Members Diametro Posted April 25, 2009 Members Share Posted April 25, 2009 I really don't like the limited synthesis capabilities of most workstations out there. ROMpling will only get you so far, and from reading the manuals for the various keyboards on offer from the "big 3" I'm underwhelmed. Why, for instance, doesn't anyone else besides kurzweil give you the option of doing crazy stuff like using 32 24db/octave lowpass filters in series? Most of them have some sort of very limited "modulation matrix" or other silly restraints on what you can do in terms of controlling a sound. They work well if you want to make music that people have heard before, but not so well if you want to innovate. Granted, people who care about those things are probably a small minority of the overall workstation market, so I don't think the workstation is dead. But it seems most workstations are needlessly hobbled when it comes to synthesis and sound mangling. Other than sound and features, workstations are all about UI and the control surface ... Generally, you can only have so many buttons and whatnot dedicated to patch editing -- or any other secondary function -- before you compromise the other features (i.e. the sequencer, patch selection buttons, other controllers, etc. ) ... a touchscreen and a good selection of softknobs (a la V-Synth XT -- even though it's not a workstation) can make up for a lot, though ... In other words, you can't have everything at once ... Meaning, it's all a series of choices and compromises ... Workstation + secondary synth = plenty (or at least a very good start) ... ......... Post above is quite humorous ... Working on the Newspeak Dictionary V11? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Mike Conway Posted April 25, 2009 Members Share Posted April 25, 2009 I really don't like the limited synthesis capabilities of most workstations out there. ROMpling will only get you so far, and from reading the manuals for the various keyboards on offer from the "big 3" I'm underwhelmed. Why, for instance, doesn't anyone else besides kurzweil give you the option of doing crazy stuff like using 32 24db/octave lowpass filters in series? Most of them have some sort of very limited "modulation matrix" or other silly restraints on what you can do in terms of controlling a sound. They work well if you want to make music that people have heard before, but not so well if you want to innovate. Granted, people who care about those things are probably a small minority of the overall workstation market, so I don't think the workstation is dead. But it seems most workstations are needlessly hobbled when it comes to synthesis and sound mangling.Okay, I'll quote this guy, also. I mostly disagree with this statement. Only the most basic romplers (like a Juno D) are that limited. Ever mess with "Structures" in the Roland romplers? How about a MOSS board in a Triton or a Radias on an M3? How about the RCM synthesis of the Yamaha SY77/99? The OASYS allows synth engines to patch into other synth engines, along with Physical Modelling, etc. Of course, the Alesis Fusion also has a few tricks up its sleeve.The workstation will never die, but it will have to evolve. I agree that they should all have hard drives that can hold massive amounts of sample data and songs. I love to sample, but have to pity the PC3 in that regard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Fuzzlabs Posted April 25, 2009 Members Share Posted April 25, 2009 Just to get the ball rolling from my end of the court, howizzit that ALL of the major workstation makers(save for Korg and Alesis) are "afraid" of installing hard drives in their keyboards? This does not seem to be the issue with stand alone DAWS (with swappable drives at that) so,what's the hold-up?And while we're at it, how about built in CD Burners? (swappable too,hopefully?) Hard Drive = major potential fail. Even flash memory can have a limited lifespanv(though still measured in years) depending on use, but memory with moving parts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Spybar Posted April 25, 2009 Members Share Posted April 25, 2009 I think you forgot to add "for me" There is no doubt that inspiration is subjective. With that said, there are only few machines (like Roland Fantom G), that will let you capture (& edit) on-the-fly musical ideas in about 2 clicks (FG Keyboard, Guitar, External Synths, Vocals etc). That's what I call INTUITIVE! SpyBar Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members realtrance Posted April 25, 2009 Members Share Posted April 25, 2009 Workstations are about convenience, interface, comprehensiveness; the Fantoms really capture all of that in spades. For super-crazy "innovative" sounds I have Reaktor, which I can fiddle with down to the microcode level, or be lazy with and download the latest genius from Chet Singer with. You can be amazingly "innovative" in your sounds even on an XP-80; sure, it doesn't have the flexibility or absolute audiophile range of a super-expensive analogue modular system, but seriously, the latter is like studying one of Ezra Pound's late Cantos in depth with all the scholarly apparatus available -- you can do it if you want and it can be rewarding, but for everyday creative activity, for most people? not worth the expense, effort and space consumption, and even for some people dedicating that much of all of the above every day to said modular system has got to be mental-hernia inducing after awhile. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Vintagekeys Posted April 29, 2009 Members Share Posted April 29, 2009 Dead in my studio, its all about the software and my Mac..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Mike Conway Posted April 29, 2009 Members Share Posted April 29, 2009 Dead in my studio, its all about the software and my Mac..... Maybe, you want to change the instruments in your sig! With 4 workstations, you're as bad as I am. :poke: Yamaha S90es; Korg M3 73, Radias, Roland Fantom X7, Korg Triton Extreme Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Vintagekeys Posted April 29, 2009 Members Share Posted April 29, 2009 Maybe, you want to change the instruments in your sig! With 4 workstations, you're as bad as I am. :poke: They are dead for sequencing but i will never get rid of them, they are PACKED with great sounds and all around features. How ever I never used them for sequencing music....... or as a one stop shop for music creation... my software and Mac take front and center as my pallet/foundation for creating new music... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members stikygum Posted April 29, 2009 Members Share Posted April 29, 2009 The problem I've had with workstations is quality sounds, which I've always felt workstations have lacked in. I like samples more if I want traditional instruments. I've come to like romplers for other things though. The Korg M3 is a workstation I want because of the creative nature of it. I think the Romplers and those who make them could do more in terms of supplying more creative ways of song/sound creation. I think I like the Motif XS sounds the best, but would buy an M3 because of the potential of creation. I own a Kurweil K2600rs and that is the only workstation that has ever been worth owning up to a the M3 imho. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Vintagekeys Posted April 29, 2009 Members Share Posted April 29, 2009 Whoa!!!! I always thought they shined in the quality if sound section..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Mike Conway Posted April 29, 2009 Members Share Posted April 29, 2009 The original poster said: im thinking maybe weve seen the last of these beastsI'm thinking if most of use have 2, 3, 4 or more workstations that they will be around a while. I agree with you about the sounds, as there are some fantastic programs. As for sequencing, the Fantom G is a step in the right direction, not to mention 22 FX processors. If it had "killer" new sounds (not rehashed oldies), nothing would have stopped it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Mike Conway Posted April 29, 2009 Members Share Posted April 29, 2009 I like samples more if I want traditional instruments.Understood, it's hard to compete with a huge, dedicated sample library. To make up for ROM restraints some units like the SY99 and the OASYS can take a sample into pretty expressive territory, via using the sample as a Physical Model "exciter" or feeding an FM oscillator. This is probably why you liked your Kurz so much - you can process the {censored} out of that sample. For realistic expression there are some excellent modelling programs. Have you heard the demos from Wivi? :eek:You probably already heard the Synful Orchestra demos. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.