The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 Search This Thread  Search This Forum  Search Reviews  Search Gear Database  Search Synths for sale  Search Gearslutz Go Advanced
Something new from Korg at NAMM 2011? Korg Kronos! Keyboard Synthesizers
Old 14th January 2011
  #271
Gear Head
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by AcoosticZoo View Post
For 3000 USD you could get much more in Virtual Synths and soft sample libraries.
This is fail reasoning.
Why people buy vintage Minimoog Model D for $4000 if you can buy something like MFB Kraftzwerg for $700 and get (specification-wise) so much more? Because they're bloody different things! And for some people, one can be better than another even while having inferior specs. If you're going to choose instrument by specs, then by this logic, Windows software MIDI synth is better than a Steinway concert grand piano, well, because Windows synth has 128 sounds while Steinway has only one, so everyone who has a Steinway is an idiot because Windows synth offers so much more for so less money.

Quote:
Originally Posted by AcoosticZoo View Post
Kronos is basically software made to run on a korg keyboard workstation.
Stop reiterating this silly argument. ANY digital synthesizer is basically software made to run on a keyboard. Kronos is no different in this regard.
Old 14th January 2011
  #272
Lives for gear
 
kilon's Avatar
 

Together with fleshlight , come someone explain to me the whole "its just a sotware in a box " argument, cause even though I know and can do some programming , this argument just leaves wondering what one means when he uses it against a hardware synth...

Are we impling here that just because it runs software its the same as any vst ?

Is that it ?

Are we impling here that one can get the same experience with just using vsts and other software ?

Is there any kind of machine nowdays that does not run some sort of software ?

I know that my andromeda has loads of it inside...
Old 14th January 2011
  #273
ok - google fleshlight (work filters WONT let you look!!)

My take on this is that just because it's running a Linux base, it's NOT a soft-synth.

What makes this (and any piece of hardware different - and it IS explained in the OASYS post earlier in this thread) is everything else.
The D/As are usually better in hardware - they're specific to ONE job, not multi-tasking.
The OS is focused on ONE task - the synth's operation and processing. Macs/PCs do an awful lot more - not that I need to tell anybody on here.

In the grand scheme of things, yes the Kronos is akin to having a load of VSTis/AUs etc - but it's about the interface and reliablity and sound output.
It's almost like the whole arguement about Macs/iphones etc etc. The package just WORKS as a whole.

Yes the same thing can be done cheaper with individual components, but there's a lot more faffing about.
Several manufacturers have tired the whole open-ended system (hardware keyboard with a software/PC running the guts) - they're not overly popular because this whole package isn't there yet.

What's needed is a culture-change.... not happening anytime soon. There's still a great deal of musicians who haven't accepted the Digital synth, let alone anything newer than 1987!!heh

That could also be said across every instrument

So the fact that this brings together 9 synth types with a workable and (hopefully!) reliable user-interface that can be trusted on stage in front of paying customers etc etc etc the Kronos does potentially offer value for money.

All IMHO, of course

Dan
Old 14th January 2011
  #274
Lives for gear
 
tyler477's Avatar
I'll buy this in 10 years when it's 350 bucks at a pawn shop
Old 14th January 2011
  #275
Lives for gear
 
GeorgeHayduke's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by kilon View Post
..
Are we impling here that just because it runs software its the same as any vst ?

Is that it ?

Are we impling here that one can get the same experience with just using vsts and other software ?

Is there any kind of machine nowdays that does not run some sort of software ?

I know that my andromeda has loads of it inside...
Yes, but the big difference is whether the software is used to control - or generate sound. Like I said previously in the thread, I can see it's use as a standalone 'computer' with keys to lessen the burden on my PC.

But let me ask you: What are getting that we couldn't get on a computer? In the Kronos we can get the Polysix etc. So? The VSTs are already available. Do we then get an awesome controller full of pots to control the VST? No. Maybe control is actually better running a computer and a BCR-2000. Then we get lots of storage space for a big acoustic library. Cool, but huge hard discs for our computers are quite cheap, and we can pick a huge variety if we use a computer instead.

Then there are the waveshaping and variuos kinds of digital sound molding stuff. Fine, but then are back at this: It ain't analog like your Andromeda. It's digital sound generation, not just digital control.
Old 14th January 2011
  #276
Lives for gear
 
kilon's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by ScoobyDoo555 View Post
ok - google fleshlight (work filters WONT let you look!!)
just looked it, niiiiiice , a masturbation device. But then there is nothing like the real thing I am afraid.

I completely agree with your posts.

Quote:
Originally Posted by GeorgeHayduke View Post
Yes, but the big difference is whether the software is used to control - or generate sound. Like I said previously in the thread, I can see it's use as a standalone 'computer' with keys to lessen the burden on my PC.

But let me ask you: What are getting that we couldn't get on a computer? In the Kronos we can get the Polysix etc. So? The VSTs are already available. Do we then get an awesome controller full of pots to control the VST? No. Maybe control is actually better running a computer and a BCR-2000. Then we get lots of storage space for a big acoustic library. Cool, but huge hard discs for our computers are quite cheap, and we can pick a huge variety if we use a computer instead.

Then there are the waveshaping and variuos kinds of digital sound molding stuff. Fine, but then are back at this: It ain't analog like your Andromeda. It's digital sound generation, not just digital control.

Well what you are not getting is , play the keyboard, now back to the mouse , now play again, back to the mouse, , play again and back to the mouse .... etc. Its a workflow thing and yes it worths it if it gets really in your nerves.

This is the one thing that I hate about computers, I just dont find mouse logical for music, its simple. Sure I went down the midi control route, sure , sure but still my desk was full of midi controllers, spend hours setting them up and guess what .... I am still using the freaking mouse!!!!

Workstations are computer replacements, they are more limited absolutely, but they free you up from that mousy bastard and make music making soooo much more enjoyable. I want to change a parameter, its just a few buttons away, no menus, no mouse. And yes the interface is much more streamlined.

Workstation manufactures are actually quite careful in this part because workstations are meant to be used live, computer and software is usally not. A daw/synth will sacrifice ease of use for features the workstation goes the exact opossite route.

For me that workflow enhancement make workstation worth any penny. My motif is my central synth , not my andromeda, its my sequencer, my sampler, my mixer my whole studio. And all of this because everything is just a step away. The only big issue I have with my motif is the very slow load and save time. Otherwise, all its limitation leaded me to make more music, instead of get lost inside features.

The flexibility of a computer is its biggest weakness, its so easy to get lost, trying the new thing. When one should invest more time in actually making music.
Old 14th January 2011
  #277
Gear Head
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by kilon View Post
Together with fleshlight , come someone explain to me the whole "its just a sotware in a box " argument, cause even though I know and can do some programming , this argument just leaves wondering what one means when he uses it against a hardware synth...
It's not an argument and it doesn't mean anything (from technical point of view).
Basically, it's a way for some people with limited technical knowledge to pseudo-rationalize buying cheaper software rather than expensive hardware. First, they divide everything in categories (like "hardware" and "VSTs"), Then they falsely assume that sound quality of hardware differs from VSTs because it runs on different tech platform, then they see a hardware instrument that runs on same platform as VSTs and because in this case the assumed difference between two categories doesn't exist anymore, it makes them think that it must be the same as VSTs. But if it's the same as VST and VST is cheaper, then why pay more?
Of course, it's all based on false assumptions that are result of technical ignorance, so this reasoning has nothing to do with reality.
Old 14th January 2011
  #278
Lives for gear
 
GeorgeHayduke's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Megakazbek View Post
..
Basically, it's a way for some people with limited technical knowledge to pseudo-rationalize buying cheaper software rather than expensive hardware.
Cool story, bro.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Megakazbek View Post
..
First, they divide everything in categories (like "hardware" and "VSTs"), Then they falsely assume that sound quality of hardware differs from VSTs because it runs on different tech platform, then they see a hardware instrument that runs on same platform as VSTs and because in this case the assumed difference between two categories doesn't exist anymore, it makes them think that it must be the same as VSTs. But if it's the same as VST and VST is cheaper, then why pay more?
Of course, it's all based on false assumptions that are result of technical ignorance, so this reasoning has nothing to do with reality.
That makes no sense at all, sorry.
Old 14th January 2011
  #279
Gear Guru
 
Yoozer's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Megakazbek View Post
It's not an argument and it doesn't mean anything (from technical point of view).
Basically, it's a way for some people with limited technical knowledge to pseudo-rationalize buying cheaper software rather than expensive hardware.
In my experience, it's exactly the other way 'round - the people who threw their money at the expensive hardware really don't like it if you call their stuff software, even if it is.

The guy with the VA gets to feel better than the guy with just plugins. The guy with a real analog gets to feel better than the guy with the VA. The trick is to recognize this pissing match and distance yourself from it.

When you save cash, you feel clever, when you're told that you've been ripped off, not so much. To make things worse, people defend their purchases for exactly the wrong reasons (it sounds better because it doesn't have to read e-mail!) instead of the right ones (dedicated UI, better "feel", no additional CPU load, sounds you can't completely cover/mimic with a substitute).

Sound and feel are always great arguments. When someone says DSPs do magically different things than CPUs, all they show is their gaping chasm of ignorance of how this stuff actually works.
Old 14th January 2011
  #280
Lives for gear
 
kilon's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Yoozer View Post
In my experience, it's exactly the other way 'round - the people who threw their money at the expensive hardware really don't like it if you call their stuff software, even if it is.

The guy with the VA gets to feel better than the guy with just plugins. The guy with a real analog gets to feel better than the guy with the VA. The trick is to recognize this pissing match and distance yourself from it.

When you save cash, you feel clever, when you're told that you've been ripped off, not so much. To make things worse, people defend their purchases for exactly the wrong reasons (it sounds better because it doesn't have to read e-mail!) instead of the right ones (dedicated UI, better "feel", no additional CPU load, sounds you can't completely cover/mimic with a substitute).

Sound and feel are always great arguments. When someone says DSPs do magically different things than CPUs, all they show is their gaping chasm of ignorance of how this stuff actually works.
Calling my motif software, is like someone calling me human. It does not mean much, and it cannot describe my motif or me . So thus I dont see the point of a "software in a box" argument, its too generic , it can mean a million things.

You brought another point which I also cannot understand " haaa... you could save money with some vsts instead ?"

Which my answer is , you think ? I mean what kind of an idiot one must think the other is for not understanding that a computer with vsts is plain cheeper. Are we workstations users some form of brainless zombies haunting musical composition ?

Its like "Look mom I invented the wheel" argument. Whats the point of all this, why people get so angry with workstations... Oh and I should not forget the "oh its only a rompler" argument, whats with that argument. I happen to own one of the very best analogues out there and I dont see its general superiority over my motif, I really dont.

What makes a workstation inferior to a va or an analogue ? because from where I am standing workstations look far superior with all the features they are offering.

What am I missing here ?

PS. This post does not target you specifically or your post.
Old 14th January 2011
  #281
Lives for gear
 
GeorgeHayduke's Avatar
 

I think Yoozer's point was simply that you cannot say that the hardware is better just because it is hardware. He wasn't trying to point fingers at anyone, except challenge the false claim that it is ignorant to say that a digital workstation is like software on a computer.

BUT, instead he says you should be looking at other benefits, namely ease of use, not having to open software on the computer etc.
Old 14th January 2011
  #282
See, the intriguing thing for me is that (and I wholeheartedly "get" the workflow thing) I will probably rarely use the sequencer aspect of any workstation.

I appreciate that they've come along way, but I hated the M1 sequencer, the D20, SY77 and even the K2000 one. They were VERY limiting in comparison to the software sequencers of the day.

Even now, I'll sit my MacBookPro with Logic on top of it and sequence/sample from there.

So where and why would I use the Kronos/Motif/Fantom etc etc?

As an additional sound palette, as I mix/produce both ITB and OTB - a combination of the 2. IMHO, neither ITB nor OTB are any good exclusively, as there's too many limitations. But a mix of the 2 is just right.....


FOR ME. My workflow is around a hardware bit of kit with complimentary software.

Where the hardware rules the roost is the sound (the D/As) - unless you're running a computer with VERY expensive audio capabilities, it's not going to sound as good (subjectively).

And for me, playing live.

But I get the software arguement as well.

Anyway, rather than arguing about this, why not get back on topic and talk about the piece of kit!!!

DAn
Old 14th January 2011
  #283
Gear Guru
 
Yoozer's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by kilon View Post
Calling my motif software, is like someone calling me human. It does not mean much, and it cannot describe my motif or me . So thus I dont see the point of a "software in a box" argument, its too generic , it can mean a million things.
"Software" is not a neutral word here on this forum (or VSE, or HC, or other places).

In a discussion about gear - on this forum or anywhere else, it automatically comes with baggage.

Quote:
You brought another point which I also cannot understand " haaa... you could save money with some vsts instead ?"
Uh, what?

Quote:
Which my answer is , you think ? I mean what kind of an idiot one must think the other is for not understanding that a computer with vsts is plain cheeper.
See, this is where it pays off to learn how quote tags work and quote the post instead of just hitting QUOTE instead of REPLY.

Previously:

Quote:
Originally Posted by zzzxtreme View Post
how much do you have to spend to get a computer/laptop that can run all those engines and polyphony and same time, plus cost of all those vsti, karma software, effects, samples, and a equivalent-grade 61-key keyboard?

$3000 is cheap for this one of a kind workstation.
Let's add some things together:

- a capable laptop (because it has to be portable if you want to make the comparison any fair)
- a capable FW/USB interface
- NI Komplete 7 (OK, so you don't have a Legacy Polysix but that's only $50, FM covers VPM, Kontakt covers HD-1 and SGX-1 etc.
- a controller keyboard
- sequencing software

Assuming someone who doesn't have anything and who has to buy all of that from scratch - then it could be that the Kronos 61 is in fact, cheaper, because a decent laptop and a decent interface isn't cheap. But that comparison is flawed for various reasons - it assumes you start from scratch with buying, which none of us here do. We've already got the computer because it was a prerequisite for other things.

Quote:
What makes a workstation inferior to a va or an analogue ? [...]
What am I missing here ?
Uh, that's not what we're discussing at all What you're missing is that we're not comparing workstations with VAs, we're comparing them to a computer kitted out with similar stuff.
Old 14th January 2011
  #284
Lives for gear
 
kilon's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Yoozer View Post

Uh, that's not what we're discussing at all What you're missing is that we're not comparing workstations with VAs, we're comparing them to a computer kitted out with similar stuff.
As I said in my ps, I was not replying to your post , I was using your post as an excuse to discuss some popular points inside this forum. Because you talked about pissing matches.

I dont disagree with what you are saying , I am just adding to what you are saying.

And no this is no what we are discussing but in the end this where it comes to, an excuse for an superiority complex. The problem is not that one does not like a workstation but that it see a workstation user like an idiot while he is the intelligent one using a va, analogue. Its the elitism that really piss me off, not personal opinions.
Old 14th January 2011
  #285
Gear Head
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by ScoobyDoo555 View Post
My take on this is that just because it's running a Linux base, it's NOT a soft-synth.
Define what you understand by "soft-synth".

Quote:
Originally Posted by ScoobyDoo555 View Post
The D/As are usually better in hardware - they're specific to ONE job, not multi-tasking.
What other job do D/As on "not hardware" have except for converting digital data to analog signal? How is it making them worse?
How exactly did you figure out that "hardware" D/As are better? What tests or measurements have you done?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ScoobyDoo555 View Post
The OS is focused on ONE task - the synth's operation and processing. Macs/PCs do an awful lot more - not that I need to tell anybody on here.
How exactly does this prevent Macs/PCs to do the same task the same or better than even specialized OS?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ScoobyDoo555 View Post
the same thing can be done cheaper with individual components
What do you mean by the "same thing"? In what way will be software solution "the same" as Kronos? Obviously, there isn't, for example, a software piano library that has the exact same piano recorded with exact same equipment and processed with exact same methods as, for example, German piano from Kronos SGX-1 engine. So when you say "the same thing", you obviously don't literally mean "the same thing". But what do you mean then?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Yoozer View Post
In my experience, it's exactly the other way 'round - the people who threw their money at the expensive hardware really don't like it if you call their stuff software
I'm talking about people who think that the fact that something is software that runs on Intel CPU proves that it can be replaced by VST's.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Yoozer View Post
FM covers VPM, Kontakt covers HD-1 and SGX-1 etc.
Again. What this word "covers" means when applied to two different synths?
Does MFB Synth II cover Minimoog Model D?
Does Waldorf Blofeld cover Access Virus Ti?
What sense does it make?
Old 14th January 2011
  #286
Lives for gear
 
omegaomega's Avatar
 

I have an idea...
How about a separate MOD-7 keyboard synth by Korg?
Maybe with the AL-1 synth engine thrown in and LOTS of knobs and sliders? A real synth, finally!!!
Now, THIS would be interesting, wouldn't it?
Old 14th January 2011
  #287
Lives for gear
 
GeorgeHayduke's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Megakazbek View Post
..
I'm talking about people who think that the fact that something is software that runs on Intel CPU proves that it can be replaced by VST's.
..
Well, it could, in case KORG made their soft synth technology in the Kronos available as a VST. Since I imagine KORG won't do that, it is true that you can possibly make sounds on the Kronos which you couldn't with a VST.
Old 14th January 2011
  #288
Lives for gear
 
Westlaker's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by omegaomega View Post
I have an idea...
How about a separate MOD-7 keyboard synth by Korg?
Maybe with the AL-1 synth engine thrown in and LOTS of knobs and sliders? A real synth, finally!!!
Now, THIS would be interesting, wouldn't it?
But think about what you're getting with the Kronos. Even if it were ONLY the MOD-7 and the AL-1 (and that stunning piano), together with the touchscreen (and Karma), it's already a decent deal. Everything else is just gravy. Believe me, I understand the appeal of real knobs and sliders, but navigating a complex synthesis engine with a big touchscreen is a true delight...
Old 14th January 2011
  #289
Quote:
Originally Posted by Megakazbek View Post
Define what you understand by "soft-synth".
Those that work operate inside a sequencer package.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Megakazbek View Post
What other job do D/As on "not hardware" have except for converting digital data to analog signal?
A DAW has more work to do - audio tracks and soft-synth tracks.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Megakazbek View Post
How is it making them worse?
Not necessarily worse (your words, not mine) - but certainly more work to do - see above comment.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Megakazbek View Post
How exactly did you figure out that "hardware" D/As are better?
By better, MY definition is that of the sound (and thus is purely subjective) I listen to my synths and have done for the last 25 years. I am also a professional mix engineer - not to say that I'm the be-all and end-all, but my experience is considerable.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Megakazbek View Post
What tests or measurements have you done?
Listened to A/D & D/As from the cheap to the expensive over my years as a professional mix engineer & producer.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Megakazbek View Post
How exactly does this prevent Macs/PCs to do the same task the same or better than even specialized OS?
In theory, any processor being tasked with more than the specific job at hand, will have its performance compromised.
Computer processors have to deal with a lot more than just a sound conversion.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Megakazbek View Post
What do you mean by the "same thing"? In what way will be software solution "the same" as Kronos? Obviously, there isn't, for example, a software piano library that has the exact same piano recorded with exact same equipment and processed with exact same methods as, for example, German piano from Kronos SGX-1 engine. So when you say "the same thing", you obviously don't literally mean "the same thing".
LOL - are you trying to be obnoxious and obtuse? (congratulations on the success of your attempts, but I'll entertain your questions)

The same thing = equivalant (if you want to bandy around semantics, then be my guest - I have a life to lead in the meantime)

OK - software equivalent.
Pianos = the list is ENDLESS of software that in essence is the same
Electic pianos - lounge lizard etc
HD1 = rompler software such as EXS24, Sampletank etc etc etc
AL1 - analogue modelling..... erm again, the list is endless.
CX3 - available in Logic and Sampletank etc etc etc
STR1 - Sculpture in Logic (I'm sure there are others too)
MOD7 - FM7/8 & aspects of the Korg Legacy collection
MS-20 & Polysix - Korg Legacy


It won't be identical, but it can be done.

Personally, I've got all the component parts, but will still be purchasing a Kronos.


Now the caveat. The written word on the Internet can be misinterpreted. If I have misinterpreted you as a bit of an ascerbic smart-a$$, then please accept my apologies - as I do feel we're fighting the same corner. thumbsup

However, if my assumption is correct, then well, I will gladly watch your scoffing attitude from afar - I came on this site to contribute and learn with like-minded gear nuts, not argue with internet personas who feel the need to attempt to belittle posters with abrasive and arrogant-sounded comments.

Take it easy.
Old 14th January 2011
  #290
Gear Maniac
 
Vermeer's Avatar
 

Back To Korg!

OK, with this synth, I'm back on board with Korg. In 2006, I sold my tricked out Classic Triton because I was getting more done with soft synths inside a DAW.

-------

What I like about Kronos:

1) Pricing
Basically the same as the Triton when it was first introduced. Never could justify the price of an OASYS. M3 felt cheap.

2) Build & Design
Call me old school, but I prefer the metallic look and build quality of the Trinity and Triton keyboards. The M3 looked like a toy and I didn't dig their LEGO-like "Komponent" systems.

3) USB and Flash Memory
Multi-Gigabytes Flash HD. Huge sample libraries were the main thing that I like about soft synths. Now, Korg has made it possible to get the same detail and quality with an integrated instrument.

-------

The Oasys/M3 were not my cup of tea, but with this machine, I'm in love again. heh

When is this available for sale?
Old 14th January 2011
  #291
Lives for gear
 
Entrainer's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by kilon View Post
just looked it, niiiiiice... But then there is nothing like the real thing I am afraid.
Well, sure it won't have the warmth and authentic soft texture, but there
are many advantages to a VP.

The real thing can become unstable at high temperatures, or unstable in
general. Very unpredictable behavior, these things can SOMETIMES have
a mind of their own.

Then there is the weight issue, you have to lug around 100-160 pounds
with you everywhere you go.

Maintenance. Holy crap.

And who's going to fix it in 30 years?

With a VP, it's portable. Reliable. Want a combo?? Stack em.
Old 14th January 2011
  #292
Lives for gear
 
shadowfac's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Entrainer View Post
Someone make a VST wavesequencing plugin that
can load wavetables + samples and save me $2700.
I'll save you $2890.

Wusikstation - $60 (Windows only though, but they're supposedly working on a mac version)

Korg Legacy Wavestation - $50

Get both. One will give you the classic Wavestation sounds, and the other will allow you to load your own samples and provide a ton of modulation routings.

Edit: Wusikstation price corrected. There's a group buy currently going on and it's already at the lowest price.
Old 14th January 2011
  #293
Lives for gear
 

Mod-7 looks sweet, although it looks like you have to press hard on the screen. Ipad version!

They shoulda thrown in two built in monotrons to filter everything through, re-sample etc.

So what is new versus oasys? Never gave much thought to the oasys because it was out of my budget. Oasys owners got f'd. The oasys situation illustrates what people already know: most digital devices are disposable.

I hope I'm wrong, but I think that's part of why this'll be a failure too. It's sad because I like the idea of workstations in concept I think they're great. I'm doubtful we'll see many more.

The mid-range gear market doesn't seem that viable. We're still in a recession. There's no sexiness factor to the sounds you get here.

Targeting so many audiences with this is a mistake. Most people that want to play classic sounds live don't care about the synthesis and vice versa for the synth folks.

Really, I think Korg made a bad decision about the price. I mean considering how old all of the software in it is. I guess most of the cost is in the touch screen and ssd? Because of their history they are somewhat trapped into high prices.

This is a dilemma for a lot of hardware manufactures. I think the trick to solve it is go the nintendo route. That is make hardware and then make damn good software for it. I think that's where Korg is headed with linux/oasys,kronos, but it remains to be seen if they're moving quickly enough.
Old 14th January 2011
  #294
Lives for gear
 
NAWAX's Avatar
I would rather buy a MS-20, a Polysix and a TX-802... for the same price.
I don't understand how can someone be excited by this synth.
I guess I'm just an old fart...
Old 14th January 2011
  #295
Gear Head
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by ScoobyDoo555 View Post
A DAW has more work to do - audio tracks and soft-synth tracks.
Ehh... what exactly did you mean by "D/A"? I assumed it is "digital/analog converter". If it is, then DAW has nothing to do with it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ScoobyDoo555 View Post
By better, MY definition is that of the sound (and thus is purely subjective) I listen to my synths and have done for the last 25 years. I am also a professional mix engineer - not to say that I'm the be-all and end-all, but my experience is considerable.

Listened to A/D & D/As from the cheap to the expensive over my years as a professional mix engineer & producer.
Sound from a synth is a result of many factors - initial samples/oscillator algoriths, filters, effect processing, etc. D/A takes only small part in shaping the overall sound of a synth. So how exactly do you listen to a synth and tell that from all those elements it's nothing else but D/A that sounds good?
Also how do you explain the fact that synth companies almost never design their own converters and buy them from 3rd party manufacturers, and computer audio interface manufacturers also buy the same converters from the same manufacturers, but yet they somehow turn out better on hardware synths?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ScoobyDoo555 View Post
In theory, any processor being tasked with more than the specific job at hand, will have its performance compromised.
Computer processors have to deal with a lot more than just a sound conversion.
Computer processor don't deal with sound conversion at all.
You're talking about number of tasks a processor should do simultaneously. This has nothing to do with how they do them. What makes you think that software processors are tasked so much that they can't do their job as well as DSPs?
And again similar question as previous one, how exactly can you listen to softsynth and tell that from all the chain of elements that produce its sound, it's precisely the heavily-tasked processor that is the reason of the bad sound, not anything else?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ScoobyDoo555 View Post
LOL - are you trying to be obnoxious and obtuse? (congratulations on the success of your attempts, but I'll entertain your questions)
I'm trying to translate what you're saying from too general words that can mean anything to more clearly defined terms. Usually then it turns out that you mean something completely different than you actually say.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ScoobyDoo555 View Post
The same thing = equivalant (if you want to bandy around semantics, then be my guest - I have a life to lead in the meantime)

OK - software equivalent.
Pianos = the list is ENDLESS of software that in essence is the same
Electic pianos - lounge lizard etc
HD1 = rompler software such as EXS24, Sampletank etc etc etc
AL1 - analogue modelling..... erm again, the list is endless.
CX3 - available in Logic and Sampletank etc etc etc
STR1 - Sculpture in Logic (I'm sure there are others too)
MOD7 - FM7/8 & aspects of the Korg Legacy collection
MS-20 & Polysix - Korg Legacy
But how exactly is this "equivalence" relevant?
Let's stop comparing hardware to software for a moment and start comparing VSTi's with other VSTi's. For example, you say that there are endless list of analog modeling VSTi's. But why of all them, some are very popular (for example, D-CAM, Sylenth, Minimonsta, etc), while others are not? Is there a reason to buy Minimonsta if you can easily find dozens of free SynthEdit equivalents for it? If they are "equivalent", then why the difference in popularity, why some people pay for something they can get an equivalent for free? Maybe, after all, not all equivalents are actually equal?
Old 14th January 2011
  #296
I'm not going to break down my response to your questions - life's too short.

Suffice to say that you are wrong on some of your comments and conclusions.

However, D/As (yes, digital/anlogue convertors) are a KEY part of the sound of a hardware synth - if you don't understand why then I suggest you do some research.

I also suggest you read my response in more detail, as your answers are (a) in my responses (whether you agree with them or not) and (b) in your OWN questions.

Move on.
Old 14th January 2011
  #297
Lives for gear
 
cane creek's Avatar
 

I hope the Krono's sounds great and is a big success.

however from what I've seen/heard up to now I keep thinking "Jack of all trades master of none" hope I'm wrong.
Old 14th January 2011
  #298
Lives for gear
The debate on hardware vs software is pointless. The idea of a WORKSTATION is that of a SELF-CONTAINED MUSIC PRODUCTION INSTRUMENT. Something you can carry around and do pretty much everything with, without the need to bring your computer, your software, your dongles and your audio interface along.

Until now, workstations were compromises that increasingly less people were willing to accept, because while in the software world we were dealing with multi-gigabyte virtual instruments, the wave ROM of a typical workstation rarely exceeded 512 mb (as far as I know, the Motif XF is the only one that does that --albeit barely-- with something like 775 mb.) Now the Kronos is a real game changer, with a whopping 12 gigs of samples. Granted I haven't tried it yet and therefore I don't know the actual quality of its samples, at least spec-wise it's something that competes with the best of plug-in instruments on equal footing. Naturally, I don't expect the Kronos orchestral instruments to be of the same quality as VSL, EW, LASS etc. But then again, in order to achieve realistic orchestral mockups, you'd need a lot of note-by-note work, with gazillions of different articulations. This is the kind of work you do patiently in a studio, not live on a stage.
Old 14th January 2011
  #299
Lives for gear
 
Westlaker's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by cane creek View Post
I hope the Krono's sounds great and is a big success.

however from what I've seen/heard up to now I keep thinking "Jack of all trades master of none" hope I'm wrong.
Actually, I think it was intended to be, and is, a "jack of all trades," and so is also, almost by definition, a "master of none." And that's actually why I want it! A single digital synth to cover (a lot of) the digital sound spectrum, without being the best at any one part of it (which would require a lot more synths, and a lot more money). If it is judged for what it was intended to be, it's hard not to be impressed (and maybe even "amazed!").

One further point: listen to Rudess' demo on the Korg site. I think they got the piano right this time...
Old 14th January 2011
  #300
Lives for gear
 
kilon's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Entrainer View Post
Well, sure it won't have the warmth and authentic soft texture, but there
are many advantages to a VP.

The real thing can become unstable at high temperatures, or unstable in
general. Very unpredictable behavior, these things can SOMETIMES have
a mind of their own.

Then there is the weight issue, you have to lug around 100-160 pounds
with you everywhere you go.

Maintenance. Holy crap.

And who's going to fix it in 30 years?

With a VP, it's portable. Reliable. Want a combo?? Stack em.
Challenge is the salt of life.

Quote:
Originally Posted by cane creek View Post
I hope the Krono's sounds great and is a big success.

however from what I've seen/heard up to now I keep thinking "Jack of all trades master of none" hope I'm wrong.
Show me one that is master of one. What the hell, show me one that is not deeply flawed and I will be seriously surprised.
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearslutz Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Similar Threads
Thread
Thread Starter / Forum
Replies
champ / Product Alerts older than 2 months
69
tyler477 / Work In Progress / Advice Requested / Show and Tell / Artist Showcase / Mix-Offs
2
TobyToby / Gearslutz Secondhand Gear Classifieds
1
2A Batterie / So much gear, so little time
11
Kaneepa / So much gear, so little time
2

Forum Jump
Forum Jump