Click on this link: http://glenscomputer.tripod.com/misc/pa1xbig.jpg PS: Give it a minute or two to download. It is a little over 400kb.

Okay, so I take it everybody is able to view the pic. Fine and Dandy!!! Now, as I was saying:

The Pa1XPro's button functions are finally revealed to the masses! We can actually see the buttons and what each is assigned to, and to what feature its assignment has.

Look at the Octave Switch on the right side of the Keyboard if you will. How neat that Korg included an Octave Switch on their "76 Key" version. Kudos! Korg. UD should also like the Manual Bass function.

I was saying in my previous post, that I haven't given up all hopes of owning the Pa1X. If Polyphony issues are minor or nonexistent there is a strong possibility I still might go ahead and purchase it. Besides, when playing with my Band I don't use Arranger Functions anyway, ie., Auto Accompaniment, Multi-Pads etc, so Polyphony should not be as much of a concern. (In the Studio is where I can foresee problems with Polyphony because I would be using ALL types of the Arranger Functions on the Pa1X "61 Key version with internal speakers." But playing with my Band I shouldn't run into any problems especially if the Pa1X has excellent Polyphony allocation.

PS: George Kaye said that his Korg Rep told him there would be no Pa1X "61 Key version" sold in the USA, ie., (Korg said they have NO plans to do so at the present time). I find that hard to believe really. The PA60/80 has been a relatively good seller in the USA so you would think that Korg would extend the Pa1X into the USA market as well. I very much expect Korg to do so and I would be very surprised- read: (Jaw Dropping surprised) if they didn't sell (import) the Pa1X into the US Market.

Any way, enjoy the pic.

Best regards,
Mike

its not working

Here Donny, try this link: http://silverhawk33.tripod.com/glenskorgsite/
Click the first link at the top on the page about the Pa1XPro. Like I said the pic is 400kb so you have to give it a minute if you're on a dial-up connection; for it to load.

Best regards,
Mike

Poof!!! where's the original message and my reply?

I pulled the previous thread because people weren't able to see the pic within the post. So I set it up now to where you just click the Link[s] to view the Pa1XPro pic.

So what are people's reactions now that you can see the minute details of those buttons and what each one is for? Mine is one of WoW!- that Boards' got a boat load of features with plenty of I/O connections on the back! Only 2 Ending buttons though but I'm thinking there may be variable's to the Ending depending on which Variation a person is in when pushing an Ending button. Also, maybe if you press both simultaneously there could be a Fill-Hit Ending like there is on Yammie Boards. At least they're giving the User a "Count-In" 'Intro' which is useful, hopefully there will be a way to trigger a Fill-Hit Ending too. Also notice the Voice and Style Bank. There is two Banks "upper and lower" for Each even though there is only "1" row. That may be a little disconcerting when using the Pa1X/Pro for Live Gigging, in that you have to push a button to 'get' to the correct Bank "then" push another button to get to the correct Style and/or Voice. The LESS button pushing you have to do to enable/disable something the BETTER.

There is also no word on whether the Pa1X/Pro can incorporate "3" Right Hand Voices simultaneously like the Tyros, etc., can. That would be an added bonus for sure if it could.

People's reactions and opinions are welcome.

Best regards,
Mike

Hello all,

I clipped out the right hand side buttons to make a point....



See how they only used 10 buttons to switch between 20 instrument banks. I will assume that you have to press the EXB button to select the upper or lower bank, then press the appropriate button for that instrument group.

Now who do you think decided that this would be easier in live play rather than just having 20 buttons, one by each group?

And I'm not saying that it wouldn't be easier, just wondering how y'all felt about it.

mike

Thanks for the link Mike. Good to see this beastie close-up finally, but as you pointed out much remains to be seen. It looks a little sparse on the controls for the styles and again you are probably right about using combinations of buttons to carry out certain fill-to functions, but until the owner's manual is released on-line then we can't say for sure. I am tempted to make some negative comments on the simultaneous three voice on the right hand thing in regards to the polyphony debate, but for now we are in that dark want-and-see period where for the next 3-4 long months we'll all be speculating and wondering what the PA1XPro will and won't do. That's bound to kill some of the talk and enthusiasm so I hope Korg releases more information soon to keep interest up.

This is the same as the PA-80/60. It's probably not easy to switch between instrument when playing live but that why there are User banks!

Surur

That's an extra button to press. I would think that would be a problem for live play. There is no numeric keypad either. That would mean pressing the EXB button and pressing 1 and 2 to get to the 2nd piano voice. Does this mean there are only 81 voices? Roland uses a simlar method of accessing voices, but it has a variation button to access further voices, still more key presses.
Star

Yes, the User Banks will come in handy Surur, but I would guess 80% of owners will use the 'Presets' ('at least to have that option', ie., "less button pushing" 'when playing Live'). User Banks are fine when you need that "special" Voice or Style, ie., "tweaked", etc. But most likely (in my case anyway) I want to be able to access the 'Presets' with "one" push of 'one' button too.

Also, Jim, the three Right Hand Voices will deplete the Polyphony even further as you imply and I'm sure Korg realizes it too. So they probably won't give the Pa1X/Pro that feature. I will be surprised if they DO incorporate 3 Right Hand Voices into the Pa1X/Pro. It would be a nice feature to have; but with 62 note Polyphony I think the writing is on the wall that that feature will NOT be included on the Pa1X/Pro. Stranger things have happened before though.

Now if they provide expansion boards "in the future"- that give and extra 32 or 64 Voice Polyphony then they could very well be able to incorporate a 3 Right Hand Voice feature on the Pa1X/Pro.

Best regards,
Mike

[This message has been edited by Idatrod (edited 08-04-2003).]

A bigger question: once you select the instrument bank, it appears that to make the individual tone selection you MUST USE THE TOUCHSCREEN. This is BAAAAD. I think most of us live players will see this as a non-starter.

However, for live playing one might set up performance memories. Hence, I am curious to find out from the present PA 80/60 users how they select performances. Do you have to select the bank (upper/lower, similarly to the way you have to select tones from upper or lower setting with the EXB button). I am also assuming anything presetly requiring a push of a button around the screen will force you to use the touchscreen on the PA1X.

I don't mean to put down PA1x before it is even released, but IMHO, Korg's I30 was a great instrument from the point of view of user friendliness. The PA-series is a giant step back, and simply adding sliders and replacing the buttons with the touchscreen does not bring it close to the i30.

Having said that, I think if I was forced to have a PA-series Korg, I would probably rely on the Single Touch setting buttons under the screen to select voices for styles. I wish Korg had not made these buttons look so cheesy (custom shape, all blending together).

Any guesses as to what the PAD group does? Could it be they are going to be similar to the multi-pads on the Yamaha and Technics? If not, why the STOP button?

What about the assignable switches? are there similar buttons on the PA-80/60?

Now we know where Terry "trtjazz" is spending the vast majority of his online time at.

Frankie, if the Pa1X/Pro has a lightening fast Touch Screen, that will 'help' in making it easier for Live Play but it won't solve ALL of the problem. Button pushing is still the cats meow for accessing Styles, Registrations, Voices, etc., for the "vast" majority of Arranger Keyboard players IMO. And if those Voices, Styles, Registrations, and what not are buried beneath layers of button pushing whether it be on the Board itself or within the TS, you can bet most Gigging Musicians will pass on the Pa1X/Pro in favor of a more user friendly, optimally configured Keyboard that has simplistic and effective feature accessibility for Live Playing. Unless there are some of those Gigging Musicians that don't mind the hassle and inconvenience of a difficult to use OS, etc. But they are probably few and far between. I know I wouldn't want or buy a Board that is User "UN"-friendly 'especially' for Live Playing purposes.

A home hobbyist will most likely not care as much although even in the Studio you want to have a User Friendly, easy to access OS and functions so as to have a hassle free (as much as possible) playing and recording experience.

One of the bigger cons of Pa series keyboard is styles / performances / program selection.

You have to press:
one button to choose operating mode (styles, programs, performances)
one button to select upper or lower banks group
one button to select the group
Pa60/80 shows its resources bank in groups of eight items, so you have to press another button once if your choice is from #9 to #16, twice if it is from #17 to #24 and so on.. Is Pa1X different in this?
one last button (or the touch screen) to finally select your choice.

Moreover, all ten style bank buttons and all ten programs/performances bank button have no light on them, and after a couple of screen changes for editing or whatever, you will soon forget your original selection.

I haven't played with a Pa1X, so things can be changed, and maybe Pa1X display will keep track of this "path of choices"...

Anyway, more buttons is (very often) better.

Another consideration about live usage.
Of course, you cannot completely foresee how your live show will go and where will it take you, because of people reactions, your mood etc etc.
So it is almost impossible to have everything you need or may need inside your board.

So, what KORG, YAMAHA etc etc should do, is give us a piece of software able to:
1) virtually configure your keyboard on the computer
2) download those configurations to the board, so that you can have a completely different instrument with a couple of mouse clicks.

Don't know how things are with Pa1X. As long as I know (please, Korg, correct me!) KORG choosed not to implement SYSEX in Pa60 and Pa80, so that software is a very complicated task.

Ciao

[This message has been edited by RicFreak (edited 08-05-2003).]

That is an excellent idea Riccardo! To have the ability to "Pre" configure your Keyboard before a performance (beyond what mere Registrations can do) would be a godsend from any of the Arranger Manufacturers IMO. It could be accomplished with a PC or MAC, the necessary Editing Software and transfered through either Midi In/Outputs or USB connection.

Now to get the Manufacturers to implement it is another story.

Best regards,
MIke

Mike, don't want to self promote myself, but I have developed an application for Pa60 and Pa80 able to store styles in a database, so that you can build banks picking the style you choose, write them to floppy disk and load them inside your board.

The application is called PRM and is freely available at www.irishacts.com

Moreover, I am developing a better version, able to manage styles, performances and programs. Without boring you with all the details, the final result is that you can "build" the Pa configuration inside your PC, save the configuration to the database and write it to floppy disks (or directly to hard disk if you have the USB interface).

I still have some problem to fix, so I don't know when (and if) I will publish this "new" version.

But, because of KORG proprietary compressed format, this software will never be able to edit resources (I can change a style name, but I cannot add midi events, nor change volume setting or whatever). This is the reason of the wishes in my previous message.

This reminds me of the Ecko keyboard announced at winter NAMM. What happened to all the hype surround this board? Is it shipping? Did anyone get one?

hmmmmm, very curious.

Al

The last I checked on their website (www.openlabs.com), their online "store" was down. For the last couple of months the page says they will be back on line in a few days. There did not seem to be any announcements from them at the Summer NAMM, and none of the people who visited there had mentioned seeing them.

I wonder if any of the people who went to Nashville NAMM had seen them there. Dan? anybody?

I hope that OpenLabs has not gone down the tube, While I doubt that I could afford buying one of their instruments (based on my recollections of prices in their store when it did work, back in April or so). However, their product could go long ways in keeping the mainstream manufacturers, e.g. Yamahas, Korgs and Rolands (and others) honest.

Regards

Is it me , or does it seem there insn't much excitement about the new Korg arranger...unlike when the Tyros was unvieled? The whole all around Arranger KB atmospher seems very subdued ....Hmmmmmm?

troublemaker...

Donny,

I agree with your observation. Here is my take on this:

When Tyros was unveiled, it looked like a new instrument, which had gotten most things right. While some people, including myself, were complaining about the fact that some of the features of the 9000Pro were not in the Tyros, it appeared (at least from the printed specs) that Yamaha had addressed all of the basic requirements of the players (user-friendliness, number of sounds, styles, polyphony, etc.) Yamaha had been very consistnt in their product line before that (PSR 7000, 8000, 9000 all worked rather similarly, and rather well). We could see from the specs that Tyros was an improvement on a good thing, which accounts for all the welcome buzz.

Korg's PA1X, on the other hand, is same old same old. Korg has a pretty poor history in arranger keyboard design. They abandoned a good design of i30 and went to a dismally bad design of PA80. I, and surely many others, were expecting the revival of the i30 user interface with the better features of the PA series, such as sounds and styles, plus the new sound engine to handle more polyphony, in keeping with the leading edge of today's technology. Instead we are seeing the combination of bad interface of the PA80 with the touch screen (much decried for live use), along with the antiquated sound engine which is short on polyphony. Its sample RAM is only expandable to 32MB - my three-year old PDA has more memory than that. While I don't use sampling, this is another example of Korg intentionally handicapping the arranger keyboard.

In other words, we are expressing our disappointment with Korg. The specs of the PA1X may be adequate for a mid-range instrument, like PA80, but not for the "flagship", retailing for over $3000.

Regards,
Alex

Are extra buttons THAT expensive? What about a faster chip (to increase polyphony) would it be THAT much more expensive?
Star

I just have a funny feeling that with technology changing so fast all around us, Arranger Kb's as we know them are on their last legs my friends. Whats next is beyond me, but I would bet soft synth or somkind of computer related ideas are in motion. How many times can manufacturers rehash, remodel, refurbish, recycle these KB's for our consumption the way they have been doing for so long? meanwhile enjoy whats out there and keep one eye open!!

Star,

I agree with you - it is ridiculous that the manufacturers are trying to save a few dollars on providing an adequate number of buttons for easy navigation, and in the process, creating instruments which are completely unusable - Roland VA-76 is the case in point. I surely hope that Korg is not going to go the same route.

Donny,

I am not sure that you or I will be playing the software-based arranger anytime soon. I remember a few years ago at the Musicmesse one of the German keyboard manufacturers (was it Waldorf?) had come out with a prototype platform which contained a PC inside. It did not fly. Then, last winter OpenLabs teased us with Eko. OpenLabs appears to be dead in the water as well. There are some real problems in trying to make a PC into a keyboard, and for now the dedicated keyboard makers have the upper hand.

All the technologies to make a perfect keyboard exist already. However, there is no desire among the manufacturers to put it together in one instrument. This forum for years has catalogued the users' opinions as to what features and functions we need and what we don't need in the instrument (and I think we have as a group been very consistent). It is an unforgivable marketing mistake for a manufacturer to so blatantly ignore the needs of the users.

Regards

I agree Alex that the technology exists. It is beyond me as to why Korg is still using the outdated Triton sound engine in their new Keyboard products. Sure the Triton is a big seller which I think in part is because Korg is sponsoring mega pop culture stars to use their Boards and they get splashed all over TV, at concerts, in the Media, etc. Then these wannabes see that the Big Boys use a Triton and they go out and get one too to be "Hip" or be part of the "In Crowd". Don't get me wrong; yes, the Triton Studio 2 has been much improved over the original Classic Triton and now we have the Pa1X/Pro with the new "RX" technology (whatever that is) that is suppose to greatly improve a Voice's "instrument's" realism. But the RX technology is still just building on to the Triton sound engine. It doesn't replace it and give us something brand new.

Now Yamaha on the other hand is at least trying IMO to listen to what their customers want although they too are sometimes slow in implementing many of those new features that their customers yearn for. The Tyros although not revolutionary does add a new dimension to sound reproduction with the inclusion of the Mega Voices and good quality Voice samples. Plus I think Yamaha sees the need for Arrangers to have ample Polyphony because of the load placed upon Arranger's when using Style Accompaniment, Multi-Pad use, plus the quadruple Voice Layering and then on top of that the Layering within the Layers, hence they gave the Tyros 128 note Polyphony and even give the CVP 209, 210, and 900 "256 note Polyphony".

They also are giving the new Motif ES "True" 128 note Polyphony plus according to Athan Billias a person will actually be able to "Play" the Mega Voices included on the Motif ES. As everyone knows it is impossible to play the Tyros's Mega Voices with any semblance of normality and correctness.

So I do see Yamaha making headway and I believe they are really trying to make an effort to accomodate their customers needs. Albeit, as I said, they are sometimes slow in the implementation of some of them. A good example would be the PSR 2000/2100 and even their Flagship Tyros all having very meager User Flash Ram Memory chips in them. The Tyros's User memory capacity is a mere 3.3Mb's. Even their newest Arranger, the PSR 2100, only has 1.5Mb's and the PSR 2000 (Now Discontinued) has a very meager 580Kb's. Another area Yamaha lacks in is giving their higher end Arrangers 'Digital Outputs'.

So even though the technology is available to give us an "almost" perfect Arranger apparently the motivation by the Manufacturers to do so is not there. Plus the all inclusive calculated Marketing schemes they are all privy to and partake in which give us the buying public and in their eyes "peons" I suppose; just small bumps in progress and feature enhancements with the 'calculated' intention of egging us on to upgrade to the latest and greatest. Now to get them to change that mindset they're geared to, is probably like trying to get a duck to fly backwards and not to quack.

Best regards,
Mike

[This message has been edited by Idatrod (edited 08-07-2003).]

I have spent a ton of time "crunching" the numbers, enough to be fairly well versed on most of the main specs of the popular arrangers. An example .. Ok, the PA series uses only 64 notes of ppolyphony, but the thing is, when I play it, I never notice any note dropoff at all. By the same token, I can easily make the notes drop off on my Motif.. also 64 notes of polyphony. All this while the Korg is playing a full style and responding to my real time playing, while the Motif is only responding to what I'm playing in real time, no sequences or anything else running. The difference is in the allocation of the polyphony. I am not sure that even 128 will be enough for the new Motif under the Yamaha note / polyphony allocation scheme. I've lost a few notes here and there on my PSR2k as well.

Specs are what they are.. great for reference. What it all comes down to in the end though is the way the board responds when I play it. For all the knocks I hear on the PA80 and "too many menus or buttons " or other shortcomings, no matter how long I play them, the PA80 is always easier for me to use in a live setting than the PSr2000 will ever be, and for whatever reason, it responds to my playing like no other board I have. The joystick is a big plus for me too.. Just makes a world of difference.

The PA80 was definitely a sharper learning curve for me than the 2000, but I would expect that with it's vast editing power too. The PA layout is just more agreeable for me in general and I find it very easy to use when I'm playing live, maybe in part because the board was setup the way I wanted it to be long before I ever took it out on the road. The PA80 has so many more functions that can be customized.. replace any or all of the internal styles, create REAL user voices from raw samples, sts ( OTS ) settings can be easily changed and customized "on the fly" for any style. These are just a few examples. Anything less for me is a poor tradeoff.

I would say that a majority of the players I know might prefer the Yamaha stuff. That's OK too. They're easy to learn and comfortable, and while the OS's get more sophisticated as time goes on and models get replaced, in many ways they work in similar ways to their predecessors. I just navigate on the PA80 better in real time than I do on any of the Yamaha boards, for whatever reason, no matter what shortcomings others might find with it. Also, I feel the need to be able to customize my board to the limit, so the PA80 type stuff may always be a first choice for me 'til someone makes something I like better.

It's great that there is more than one type of board out there, just as there are more than one type of keyboard / arranger players.

So, all this long winded reply really means is that I'll pass judgement to an exctent 'til I actually get one of the new boards in my hands and can hear and feel how it responds to "me" . Then I'll know for sure. It's great to talk about them now.. but.. the acid test is when it's in my hands.


AJ

AJ, thank you for sharing your observations with us. You are certainly not alone id noticing that Korg handles the polyphony better than Yamaha does. Indeed, Yamaha (Tyros and Motif) has some voices with up to 8 samples per note (I think on PSR2000/2100 it is the maximum of 4), while Korg (and Roland, and GEM) use a maximum of 2 samples per note. Hence, if you were to use a real high quality voice on the Yamaha, you would only have a maximum of 16 voice polyphony, while Korg would give you 31 voices. I can not comment on how these sounds compare, as well as how Yamaha's lower-quality sounds, which only use 2 samples per note compare to the Korg's sounds. But I think, in our propensity to use the highest-quality sounds we end up unwittingly giving away the polyphony. It is my experience with the Roland, which also uses maximum of 2 and often 1 samples per note, that with its 64 voices I occasionally run out of polyphony (with the way I play, which might well be different from the way many others play).

The concern that I and others have is that 62 voices of polyphony is fine for a mid-range, $2000 keyboard, but buying a top of the line keyboard, costing nearly twice that, we would (rightly or wrongly) expect the polyphony not to be an issue, even if everybody else's instruments (which are also less expensive) did have this limitation. I don't need the CD burner (heck, I don't even need a joystick, though a breath controller would be nice). But having a top of the line instrument with 62 voices of polyphony is the same as building a big expensive house but not putting in a heater (or here in Phoenix the AC) to save money. It may be true that this house has more wall insulation than the average home (though with 110F outside for weeks this wont help too much). And sure, people used to, and some still do, live without the AC. But they do it as a compromise. If I am going to shell out for a big expensive house (or a keyboard), I want it to be better than the one I have now, and I don't want to make such compromises. Unfortunately, Korg is big and expensive but still forces me to make this compromise.

Like you, I will reserve my judgement until I can get my hands on the PA1X, but no AC is no AC, and no amount of insulation can replace that.

As to your other comment, I hope that you will be able to navigate the PA1X with its touch screen as well as you do your PA80 with the buttons surrounding its display, especially when playing live. My experience with the touchscreens (trying them at the store) has not been so great, especially when trying to change things on the fly like I may need to during a performance.

Regards,
Alex

Alex,

Thanks for a thoughtful response. I don't need the CD burner either, and I'm not sold on the idea of a touchscreen either. Really, I'm not certain at all that I will consider replacing my PA80 with the PA1X anyway, mainly because I don't feel a need to replace the PA80 at all. I'm still happy with it. I tried the Tyros out too and I really like a lot of it, but not enough that it would be more comfortable for me to use live than the PA80 is. I'd have to trade the 2k or the PA80 to get one, and I really don't want to let either go.

The joystick is a big deal to me. I emulate a lot of guitar, and I just get a better feel with it. Which moves me to sounds. Both the Yamaha stuff and PA80 have great sounds for me, and in some areas ( for me ) the Tyros / 2k / Motif shine over the Korg stuff, especially those flutes, and sax / horn sounds. I just think overall that I like some of the "basic" rock sounds a little better overall on the PA80 than on the Yamaha arrangers. That is, drums, bass, lead guitars, organs.. especially the the harder edge guitar sounds. Now on the Motif.. the bass sounds and drums kick @&&... lol. So do the electric pianos and synth sounds.

In fairness though, I've done a lot of editing on the PA80 and have edited and combined a lot of the panel voices into performances. Perhaps I could go as far on the Tyros and customize to what I like, but the 2000 just doesn't have the same capability. Still, the 2000 has some excellent qualities that make me wanna keep it as a very nice companion to the PA80,.

Really, I'm set with arrangers for now. the real question for me is whether the Motif ES and the additonal polyphony and features make it worth the upgrade. My preliminary guess is ..yes, but I want one in my hands first. I'll give the PA1x a look for sure, but I don't know that I'm really interested in it.

AJ

[This message has been edited by Bluezplayer (edited 08-08-2003).]

I've been watching this thread with some interest, mainly due to the polyphony issue, which to be honest 'doesn't exist'.

Korg sounds are made of 2 samples, while Y&R keyboards can be made up of 4. For example if your keyboard is 64 note poly, on a Korg that would drop to 32 with a 2 sample voice, while on a Y/R that would drop to 16. That's typically why you hear drop-outs on Yamaha's and the Motif in particular.

The above is also the reason why Korg is able to do the 8 track combi's and Yamaha does the 4 track performances.

In my experience, Korg boards average around 80-90 poly compared against Y/R.

I've owned an i30, Trinity and Triton and haven't experienced note drop-off's. Like AJ, I have done on the Motif. What you must also consider is that the Pa1X has sampling features, and it's possible to record the drum part (with mp3 option) and replace that in a style with the sample, thereby saving you perhaps 10 notes.

In response to other comments. The Pa1X, like the i30 before it 'might' turn out to be a much understated keyboard. The i30 wasn't to everyone's liking mainly because it didn't have a lot of 'flash' elements like Rolands V series, especially.

What I would say to all here is 'seriously give it a go', but please don't come back after a 1 hour demo at your music store and pronounce it 'dead on arrival'. The i30 was a composers dream (then), and while it might not be 100% suitable for your needs, maybe live, it may make up for this in other areas.

A poster commented about the lack of hype surrounding the Pa1X as compared to the Tyros. Please remember that Yamaha is a BIG company compared with Korg, and in the arranger market much more embedded, especially schools/teachers and the like. Dealers also make a bigger profit on Yamaha's, not surprising.

One other thing b4 I go and it's the Mega-voice thing. Quite honestly, i don't see the excitment. Mega's are nothing more than multi-layered voices, albeit programmed well. Playing them is a task in itself, and best left to programmers. What is surprising though is that we've seen this technology well-before the Mega-Voice term was coined.

The way the programming market seems to be going is using and manipulating samples (which are far more realistic than any mega voice can product). I think Korg sees this and that's one of the main reasons there's sampling features on the Pa1X.

Let's be serious - there is no way you can make this assertion. The polyphony issue MAY exist in ANY keyboard with however many notes of polyphony it can support. The more notes of polyphony the instrument has, the less is the likelihood that its polyphony limit will be reached (while it is highly unlikely, it is possible to reach the poly limit on any limited-polyphony instrument).

All you can tell us is that you have not experienced this problem yourself, and good for you. I know for a fact, that on my Roland G1000 which has a max 2 samples per note, I hit the polyphony limit quite often. Of course it depends on the way one plays (not better or worse, just different styles).

Secondly, Korg is positioning the PA1Xpro as a significantly more expensive instrument than anything else on the market, except maybe the overpriced Technics. At that price point, I don't think they should expect the users to make compromises on polyphony.

As far as the ease of use goes, that is also a subjective issue. If you thought that the PA80 was an improvement over i30, then you will surely love the PA1X.

[QUOTE]The Pa1X, like the i30 before it 'might' turn out to be a much understated keyboard.[QUOTE]
That might be. But then, I might be in Philadelphia now (no offence to our PHilly members).

I will certainly give it a try, once it is out in the stores. However, I think that Korg's entire strategy of building a luxury version by adding bells and whistles while skimping on the fundamentals is wrong.

If we as the user community make Korg realize it, then there is a chance that the next model they make may address our concerns. If we are complacent and happy to eat whatever crap they offer us, they will never improve their products.

I can't and wouldn't want to argue about that, it's a given that the more notes you have the less chance there is in running out of them. I guess the jist of it is if you have used or use a Triton or Karma and found them suitable, the same will be true of the Pa1.

As I mentioned previously though, the Pa1X does have sampling features, hopefully resampling as well.

Agreed, the Pa1X-Pro is expensive. A case of waiting to see if you get what you pay for.

That is not true. Someone playing Triton only plays with his own ten fingers, not having 8 polyphonic tracks following along. Even when one plays pre-programmed sequences, these can be optimized ahead of time to be right around the limit but not run out of polyphony. This is not the case at all with the arranger play - you have the "band" going, and at the same time you play however many solo notes, layering the sounds - this requires the polyphony of two Tritons.

Also, some people may disagree with me on this, but IMO Triton sound engine is geared to producing very synthy sounds - the ones which are not played with chords, and more often than not with only one hand (the left hand is on the joystick).

Hence, the polyphony may not be an issue for most Triton users. But in the arranger world most of us try to reproduce sounds of the acoustic instruments, and many of those are played with chords (in the case of a piano, with both hands).

I hope that resampling will help. However, if they could reproduce acoustic instruments well, I would think they'd simply provide better sample ROM, so that layering of samples would not be needed in the first place. This would in effect double the polyphony, and I, for one, could live with 62 voices of TRUE polyphony, and not be concerned about running out. But I doubt that it is possible.

I agree that we will only be able to pass the "final judgement" on this (or any other) instrument once we can get our hands on one and hear it play. However, being aware of possible problems can allow us to focus my evaluation on the potential problem areas. This will make a difference whether we buy a known quantity, or make a blind purchase and regret it later.

Don't want to disappoint potential buyers, but going out of polyphony isn't so difficult with Pa80, despite its 62 notes.

You can try it very simply: select first style of bank #3 (Groove bld), select variation #4, sts #3 (acoustic guitar) and play a chord with 5 notes: all will be right, you will hear anything.

Now add something with your right hand, maybe a chord with 4 notes, or a solo melody with the damper pedal pressed, or a very fast solo melody.

You'll notice that sometime the snare drum disappear (well, it happens on my Pa).

So, Pa1X has 62 notes like Pa80... but new RX technology (whatever it is) is able to "... use up to five oscillators per voice ... ".

So, do some mathematic by yourself ...

[This message has been edited by RicFreak (edited 08-11-2003).]

Leave the Math to the school teachers and use your EARS. Don't make a judgement on playability till you PLAY it. It might just work fine.