A friend is interested in an arranger but wants one that has possibilities to modifiy sounds like a synthesizer.

He has used a Triton, and is now considering either the Motif, Studio, or used K2500. But likes the arranger portion of my SD-1. He says the saounds are great meat and potatoe sounds, but noticed orchestra sounds were better in the other keyboards, the organs were better, the guitars were extremely better.

As for the synth sounds he said they were ok for fill but he needs more

any suggestions?

Well the PSR-2000 will allow voice editing, but it's quite limited. A standard synth will allow at least 4 elements per voice, with features like velocity curves and so forth.. The 2000's voice editing lets you do some pretty decent things, but if your friend wants to dig into the sound and really twist it up, he might not like the 2000. Now if he likes the Triton, he'll want to look at the PA-80, and PA-60.... These boards sounds are Triton based, and I think they're pretty extensive in voice editing.. Several people here have the PA's and I know for sure Bluezplayer does and knows a great deal about the keyboard. As for the Yamaha PSR-9000, 9000 Pro, and Tyros, I'm not sure how they are.. They allow voice editing, but I'm not sure if they have full blown synth engines. One lower end arranger that I and Bluezplayer used to own was the MZ-2000 by Casio.. That keyboard had a killer synth.. You could really mess up a sound if you wanted to.... Plus I think someone said they've seen them selling somewhere for like $600 or less... I suggest your friend take a good look at the Korg PA series if he likes the Tritons sounds and synth engine. If he favors Yamaha I suggest he look at the PSR-9000, 9000 Pro, and the Tyros. Roland also has the VA series.. I've never played this keyboard, but many here have and own it as well and they can tell you how this one performs.. You might want to look at the GeneralMusic line up too..

Squeak

Squeak

All the higher end PSRs contain a powerful synth similar to the MU128. You can't get at the features from the keyboard but via sysex you can. For instance, the PSR-2000 has 55 basic effects with up to 16 parameters per effect. Quite a number have LFOs where you can alter the frequency, amplitude, feedback, delay and depth. Most of them have variable filters of one kind or another. Just connect the PSR to your computer via MIDI and send it the sysex. There are several sysex editors out there that will do the job.

Well certainly the Tyros comes bundled with voice editing software that he can tweek to his ears desire any of the sounds.
jam on,
Terry

------------------

http://imjazzed.homestead.com/Index.html

The Tyros has some excellent sounds already built in, ( I finally spent a couple of hours with it ), but as far as editing goes, I haven't seen anything yet that indicates that it is any more capable than the previous Yamaha arranger models even with the software, and yes you can save the edits as referred to above in a midi file via sysex. In previous Yamaha arranger models, you could do the sysex edits but could not permanently store the voices that are edited in this manner internally in the board for replay or live play without accessing a midifile or being hooked up to the external software ( not good for road work to be certain..) Does anyone know if this is different in the Tyros ?

Based on the specs I see, I envision the editing software as having similar capabilties to what is available via XG editing software .. Good editing to be sure, but not of the level of Triton or other workstation / synth editing capabilities. Also .. is there access to the raw samples ? In other words, the question would be .. can I access each individual element of lets say one of the megavoices.. so that I could modify the level or velocity span of the picking sound without changing the acosutic guitar sample ? Can these edits be stoed permanently as a user voice ?

You can do a lot of cool editing with Yamaha arrangers.. no doubt, but I wouldn't expect Triton / Motif type voice editing capabilities unless Yamaha has radically changed the approach from previous models.

The PA80 is the closest thing out there in terms of matching the Triton / other workstations for voice editing capability. In fact the edit engine is basically the same between the Triton / PA80. You are alloted full access to the raw samples. The PA80 shares the "Triton" sample engine as well, minus some effects. Of course it does not have arpeggio capability and sampling is somewhat primitive ( for starters you'll need an external Korg formatted Smart media card ), but still it allows better voice editing than any other arranger I've tried ( Rolands, Yamaha's GEM's etc )

The MZ2000 was the second best at voice editing of any arranger that I've tried ( I actually owned one for about 6 months ) . It allows access to its' raw samples, is generally excellent in voice editing capability, and it has some cool voices inside. Unfortunately it has some poor styles and other issues going against it that would prohibit me from recommending it at all.


AJ

As the owner of both a PSR2000 and an Enqoniq SD1 Synth Workstation I can tell you there is absolutely no comparison between the voice editing capabilities of the 2k and the SD1.

Yes, you can do quite a few things with the 2k (LFO's, effects, Attack, decay, harmonic content etc) (and I have to say this is all I've ever wanted to do on the 2k) but on the SD1 (which is now 10 years old and so I expect things have moved on) you can select up to 6 different waveforms as "oscillators" then, for each of these voices, there are three complex envelope generators and LFO's assignable to most variable parameters. this is the simplified description!

Most synth "I create my own sounds" owners will find the voice "twiddling" capabilities of most arrangers (and include my 2k in this) extremely limited.

MAc, don't forget that you have 5 DSPs on the PSR2K, all of which can be applied to the same voice, so that gives you 5 LFOs (with all their parameters) even if you don't have the different waveforms. However, you can layer all 16 parts on to one voice unless you want the styles (for which we buy arrangers). And you can use a cheap laptop for the sysex which takes the place of the synth panel. What we need is the MU128 panel on our arrangers as well as the regular panel. Then we would have a worthwile instrument.

Bryan

Someone made a comment on another thread that the PA80 sounds aren't as good as the ones on the Triton. That is so subjective . I think exactly the opposite here when it come to the acoustic instrument sounds. To me ( and my ears ) it appears that more effort is put into featuring the typical acoustic instruments on an arranger than on a workststion. This is very evident when I listen to a PA80 Sax sound vs it's counterpart on the Triton. It's just better on the PA80. While I like my Motif very much and have finally figured the whole board out ( sampling works well once I was able to understand it ), I will say the same of the Tyros vs the Motif. The guitars and sax sounds and maybe some of the others are better on the Tyros. Not even close in some cases. Some of the best I've heard to date.

On the other hand, I find the reverse to be true with synth sounds. The Tyros has some nice ones, but true tweakers ( "I make my own sounds" types ) will surely tire of them and the lack of editing quickly. The sysex thing is too bothersome for me, and would never be my choice especially for live play. Can't store the voices in the kb permanently, and I'm not bringing a laptop to a show or to jam with, so not an option for me ( been this route before with the 740 and 2000 )

Depending on what I'm doing, I bounce back and forth between wanting great acoustic sounds and having my own sounds made up. For my homemade sounds, the first choice for me is the Motif, especially with the add on boards, but on an arranger the PA80 is my choice, ( and remains one of the primary reasons I won't part with it ). I have no experience with the SD1, so it could be a viable alternative as well.

I'll say it again. The PA80 does have all the synth editing features and the same samples as Triton. It has basic sampling via the external cards. Where it will lack vs Triton is in the effects dept and the ability to add expansion modules. Because of this, it simply isn't as good as a Triton for homemade sounds, but it is better than any other arranger if your priority is homemade sounds( again maybe the SD1 would be in thse same league, I'm not sure ). If my two top priorities are arranger functions and homemade sounds, the Yamaha arrangers simply wouldn't cut it ( lack of detailed editing and sampling eliminates them as a choice for me ). On the other hand, Tyros has great sounds and I could easily make it my first choice for songs that primarily feature non synth or acoustic type voices.

AJ



[This message has been edited by Bluezplayer (edited 01-20-2003).]

Pilot: everything you say is correct (and I'm absolutely with you all the way on the MU128 control panel) but it still doesnt compensate for the sheer adjustability of a proper synth engine when it comes to building custom voices.

Mac, I agree with you too, but the original question was about getting the sounds out of an arranger, hence my comments. And generally there are no styles on a synth, so an arranger like the 2000 is a good compromise if you only want one device (plus the PC of course).

Bryan

True!

the Yamaha Voice editing software for the Tyros works quite well, and the thing can save your sounds in a user location.

Problems for me, the computer is nessary and third the software is not the smoothest thing in the world, feels like a development tool that was made public. Also, the USB MIDI driver is still in my computer even after the uninstall process and I've have yet to find a way of tossing it. I even went though my registry dumping every thing Tyros and Yamaha as the unintaller would not function to begin with.

You can select multiple keymaps per voice (ala MegaVoice) but they share one signal path after that (including all modulators) not a bad synth engine accually. The program is very mouse dependant it seemed (i didn't spend that much time on it) and rather slow.

The Pa80 is a variation of the good old sound engine in the Triton and allows you access to all of it with out the use of a computer, but does reduce you to parameter lists and values, so if you like nifty little drawings of envelopes or wave shapes then your set to be dissapointed. Still it is the same thing sans a few point which I will get to in a second.

First off, most of the ROM sample data is the same with the exception of certain voices that suit the arranger player more, so the Accordian, flutes and such are different than the Triton, and pretty much better. But the biggest difference is the lack of Insert FX that are in the Triton. It also has some pluses, there are 4 OSC oer voice doubling that of the triton. A decent trade off depending what your doing (also a good way to tax the Polyphony)

Personally I would have to give the Pa80 the edge as it is a variation on what I believe is the most popular Rompler subtractive synth engine on the market right now. There is also a very large online information source in anything triton related, of course with some adaption as you lack the insert fx and some of the sound ROM is different. Also everything is availible from the front panel . I don't think there is a computer editor avaible with all the parameters (something like emagics Sound Diver) but for the basic edit features like cutoff, resonnace, the Amplitude ADSR and some LFO (refered to as Vibrato) parameters are availible as MIDI controllers so they are easy to tweak via midi.

One other thing to note about the Yamaha engine though, there are more filter types than in the korg as I recall. None the less the korgs Lowpass or Lowpass to Hipass system pretty good too. This is where the extra Ocilators come in handy.

Hope this clears up some of the differences between the three systems. Anyone want to know how many algs and layers it takes to emulate all of this in a Kurzweil?