There was recently a thread about a questionnaire Yamaha was circulating as to feature updates on the Tyros 2.

I think that a lot of people answering these surveys get caught up in the details and forget about the bigger picture.

For example: I think that the single most important update needed on the T2, is better bass and drum samples. Most people don't tend to directly use these instruments very often, so requests for them are often forgotten. But every single Yamaha style consists of these two instruments, and yet they are from the poorest samples available in the professional market. Even though Yamaha hands-down beats its competition in nearly all other sounds, for some reason, they ignore their bass and drums. For a one man band, especially for one working on a dance floor, drums and bass are more important than a good brass and sax.

I am therefore in a great dilemma. I don't want to give up my Yamaha solo instruments, but on the other hand, I need a better overall sound and am seriously looking to Korg. I could use both, but honestly what's the point in the schlepping two keyboards everywhere?

Second thing: Many of us use our keyboards as power tools. I heavily rely on the Style creation functions to make my styles. (I play mostly ethnic music and pretty much everything I use is custom made). However the options for doing these kinds of things are really backward. Oftentimes, I have to go through up to twenty steps to do what other keyboards can do in one. Thank G-d for people like Jorgen Sorensen, who make quality programs to do these things properly.

Just my rantings,
Chony

Sounds like KORG is the way to go for you...regarding editing styles which is one of the best & you can do so much with it to create custom styles anyway ypou desire & beyond.

What amazes me is that Yamaha put a pretty decent sampler into the T2 (but unfortunately make it proprietary, so you can't load in Akai format, the most common multi-sample format), but absolutely suck at releasing titles for it that people need. You would think a 64MB, ballsy multi-velocity modern drum kit would be a no-brainer for T2 users that want more realistic drums. But do Yamaha make one (or three!)? A fat bass library... does one exist?

If it could import Akai, no problem (there's a heap of them available). But Yamaha's own proprietary format is probably the LEAST well served in quality and choice. But this will only improve if owners scream long and loud for this stuff. However, I doubt whether 5% of T2 owners have EVER used the sampler (half probably don't know it's got one!). It IS the solution to the problem, but involves either doing a boat-load of work yourself (to roll your own drumkits and translate them from other formats), or making a boat-load of noise at Yamaha to get this import problem fixed.

Proprietary formats are only as good as how well they are supported. Time for Yamaha to either come out with a LOT of new sounds in it, or open it up, finally...

Hi,

Yamaha should take a look a Ketron product. I recently purchased a used Ketron XD-9. I have to admit that no other manufacture can beat the Ketron live Drum and Bass. The bass is sound so good.

I also wish manufacture create style that have 10 intros, 10 fills and 10 endings. This way, we can have many styles within style.

coca

The big issue for me with the Tyros 2 is that it has a Professional Level price but not professional level features! Here is what is needed to make it a professional level board:

* 76 keys
* TC-Helicon Vocal Harmonizer
* Dedicated Sliders for Style Parts/Drawbars, etc.
* Dual XLR microphone Jacks w/Phantom Power
* Dual MP3/Audio Players with Pitch/speed correction.
* A new Musicfinder that stores ALL the keyboard settings including Transpose, effects, volume, EQ, Style, Lyrics, Text, etc..
* Dedicated SPLIT key
* Manual Bass
* Riff Key
* Better Style creation
* Extract Style from MIDI File function.
* Button for Left Hand Voice Freeze (so it doesn't change when variation changes)
and more....



------------------
Al Giordano
http://www.arrangerworld.com


Tyros 2, Yamaha P-250, Korg Triton Extreme 76, Roland VK8-M, DW Collectors Series Drums, Roland SPD-S.

Al sounds like that's a PA2xPro

Al....Nice wish-list of goodies...but I would not expect anything like that in any upcoming Yamaha models which their arrangers are more Home Use Orientated.....I would look at Roland, Korg, & Ketron to first lead the way to implement anything closer to your list & more in years to come.

The next "T what ever"

Will be just about the same , NO built in speakers.

No HD or SSD ( USB Recording ).

Will have EA sounds from the Motif.

You might even see a few surprises , like "Sliders" and "Function" buttons that are user assignable ( think Motif ).

FireWire / HDMI ( maybe ) / USB 2.0

Still not Mac friendly

I was never here...

O ~ 61 push buttons ! ( keys )

Steve, your right! Each one of those options are already in the Pa2!! I guess the only thing from the Yamaha I would want are the Styles and some of those voices.

Pa2 here I come...

Donny, sadly I agree with you. Yamaha just doesn't get it for the pro/semi-pro/serious home enthusiast. Are these features really so out of reach cost wise? Why do they make their workstations in Lite Version and in 3 flavors; 61, 76, 88, but not their arrangers?

Puzzling?






------------------
Al Giordano
http://www.arrangerworld.com


Tyros 2, Yamaha P-250, Korg Triton Extreme 76, Roland VK8-M, DW Collectors Series Drums, Roland SPD-S.

I disagree Al,

We don't need harmonizers, mp3 players, and xlr inputs on our keyboards. If I you want harmony, buy a helicon; if you want an mp3 player buy an iPod. It becomes a big problem when a keyboard tries to be everything, because in the end you're left with "a master of none".

Chony

I would like to see a library of great sample voices.

I would like the frickin' styles to be normalized so I can use user voices and Reg Mem on any style without having to futz with the balance all the time.

How about being able to use the Music Finder with the HD.

How about making the next T model the size of a PSR3000, which I believe could be done, but I believe Yamaha feels that it must be bigger and look different for aesthetic purposes so they can get their $3K.

Also, I'll take mine in black.

Other than that, I think I would be hard pressed to go to another brand, in that I'd lose way too many things that I don't hear happening on the others.

Scott

Zonies: All this discussion about “up to par”? Here we go with the inference that Tyros 2 is now “sub-par”. So what exactly is PAR? Is that a 55 pound hernia starter with lots of sounds that aren’t “up to par” with the SA voices? It’s been said many times on this board before…. What really matters is what each INDIVIDUAL wants or will accept in his keyboard.

The mere fact that a dozen or more people on here have bought G70’s and dropped them (some quickly) tells me something about the G70 is not “PAR”. The fact that folks have had the PA800 and dropped them tells me that something about that board is not “PAR”. So in my mind for this discussion “PAR” SHOULD be an acronym for “personally acceptable requisition”, that is, it’s “PAR” if to me, it is worth the investment of MY money.

Plenty of folks on this board have bought T2’s and they find them “quite PAR”, that is, they are glad they purchased them and don’t feel a need to move to some other board. I wish my Odyssey had an in-dash GPS (it doesn’t). So even though I might wish it had that and some other helpful features (which many new vehicles have), the van is still very reliable and it meets my needs perfectly. So it’s PAR to me.

To their credit, Yamaha is apparently asking owners if they would be interested in voice and style upgrades. If they were to include the Helicon harmonizer, that would likely drive up the price, and many users who don’t sing may not want to spend the extra dollars for these features. As an alternative, the singers who want harmony can buy the foot switch harmonizer for a couple hundred.

I don’t think the Tyros product is sub-par. And from what I’ve read on here, I haven’t seen a single keyboard that is universally agreed to be “PAR” as defined in the traditional sense.

R/I

UP TO PAR will require that Yamaha or any manufacturers LISTENS To Real Players that use theses KBs every day in the trenches & LISTEN to their needs Before they design them & just rehash old parts & inventory just to make a buck...leaving things out so they can just string along their customers for the next greatest debacle. Its all about $$$ first & foremost

[This message has been edited by Dnj (edited 02-11-2008).]

I would hope all my competitors..decide to play Tyros 2 or any Yamaha keyboards..

This is one guy that kept the G70...

Key feel, Drums, Piano, Organ, Scat ..Harmonizer.....I could go on and on...There is just no comparison...G70 RULES..of course you have to be able to lift 45 pounds..

Donny - exactly my point. The field is full of manufacturers who need to "listen". I haven't seen the perfect board come out of the production line yet. There are a lot of users crying out for a sympathetic ear. Here's a sampling of the "state of the art"... just taken from the last 10-12 posts on this board:

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

"I'm not really sure why the g70 lacks in the motown/r&b/soul styles. I wasn't finding it and I really did look." (Is that PAR?)

"I have spent a week going through all the styles on my PA1X trying to match up styles with my gig sets and find that not many of the styles on my hard drive are a very good match." (Is that PAR?)

"It's amazing they dont have an extensive style library to back up there wonderful feature packed arrangers....its like running a car with just a gallon of gas....ya cant go to too far." (Is that PAR?)

"It sure would have made my life easier had PSR3000. It looks like even the ones I am finding that might work will need at least one or two of the STS voices changed. Lot of work when you pay this much for a arranger." (Is that PAR?)

"The [PA800] variations seem OK and graduate nicely, but the fills in many styles are just plain awful - major glitches." (Is that PAR?)

"The [PA800] variations worked perfectly for the first 4 bars ( I think it was the Bequine style), by the time it got to the 8th bar it no longer suited, so I just chopped off the last few bars." (Is that PAR?)

"For some bizzare reason , the default Korg setting for fills & breaks is "immediate."
In short, the fill sometimes starts in the middle of the bar, making it glitch.
If you want to get rid of it & have the fill start at the beginning of the next bar, nice & smooth, you'll have to go into style edit." (Is that PAR?)

---------
Yamaha and all the rest of the developers should start listening and not stop. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to decipher the posts on this board alone. I have begun to believe they don't want the perfect board. Because people would buy them and never upgrade. I'm sure they are fully capable of meeting the "dream list". But if they piece it out they can sell a new keyboard every 18 months for the next 10 years. I just wanted to make sure that if there was a "PAR", we all agreed that it was indeed the target to shoot for.

R/I

I think only the Korg PA2X, can give the G70 a run for it's money....But because of the Korg OS..it would still be second best..TO ME...

"Yamaha and all the rest of the developers should start listening and not stop. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to decipher the posts on this board alone. I have begun to believe they don't want the perfect board. Because people would buy them and never upgrade. I'm sure they are fully capable of meeting the "dream list". But if they piece it out they can sell a new keyboard every 18 months for the next 10 years. I just wanted to make sure that if there was a "PAR", we all agreed that it was indeed the target to shoot for.
R/I"

Now your getting the picture You can only hope for something YOU CAN TOLERATE playing FOR YOUR NEEDS.....what ever workarounds is least prohibitive to your style of playing & keep going...
"perfect" will never exist.

In western music playing arranger world , Yamaha (arrangers)will outsell Roland and Korg just because of the SIMPLER (yet effective)styles,OS and 3 rd party support.Yes they have not as great drums and bass,VH and hardware.(Yammy's PSR A /O models are also doing well for ease of use despite complaints about their hardware and overall sound).

Has been,most likely will continue.

Unless the following happens
1.Korg fires the style team and put new people who understands how to make a simpler style without over orchestration,how to a program a fill and why we need more fills than 2+1.
2.Korg replaces some folks form OS team - ask the design team serious questions like this- why do they have to carry old PA80 format where you need to press A/B button to change sounds (Piano to Sax) or styles (8 beats to Bossa).A serious draw back where you need to change sound or style in arranger mode(you have to see the lights).


In non western music playing arranger worldmarket is also huge (more than 65 % of total pro arranger sales) -Arabic,turkish,iranian and other mid east market and also former USSR republics -armanian,azerbycan etc)-Ketron,Korg(major players) and Roland(smaller market now,was better in mid and late 90's) will continue to rule:Because of the sampler (Korg) which can load ethnic solos sounds/percussion and pro 3 rd party styles out there for last 15 years .Since Yam is not making what they need(meaning Tyros like oriental arranger with VH,not even like s900 like arranger with VH, only lower mid models like S700 level),Korg is selling well(that makes Korg think they don't have to change anything since the market is bigger than westen music market -we are talking about pro arrangers -not PSR 295).


Korg should have learned thier lesson from Psr 2k-PA80 days.PA 80 great sounds,limited VH,bad OS - Vs - PSr2k -Ease of use,Better display and multi pads (Yes multi pads that play loops are new for Korg - started in Pa1xs with OS update).PA 800 is a great tool but they still need to fix style/fill/layout department.they have better seq,sound editing plus others -but again - missing the point of as arranger------STYLES and FILLS that are to be used to make a backing song to sing/play along with!!


By the way PA2x wins on keys department.YES ,better than G70!(which I loved).G70 was better than PA1x pro.



[This message has been edited by jamman (edited 02-11-2008).]

jamman,
there's not such thing as "over orchestrated styles"! i've heard this so many times, and i wonder why... to me it is obvious that those 5/6 tracks of accompaniment, besides drums and bass are not meant to play all at once! it is your choice and entirely up to your preferences what accomp tracks would you use and when.
too me, i don't have enough of them, they are not too many.
if you are talking about the way the styles are designed, here too, having such a great range to choose from would make the point invalid. you just need the right features and time enough to take care of it.

to the subject, i think yamaha should have gone 9000pro format with tyros. maybe they were not sure about the success, but with tyros2 they must have been aware it'll be successful. so, even though i doubt they will take this route with T3, i believe a 76er would do good for yamaha.
features wise i dont really know. i never had a yamaha keyboard.

[This message has been edited by adimatis (edited 02-11-2008).]

The manufacturers know who they are selling their instruments to and kit out the keyboard accordingly. It is no secret that yamaha position the Tyros and psr range at home users. Thats why they have a limited VH , stripped down sampler and minimal voice editing capabilities. Home users typically play guess where ????? At home !!!! They usually play for themselves or friends and family, they dont create their own sounds, styles, or samples so dont have need for gigging pro features. Yamaha styles are not too in your face and seem more subtle and simple (presumably because the home user does not want to have to compete with the keyboard styles)

This is the market where yamaha make their money period. There are very many professional musicians who make a great living from this keyboard and use it for its best potential in pro use. If it isnt up to 'par' (something i do not believe is true) then there are an awful lot of musicians out there who use the instrument daily and have made this instrument sound great regardless.

As far as the styles are concerned, it has been said so many times now that you can simply strip down styles as you see fit. All manufacturers could not have made it easier to aedjust styles in live play, especially in regards to korg instruments. I actually love the style programming in the korg range for the very fact that the style programmers assume you can actually play a keyboard and not simply use 1 finger chords !! The preference for progression from simple to complex style prgramming can all be accomodated in any of the main keyboard manufacturers arsenal of styles. Its up to the user how they work with them.

whilst this is true (yamaha producing home keyboards) features like SA voices are definitely not meant for regular, home player...
it would take lots and lots of time to master the tehnique for playing these sounds at their full potential. what home keyboardist would do that?! and only for home (friends, family) performance?
whoever buys a T2, does it also for those advanced voices... that one must be a little bit more than a home-player.

Hi Adimatis
Come over to the UK Festivals or anywhere in mainland Europe and you will find virtually all Home Players learn and make full use of the SA voices, (After all that’s what they were designed for) and if you’re not sure how to play them, just press the help button and it explains it all to you.
You will also notice that most add pedalboards so as not to have to rely on the style section to do everything for them.
As to the 9000Pro, why would Yamaha continue with what was their biggest disaster in Arranger History.

To US Buyers
Although the US is a large country, to Arranger manufactures it is of little relevance as the percentage of sales are low, (The vast US community seems to have great difficulty accepting arrangers as anything other then toys) and as most of the complaints of keyboards come from the US, then there is little chance of them being taken notice of.
So like I have always said in the past, if you want to change something then lobby the European and Asian markets, as this is where virtually all the decisions on arrangers are made by the manufactures.
Also please remember that manufactures try to satisfy the majority, and very few in the European and Asian markets (The biggest arranger markets in the world) are interested in some of the features that US buyers want.
The above might be painful, but then this is the Real World.

Bill

Chony, I still use my iPod when I need music for breaks. For me the built in MP3 player recorder allows a convenient way of recording. Although I've played keyboard for many years I still need to hear how I'm playing a tune. I've only recently started doing vocals. No better way than listening and trying to correct what needs correcting via the Mp3 player/recorder. The vocal harmonizer I need to enhance a voice that has a long way to go before it's where I'd like it to be.

That's fine chony, that's why were here to listen to other viewpoints.

But there are counterpoints to your arguments. How much equipment do you want to bring to a job? We are talking all-in-one convenience. That's what Arranger Workstations are.

And if you don't perform in public, how many home players like to sing, but don't either sing on key or sing alone and want 2-3 part harmony?

If they do want to sing, they have to purchase a microphone. When was the last time you purchased a microphone without an XLR Jack? Maybe Sam's club or Costco sell Microphones with Hi-Z 1/4 inch jacks, but most decent quality mic's need the XLR jack.

Do you want to record with your arranger? Is it more convenient to record to a WAV file or an MP3 file? How about both? Since WAV's are very large, you can compress them down in size to an MP3. Do you want to adjust the pitch of the MP3 or WAV file playback? How about transposing it?

I could go on and on, but please keep in mind, that the Tyros 2 sells for $3495.00! That's is a lot of money for a home player to spend on a hobby. He or she should have everything they need to perform for that kind of money without purchasing additional equipment. The base tyros 2 doesn't even come with a hard disk for crying out loud!!






------------------
Al Giordano
http://www.arrangerworld.com


Tyros 2, Yamaha P-250, Korg Triton Extreme 76, Roland VK8-M, DW Collectors Series Drums, Roland SPD-S.

that means that styles are either too busy to sing over.Yes I know I can mute them,etc but it'll not always work.But that's not the point.


For Eg.take the latin rock style- Taken from Santana's smooth -It'll only work with that song.not others.(too much brass with signature licks and busy fills).

Simpler style/bass lines will work with most songs - is the way to go.You can still have gtr strums,EP comps, but the style has to be free enough to play or sing over.(most problems are in Vari 3 and 4 which are alittle over done.)

IMO most of these SA sounds are not what they are cracked up to be, especially when you can't play them correctly in the right scenarios,....I feel they are more gimmicky then usuable for MY needs as a Vocalist first I need good stock backing sounds...vs a instrumentalist player... ....& in the real world Pro Gigging trenches aren't a big deal for practical use but do act as a great selling point for the home user.



[This message has been edited by Dnj (edited 02-12-2008).]

My arranger, right or wrong...

There IS no 'par' when talking about an entire arranger. NONE OF THEM ARE PERFECT. Every last one of them has something no other arranger has, and every last one of them has something that pretty much ALL the others do better.

What matters are YOUR particular needs, and then how quickly a manufacturer moves to correct shortcomings in certain parts of the OS or hardware. Some are quicker than others. Some go multiple generations with exactly the same flaw unfixed. Some throw perfectly good ideas away, to make room for other new features of dubious value. Some do virtually nothing except make online content easier to purchase.

I am pretty sure that everyone who ponied up for a T2 is still pretty happy about it's capabilities. Primarily because it's few, well documented shortcomings (or 'sub-par' features, if you will) never impacted their buying decision in the first place. No-one bought the T2 for it's sampler - it's closed nature would have deflected them to Korg in the first place. No-one bought the T2 although they thought the styles were too busy. They got a Roland or Ketron. Those that bought it thought the styles were great (and still do).

Take a look around... What has been released since the T2 that challenges it at the things it is best at? The SA voices, the integration between style play and SMF playback. The Mega voices and styles that use them... Nothing. There's a trickle down product (the S900) that steals a few SA voices, but the main T2 feature set is still intact.

VH issues... Look, Yamaha don't like technology from other sources. They don't make any good commercial VH products, so they can't fold them into the T2 OS. The only people that DO make good VH products are in direct competition with Yamaha. TC already have a deal with Korg. You can be SURE that's an exclusive deal.

But overall, I see next to nothing added to the OS of more recent arrangers that has anything to do with playing an arranger. Korg's guitar mode, perhaps, and that's it. Where are the new features? Gone to karaoke, every one...

Dueling MP3's, anyone? The HOME user, if they want to do karaoke, get a nice inexpensive karaoke player, not a $4500 arranger. This is only for pro's, who want to fool the audience they are NOT doing karaoke. Home users don't care...

I believe that all the TOTL arrangers are on a very level playing field. No one is dominant, no one is a complete dog. The only reason T2 users are getting defensive is that no-one has bought one lately and started gushing about it. And at $4500, that's not surprising, when an S900 can get surprisingly close to it's capabilities, and a third the price. The main things the T2 has the S900 does not are flawed (especially the sampler), so more and more make their comments about this smaller, lighter, cheaper keyboard (pun intended!). But most of their gushing could just as equally apply to the T2. Yamaha simply made the error (if you want to look at it that way) of making the trickle-down S900 BEFORE they raised the T-series bar a lot higher. Once that gets made, back to the trumpeting from IT'S owners....

My arranger, right or wrong....

I couldnt disagree with you more DNJ and i know we are just trading opinions here. when someone knows how to use the SA voices properly the realism achieved is nothing short of scary !! If yamaha made a true workstation arranger i would have bought the T2 like a shot. The saxes and concert guitars are that good i have seen real saxophonist and guitarist at church get very very annoyed because they insisted that the sounds coming from a T2 could not be replicated live ....until they came to a demo with me and watched James sergent ( a well know UK yammy demonstartor) show what it could do.

There are lots of critiscms about what yammaha lack in their arrangers but make no mistake the SA voices were and still are head and shoulders above any of the competition and this technology is (for me) the only true innovation in the keyboard world for 5 years or more.

Have to disagree Spalding, I have heard the Korg PA800 (The PA2x uses the same sound engine) side by side with the T2, both played by professional Artists, and I can assure you that the latest Korg sound engine easily matches Yamahas SA voices, and in many cases betters them.
Why, the answer is simple, the Korg sounds Real whereas the Yamaha SA sounds Impressive. (Big Difference)
TIP; always compare sounds against Real Instruments, NOT other boards.

Bill

BTW when compared to a Real Sax, (Side by Side) both are still lacking

VERY WELL SAID.


[This message has been edited by chony (edited 02-12-2008).]

well i would have to take issue with you there Abacus ! (in the friendly spirit that i understand your post to have been made :-)) Can the pa series guitar, any of them, play staccato and joined notes in real time playing ? It cannot.I own one and i know. Can the saxes play notes without each note being "re-blown" like a real sax ? No it cant. Name one instrument that has rx technology that plays better than the yamaha SA technology ?

if i get it right, SA is more of a particular WAY to reproduce sounds. the samples themselves are probably as good/bad as anyone's else. but the way they are triggered and modeled is different. something like that.
now, i must say i am yet to hear a totally knok-out performance with SA voices, to lead me believe they are far superior.
i think korg's sounds are top right now.

of course, the tehnique of the player is the main factor. even an old casio's distorsion guitar sounds good when the player know how to do it. and lately, having so many sounds with different velocity-triggered samples, any of the manufacturers have quality voices.
so, are there some incredible demos for SA? links...

[This message has been edited by adimatis (edited 02-13-2008).]

Spalding,

I don't think you understood what abacus was saying. There is no question that many of the yamaha are in a class of their own and put korg to shame. That doesn't take away from the fact that when you listen to those same instruments on a korg in action it just overall sounds more pristine. I've programmed for both keyboards even though I so far just own the yamaha and I must say last night at a wedding I attended I was just blown away by the punch and clarity of the korg. I simply cannot get those elements out of my yamaha no matter what equipment I use or how the compressor is set.

Yamaha has much better sounds but the korg has a much better sound. Read carefully.

sound overal will always be subjective but accuracy of sound is not. A sax that is reblown everytime a note is played does not "accurately reflect hopw a sax is played" Doesnt matter how good the original sample is. subtle nuances like continued blowed notes that blend into each other like a real sax is far more accurate than how korg do it. Notes that fall off naturally just as a sax player would and the ability to over blow a note are elemnets of the SA voicing technology that no other manufaturer has replicated yet.

There was a simply astoundind demo done by Peter Baartam

I cant find the link to it but click on this link and listen to the SA voices
http://aux.music.yamaha.com/tyros2/

Then go on this link and listen to the same family RX voices
http://www.korgpa.com/pa_root/en/products/pa2x_demo.html?en

Dont compare bthe quality of tyhe recording. compare the natural behaviour of the real instrument that both keyboards are trying to mimick

Hi Spalding
The new upgraded RX technology and memory goes way beyond SA, and is akin to EA (Extended Articulation) that Yamaha now use in their Motif range of instruments.
SA was good in its day but technology moves on (As is demonstrated with Yamahas Motif EA voices) and so now manufactures do not have to limit the articulations to a simple Mono/Poly (Solo/Legato) of SA.
I will see if I have time to put together a fuller explanation when I get back from work tonight.
Hope this helps for now

Bill

Go on the motifator forum which is the yamaha users forum and do searches on the Motif XS which is yamaha's latest flagship workstation using EA technology . Type in the search engine "tyros 2" . Virtually all the users are complaining that they want SA technology compared to EA technology it is far more realistic and intuitive than EA (which requires the use of a free hand to use in real time). In particular the users want the same saxes and guitars as the Tyros 2 !! They even created a petition that is being handled by yamaha japan at this moment to import the tyros 2 SA voicing technology into the Motif XS. The interesting theme of their complaints are "why does a home keyboard have better sounds in it than the top of the range pro workstation !" Go figure !!!

I have heard the Pa800 and Pa1x side by side and apart from the organs which are noticeably better on the Pa800 ( but not much as the korg organs are good anyway) compared to the PA1X there is virtually no sonic difference in the sounds or the way the RX technology triggers the sounds. Korg as far as i am aware have not redeveloped the RX technology. The marketing hype says they have a new sound engine Enhanced Definition Synthesis which when you close your eyes and listen to the instruments sounds just like the same synthesis in the KorgPA1X. Certanily not the jump that the Tyros 2 was from the tyros 1. Korgs RX technology was designed to compete with yamahas Megavoice technology.It was not an answer to the SA technology and as good as Korg sounds as an ensemble keyboard, its individual voices in key categories, sax, brass, strings,acoustic guitars are in my view are inferior to yamaha but i bought the Korg for the ensemble sound both in arranger mode and sequencer.

[This message has been edited by Spalding 4 (edited 02-13-2008).]

[This message has been edited by Spalding 4 (edited 02-13-2008).]

Acronyms, acronyms, what's a boy to do?

Don't assume that, just because another manufacturer uses a two letter acronym for some unspecified improvements to their voice technology that it has ANYTHING to do with another's.

Yamaha's SA technology is the ONLY hardware system that is capable of detecting legato and staccato play IN REALTIME, and use that to determine which set of samples to trigger. Plus, it can modify that behavior based on other rules as well, such as intervalic rules (don't make a squeak until the interval jumps more than a 4th, for instance).

Now, this isn't groundbreaking stuff, many software sample players have had complex rules-based behavior for several years. But it is, AFAIK, the only HARDWARE, non-computer-based (in other words, short of Neko, Muse or possibly MS) arranger that can do this. From what I can glean from Korg's literature, the RX technology simply uses more velocity layers to get different sounds, but you can't apply intervalic and legato/staccato rules.

This truly is, I believe, the only real improvement to ROM-plers in the last ten years. More RAM and more velocity layers is just more of the same. But the ability to play a natural technique, and have the instrument figure out, fast as a blink, which of a totally different set of samples to trigger to make the samples have that exact same natural technique is a totally new concept for hardware.

And going by the mistakes that Yamaha's WS division have made, trying to port this over to their side of the company, it is obvious that some of you are not the only ones to fail to grasp the overall concept..! The T2 has done an amazing job of making all this formidable power completely transparent to the user, whereas the MotifXS still demands a lot of non-musical (button switching, pedal pressing) techniques to achieve the same thing.

Now, this is NOT to say that any Joe Blow can sit down at an SA voice, and immediately get the best out of it. First of all, it requires a VERY refined legato/staccato technique, similar to the technique you would use on a Minimoog to trigger the envelope sweeps EXACTLY where you wanted them, and no other place EVER. That takes a degree of control and practice few attempt (not really needed for many other sounds). THEN you have to learn the intervallic rules for each sound, and play with those in mind. And each sound has a different one...

So it's unsurprising that some don't get it (you might have to actually KEEP your arranger more than a couple of months to get the hang of it!) and some do. There are some completely believable demos posted at Yamaha that showcase exactly HOW realistic these things can sound. What's that? You say YOU can't make it do this? They are playing the exact same arranger and sound as you. If you can't get it that good, just exactly who is to blame..? Oh, that's right... It MUST be the arranger!

yeh what he said but shorter :-)

Sorry, Spalding... I have sadly figured out that, if you don't explain it in detail, they keep spouting the same old sh*t...

Question, why if you put a Real Saxophone with a Real Player side by side with a Korg PA800 and a Yamaha T2 with professional players and listen and compare all 3, (And everybody that has done this comparison comes to the same conclusion) the T2 SA sounds Impressive but the PA800 sounds more like the real instrument, as if what you say is true then the T2 SA should wins hands down, but in actual fact always comes in 2nd.
Curious

Bill

(Remember the only way to test how good a sound is emulated, is to compare it with a Real Instrument)

Which sax player, playing what? Which arranger player, playing what? So much has to do with the player, when it comes to horn emulation, that anything but the best player head to head with the best saxophonist (LOTS of room for argument there!) and I bet you STILL get as many different opinions as listeners.

I have auditioned every arranger out there, play horn myself (only T'bone, though) but have played with some of the best sax players in the world. I am sorry, but I haven't heard ANYTHING posted from any manufacturer that beats the SA sax for realism. Sure, play ONE NOTE, and some will sound fuller, fatter, breathier, whatever (each individual sax player has as much difference too, though!). But, when it comes to solo sax (let's not get confused with sax section sounds), as soon as you play a phrase, it is immediately obvious that everything but the SA sax is a synth.

Horn players DO NOT tongue every note. That is a fact. Every arranger's sax except the SA sax tongues every single note. That is a fact.

Please, Bill, point me to what you think is the best posted Korg sax solo demo you can. Then listen to the SA sax demo at Yamaha. Tell me what sounds 'real'.

IMO, it doesn't matter if it SOUNDS like a real sax player playing a real note. It matters if it sounds like a real sax player playing a real phrase.

i listen again to the demos from yamaha's site. very closely.
while it sounds as it's suppose to be a realistic emulation of a real sax, somehow it failed to really, completely give me this feeling. now, maybe i expected too much, but i realize once more that what makes it special is the WAY they can be played, not so much the sounds samples, which are bellow korg's. just my oppinion. i would rather have korg's sounds than yamaha's technology.

I love Korg. Hell i own one of the bestKorg arrangers made todate ! But i dont care how good a demonstrator you are , you cant make the korg sax phrase like a real sax or a korg guitar phrase like a real guitar. On the Yamaha through SA technology you can. Thats just a fact. Not just my opinion. Try to play a series of notes on a korg sax without it it soumnding like separately blown notes...or hammreing the strings on a guitar fretboard using the korg guitar. Its impossible not because of the limitation of the musician but purely the limitation in the technology.

I will bow out of this one because as much as i love Korg i know that in terms of individual categories of instruments yamaha have them and in my opinion all the other major manufacturers beat hands down.

Diki
I think we will have to agree to disagree on this one, as I have heard them all live (As have many others) and the PA800 easily matches, and in many cases betters the T2 SA voices.
BTW I have not heard any online demos from any manufacture that sound as good as the boards played live.

Spalding
Going from the old RX technology to the New RX technology is like going from SD to HD TV, the more you use it the more you realise what you’re missing on SD.
As to whether the extra cost is worth the extra performance, only the individual can decide.

Bill

This post, like all the similar posts before it, proves one thing and one thing only; IT'S ALL SUBJECTIVE.

chas

Bill... Wow! You must be hanging with some amazing players! Shame none of them post, anywhere!

Because I have yet to hear a user demo of even the T2 SA sax that matches the demo, yet alone exceeds it...

The manufacturers ought to hire these guys if they are THAT good...

For me.. It's easy. I'm happy with mine. OK... I'd have liked better analog / digital synth type sounds an scapes but it isn't an analog or modeling synth ( my favorite toys ).

I recognized long before I considered the T2 that for my personal tastes, of the major manufacturers Yamaha has pretty much always had my least favorite of these type sounds in their digital machines ( their analogs are a completely different story ). Therefore I was not disappointed because I knew what I was getting.

Wow factor for me on any future boards ( from any manufacturer ) goes something like this:

If anyone comes out with an arranger that allows me to radically alter individual style elements in real time.... like algorithims ala Karma, or allows the user to control the diversity of style elements perhaps similar in the functionality of Jamstix and virtual bassist to name a few, and can get these under one hood without me having to import ton of samples.. I'll then say "wow" !!!.

'Til then, for my arranger needs the T2 is fine for me the way it is and for the real diverse stuff my PC continues to carry the ball.

AJ

After a couple margarettas I decided to read this post all the way through to the end--I wasted two good drinks and 10 minutes of time. The topic should have said "How to create another pissin' contest!" Fortunately, I read DomM's post, which was much more informative and unbiased.

Gary

------------------
Travlin' Easy

Uh oh, I disagree (somewhat) with everyone!

Fact 1: As someone who uses both, Yamaha T2s SA sounds are indisputabley better than anything else out there. I don't think this is a "subjective" issue. Anyone who has tried both will, no doubt, agree.

Fact 2: Overall, when listening to the Korg, it has more clarity and punch than the Yamaha.

Some people seem to think these facts somehow contradict each other. They do not. The Yamaha is better in many ways, and the Korg is better in many ways.

Which brings me back to my opening post. Yamaha, give us some amazing bass and drum samples so that the overall Yamaha sound is as good as, or better than, the Korg.

Thank you!

(PS: My appologies, I agree that "par" was a poor choice of words ... but I think that everyone understood what I meant.)

Since when have peoples opinion of which board they prefer been a p****** contest, if they were running the boards down yes, but there is not one post that does that, (Least not that I can see) if you read again you will find both boards are held in high regard by all the posters.
Confused

Bill

Actually Diki I was referring to like with like.
E.g., if you listen to an online demo of Peter Baartmans and then go to a club or dealers meeting, where he plays the same song and instrument live, you will find that the online demo is not as good as the live sound. (You will find this applies to all online demos)

Bill

Bill,

When comparing Sax sounds in each the Korg and the Yamaha, have you actually spent some quality time with each keyboard? There are members here in this discussion who own either/and/or both keyboards and they are giving you their opinion, but you are basing yours on a presentation at a keyboard festival.

Maybe you should sit down for an hour on each keyboard and re-examine those sax samples and see if your opinion changes or stays the same?

Regards,
Al

------------------
Al Giordano
http://www.arrangerworld.com


Tyros 2, Yamaha P-250, Korg Triton Extreme 76, Roland VK8-M, DW Collectors Series Drums, Roland SPD-S.

"Since when have peoples opinion of which board they prefer been a p****** contest, if they were running the boards down yes, but there is not one post that does that, (Least not that I can see) if you read again you will find both boards are held in high regard by all the posters.
Confused"

I agree Abacus. I thought it was very cordial and respectful discussion

I've had the Tyros2, Pa800 and now the PA2xPro. IMHO the SA voices have an edge over the Korg. Please don't misinterpret I think the Korg saxes are terrific.

I played my first gig today with the Pa2xPro. It's a Valentine luncheon that goes as far as crowning a King and a Queen.( King and Queen of hearts This is my 3rd time playing this retirement community Valentine luncheon . Seems as though the audience enjoyed my playing more than the past 2 years. The AD while I was playing my last songs said make sure you reserve the date for 2009. As I walking out the door she followed to ask did you book us on your calendar. Is it the PA2xpro?? hmmm, don't know for sure but it sure felt great to play 76 keys with a pro level action. And I always love the wide eyes the audience gets hearing the trumpets, especially the Wah Trumpet.



[This message has been edited by Stephenm52 (edited 02-14-2008).]

Steve,

I suspect it was the performance of the player that triggered the AD's response about book for next year--not the keyboard. Give them a great performance and you'll have more days booked than you want, and that was likely what you did.

Cheers,

Gary

------------------
Travlin' Easy

Must agree. The fact is, that a good performer is more important than a good keyboard. Musicians get paid scale; the sky's the limit for a performer though.

Gary and Chony, I've been working hard and listening to what you more experienced folks have been suggesting since coming to this forum. Nice to know that it's paying off, thank you gents.

Steve,

I think it was your new singing voice

Finally got a bit of time to write a bit fuller explanation that I promised earlier in the week
When we come to the sound of a Saxophone (In its simplest form) we basically have 2 parts, the articulations and the sound itself, and so to make an accurate Sax sound we need to emulate both accurately.
Due to the way a blown instrument is played and the way a keyboard is played, it is not possible for either instrument to truly accurately emulate the articulations (Operation) of the other, but you can get close.
Sax Sound
This is the basic sound of the Sax itself, and as most keyboards use sampling (Recordings of the real instrument) this can be made to sound excellent, with the limitations being the number of samples that can be stored in the instrument, (The more samples the better) due to the limitations of the available memory in hardware boards they at present cannot compete with software based VSTs etc, but by using clever sampling techniques they certainly do well.
Sax Articulations
Articulations on the other hand are related to how the Sax responds to the players input, and to emulate these you either need a vast amount of samples, (So that when it is played on the keyboard it has suitable samples to play back) or to use sound modelling, where how the instrument reacts is measured and converted into a mathematical formula (Algorithm) which alters the sound in real time (Just like a real player) as you play the keyboard.
The main problems of the sample approach is that you need to use a large amount or memory or disc streaming, where as the sound modelling approach requires fast processing, both of which are currently only generally available in computer based systems, (The main exceptions being the Kurtzweill instruments) and so hardware boards have to take second place.
Yamaha marketing and their R & D however realised that while for true studio production fast computers were needed for accuracy, for the home market (Which is the market arrangers are aimed at) they could simplify this and still give a sound that would impress their intended market, and so SA was born, (For the Pro market this was expanded into EA voices, which give a lot more flexibility and control of the articulations that Workstation uses require, (Or so Yamaha thought, however if you look at a lot of forums the Pros actually prefer the way the home version is implemented) and which uses a much simplified sound modelling technique (Steps rather then continuous variation) and added in just a few more samples to give a more impressive sound.
Coming onto the Korg Sax and Yamaha SA Sax, then the articulations on the Yamaha easily beat the Korg, but the basic sound of the Korg easily beats the Yamaha, and when you compare the 2 with a real Sax (Or a high quality recording) the Korgs basic sound wins out over the Yamahas articulations, thus the Korg Sax sounds more like a real Sax.
Now if you could add the Yamaha articulations to the Korg sound then “WOW” that would be something, however for the time being to me and others, the sound of the Korg Sax sounds more real then the Yamaha SA Sax.
In the end it comes down to personal opinion, and only the individual can decide this.
I hope the above explains better what I was trying to put over in my earlier posts.

Bill

I think you pretty much nailed it, Bill...

The thing for me is, as a horn player, while the tone of the horn is quite important, what you do with it is the primary thing. Occasionally, you'll hear a genius sax player (a little Bird tells me) playing quite a lousy horn (Bird recorded some amazing stuff on a cheap plastic horn). It's pretty much an ideal illustration of the fact that the horn's tone, though somewhat important, has next to nothing to do with a great performance.

So, to do the best job of imitating a horn PLAYER (rather than a horn), the ability to articulate, to put expression (or motion, if you will) into something that is essentially static is of primary importance. Yes, ideally, we would all love to see the marriage of Korg's tone with Yamaha's SA technology, but the nature of patents and competition make this unlikely. But, getting too hooked on the tone, at the expense of the playability can only limit you to what you want to play. If you HAVE to play a certain line, because that's the only way the horn samples will work without starting to sound like a keyboard, that tone starts to become a liability, rather than a strength.

Yamaha's SA sax is the first thing that I have ever heard that allows you the freedom to play what YOU want to play, rather than what the horn sample will allow you to play. A certain amount of tone sacrifice for that ability is a price I am more than happy to pay.

I have always wanted to sound like a sax PLAYER. You work with a dozen sax players, they got a dozen different tones. Some better than others, and often the better player may not have the best tone. HE'S the guy I want to sound like...

Bill, I'm going to have to assume that you've never actually used the Yamaha sax. Maybe you've heard it on YouTube or somewhere but not in the flesh. I'm not a dieheart Yamaha fan - remember I'm the one asking them to learn from Korg - but I just don't see how the Korg Pa1xs sax "sound" (forget articulations), sounds as good or better than the Yamaha...

Bass, drums, pianos and strings to name a few, now that's a different story. Korg wins out easily in that department.

Hi,
better style creation & editing functions, be lost without the 3rd party software written by people like michael , jorgen & jos.

The abitily for the pads to sync like my korg PA800 pads ( has 1 additional function)

sustain pedal "controller 64" in style tracks.
Took me a while to realize why some of the piano tracks converted from othe brands sounded chopped off especially arpeggio's. The styles used the sustain pedal , yamaha doesn't.
Same goes when trying to convert BIAB styles. Sustain is used. Conversions require too much editing in trying to lengthen the notes to emulate sustain.
( I'm basing this on my PSR1500, I'm assuming the T2 doest use controller 64 either in it's style tracks?)

best wishes
Rikki

best wishes
Rikki.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by chony:
[B]

Rikki... Several computer sequencers have a 'Sustain to Note Length' command, that easily converts any CC64 commands into the actual note length.

Hope this helps.

Hi Diki,
thank you.
my pc sequencer does actually lengthen notes, but I think it's done by a percentage value ?? Haven't actually come across the option you mentioned, if I'm reading it correctly .
I've only got a couple of inexpensive sequencers PT12 & XGWorks.
For what I use them for ie a bit of style editing, buying one of the more expensive ones like Sonar or cubase wouldn't be worthwhile.

Sorry , I'm a bit down, I thought I'd found a simple way of converting BIAB styles to PA800 format, by using Micheal Beddersom's Stylemaker "BIAB conversion" option for PSR styles, then putting it thru EMC to convert it to Korg Format.
I'd forgotten about the lack of sustain controller within PSR styles.
BIAB styles seem to use sustain in all sorts of tracks. By the time I lengthen all the notes , I might as well do it midi to style for the PA800 & probably get a better result anyway.

Probably why I stopped trying to convert BIAB styles to PSR format in the first place.
Becoming more & more of a feather brain daily. haahaa.

thank you for the suggestion ,though.

best wishes
Rikki

Can Cubase do this?

"indisputabley better" ??? And that's a Fact? No roon for bias or preference?
Sheesh ... who ARE you?
Of course it's subjective.

Hi Chony,
sorry , wouldn't have a clue. My wording might have been a bit misleading.
I just assummed Diki was refferring to something a bit more upmarket like Sonar or Cubase.
Going back , the top of the line sequencers used to have the better editing facilities.

Nowadays I just use Powetracks 12. Pretty much does everything I need. Trying to upgrade my old Win95 cubase to current standard was just too expensive.

PT12 will lengthen notes, it's done by specifying a percentage. Bit of trial & error though getting the correct % so that a piano arpeggio will play back smoothly.
The one thing I really find usefull, is that it can split up a drum track into individual drum instruments. Snare on one track, Hi hat on another etc etc
Makes editing velocities or reassigning drums from one type to another so much easier.

We might need to ask Diki which of the sequencers will do what he mentioned.

best wishes
Rikki

Rikki, I know it's going to sound sexist, but it's got to be a gender thing (as in, the absense of testosterone). I can't help but wonder how much better the world (well, at least, this board) would be if the rest of us could master your social skills. Props. Seriously.

chas

Cubase CAN do this, and I think you'll find the old Cubase VST (that you have for Win95, or whatever) will do this. For certain, VST5 has it, and I've been on Cubase since the Atari days. I am 'fairly' sure the older versions had this command.

Changing length by a percentage is not the way to do this, each pedal on/off is most likely to be different. If your current sequencer can't do this, is there a piano-roll screen that can show you notes AND the CC64 commands at the same time? If so, you grab ALL the notes that are sounding when the CC64=127, and then drag their endpoints to the point where the CC64=0 is. Again, Cubase has a modifier to the pencil tool that will make all selected notes stop at the pencil point. Drag that to the CC64=0 and on to the next.

I am sorry I can't confirm any other sequencer (I've been a Cubase addict since it first came out), but I would be surprised if most modern ones DIDN'T have the command. Although bargain sequencers like PowerTracks are OK up to a certain point, there comes a time when you want to do more sophisticated editing, and Cubase is what you REALLY need.

As you are on an older computer, VST5 should be perfect for you (and is, IMO, better at MIDI than later versions!). Want to average the levels of all the snare backbeats, while leaving the rest of the snare notes alone? Cubase can do this. Want to convert all CC7 (volume) commands into CC11 (expression), and scale them to be less extreme? Cubase can do this. Want to take all Cowbell hits LESS than vel=64, even them out and bring them up WITHOUT touching the higher velocities? You get the picture...

Editing styles is about as demanding on a sequencer as anything I've done. Don't hobble yourself by trying to do it on a bargain sequencer...

I agree - what a wonderful lady

zuki

UD,

What I was saying is that in my subjective view, it is not subjective ...

In other words: to me, the Korg sax to Yamaha sax is like comparing a Dihatsu to a Jaguar - you're free to prefer the Dihatsu but I don't get it... (Switch the example around for Yamaha's pianos, bass and drums.)

That said, I hold most everybody here at the SZ in high esteem, no matter whether they agree with me or not, and enjoyed the debate in this thread.

PS: I notice that a lot of people take offense when people write like I did, and I've noticed others posting a disclaimer saying "this is only my view and others have a right to disagree" when posting what they feel might be controversial.

I guess the reason for this is to prevent some of the immature fighting that goes on here at the SZ from time to time. But as adults we should be able to have these kinds of conversations without anybody getting offended by someone saying that "my keyboard is the best, and nobody can disagree"!

I think a lot of bad blood happens on this forum when one person's strongly help OPINION is mistaken for FACT... Either by the poster, OR the reader (or both)!

But, in all fairness, we're adults here (mostly ). We should have the sense to realize that everything posted here is an opinion. Heck, even posted manufacturer specs are often 'fluffed' by the marketing division to the point that all they are is 'opinion' too!

What matters most is an ability to explain your 'opinion'. Simply stating it (as if it were simply a fact) is of little value to any reader. This thread has a good example of opinion (about the 'realism' of the sax samples of Korg vs. Yamaha) that some don't explain, and some do. I don't, in a fairness, have much interest in anyone's opinion, if that is all there is. What I want to read about is HOW you come to that conclusion... The process of explaining it is FAR more interesting than the simple FACT (OK, opinion ).

I don't mind contrary opinions at all (just don't expect me to agree all the time!), I just hate it when they come without reason and explanation...

"I like Yamaha". "I like Korg". "I like Roland"... BORING

Tell me WHY.....

Hi diki,
thank you for the info.
I still have an old win98 laptop with a serial port, so I may just go thru my software & try & resurrect my old cubase.
I'm fairly certain it's the one I used to run it on.

best wishes
rikki

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Diki:
[B]

One thing I do enjoy on the S900 vs the PA800 is that when you push and ending while using the multipads the songs ends as prescribed......vs the PA800 although it has better Pads they dont "Sync" at songs end properly and continue to play for one more measure or so & that's not good & needs to be fixed.

That's true on the PA1x Pro as well, and yes, it does need to be fixed.

chas

You always have to remember to hit the PAD stop while the ending is playing or its will play an extra measure....UNACCEPTABLE!!
maybe in future Os updates..I cant believe that Korg Design engineers overlooked this...& other things also before releasing it.

Hi Chas & Zuki,
you'll give me a swollen head, & my halo won't fit any longer haahaa.

best wishes
Rikki

I'm a Cubase addict too. I'm a power user of C4 for the Intel Mac, but I'm not sure I can find how to do as you've described. For some reason after VST, Steinberg omitted certain minor features in the new SX series.

Good to meet another Tyros 2 / Cubase user!

The continuation of the pads is sometimes good when using an ending as a 'fill', the kind of stuff I do all the time. Use those endings and intros as fills - works great.

Try menu bar MIDI>Functions>Pedals to Note Length

BTW, I am a G70/Cubase user, but you'll have to pardon me for THAT gaff!

I tried early SX versions of Cubase, they were an embarrassment compared to VST5. And now C4 seems stuck in perpetual hotfix hell. I know it's better for audio, but I still use Cubase primarily for pre-production, so I am happy with VST5.2pb on my old Mac. OS9, OMS, all that old stuff. It's bombproof, and my Midex3 works great (can't say that about SX/OSX). Sometimes less is more...

Aah, figured it was too good to be true ... I have yet to find a T2, C4 user to share my ups and downs with...

But C4 is pretty stable. I waited more than a year before I bought it, and haven't had any problems -- and I'm working on very intensive projects.

Chony

Is that command there in C4?

It is on LE and SX1

Hard to believe that after reading the Steinberg Cubase forum since C4 came out

You must be one of the lucky ones...

The problem with the Steinberg forum is that it is not a community. People only come there to post their problems...

I've had SX2, SX3 and now C4, and haven't run into any major issues that couldn't be resolved.