In my never ending quest to find the perfect keyboard I'm considering a Tyros3. I say that in jest we all know that perfect board hasn't been built yet, but I'm like what I hear on the Tyros3.

I'm not totally sold on a Tyros3, but am considering the purchase of one. I know these topics usually bring up some interesting debate and comments so...........what do you think?

Hi Stephen, how could you bear to lose those extra keys you enjoy on the Pa2XPro? Certainly wait until after you've worked with the new OS 2.0 for a while; there look like there will be some great sounds coming with the release that will compare well to the T3.

With my SongBook now set up for about 65% of my repertoire, I could only ever consider a T3 or other keyboard if it had a similar feature.

Graham

Hi Stephen,
As you know, my T3 will be delivered today. I am not one to jump up and down with unnecessary excitment so I will hold off my opinion until I feel comfortable enough to take it on my first gig. About the 76 key thing - I would enjoy turning off all the "gadgets" and just playing piano once in a while. Unfortunately, being nearly 70 years old I have to be careful about weight of my keyboards. I had to sell my Korg PA1X because it was just to heavy for me to handle. My feeling about all of this is simple - if you really use your keyboard much like you would play a piano than the 76 keys would be really nice. On the other hand if you are an "arranger" type player than I doubt it really makes that much difference. I still own a piano and an organ but seldom play either anymore. I will provide a true and accurate "review" of my new T3 but not until I have time to give it a good workout and feel like I know what I am saying.

Best of luck with your decision.

Hammer

.. must be nice .

t.

Just got another call, might only have 1 left this weekend.

Is that what they call high pressure sales? LOL

Steven congratulations on your new TYROS 3....send me some songs when you get comfy with OK?

dp

Donny, it's not a done deal yet. I should have posted in my original as Graham pointed out I will be waiting for Korg to release OS2. Rumor has it, that it could be as soon as October 19th, but I'm not betting on that date. If I do make the move I will send you some mp3s.

Having used the PA2x Pro for four months, I fell I gave it a fair shot and I decided to sell it and buy the Tyros 3. For the subjective reason of "sound". Regardless of bells and whistles the end result is the sound.

Since I don't use arrangers live I found I did not need the dual sequencers, Low Impedance mike input, on board harmonizer, motorized screen, 76 keys. I did not like the button feel (same as my old Triton)or the wobbly sliders. I did like the styles but the after market availability of them were practically non existent unless you like to create Arabian music.

The manual is War and Peace which can be a good thing as far as features go. But I found I spent more time reading than creating. IN the end I missed the polish of the Yamaha CD like mixes. I played the Yamaha T2 by day at work and the Korg by night at hone and always preferred the Yamaha sounds.

When the T3 was announced and I began to see the specs it became a no brainer to sell the PA2x and take a $400 loss (which I felt was worth $100 month to use anyway).

AS far as the T3 goes. It's a huge leap from the T2 in my opinion from the built in hard drive to the SA2 voices, revamped EFX engine,

The manual is 1/4 even the P50 we have in the store!! The Direct Internet connection is huge for us because we can connect from the keyboard through the LAN port and download any song of style we need. 61 keys is not a deal breaker as we have an RD700 MIDIed to it for a full 88 key weighted controller.

It interfaces with Sonar well (although IM waiting for someone to write an INS file to be able to change patches from the software.

Many do NOT like the polish of the Yamaha and prefer the grit of the Korg. Thats a personal choice. I use it for recording and in that regard it saves a lot of "mastering" time. The inserts are nice if one wants to use an external effects unit as well as seperate outputs. The buttons "in play" for any given set up are lit up and LARGE. The ergonomics is better having the octave keys above the mod wheels and the smooooth sliders right under the screen which is akin to any good computer TFT LCD screen.

You really have to work with one and make your own choice. The sounds ARE different. Yamaha had thousands more styles available. Some will say Korg is better others will prefer Yamaha, That should not be of concern. What YOU hear is the final word.

IF I could pick up a banged up PA800 for less than a grand, I would. But even though I can buy either board 10% less than dealer cost being a retail employee I still would choose the more expensive Yamaha.

I can say this, for my use there is nothing I miss about the PA2x for studio use.
All that said if you intend on using just one keyboard in a OMB live situation the Korg wins hands down.



[This message has been edited by Kingfrog (edited 10-15-2008).]

If I might add something to what you said. In my opinion even arranger type players should welcome and benefit from the extra 15 keys i.e. (76 vs. 61) because the extra keys allows extra available space for split points and even the inclusion of additional split points without being nearly as cramped as you would be on a 61 key arranger. 76 keys is beneficial for other voices besides just piano too, plus you end up not using the Octave switch nearly as much as you would on a 61 key board. 61 keys are fine for Organs but when you again consider setting up split points 76 keys would be more desirable in my opinion - especially if you use split points quite a bit and want to have more control and freedom, which 76 keys would allow you to do.

Weight is a big factor for many people but manufacturers are finally addressing this issue and you can now get a 76 key totl arranger today that registers under 40 lbs. Case in point is the Korg Pa2XPRO 76 key at 39.68 lbs/18 kg, whereas your former Pa1X 61 key weighs in at 48.5 lbs / 22 kg. The Pa1X has speakers though, of course, but the main point is the Pa2XPRO has 76 keys and weighs under 40 lbs.

I wouldn't be surprised within the next 3 to 5 years manufacturers will even further reduce the weight on their 76 key totl arrangers to around 30-35 lbs and still build them like a tank. With lighter and stronger composites becoming available, and becoming a viable option for manufacturers to use them, I think we will continue to see a decrease in weight on arrangers and workstations alike in the coming days and years ahead.

Best,
Mike

I guess my take is that I don't WANT to have to use two keyboards, one for arranger, one for piano. Why not simply combine the two, and save yourself a fortune!

If all you are is a pianist, well, that's all you need. But a true 'keyboard player' needs to do it ALL... whatever they want, whenever they want, with as little compromise as possible.

I admit that, simply as a sound source and as a pure arranger, the T3 has a lot going for it. I might even get one if it had a 76. But when my clients, or the band I am in need a full(ish!) piano part, I can't exactly say 'sorry guys, this thing isn't big enough!'.

Conversely, If they need tracks or automatic backing, I can't turn round and say 'sorry, this is just a piano, it won't do drums and bass!'

Perhaps not owning or working at a music store makes me a bit more penny-conscious than some around here, but cartage is getting more expensive, gigs are getting rarer, and anything that interferes with my versatility has got to GO...

BTW, Kingfrog, nice studio... but I'd think carefully about getting some better nearfields! A $5k+ keyboard rig through a $200 a PAIR monitors?!

Or maybe there's something out of frame I can't see?

Don't Do It!!!
If you do not sing ... Maybe?? But if you do the Pa2x is Nirvana!! Compared to what is out there right now. That is the main reason I will not give up the Korg!
Also Midi Files .. The Yamaha is ... well let me be kind ... Average!
As you stated in your post "there is no perfect arranger".
I am verY confident the 2.0 upgrade will solve the "SA" difference and give the advantage back to the Pa2x.

[This message has been edited by JCkeeys (edited 10-15-2008).]

As an owner of both the T3 and Pa2x:

-If you want good right hand sounds, use the T3.
-If you want good drums and punch for your dance music, stick with the Pa2x.
-If you want to save money, get the T2, and you'll get 97% of the T3 features, at half the price.

If you want great 3rd party support, and oodles of styles, registrations and pads, you can't go wrong with Yamaha, Steve...of course, you know that already.

Ian

Thanks everyone for your feedback. A number of you also called or e-mailed me with your thoughts. I appreciate the support, thank you.

So where am I at, probably the same place I was at before posting. Some of you may have heard of the "Ben Franklin Balance Sheet" You list all the pros and cons of 2 products you're comparing add the pros/cons up and the one with the most points in the pros dept wins. It's a dead heat right now. eek! So.............I've got 2 things before making a decision. The first is to get my butt to Frankieve's store and demo the T3. With my schedule that won't be for a couple of weeks. I also want to access OS2 from Korg then..........

Steve,

Why choose, GET BOTH!!!! You can help yourself and the economy at the same time! LOL

Ask yourself; "Why am I even considering the T3" to get to the root of the problems with the Pa2. And if those problems cannot be fixed, then you have your answer.

I will sit by and watch vicariously through your decision as it's one that I am also curious about! LOL Your the guinea pig on this one big guy!!!

Regards,
Al

So there you have it,
ROLAND, KORG, YAMAHA, KETRON,

all equally good

doesnt that make it easier?

Mike and Diki,
Great points. It all boils down to what a player needs from his keyboard. I seldom use more than one split point so the 61 keys are just fine for me. But I agree totally that if I was going to setup multiple split points then the 76 keys would certainly help. Still, for me the weight is a big factor - don't forget the extra weight of the larger case too. Been there done that. The PA1X plus the wheeled gator case damn near killed me.

Guys, I got my T3 yesterday and I have to say it is an absolutely awesome keyboard with some of the best sounds I have heard coming from any keyboard. I am glad I got it.

Hammer

Al, great idea As a patriotic American it is my civic duty to help the economy and what better way than owning both!! BTW our friend TonyMads also suggested a T3 purchase would be good for the economy. Always wanted to be a guinea pig

Well, at least you're helping the Japanese economy...

Hey Chony,

I got my Tyros3 two days ago. I've also had a Tyros2 for two years. After playing T3 for two evenings, and then playing my T2 today I think you underestimate the difference between the two keyboards. The sound quality and voices......not just the SA2 ones.......are so much better on T3. There is certainly more than a 3% difference between a T2 and T3. The newest technologies bring better voices with each model. Anyone who is thinking of buying a new T2 should at least play a T3 in person first. I really think they would be unhappy with T2 after playing a T3. The voice and sound quality is improved that much. The key feel is better on Tyros3. For me, the improved sounds are why I always upgrade to new boards every few years. Mind you......I was one of those skeptics who couldn't fathom how T3 could sound that much better than T2. Playing my T2 the past few weeks, and reading the posts of the earlier T3 receivers, I still was wondering if all that money was well spent on T3. I can tell you that after doing side by side comparisons thru the same sound system, I know I made the right decision and will be very happy with Tyros3! -charley

LOL REFERENCE Monitors.....

I understand you "confusion" regarding a $4000 keyboard and a pair of old Alesis Monitor Ones. I have the same confusion when I learn of people paying $16,000 for a PMC BB5 Center speaker in a home surround system that was mixed on $3000 Genelecs!!!

They are what I have been using for many many years, I "know" them much like some producers "know" and carry around the old Yamaha NSMs to this day with (tissue on the tweeters.)to do mixes on.

(I do have a powered sub)

I think people need to understand what "reference monitors" mean,

When you first get a pair of monitors I don;t care if they are Klipsch, Radio Shack or Genelec you still need a reference when you first buy them or one may over compensate for the speaker's deficiencies to one's own ear. There are no "perfect" reference monitors. There are more "accurate" monitors but when one gets used to a pair they know the idiosyncrasies.

I used to use CDs recorded by whomever is closest to the type of song I am working on and track them for A/B next to my mix. I would ensure the "edge" frequencies match up with my mix. Its easy to over or under compensate for EQ on any monitor without the reference of a CD recorded in a $100,000 Studio.

But Over the years I got to know them and know where the frequencies should sit to sound ok on any system. Getting a pair of Genelecs or Any other monitor system now would have me starting all over to find thier reference. Im am to accustomed to the Alesis. In fact years ago, I did buy a pair of Mackie 824s years ago and EQ'd the Alesis to match them and them brought the 824s back. Now working in a Music store I can get any monitors at very good prices but I "know" these guys and they still do the job.

The bottom line is if you "know" your monitors and learned using references from professional recordings you can mix on any speakers. I have already replaced the tweeters twice on them (and have a few extras in my closet). I don't want to have to learn a new set of monitors.

Besides one of the beauties of the Yamaha Arrangers is they need very little EQ tweaking. They already sound like a CD much to many people's chagrin.

What you don't see is the Bose LT1 System my wife uses for her mixes (and the small PA speaker behind the Alesis as well) She prefers mixing on the systems she will actually use.




[This message has been edited by Kingfrog (edited 10-17-2008).]

I agree totally with your first two assertions. But definitely not your last. The T3 is far more than an upgrade. The PSR900 is closer to the T2 and a mile away from the T3. More sounds, Better sounds, whole new EFX engine, Correct guitar chording, real time slider controllers, SA2 controllers, I would say the PSR900 is 2/3 the T2 and 1/6 the T3. Then you have the capability of additional Voice Packs from Yamaha..I had the PA2x. If I wanted to play live I would have kept it, It had too many features I would never use and those it had that were important to me, the T2 did not have the T3 now has,

Dig a little deeper...



[This message has been edited by Kingfrog (edited 10-16-2008).]

"John Leventhal did the bulk of his mixing on a pair of small Radio Shack speakers. (Leventhal, a famous New York City-based guitarist, songwriter, and engineer, made his mark by producing Shawn Colvin's acclaimed 1989 record, Steady On.) Leventhal owns both a pair of Yamaha NS-10Ms and a pair of Radio Shack Optimus 7s. But he prefers the latter."

Mixing depends a great deal on the person doing the mixing. The speakers are only one part of the equation and as you can see from the above example, not necessarily the most important part either.

Best,
Mike

Exactly. The key word is "reference" monitors which seems like an oxymoron as no monitors are truly an accurate representation of the full frequency of a given piece of music without a Sub woofer yet many very good mixes came from and still come from those pesky Yamaha NSMs the Alesis (and others) used as a reference in their designs..

No monitors I know of with 8" drivers on the bottom will project 40hz physically into one's chest like a sub, Yet many created great mixes on them.

Hey Kingfrog,
I noticed we share a Strat VG in common. Do you like it, love it, or something else? MIne has a rosewood neck ( my fav ) and I love the s/b body too. I really like the fact that I have a tone control for the 5th position on the p/us.
Your thoughts overall?
I like it about 25% better than a regular Strat. I like the detunings better than the different sounds....would rather have a piezo picup than the models they gave us.

I guess I'm more of the 'I want flat!' school of mixing. Sure, I've used NS-10's in the studio, but those were primarily to reveal flaws, and have a studio to studio transportability of mixes thing. I have to confess that, when I'm noodling at home, I don't want to have to 'imagine' what it would sound like on a full system, I just want to hear it that way!

But thanks for pointing out the powered sub... That probably goes a long way to rectifying the Monitor One's abysmal bass response!

My 824's are the ultimate arranger accessory! And still 1/3 the cost of the arranger.

BTW, does your wife run a mono Bose system, or does she go stereo for the piano? Perhaps she prefers the Roland's because they collapse to mono a bit more graciously than Yamaha do?

Worth the additional money vs Regular American for sure. But now that I have great guitars and distortion EFX on the T3 I am using it less and less. I may cash it out for $1100 and use the money to buy something i will use more. Yep the T3 acoustic is better than the Modeled Start. The 12 Srring is nice though.

I can certainly understand wanting to hear as accurate mix as possible. I just don't know what that is. SO I have to depend on reference recordings generated in a real studio using top notch gear. Between the Bose 701s in our Surround System, the car units and various boom boxes we can get a good balanced sound.

My wife uses a single Bose system. She (and I ) feel the clarity and convenience of the system more than makes up for thr lack of Stereo spread.

As far as the Roland Digitals she has always preferred the RD700 and the previous incarnation over the Yamaha. (AFTER she sold her CP70 the Rolands were not only much lighter but she likes the Piano sound and is and has become a reference against which all others are judged. The stereo collapse is not a factor. All sound generators have mono outs now which does not adversely affect the stereo phasing issues.

Whether the collapse of a stereo signal is done inside the keyboard, or outside in a mixer, the result should be exactly the same. If there are phasing issues from doing so (it's VERY tricky to get a stereo recording of a source to sound identical to it's mono version).

That's why good mixing boards always have a 'MONO' button on them, so you can check this constantly... Piano is one of the most complex sound sources, difficult to mike well and remain phase accurate over it's entire range (the mike to source ratios change as you go from low to high). Just about everything changes in SOME way with stereo piano sample sets, but some ARE better than others...

One of the things I like to do with the P. Creek sound files is play them mono. Admittedly, it's a 192kbps MP3, so you get a bit of smear compared to a WAV, but it is still possible to hear the likely consequence of collapsing that big, gorgeous grand down to mono and putting it through a keyboard amp or mono PA.

You would be surprised at how few of them survive this well....

While I agree with all of you assertions, I have to conclude the avg Joe Plumber in the audience could not tell the difference in the slight phasing issues and delicacies of the piano sounds.

ITs like spending hours tweaking one channel of audio on a 36 track project. WE listen with microscopic ears in the studio where as the public devours that passing moment without even making a judgment in a high signal to noise ratio environment and could care less about a roll of of 2.5 db of 5 k on a cymbal at a Q of .1hz...... hs

That's not to claim it does not make a difference in the overall mix quality and feel. But 120 less little dabs on Van Goghs Sunflowers would not have changed the value one iota.

Put that on MP3's and what's the point?

Excactly

DITTO!

Gary

Joe Plumber cannot tell WHY he hears the difference, but he knows 'something' is wrong, or better, or worse.

Until he becomes Joe Sixpack, that is...

Look, it's a well discussed issue even here at SZ, not exactly brimming with 'golden ear' studio types (of which I am not one, either ). The sound of the Yamaha pianos changes quite considerable between mono and stereo. It gets 'pinched', or 'hollow', or to the more knowledgeable, 'phase-y'.

You don't need a degree in acoustics to HEAR it.

But you might need one to 'excuse' it away...

The Yamaha pianos do sound the worst in mono...so that means that the sample is at fault, and not the system. 99% of everything else I throw into the L1 is amazing. I tweaked a piano to sound pretty good in mono, but i mainly use EPs anyway, so it's never been much of an issue for me. I'm a Rhodes man .... not a piano player.
(Thanx again, Russ!!!!!!)

YEah I have heard the "don't know why but it's there argument a thousand times in 40 years!! LOL since the vinyl days It's a great rationalization for those who spend $16000 on Speakers too. "That something one cannot explain" I CAN expain it...Imagination. The adjectives when used in audio like sparkle, hollow, phasy? (a new one) make no sense. Tell a monitor sound mixer in a 3000+ seat venue during a sound check you want more "Sparkle" or it sounds "phasy" and watch his face.....I have seen the first example for real....The look is priceless.

Despite the vast expertise on keyboard Arrangers here, I guess i am the only person who advocates mixing for live use done using the Bose LT system (or any System that will be used fpr performanc) Unless the comparison was clearly noticeably inferior, I would put the Phasyish Yamaha mono sound in the category of Yamaha NSMs are not "state of the art" so they cannot possibly create a Platinum worthy mix and or $16,000 BB5s are noticably 8ox better than Paradiams...... or the PA2x sounds better then the Yamaha...or vice-versa...Sound at the levels of these arrangers and the venues they are used in are subjective at best. Specs are not. I don;t care if 12,000 fanatics tell me the Yamaha creates a lesser stereo field unless audience member comes up and says hey man you should have kept that thing in stereo,its way out of phase......I have to take adjectives like "phasy" with a grain of salt. I have heard phase issues first hand, and they are not not subtle. Especially in the Stereo miking world.

Another Bose system at cost would not stretch our budget but we see no need for it and it certainly won't bring anymore work for my wife. There are only 7 days in a week. She chooses to work four.

Besides Stereo in a 6400 SF venue or worse outside, is of no benefit to anyone but the third or less in the very center sweet spot where both driver frequencies tag both their ears at the same time. Much of the time they are dancing or chatting. or doing the Macarena...LOL

Then again the uses a Roland RD and Previa 320 on salty beach or Casino boat gigs. There are mono pianos on the Yamaha gear that would suffice if the problem is that bad,For the most part the average lkistner cannot tell a Fender Rhodes from a Wurlitzer 200....Acoustic pianos would be much harder some REAL and expensive wood and string pianis sound different....




[This message has been edited by Kingfrog (edited 10-19-2008).]

Concerning phasey, I've never tried mixing sereo down to mono - seems like sacrilege to me -lol!
But phasey could make sense:
The Ty2 Live Grand is made up of 2 voice elements - very similar/seemingly identical to my ears when sounded separately- except one is panned hard left, the other hard right in normal use.

To my simple mind if you coalesce these elements into 1 mono channel you have 2 "identical" waveforms superimposed - hence an opportunity for phasing - noticed by some, hence the phasey comments??.
John


[This message has been edited by jwyvern (edited 10-19-2008).]

IF they were exact copies you would have cancellation. That's how vocal eliminators work revers the phases and add them together. Now there may be some frequencies of opposite phase that may cancel each other but but if that was a real issue there are plenty of Mono piano patches to use. The audience would be no wiser. They hear Piano.99.9% don't have a reference to determine what kind or quality unless its really out of bed, No Digital Piano (and lately GM piano) is that far off the make for most Joe Plumber listeners. And its THOSE people we are hired to play for. Not a room full of Music professors and Recording Engineers.

BTW to the guy who mentioned the Radio Shack Optimus 7's . For a long time they were considered great speakers to mix on,

The Lowly MDR7506 head phones are STILL industry standard headphones. I just bought a new pair after 20 years with the old ones. I took the drivers out and put them in my Motorcycle Helmet. They still work well




[This message has been edited by Kingfrog (edited 10-19-2008).]