is perfect, no layers and no strange panning. I would love that way of programming for the KARO cp80 multisamples, because individual they are really great.

Overall I am very pleased with the pianos and elpianos, deep sounding, warm, very realistic, but I think an update would be most welcome to solve the matters I mentioned.

I am no expert but just using my ears.

I listened to your demos of the new symphonic libraries and I am impressed, and considering the update. I am supporting your great work, with respect.

But I felt I had to respond to Kevin’s comments and share my thoughts.

[Charlie]

I'm very happy with my Karo-Libs and own all of them!
I'm glad Karo still supports the Oasys. I agree that esp. the epiano-progr. could be improved regarding vel-switches. But I'm not sure this can be done by different programming. The original goal of loopless samples was (and is) ambitious. But perhaps an alternative would have been to have loops and more vel-layers instead? I know that there are "only" 4 per program, but couldn't one have more than 4 layers by using combis instead of programs? Esp. the rhodes varying in sound so much could benefit from this. If it's possible it still means sampling again and I doubt this will make sense (economically) for Karo. So reprogramming might still be the best solution.

[Sharp]

I know that there are "only" 4 per program

There's actually 8. Both OSC's can be set to work together to achieve 8 full stereo layers with full velocity switching between each and every one.

Sounds to me like tweaking the filters to work more in tune with the velocity of the keys being pressed will give you a seamless switch between layers. That said, the panning uses are directly associated with the samples. Everything I know about that though is a secret Its not my place to get involved in any of this.

Kind Regards
Sharp

[jg::]

Kevin,

You and some others have discussed velocity layer programming in some of the programs in some of the Piano/El Pno set.

But you also mentioned the Strings. Most people seem to be extremely happy with the Philharmonic Strings package, so let me ask you: If the samples themselves are great, what could possibly be wrong with some of the String Programs?

jg::

[Kevin Nolan]

jg::

I’m working from memory - the reason being that I was so disappointed by the original Philharmonic strings package that I have never used it. I know nothing of their latest strings which may be altogether better.

With the original Philharmonics Strings, while individual samples quality is unarguably pristine, the programs and combis do not work. They just sound ‘wrong’ in many instances - the attacks are too slow on most of the samples, the velocity dynamics sound unnatural, the use of vibrato and tremolo on others is poor in some programs they merge samples from different string sets - including in at least one program (again from memory) with sample strings and sample analogy-synth strings merged across velocity layers that’s just absolutely awful.

I literally found nothing useable with the original Philharmonic strings and have never used it - yet it was expensive. The Korg OASYS default strings are infinitely superior. I don't want to keep repeating myself but I feel KARO rush their programming - they arguably take on too many projects and need to slow down, program packages to a far superior standard and support issues arising post sales. By comparison, K-Sounds Pianos and KBX3 Virtual Organs for the Kurzweil K series synths are incredibly precisely programmed and are far superior, although upwards of 10 years old.

I think KARO have the wrong focus on the OASYS - they are too ambitious with their sample packages and are trying to compete with dedicated sample libraries which the OASYS resource will never allow them to do. Instead I think they should concentrate on programming the internal synth engines; and where releasing sample packages such as electric pianos, release simpler setups - very much like Korgs HD-X expansions. The CP80, Fender Rhodes on those are very good and natural; though they do not cover all scenarios.

There are a range of vintage synths such as the Roland VP330, Minimoog, D6, as well as individual wind, string and percussion instruments and so on that would be easier to sample and devise programs for to enhance the OASYS (and M3) palette. Sharp did this with OASYS Assault but again the flaw there is that you can't load the instruments individually. But selling instruments, cheaply and incredibly well programmed for both OASYS and M3 is where, IMO, the value add and good business will come from.

As said before too - I do not want to be scathing on KARO as they do ‘sampling’ incredibly well - I mean INCREDIBLY well - especially with their Pianos, but their programming of the original Philharmonic Strings was not up to scratch, nor is their Fender Rhodes piano. As we all know sampling well does not necessarily translate to good programs - sampling is just the first step in a several step process including building the multisamples, layering multisamples, using filtering, velocity dynamics and effects and so on and KARO have a lot to do on those later steps with just their Philharmonic strings and Fender Rhodes Piano. Again –their Acoustic Pianos and other electric pianos are by and large exquisitely programmed too (with some issues outlined through this thead)

Cheers,
Kevin.

[PeterJung-IKT]

Dear all,

Following the suggestions by e.g. Kevin, we prepared an update for the KEP1 RHODES1 and RHODES2 library parts. We will make the PCG files available in the coming days.

Of course, our registered customers who already bought the KEP1 will receive the PCG files complementary, i.e. without any further costs.

By the way, we recorded a couple of further demos showing the quality of the new sounds which will be found on KARO's demo page in a few days.

Please send an e-mail to KARO if you are interested in the update.

We hope that you will like it.

We will however not provide a further update of the KPS, sorry about that. We believe that the upgrading to the much more elaborate and extensive KSL cannot be topped at the moment and we do not want to bother anybody with suboptimal sounds. So, we would like to encourage all of you to consider using the KSL lib which we introduced a couple of weeks ago. We hope that this solution will by a synthesis rather than a compromise to all of us.

Bests,
Peter

[Charlie]

Looking forward to the update of KEPs!

[medusaland]

Looking forward to the update of KEPs!

Regards,

Kurt

[Charlie]

THX for your great support - now I just have to take the time for listening to all the new stuff - right now it's "christimas endspurt".