Now there is a great post....thanx Dan

Bull... Time won't tell. Ketron could say RIGHT NOW

This is no more a secret to Ketron than whether it has USB1 or USB2. No conjecture involved... other than from us while we wait, and wait, and wait for an answer from Ketron.

Want the conjecture to stop? ANSWER THE BLOODY QUESTION.

Simple as that.

And I am tired of all the redundant evasion of the question.

We get it, Dan.... YOU DON'T KNOW.

But I wasn't really asking you. I was asking Ketron. AJ, or anyone who knows. Not you...

[This message has been edited by Diki (edited 01-22-2009).]

Well he did answer the question it is you who is choosing not to believe the answer. Recording all variations may not be the way that Ketron gets the audio tracks of the Audia to recognize extentions of chords.

to the genesys

You are correct (above)!! But unfortunatly, I can't say much more on this (nor how we did it).

AJ

I had a feeling that not all chords were recorded,

i guess it's something like individual notes are recorded,
and then triggered,
combined as per chord played
then chord plays, perhaps???

so it works exactly like midi,
but instead of trigerring a midi note,
it triggers the audio corresponding to that note or those notes...

DIKI

You have the venerable unrivaled G70. Why would you even care this much about another Arranger.

[This message has been edited by Kingfrog (edited 01-22-2009).]

Uh, that doesn't make much sense to me. That sounds like a garden variety sampler. That's not "exactly like midi", that IS midi. Plus, where does the 'audio loop' come in? This just sounds like describing the sound source for an individual note. I thought the whole concept of an 'arranger' was that a specific chord would trigger a (in the case of the Audya) pre-recorded audio loop (of up to 'X' bars). Am I missing something here? I could be. I'm not that bright.

chas

Maybe they use loops where applicable, and individial notes or slices elsewhere:

1) Drums use loops: you can't (I mean don't need) to transpose, there are no chords etc.

2) Accompaniment uses individual notes to "assemble" a chord, avoiding the need to record multiple loops per style/variation, as AJ stated.

One way to achieve this would be to use a real guitarist to record both the audio and the midi events (via a midi converter soemthing). Say we record someone play a chord (say C), over a period of time, some measures, over some different positions on the guitar, (say 4 positions, from lower to higher)

We get the midi notes that capture all the individual micro timings and nuances of his playing (what makes the playing "human"), and store it somewhere.

Then we get the audio and "slice" it horizontally, over time, into individual notes (C and E and G) we now have a set 3 different samples, multiplied by 4 positions, 12 samples on total, in 4 sets. So if we manage to get enough sets, don't we have the ability to play a D (DFA) just by playing the original "C set" but like (Note 1=2 semitones higher - Note2=1 semitone higher - Note 3=2 semitones higher?

The "feel" of the timing will be there, because that is what we captured with the original midi track, and I think that we will also capture the feel of 3 notes struck together and "belonging" together instead of 3 separate notes "joined" by a traditional ROMpler. And maybe we don't have to retrigger notes in a late chord press, at least in a similar chord because while playing a C and say change to a Cm, we just have to "leave" sets 1 and 3 as they are and transpose the 2nd stream 1 semitone down. Kind of hard to notice in a busy part.

Of course, I don't know one end of the guitar from the other, so this thing might not apply in reality, feel free to say so, or expand the theory.

Congratulate or torch me,
Theodore