surely the less successful the product, the bigger the price drop? the manufacturers have to recoup some of the fixed development costs if it is not selling, so cut price to get some more sales. if the product is selling successfully, there is no need to discount heavily. every price drops when replaced by a new model, so success is measured in the time before price drops come in. with the mz that was soon.

the example of the full price psr8000 is just a retailer relying on customers ignorance in not knowing what they are buying...

sorry to read about your 2000 chip saga, it must be frustrating to say the least and spoil the excitement and energy you get from the adventure of a new board to play.

2000 versus 2000??
you have to look at your local prices, but I would say the yamaha wins the voices, harmoniser etc, and although the psr operating system has improved, there are a few tricks in the mz that are worthwhile, in the ease of use department, so it is not totally out of court in comparison. but for me the voices count a lot...

as far as value - I have said every time this is the last time I buy at launch - next time I wait until it is about to be replaced and get it cheaper - and then you listen to it, get enthusiastic, play a little music, hear some great samples, see the improved features or editing... and all the good intentions go flying out the window...
go figure

ps my first full size, top of the range board was a casio XXX7000?, maybe 20? years ago, before the days of digital, samples, FM?, midi???. This was a huge grey beast with a few patterns and a handful of voices. The best voice was an analogue electric guitar (v.e.r.y... fender/wet reverb) so I used to play virtually every song with this blasted electric guitar!!!

Synth,

The comparison of the day was the 740 vs the MZ, and as Tech says, for voices ( overall )and styles I would give the edge to the Yamaha's, but the 740 was a little light in the features department, and the MZ was way ahead in that area. The PSR 2000 has come a long way to improve in the features dept, and I'd rate it above the MZ, but if you get one with an original OS, you are probably going to be stuck with that OS for a while, and for me there were several problems. Right now mine is in limbo because the disc drive went bad in it and the tech himself found problems with the OS chip. There aren't any chips available here in the USA to replace the faulty ones at this time.

Tech,

The more I think of it, if the MZ has a lot of the features and operates like the KN5000, then I really want to find something in the KN line to look at. The thing I liked most about the MZ was the way it the features were laid out and the ease of access to all of them. It was a very simple board to learn and understand too.

There was one huge glaring problem for me with the sequencer in the MZ though. I did not like that I couldn't edit any of the "midi" note data that came from the accompaniment section of the board after I recorded a song in the MZ. All that could be edited were things like the chords and the variations, because that part of the song was recorded as a "Casio" type midi file, while the real time parts that were recorded on top of it were recorded in SMF format. I was able to get around that by recording directly to an external sequencer, but it kind of defeated the purposde if I wanted to record away from the computer. Is it that way with the KN 5000 as well ?

Korg AJ

basically with the 5000 yes, but maybe not quite as bad as the mz operationally, I seem to remember. but you still need the external sequencer.

what they did with the kn6000 was give an auto chord/pad to smf conversion facility. this played the sequence in real time back into the sequencer with all auto accomp and pad tracks converted to midi tracks with individual note data.

it works well, the only problem is that you have to fiddle with gm voices and controllers to get the midi file to sound anywhere near as good as the original easy play sequence with the technics voices.

Hmmmm,

I wish it had been different on the MZ because the sequencer itself was one of the best and easiest I ever used for an internal one. It was something I would actually USE as opposed to the ones on any other keyboard I've tried, and it worked well with real standard midi files. It wouldn't be enough to stop me from getting one though Tech. I was willing to live with it on the MZ, but was hoping that there would be an upodate for the MZ that would do something like you describe on the 6000. ( more like dreaming..I know better than that ).

I'm gonna take a wild guess here, but I remember that the MZ can auto convert both Technics and Roland accomp patterns, sooooo... the question for the Roland guys is.. does it work that way with the sequencer on the Roland arrangers too?

Korg AJ

AJ, Technics 6500 yes[for supported models], Roland VA-7 no..

Will the MZ disk drive send and save sysex data (like a MIDI data filer)?
IOW, can you send sysex to the MZ and save it as a file on the disk, and then send it back out the MIDI Out?

Finally got my hands on one this week, and liked the layout and sounds.

I couldn't find the sysex info on Casio's website.

TIA,

tommyde

Do not take this to the bank but there has been gossip that the Casio and camp Panasonic (Technics) had or have a joint venture. Makes you wonder if the MZ is a less featured KN and most importantly how much of this gossip is true. AGAIN, might just be a rumor, but I would doubt it now a days although some features remain always true to the marque and are not shared regardless, there are alot of share components out there. Ford-Jaguar? Who would of dreamed that one would of happened, since 1988, by the way. You get the picture.

there has been no indication of any joint venture anywhere.

I have heard no mention of merge with Casio + Technics .
I believe that Technics may drop the label " Technics" in the near future . Panasonic will be used ! dano

Although there isn't any official 'merger' b/w CASIO and MATSUSHITSA CORP. (TECHNICS/PANASONIC), 2 of the key engineers on the KN projects left TECHNICS early '98 and started working with/for CASIO. By then, the MZ project was already on the design board. Modifications, adjustments etc were in-evitable; hence the slight resemblance in layout and functions.