Clif,

I agree with Uncle Dave - 62 note polyphony is a show-stopper for me. The arranger tracks (8 polyphonic parts) can use up tons of polyphony alone. Add to that real-time parts with the sustain pedal on, and there goes another 20-30 simultaneous sounds. Add to that the fact that most better-sounding voices use more then one voice of polyphony (2 on my Roland, up to 8 on high-end Yamahas) and there goes all the polyphony.

I find that with my style of playing (big chords with two hands, once I really get into it, sustain pedal, arranger going), I ran out of polyphony on more than one occasion. This does not mean that everybody will be concerned about this as much as I am, but how many one-finger players are going to fork over >$3000 for a keyboard?

This is INEXCUSABLE SHORTCOMING for an instrument intended as a performance arranger keyboard.

I don't use the sequencer, so that is of little concern to me, though it would be to many others in this forum. The sampling RAM is also miniscule - granted, if the native instrument sounds are good, most people it this forum would probably not use sampling. Still, it appears that Korg is intentionally handicapping the arranger instrument, as if we deserve less than someone who wants to play sequenced tracks with Triton (this is what most big-act stage performers do).

I hope that someone at Korg is listening to us, as I believe people in this forum are a pretty representative sample of the PA1x target market, and either fix the misprint (if this is what it was), or change the design between now and November (or whenever this thing will ship). As much as the 76 keys appeal to me, I am inclined more than before to buy a Tyros, which has many of the same features, much lower price, and more polyphony.

Regards,
Alex


[This message has been edited by Alex K (edited 07-20-2003).]

I never had a polyphony problem until I bought a Motif with 62 note poly. That was the first time I ran into dropping notes. As Dave pointed out, it's not hard to do layer some lush strings, piano drums bass and use some open voicing chords ....hit the sustain pedal and then say hmmmm, doesn't sound like everything is playing.

62/64 note polyphony is just not enough especially at the $3500.00 level, which BTW I think is a bit much (dependant on what it will sell for street price) considering many of the cool things are options. If you compare them out of the box, I think you get more for $1000.00 less (or at least $500.00, I think the Tyros MAPP was around $3k) out of a Tyros myself.
Terry

------------------
jam on,
Terry http://imjazzed.homestead.com/Index.html

[This message has been edited by trtjazz (edited 07-20-2003).]

[This message has been edited by trtjazz (edited 07-20-2003).]

Any info on when the Pa1X (the 61 key note model) will be releasing? I hope that model will have about 128 note polyphony or more. I am not a pro thats uses complicated chords but I still am running out of polyphony on the psr9000 from time to time. So when I heard that the Korg Pa1X/Pro has 62 poly, to me...it was a joke to have that on the million dollar machine!! Okay.....$3500.00 machine. Will wait for the 61 key model. Hopefully it will be releasing next summer or so after the 76 model.

Just my peronal opinion

Johnny

Islander, greetings! If you have a PSR 9000 then you have 126 note Polyphony already. So the Korg Pa-1XPro would definitely be a step down polyphony wise.

The PSR 9000 was noted for having poor Polyphony allocation and many people were complaining of note drop off on the PSR 9000, so I can see your need and interest for an Arranger that wouldn't have that problem. Unfortunately I don't think the yet to be Korg Pa-1X "61 Key" Arranger will have more than the 76 Key Flagship Pa-1XPro. Even Korg's new Triton Studio "non-Arranger" which has 126 note Polyphony does not allocate that polyphony across the Board. Half goes to the Piano Voices and the other half goes to the rest of the Voices. Disconcerting to say the least.

Best regards,
Mike

NOTE: Korg's allocation of the polyphony on the Pa-1XPro could be much better though, so even though it has only 62 note polyphony it may be allocated extremely well and even may have fewer dropouts (comparing apples to apples- "Voices/Layering/etc., when arranging a song on the PSR 9000 VS the Pa-1XPro) than you get with your 126 note polyphony PSR 9000. But that has yet to be determined.

Aloha!

[This message has been edited by Idatrod (edited 07-20-2003).]

My PA80 handles dropouts much better than my old psr9000 did. I think Yamaha layers more voices from the factory. The raw Korg samples seem to stand up alone better, so you can add a layer and still have some room to play.
I'd love to see everyone add to this total (128 or more!)but in the meantime..... the Korg allocation is actually not terrible. It's just not moving ahead with the times either.

Thanks Mike for feeling me in on the 9000 poor "polyphony allocation". Lets hope the Pa1X Pro handles that problem much better even with the 62 note polyphony!

Again, thank you sir and aloha!
Johnny

I played the TS at guitar center, and the arrangements or arpegios sounded rich and thick... I never noticed a single note drop off....

I really think it wont really matter if its only 62 notes. I think people are getting scared and turned off by the 62 notes, but these are people who perhaps havent owned a Korg in the past.
Ive owned Korgs, Trinity and I30...., the Trinity has only 32 notes, but ive heard songs, that litterally sound like it is playing more than 64 notes. I dont know what it is, but the sound is thick and lucious...
Now, the I30 has 64 notes, but it doesnt sound as thick as the trinity...

So what comes to mind, is that the new PAx will sound as beautiful and thick sounding as the TS.. For sure...
The only thing that bumms me out, is that it doenst have insert effects...Korg, this is supposed to be and arranger, composer workstation.
We need insert effects PLease...INSERT EFFECTS ON THE PAX PLEASE !!!

If the Pax is using the same sound chip as the TS please give us the two audio tracks as well....please do so...I dont mind the poliphony but for the price, please add these two options..

INSERT EFFECTS AND TWO AUDIO TRACKS... and we will live happily ever after....

best,

musikman

I am not arguing that that is what it sounded like. However, you realize that it was no more than 32 notes.

The only reason you are not concerned about the polyphony is if the note drop-outs have not happened to you. I will agree that not everyone will be upset by it - some people only play bass and drums and for the most part do not use auto accompaniments. Others play not very complex arrangements.

However, it happened to me a number of times on a 64-note poly instrument (which handles polyphony "well"), and I believe that going to a lower-polyphony instrument would make this problem worse. I would keep quiet about it if Korg had said "We realize this is a problem, but in order to have the instrument not delayed by another x months we had to re-use the existing antiquated components (e.g. Triton engine). We will correct it in two years". Istead they are saying to me "You don't need any more polyphony. Plenty of known musicians use Triton, therefore it is not a problem for you". I find this attitude insulting - they don't know what does or does not work for me. I see this as a company that is being lazy and backward, trying to milk their 5 year old technology, when in today's software-based instruments all they needed to do was to replace a processor with a newer model, which is likely not twice by twenty times as fast, and increase the limits on some software counters.

Also, what about 32 MB limit for a sample RAM? WHO limits sample ram to 32 MB in 2003???? My 3 year old PDA has more RAM than that.

I think that KORG is aiming this instrument at the studio musicians, who have no problems using racks full of additional tone generators (and various effects). However, this makes this instrument unsuitable for people who play single acts, need to be able to quickly get in, set up, and break down, and are concerned about poratbility and compactness,. I believe this is a marketing mistake on Korg's part.

Regards

Hi there do not mean to be sarcastic and I am writing this in good sort of way I have notice that some people are constantly arguing about 62 note polyphony and how it is not enough, I really like to know what workstation they have been using up till now since, all the major brands like Motif from Yamaha, Fantom from Roland, Triton from Korg have been using 62-64 note polyphony? So how do other professionals like we have some here on the forum cope with this 64 polyphony? I am sure not all use Tyros or 9000 or Do they use software synths, samplers like Giga or some of that sort? I really would like to know cause this seems to be one of the biggest issue around here for me PA1-X lacks in insert effects just like PA-80 it could have been like triton and the second issue is price even Tyros is overpriced (it is just my opinion).

Arbaz,

I am using a Roland G1000, which has 64 voice polyphony, and it is NOT ENOUGH.

Tyros, as well as the previous generation of Yamahas has 128-note polyphony. You may argue that their allocation is worse than Korg's or Roland's or GEM's, but at least they recognized that the previous limit of 64 voices was insufficient for an arranger keyboard. Ditto for Technics.

IMHO, good selection of insertion effects is nice, but should not be necessary on the arranger keyboard, where the primary thrust is on trying to accurately reproduce the acoustic and existing electronic sounds, and those, when sampled well, should sound good when you first turn the instrument on, without the need for additional effects. Perhaps, a synthesizer board with the leading-edge sound synthesis technology should be offered as an add-in board, for those into making new sounds and using them in their performances. But I (and I'd guess, many others in this forum) want to turn my keyboard on and start playing, instead of fiddling with the sounds.

Regards