Korg Krome

[1001gear]

 

Originally Posted by ChristianRock

No, time to prove your point or concede that you're just trolling.

 

I stated myself clearly. You nibble =/= me troll. Doesn't merit you retro lling either

[cresshead]

the topic is this way>>>>> for anyone who cares to talk about the korg krome!

so can anyone confirm that switching octave via the up/down octaave buttons results in sustained notes being shifted?

[AnotherScott]

 

Originally Posted by elwoodblues1969

I don't know where the information is coming from,but I've read that 2.8GB is for the pianos(don't know if the e.pianos are included in that figure)...so is the 600MB for e.pianos separate or not??

 

Yes, separate.

 

Originally Posted by elwoodblues1969

300MB are for drums...

...

If the 2.8GB are just for the acoustic pianos alone,then that would mean there is only 100MB reserved for everything else apart from the pianos,EP's and drums,which doesn't make any sense.

 

I didn't realize the drums were 300 mb, but yes, I guess that means 100 mb for everything else.

The M50 had 256 mb total. A bunch of that was for piano, EPs, and drums. Maybe the balance was about 100 mb, so then the amount of space for sounds in the Krome (other than piano, EPs, drums) would be the same in both. (The biggest sample in the M50's 256 mb was probably its own piano.)

 

Originally Posted by elwoodblues1969

I had the MOX6 and the synths were no better than that of the M50's,so it sounded to me,that Yamaha dedicated a significant portion of the ROM to the pianos,drums & orchestral...which didn't make the M50 much different than the MOX.

 

You may be right in terms of synth sounds... in fact, general wisdom seems to have been that M50 was stronger for synth sounds than MOX. But if you are looking for more acoustic sounds (brass, woodwinds, etc.), that's where people have often preferred Yamaha. My guess is that that split will continue... Pianos/EPs aside, Yamaha will be preferred for those looking for acoustic sounds, Krome will be preferred for those looking for synth sounds. But sure, people will also take into account the pianos, DAW integrarion, etc.

[elwoodblues1969]

 

Originally Posted by AnotherScott

Yes, separate.

I didn't realize the drums were 300 mb, but yes, I guess that means 100 mb for everything else.

The M50 had 256 mb total. A bunch of that was for piano, EPs, and drums. Maybe the balance was about 100 mb, so then the amount of space for sounds in the Krome (other than piano, EPs, drums) would be the same in both. (The biggest sample in the M50's 256 mb was probably its own piano.)

 

I once had a discussion on YouTube regarding the ROM and how it was allocated and supposedly,the source of the info was from a translation from one of the Japanese Krome demo vids(which as you know,can be unreliable info)...so it's anyone's guess I gather,as to how the ROM was divided up.

I looked through the PDF files,but I've never known Korg to reveal such details about ROM content(other than the total amount),so there's no way to confirm anything...as far as I know.

[Synthaholic]

 

Originally Posted by elwoodblues1969

To reiterate what has already been pointed out,comparing a flagship(as it were),to a budget workstation is patently absurd.

 

First of all, no one has pointed that out, or that anything is absurd.

Second, I'm comparing bang for the buck within a certain price range. They are both ROMplers, they are both workstations (whatever the hell that means, in 2012).

 

Aside from that,anyone who places the quality of organ sounds above everything else,would not even consider a Krome(especially since there's no slider controls).

 

I didn't place organ sounds above everything else.

I said that, in addition to the superior Kurzweil sounds, you also get one of the best clonewheels available, which is certainly worth a few hundred bucks more considering the price of a Hammond SK1 or a Voce.

 

I have yet to demo a Krome for myself,but based on my previous PC3LE6 and the videos of the Krome I've seen,the orchestral sounds seem to be at least as good as the Kurzweil's.

 

This kind of speaks for itself.

 

There are quite a few categories that the Krome excels in over the Kurzweil PC3LE series(which is a much more appropriate comparison),such as the pianos(being the most obvious),drums,the implementation and layout of effects,much more intuitive and larger display,nearly twice the polyphony,VST plug-in for DAWs,included sound editing software and the Krome 61-key is $500 cheaper than the PC3LE6.

 

• The pianos may be better. I won't be able to decide until I play one.
• The drums in the PC series are excellent. Perhaps you haven't heard the ones included in the latest FREE update (another huge advantage of the Kurzweil: regular free OS and program updates)
• The effects engine in the Kurz PC series:

16 insert effects distributed over 11 busses, two auxiliary sends and two Master Effects (saved with each song and setup); featuring over 500 of our award winning effects - reverbs, delays, chorus, flange, phaser, EQs, distortions, Leslie simulators, compressors, and more.

• The effects engine in the Kurz LE series, since you insist on including it:

10 insert effects distributed over 10 busses, two auxiliary sends; featuring over 500 of our award winning preset FX chains - reverbs, delays, chorus, flange, phaser, EQs, distortions, rotary speaker simulators, compressors, and more (FX editing limited to chain selection and wet/dry mix).

• The effects engine in the Korg Krome:

5 Insert Effects (stereo in/out)

2 Master Effects (stereo in/out)

1 Total Effect (stereo in/out)

• Polyphony

PC361: 128 Voice Polyphony, dynamically allocated, lightning fast performance.

PCLE6: 64 Voice Polyphony, dynamically allocated, lightning fast performance.

Krome: 120 voices (120 Oscillators) / Single Mode

60 voices (120 Oscillators) / Double Mode

*The maximum simultaneous voice polyphony will vary depending on oscillator settings such as stereo multisamples and velocity crossfading.

• Arpeggiator

PC361 & PCLE6: 16 full-featured independent arpeggiators with multiple latch modes, selectable play order, velocity, duration, tempo, and sync functions as well as pre-recorded beats and musical phrases.

Krome: On/Off

The PC series does not have VST support, so I guess that's a Korg win, if that matters to you.

All that said, what is your end use for the Krome? If it's live work, the differences in pianos will be imperceptible, but the absence of clonewheel would be HUGE. If you are going to set it up in your studio, the lighter weight makes no difference, but the inferior sequencer (Kurz: 960ppq/Krome:480ppq) would be big. Unless you are using a computer sequencer, in which case the sequencer is a moot point.

The Krome seems like a live board to me. In which case, it can't come close to the Kurzweil in sounds, effects, sequencer, or MIDI controller/live performance functions.

But it is lighter.

 

I should also mention that the optional sound editing software for the PC3LE6 is an additional $70.

 

Non-factor.

Let me know if you want to discuss the Kurzweil Master EQ and Compressor section, too.

[Synthaholic]

 

Originally Posted by zoink

Words to live by.

I NEVER buy returns or floor models and always insist on a factory sealed unit. Internet retailers are notorious for selling demos and returns as new, and I've even had local retailers try this.

 

This is especially true in the sex toy industry. Yuck!

[elwoodblues1969]

 

Originally Posted by Synthaholic

Second, I'm comparing bang for the buck within a certain price range. They are both ROMplers, they are both workstations

The pianos may be better. I won't be able to decide until I play one.

The drums in the PC series are excellent. Perhaps you haven't heard the ones included in the latest FREE update (another huge advantage of the Kurzweil: regular free OS and program updates)

The effects engine in the Kurz PC series:

16 insert effects distributed over 11 busses, two auxiliary sends and two Master Effects (saved with each song and setup); featuring over 500 of our award winning effects - reverbs, delays, chorus, flange, phaser, EQs, distortions, Leslie simulators, compressors, and more.

• The effects engine in the Kurz LE series, since you insist on including it:

10 insert effects distributed over 10 busses, two auxiliary sends; featuring over 500 of our award winning preset FX chains - reverbs, delays, chorus, flange, phaser, EQs, distortions, rotary speaker simulators, compressors, and more (FX editing limited to chain selection and wet/dry mix).

• The effects engine in the Korg Krome:

5 Insert Effects (stereo in/out)

2 Master Effects (stereo in/out)

1 Total Effect (stereo in/out)

• Polyphony

PC361: 128 Voice Polyphony, dynamically allocated, lightning fast performance.

PCLE6: 64 Voice Polyphony, dynamically allocated, lightning fast performance.

Krome: 120 voices (120 Oscillators) / Single Mode

60 voices (120 Oscillators) / Double Mode

*The maximum simultaneous voice polyphony will vary depending on oscillator settings such as stereo multisamples and velocity crossfading.

• Arpeggiator

PC361 & PCLE6: 16 full-featured independent arpeggiators with multiple latch modes, selectable play order, velocity, duration, tempo, and sync functions as well as pre-recorded beats and musical phrases.

The PC series does not have VST support, so I guess that's a Korg win, if that matters to you.

All that said, what is your end use for the Krome? If it's live work, the differences in pianos will be imperceptible, but the absence of clonewheel would be HUGE. If you are going to set it up in your studio, the lighter weight makes no difference, but the inferior sequencer (Kurz: 960ppq/Krome:480ppq) would be big. Unless you are using a computer sequencer, in which case the sequencer is a moot point.

The Krome seems like a live board to me. In which case, it can't come close to the Kurzweil in sounds, effects, sequencer, or MIDI controller/live performance functions.

 

Just what particular price range are you referring to?The Krome 61 is $1,000 and the PC3 61 was at least double the price.The PC361 has flimsy synth action,a memory card slot so incompatible,that you can only find the right memory card online,a screen the size of a calculator(a size of which,Korg has advanced past 10 years ago) and who really wants to go blind trying to not only edit the effects and tracks in the sequencer,but what about doing VAST editing on such a display?NO THANK YOU.

Does the PC3 or LE have 2.8GB of uncompressed and unlooped piano samples?Well...Kurzweil doesn't do you the courtesy of informing of what the ROM content is of their keyboards,so couldn't really estimate,but I do recall Dave Weiser telling me that the ROM was compressed.

By the way,why the F**K,is the Kurzweil user forced to contact support to get any info on the ROM content,whereas every other company readily provides this info in their product pages?

NO ONE is saying that Kurzweil's drums aren't excellent,as they do provide a wide selection of quality sounds,but the Krome's drums offer a PC software-grade level of edit-ability(one method of which,is that you can adjust to get a close mic sound,or a room ambient sound),which isn't quite the same as adding a preset room reverb effect,now is it?

Does Kurzweil have this on ANY of their workstations?

Since Kurzweil is still stuck in the 20th century with their display screens,I don't expect much progress from them any time soon,in terms of developing a workflow that matches Korg's.

Kurzweil has dynamically allocated polyphony?

Wow

...really?Explain to me why that is so critical to have,being that the Krome has 120 note polyphony?I've been sequencing on Korgs for many years using all 16 tracks and I've NEVER run into a shortage of polyphony.

Also explain to me how a higher resolution PPQ feature is going to compensate for the archaic display and the time consuming trek through such an outdated menu configuration in the Kurzweil?

The Krome has a superior menu configuration,more advanced editing than the Kronos and a display that provides computer DAW-type workflow(all of which are far superior to your precious Kurzweil's sequencer and it's higher resolution PPQ feature).

Although Kurzweil's $4,000 flagship PC3K has a slightly larger display,how in any way,shape or form,does it measure up to the Krome's.?.

Honestly,if I wanted a completely self sufficient song creation tool with superb sounds and I had $4,000 or more to spend,I'd choose the Kronos X without a nano second's hesitation...OVER ANY OTHER WORKSTATION ON THE MARKET-PERIOD.

Kurzweil's effects are indeed,superb,the VAST engine is amazing and the retro compatibility of sounds(non-obsolesce) programs are truly a wonderful thing,but in today's market,Kurzweil's acoustic sounds do not reign supreme like they did 10,15 or 20 years ago.

The really sad thing about Kurzweil is that those incredible effects and synth sounds are encased in such an outdated design and actually,all of that power should be put to better use as a PC software package,so studio-based musicians don't have to contend with the enormous lag of trying to create a polished song using a neolithic piece of hardware.

As good as they are,what would I really care about Kurzweil's on-board effects...being that I will have the ability to use the Krome's sounds as VST's in my DAW,whereby I have access to a UNIVERSE of high quality effects that I can apply to those sounds?

Yes-of course,the Krome is designed with the gigging musician in mind,hence the improvement of some of the bread & butter sounds,but the Krome is equally designed to function quite well without the use of a PC,while also having the ability to integrate exceptionally well WITH a PC.

Kurzweil are the keyboards that are exclusively designed as live instruments,because the PC3's sequencers are an utter failure in terms of workflow and PC integration.

How many people do you know that actually use the on-board sequencer of the Kurzweil?

Most of what I read on the internet indicates that Kurzweil users DON'T use the on-board sequencer and the fact that I had bought a PC3LE6 as a song writing tool,was the biggest mistake in the history of my keyboard purchases(but I had to have the VAST engine)...so what choice did I have,since there's not a softsynth version of it?

The fact that the PC3 series is marketed as a "midi controller" line with a built in sequencer,is very misleading,because for one thing,if you want to make the transition from controller mode-to the on-board mode,you have to power down the keyboard for the change to take effect.

The old method I used in the past with my older Korgs(in order to sync my on-board sequences,with that of my DAW's),was to simply depress both play buttons simultaneously to achieve the desired action,which always worked fine(SOMETHING OF WHICH,WAS IMPOSSIBLE ON MY PC3LE6,BECAUSE THERE WAS A F**KING FRACTION-OF-A-SECOND LAG FROM THE TIME I DEPRESSED THE PLAY BUTTON ON THE KEYBOARD,TO WHEN THE SEQUENCER ACTUALLY BEGAN PLAYING).

It was once suggested to me by someone on the Sonikmatter forum,that I should try to tinker around with Kurzweil's midi clock,in order to send commands to my DAW's sequencer to syncronize everything...but I was piss-tired of f**king around with the PC3LE6 and why should I have to put up with all that bother?

This is the 21st century for f**k's sake and the only other workstation that gave me that much trouble,was the MOX6 and all of the horse-sh*t with the dreaded Cubase AI5.

Every workstation has it's pro's and con's,but the Krome has vastly improved pianos,EP's and drums(and from what I heard in all of the YouTube videos,the orchestral sounds are very usable),the same editing features as the M3's sequencer and seamless PC integration(so whatever synth sounds may be missing from my future Krome),will be compensated by my VST arsenal.

[AnotherScott]

 

Originally Posted by elwoodblues1969

The PC361 has flimsy synth action

 

I actually think it's a very nice synth action, equal to or better than the various Korg synth actions. It has aftertouch, too.

 

Originally Posted by elwoodblues1969

a screen the size of a calculator...what about doing VAST editing on such a display?NO THANK YOU.

 

That's why the computer editor is so important. But yes, Kurz still lags in their displays, and Korg leads.

 

Originally Posted by elwoodblues1969

Kurzweil doesn't do you the courtesy of informing of what the ROM content is of their keyboards,so couldn't really estimate

 

I believe it is 64 mb.

 

Originally Posted by elwoodblues1969

By the way,why the F**K,is the Kurzweil user forced to contact support to get any info on the ROM content,whereas every other company readily provides this info in their product pages?

 

By "any info on the ROM content," do you mean the total size, as discussed above? If that's the case, I think the simple answer is that companies promote the specs that show off their competitive advantages. The primary purpose of posted specs is not to inform the customer, it's too help sell the product. It's similar to how Apple won't tell you how much RAM is in an iPad. It's not impressive (especially before the new model). Apple would say that the RAM spec isn't important... what's important is what it does. Kurzweil would likely also tell you that what matters is how it sounds, not the size of the ROM. And IMO, they would be right.

I own the PC361 and M50, and I would agree with those who say the Kurz sounds better, even if the Korg has 4x the ROM. I'm sure there are people who prefer Korg sounds, there's always an element of subjectivity to these things (and people using them for different purposes), but whether it's better quality original samples, more flexibility in the OS in how the samples can be employed, superior programming, or whatever, I'm among many people who have preferred Kurz sounds. I expect I would prefer the Krome piano and possibly EPs as well, but if the other Krome sounds are M50 calibre, I think the Kurz will likely maintain its lead in other sounds, or at least the ones I care about, which tend to be classic keys and orchestral.

There are some architectural advantages to the Kurz to consider as well. Its sound generation engine is not simple sample playback (rompler) as the M50/Krome are. It also has the KB3 clonewheel engine built in, and the VA1 virtual analog synth architecture (which uses non-PCM based oscillators).

As I said, I own both. I prefer the PC361's sounds, keybed, MIDI controller flexibility, connectivity (more pedals, assignable outs), wheels rather than joystick, and some other things, but I've gigged with the M50 because it's 73 keys and weighs 17 lbs. (And I do like the M50's touchscreen.)

BTW, it's not true that "every other company readily provides this info in their product pages" -- or at least not on all products. They tell you when it serves their marketing purposes. Roland doesn't tell how how big the ROM is in an RD-700NX, Jupiter 80, or numerous other products. I don't think I've ever seen a ROM size spec from Casio or Kawai. Yamaha doesn't provide their ROM sizes on the CP5/CP50 or NP-V80 etc.

 

Originally Posted by elwoodblues1969

NO ONE is saying that Kurzweil's drums aren't excellent,as they do provide a wide selection of quality sounds,but the Krome's drums offer a PC software-grade level of edit-ability

 

Again demonstrationg that all these boards have advantages for different people and scenarios... I've never used a drum sound on any keyboard, as I always play with real drummers. I'm actually surprised to see such emphasis on drum sounds these days. It seems to me that most live performers have live drummers, and if you're recording into a DAW, wouldn't you be better off using a VST anyway? But then, I don't use these board's built-in sequencers, either.

 

Originally Posted by elwoodblues1969

Kurzweil has dynamically allocated polyphony?Wow...really?Explain to me why that is so critical to have,being that the Krome has 120 note polyphony?I've been sequencing on Korgs for many years using all 16 tracks and I've NEVER run into a shortage of polyphony.

 

This is an unfortunate limitation of the Korg M50... timbres in a combi use up polyphony even if they are muted. This is an issue in live performance, where it would otherwise be very helpful to assign the different sounds you need for a song to a single combi, and call them up as needed from within that combi. Kurzweil does not have this problem... muted sounds in a setup do not use up polyphony. Related to this, Kurzweil has (and I think this is Roland's term) "patch remain" which means you can, for example, hold a string chord, switch to a piano sound, and the strings won't cut out when you switch sounds, they will play until you release those keys. Korg has that in the Kronos, but not the M50, and presumably not the Krome. Overall, I find the Kurz to be a better performance board than the M50... except for its travel weight. (Yeah, it has an internal power supply, which is nice, but I still prefer the light weight of the boards that don't have them.) Of course, as mentioned, the Kurzweil was also designed to sell at a higher price.

 

Originally Posted by elwoodblues1969

Although Kurzweil's $4,000 flagship PC3K has a slightly larger display

 

Actually, I don't believe it does.

 

Originally Posted by elwoodblues1969

How many people do you know that actually use the on-board sequencer of the Kurzweil?

Most of what I read on the internet indicates that Kurzweil users DON'T use the on-board sequencer

 

That could be. I'm really not sure why anyone cares about on-board sequencers these days. But apparently people do, and if that's your application, I could see where Kurzweil would be bringing up the rear.

[MikeyParent]

 

Originally Posted by midinut

Michael:

Have you considered a Kronos 61 on top and a MOX8 on bottom? Could be the best of both worlds my friend. At least that's the path I'm heading down. Got the Kronos already and was considering a Privia PX3 for a controller/backup until I saw what used MOX8's are going for. Only a few hundred more. It's quite a shame to have those beautiful pianos in the Kronos and not having a weighted action to play them from. I bought my Motif ES6 used based largely on watching your impressive Motif videos. I too have a place in my heart for the Yamaha sound set. My plans are to unload my M3-73 and ES6 and add the MOX8 and a pair of QSC K10's. Should put me pretty close to Nirvana for live AND studio. Plus I do use Cubase, so the MOX DAW integration works for me. Curious about their iPad apps too. Still waiting for Korg to update the Kronos Editor software so I can integrate it as a VST as well. lol

(of course you do have that MOFO of a Virus Polar already too - you lucky bastid)

 

Um so yeah, I am asking about choosing between them, because I only have the budget for one. ;-)

I should also mention context - I would be looking for something to potentially sequence entire songs (drums and bass primarily)

[midinut]

 

Originally Posted by MikeyParent

Um so yeah, I am asking about choosing between them, because I only have the budget for one. ;-)

I should also mention context - I would be looking for something to potentially sequence entire songs (drums and bass primarily)

 

If you only have the budget for one, then my suggestion is to go to a store that has both and spend some time on both. One of them will appeal to your soul more than the other.

Pick that one.

The logic I apply in situations like this: (warning - this is how my brain works)

I want one controller that is weighted to handle the piano/rhodes/wurly duties mostly for the tactile respomse. I want it to be 88-notes and weighted like a big boy piano. My second controller I want to be 61 keys, non-weighted synth action for playing organ smears and synth and sampled sounds. That takes care of controllers. For sounds, I personally prefer the Korg soundsets but Yamaha runs a close second and does better with acoustic guitars, electric guitars, brass and woodwinds IMHO. So I want both. I'm like a few others around here I think in my logic (except they may prefer the Roland soundset or the Kurzweil soundset). So in MY personal quest, I already had some of my needs met in the M-73/Motif ES. I took advantage of a small windfall that came my way to upgrade my gear. I chose the Kronos 61 as my top-tier and am pretty fixed on the Motif MOX8 as my new bottom-tier. I considered a Motif XF8 or XS8 as my bottom board and just using my M3-73 for the upper-tier but when Kronos came out the 9 engines caught my attention (plus I love the pianos, epianos, and organ engines). My next need was to upgrade my amplification to the QSC K10's which seem to be the defacto standard around these parts for crystal clear sound for keyboard rigs.

Can I tell you that this will cover ALL my needs for the rest of my life? Hell no! I get GAS just like most others in this forum do. I may want a real Hammond one day (had several many years ago). I may want a real Moog someday. If I can ever find a Kurzweil to sit down and play on I may like the soundset enough to justify adding that to my arsenal. But until then ... that's the way my mind works when I contemplate keyboard purchases. Will I use it? Will it inspire me? Does it give me a woody?

I have audio and MIDI recording/sequencing capabilities in all of my workstations but I choose to use Cubase on my PC for recording and playing with VST instruments. For me personally, the capabilities of a dedicated DAW far outweigh what you can do with the built-in sequencers (and the screen is bigger). If you have a PC (which I am assuming you do to post in this thread) or even a laptop, you can buy into the DAW experience for cheap. Most DAW manufacturers have a "Lite" version to help you get started for less than $100US (examples: Steinberg Sequel, GarageBand, Ableton, etc.). So if you're ultimate goal is to sequence entire songs, get a DAW. Seriously. I think you'll be much happier in the end. And best of luck!

Sorry for the lengthy post - just trying to be helpful. That's all.

[MikeyParent]

 

Originally Posted by midinut

I have audio and MIDI recording/sequencing capabilities in all of my workstations but I choose to use Cubase on my PC for recording and playing with VST instruments. For me personally, the capabilities of a dedicated DAW far outweigh what you can do with the built-in sequencers (and the screen is bigger). If you have a PC (which I am assuming you do to post in this thread) or even a laptop, you can buy into the DAW experience for cheap. Most DAW manufacturers have a "Lite" version to help you get started for less than $100US (examples: Steinberg Sequel, GarageBand, Ableton, etc.). So if you're ultimate goal is to sequence entire songs, get a DAW. Seriously. I think you'll be much happier in the end. And best of luck!

Sorry for the lengthy post - just trying to be helpful. That's all.

 

Thanks man. I don't want to get into it too much at this time, but the sequencing I need would have to be able to be done on stage, ruling out a DAW for me.

[midinut]

 

Originally Posted by MikeyParent

Thanks man. I don't want to get into it too much at this time, but the sequencing I need would have to be able to be done on stage, ruling out a DAW for me.

 

There is nothing stopping you from creating the sequences in a DAW on the computer and then transferring it to the keyboard workstation for playing on stage. It's just a much easier way to create. Once done, you can get it into board in several ways. One-shot sampling, RPPR, or directly import the tracks into your sequencer. Depending on what platform you choose, even audio tracks can be brought into your keyboard. Just open your mind to the possibilities. I'm just throwing this out here so that you realize you have choices you may not have explored, that's all.

Another item you might want to take a look at is the Zoom R24 recorder. It's stand-alone, it records 24-tracks, it acts as an audio interface for your PC, it acts as a sampler, a control surface for your DAW, and onstage you could control easily which tracks get played and which ones don't. I bought one using the logic that sometimes ... when inspiration strikes ... I don't want to have to boot the PC, launch Cubase, arm a track, etc. By the time I get all that done, I've sometimes lost the idea or inspiration. With the Zoom R24, I turn it on, arm a track and record. Even at 3am. It mostly gets used a my audio interface but it offers me the peace of mind of knowing it's there if I need it. Your needs are a bit different but could possibly be handled by it. You'll have to decide. As an added plus, with its built-in mics you could record rehearsals too.

[zoink]

 

Originally Posted by Synthaholic

This is especially true in the sex toy industry. Yuck!

 

I'm going to go ahead and take your word for it on that one. lol

[cresshead]

video manual

 

 

part 2

 

 

[MikeyParent]

 

Originally Posted by midinut

There is nothing stopping you from creating the sequences in a DAW on the computer and then transferring it to the keyboard workstation for playing on stage. It's just a much easier way to create. Once done, you can get it into board in several ways. One-shot sampling, RPPR, or directly import the tracks into your sequencer. Depending on what platform you choose, even audio tracks can be brought into your keyboard. Just open your mind to the possibilities. I'm just throwing this out here so that you realize you have choices you may not have explored, that's all.

 

Thanks for the suggestions - I hope I am not coming across as being unreceptive... I may have had some preconceived notions about how this is done...

I just know that having a PC on stage was not probably in the cards... if I can do it on my Mac and some how get it onto a workstation so much the better.

[Bernard]

REVIEW by audiofanzine Synthwalker:

http://www.gearslutz.com/board/elect...rkstation.html

[ChristianRock]

Wow, great demo!!

I didn't know this Fernando Draganici dude but looking at his other videos, the guy's insanely talented.

[Leonard_Hatred]

So, worth selling my M-50 for?

The pianos DO sound a lot better.

[Leonard_Hatred]

So, worth selling my M-50 for?

The pianos DO sound a lot better.

[Gaul]

Piano's are the only things that sound better, because the rest is made of the same waveform set (multisamples) from M50.

[ChristianRock]

Is that a fact though? Taking away the drums (which people fail to mention and are a huge improvement over the M50) and the pianos, it seems there's still at least 300Mb of ROM content, which would still be a bit more than the M50 by itself (and that includes its piano and drums too).

Oh and I did play the Krome 61 at Sam Ash this past Friday. The action is much improved. I'd say it's almost on par with a Novation Remote 61 that they had in the store. A bit clanky compared to the Kronos 61, which also has a better feel, but the Novation also was just as clanky in comparison. I'd have no problem playing with this Krome 61 keybed though, I quite enjoyed its action. It made all the tons of M-Audio controllers they had feel unplayably horrible... finally, the touchscreen was a joy to play with, it felt bigger than I thought it was from looking at the online pictures... I'd say another total winner for Korg.

[McHale]

I wonder if the Krome .pcg files are compatible with the Kronos (similar to how the M50's were compatible with the M3).

gonna have to download tonight and test...

[AnotherScott]

 

Originally Posted by Gaul

Piano's are the only things that sound better, because the rest is made of the same waveform set (multisamples) from M50.

 

What I've seen is: new pianos (2.8 gb), new EPs (600 mb), new drums (300 mb). The rest is, if not identical, then at least close to what was in the M50.

[ChristianRock]

Has anyone played the 88 keys version? I'm curious as to what this NH keybed feels like.

[Synthaholic]

Since this is the last thread that I discussed the PC361, I'll post this here:

http://tampa.craigslist.org/pnl/msg/3326127226.html

Tampa/Clearwater area. Not a bad deal for someone local. I would never do a craigslist through the mail, though.