Korg Forums

Sample preview before importing doesn't seem to be possible.

Also scrolling the sample name when it doesn't fit on the display would be useful.

ComputerControlled wrote:here's something i can't find in the manual, is it possible to preview a sample before loading it up?

ComputerControlled wrote:DSP isn't powerful enough? They sent people to the moon with less.

There was no DSP there those days. It is time to google DSP. .. It is NOT a a CPU...
The moon analogy is actually a good one... especially in regards to the power consumption... A lot of compromises to use smaller CPU on the Apollo ships was attributed to battery capacity, thus they dealed with same power issues as korg deals today with their battery powered gear.
Why JD-xi (roland) didn't include batteries and only got 4 tracks?
B/c they did not compromise the amount of DSP to cut corners like korg did.

bladuck wrote:

ComputerControlled wrote:DSP isn't powerful enough? They sent people to the moon with less.

There was no DSP there those days. It is time to google DSP. .. It is NOT a a CPU...
The moon analogy is actually a good one... especially in regards to the power consumption... A lot of compromises to use smaller CPU on the Apollo ships was attributed to battery capacity, thus they dealed with same power issues as korg deals today with their battery powered gear.
Why JD-xi (roland) didn't include batteries and only got 4 tracks?
B/c they did not compromise the amount of DSP to cut corners like korg did.

Makes me wonder why they didn't just make it psu only, or at least put a laptop style rechargeable battery in it

bladuck wrote:

ComputerControlled wrote:DSP isn't powerful enough? They sent people to the moon with less.

There was no DSP there those days. It is time to google DSP. .. It is NOT a a CPU...
The moon analogy is actually a good one... especially in regards to the power consumption... A lot of compromises to use smaller CPU on the Apollo ships was attributed to battery capacity, thus they dealed with same power issues as korg deals today with their battery powered gear.
Why JD-xi (roland) didn't include batteries and only got 4 tracks?
B/c they did not compromise the amount of DSP to cut corners like korg did.

I know there was no DSP in those days. Just a weird way of saying we have more power in our cell phones than Apollo did back then. And this is STILL an issue these days.

Buska wrote:

bladuck wrote:

ComputerControlled wrote:DSP isn't powerful enough? They sent people to the moon with less.

There was no DSP there those days. It is time to google DSP. .. It is NOT a a CPU...
The moon analogy is actually a good one... especially in regards to the power consumption... A lot of compromises to use smaller CPU on the Apollo ships was attributed to battery capacity, thus they dealed with same power issues as korg deals today with their battery powered gear.
Why JD-xi (roland) didn't include batteries and only got 4 tracks?
B/c they did not compromise the amount of DSP to cut corners like korg did.

Makes me wonder why they didn't just make it psu only, or at least put a laptop style rechargeable battery in it

Agreed. I actually find the battery option to be pretty stupid. I'd have loved more power over portability. I know for a fact that I'll never run this thing on batteries, ever.

I tried it for the hell of it. They lasted 20 minutes =o]

Noooo!!! Battery power is one of it's best features!! For me anyway, it's an absolute godsend. With some decent rechargeables that are bedded in, you can get 3 hours use and that's with full brightness.

Everything should have the option to run off batteries these days...

Battery operation is essential for me. It's an option. Nobody needs to use it. BTW, the lack of battery operation is the main reason for me NOT to purchase the JD-Xi.

Another huge fan of the battery option, I use it all the time to just grab the electribe and go make some music.

Tom 62 wrote:Battery operation is essential for me. It's an option. Nobody needs to use it. BTW, the lack of battery operation is the main reason for me NOT to purchase the JD-Xi.

Haha... I run jdxi exclusively on battery. Got an older power pack to charge phones Ipads...created an USB to power cable from some older USB charging cable an old PSU that had the same connector as the jdxi power adapter soldered two wires. Jdxi PSU got 5.7V ...the power pack is 5.1V but it works ...when u do this measure twice and cut once... Im not responsible if somebody bricks/burns their jdxi or e2..not all power packs works...they have some protection etc as mentioned on FB JDXI page. I first tested the cable with my laptop. I get anywhere from 7 to 10 hours of run time...I have a few power packs each with different capacity. I think the brand is "new trend" and capacity 11000mah. If the es2 needs a DC PSU then this should be doable with ES2, I've seen power packs that output 9 or 12v.
I'm not sure what batteries u use on ES2 but I get 5-7 hours from NIMH AA sets... Again good charger is the key...I use MAHA charger

roblabs wrote:Agreed. I actually find the battery option to be pretty stupid. I'd have loved more power over portability. I know for a fact that I'll never run this thing on batteries, ever.

Korg could implement to have two DSP modes one for battery powered with 24 voices and PSU power mode with 48 voices. But that require almost twice developer time to implement ... Which somebody pointed here KORG does not have

Buska wrote:Makes me wonder why they didn't just make it psu only, or at least put a laptop style rechargeable battery in it

You're kidding, right?

Laptop battery = $$$$$$$ It would also make the unit a lot larger.

Making the unit portable was obviously a large part of the marketing strategy.

First, I loaded up the ES2 with the blank presets - that means, no factory samples. I sequenced a pattern with one of the oscillators, and then went to resample it.

When selecting "mono" & "resampling" - it gave me an available sampling time of 273 seconds.

Then, I loaded up the ES2 with the factory content. I did the same thing- quick pattern with a basic oscillator, and went to resample it.

When selecting "mono" & "resampling" - it gave me an available sampling time of 99 seconds.

So, using my blank presets clears out the factory content, which takes up IN MEMORY, roughly 174 seconds.

The "slots" are like file pointers. There is either something in there, taking up memory, or not. If you delete them all, you can't put something in that slot, but you can use the memory they took up.

Does that mean that there it will not free up the factory slots, but instead gives you more memory = longer samples? Then you could chain samples into one and upload it and split them when needed. Or chain the reversed sample to another sample and play reversed or normal to get two out of one (like on the ESX)?

If you go look up the costs for modern embedded boards with a lot of power you don't have to break the bank to create a powerful tiny box.

It is funny to see how people defend Korg by claiming other people don't know what a DSP is. As if it matters.

There is a little thing called Moore's Law. A new Electribe a decade after the last one should be so much better and not loose any features. In the end Korg either didn't get beefy hardware or skilled coders, or a bit of both.

I have machines from the 80's and 90's with DSP's that can carry over FX and change patterns without a hick-up just fine. It is 2015. There is no reason why Korg can't make something in a tiny box that at least matches stuff like the RS7K or other old groove boxes.

The e2's DSP is a different generation of processing than stuff from the 90s. The modeling and code it runs is higher resolution and vastly superior. The extra processing advances were applied to sound quality, not quantity.

If Korg implemented the same noisy low-res steppy garbage from the EA and ER series, you could have all the tails and insert reverbs you wanted.

Processing gets faster, but the tasks become more processor intensive.

90's grooveboxes bussed signals to dedicated processors for everything. They also sounded awful. Sweep a very resonant filter on an MC-303 and see how you like it compared to the e2.