OK, since i feel this Compression RAM Issue is VERY important, i started a new thread on it.

On the next post you'll see a bunch of talk already on it (copied from the Leezone AUDYA review thread.)

lets get to the bottom of this :-)

leezone
Member posted 02-24-2009 02:18 PM

Memory Issues:
The one thing that was discussed was the miniscule 64MB of Ram. I think this is an issue which Ketron has to explain a bit better. I will attempt to explain this a bit…
From what AJ said and from what I understood, the AUDYA compresses your samples, or what’s loaded to keyboard. It compresses it NOT by degrading the sound as does an mp3, but rather it kind of .ZIPs it, but with a Ketron proprietary compressing program. I believe it compresses somewhere near 12x or maybe more. So lets say you want to load samples which total 62MB (which normally would fill up AUDYA’s entire RAM),,,, In reality AUDYA would compress the 62MB to let’s say about 5MB. So in reality what we think is 64MB of RAM is actually about 768MB. (assuming compression of 12x)
AJ or anyone, PLEASE do correct me if I’m wrong. But that’s how I understood it, and that’s how I can best explain it. I do not want to assume or put out false info on this so please do correct me if I’m wrong.
It just seems that IF this is how AUDYA handles the memory, Ketron should really think about HAMMERING this into our brains and making everyone aware of this. Promote this Compression feature… You can say something like it has 64MB but compression gives you the equivalent of roughly xxx MB
AJ, please do explain this a bit further as I am a bit uncertain how it works…
________________________________________

mrdave
Member posted 02-24-2009 03:51 PM

quote:

Originally posted by leezone:
...the AUDYA compresses your samples, or what’s loaded to keyboard....

What I can say is that when I tried the Audya and loaded samples, they occupied their actual size in RAM, i.e. loading the stereo grand occupied around 36MB of ram (the size of the file).
___________________________________________

leezone
Member posted 02-24-2009 04:58 PM

mrdave,
i am unsure as to exactly how this whole compression thing works, how it's used,
whether it's compressed to hard drive and then expanded to RAM, which would be useless, SO...
perhaps AJ can explain it in more detail...
___________________________________________

Ketron_AJ
Moderator posted 02-24-2009 07:19 PM

Hard Drive/USB ------> Compressed [12:1] ------> Audya RAM.
So files (when loaded) are "zipped" into RAM. When reading from RAM to Sound card ----> Unzipped for processing/use. Display shows actual file size though.
Hope this helps.
AJ
PS: Leezone - good explanation. I figured someone else would be better off explaining so more understand, than me!
___________________________________________

mrdave
Member posted 02-25-2009 04:51 AM

quote:

Originally posted by Ketron_AJ:
Hard Drive/USB ------> Compressed [12:1] ------> Audya RAM.


So yuo're telling me that the 36MB Stereo piano instrument when loaded into RAM will take only 3MB? PLEASE.. don't be fool... this is somewhat not possible for at least 2 reasons:
1) Lossless audio compression at 12:1 is pratically impossible, you can achieve 12:1 ratio with lossy compression algorithms like MP3 but you'll have a noticeable loss of quality in sound at these high ratios.
2) If this would be the case I could load many supersolo sounds on audya's RAM, instead when loading big files (like the stereo piano) I can barely load 2 or 3 of them before getting out of memory. I tried this on the Audya I had for experiments, so I know what I say...
Note that I tried os ver 1.0, but I don't think they added this "compression" to 1.1.
Do you want to prove it? Simple: make a video where you load the following 3 sounds together:
SUPERSOLO/STEREO_GRAND.INS
SUPERSOLO/POP_ALTO.INS
SUPERSOLO/POP_TENOR.INS
These together are around 96MB in size, if they would be compressed at 12:1 they would take 8MB and could be loaded together.
___________________________________________

Irishacts
Member posted 02-25-2009 05:34 AM

quote:

So yuo're telling me that the 36MB Stereo piano instrument when loaded into RAM will take only 3MB? PLEASE.. don't be fool... this is somewhat not possible for at least 2 reasons:

AJ said above that they are zipping the files. Which means you will likely fit about 70MB of data into the 64MB chip.
Regards.
James.
___________________________________________

trident
Member posted 02-25-2009 05:45 AM

quote:

Originally posted by Irishacts:
AJ said above that they are zipping the files. Which means you will likely fit about 70MB of data into the 64MB chip.
Regards.
James.

The word "zipped" was in quotes... there is a compression scheme called flac that looslesly (sic) compresses audio files (cd ripped audio etc) at about 1/2 their original size, but consumes a lot of processing power. You probably know it better than me.
12:1 ratio? Well, let's see it.
Onthe other hand, a "simple" waveform, such as a sax or piano would be more "compression friendly" than a full, complex song, right?
___________________________________________

LIONSTRACS
Member posted 02-25-2009 06

quote:

Originally posted by Irishacts:
AJ said above that they are zipping the files. Which means you will likely fit about 70MB of data into the 64MB chip.
Regards.
James.
[This message has been edited by Irishacts (edited 02-25-2009).]

yes James, this is about the correct calculation.
I'm working right now for programming the Dream 64Mb flash chip for the new MS too: http://www.lionstracs.com/demo/flashprogramm.JPG
so, I know well how the dream chip work from many years.
The Dream DSP allow to load only compiled soundsfiles.INS or complete binary bank files but NOT raw data like wav.
For playng the sounds in realtime must be compiled first and loaded in RAM/Flash, no compression is allowed.
For create a clean 64Mb file that can fit in one 64mb flash, I have used about 71Mb or raw wav/pcm data and during the compiler wil be optimized/compressed to get a 64Mb binary file.
Conclusion: the file that you have to load on DSP is already optimized and the RAM used wil be the same as the file size loaded.
___________________________________________


[This message has been edited by leezone (edited 02-25-2009).]

what i want to know is if the AUDYA can load 768MB into RAM...

it would seem so, if the AUDYA compresses 12x right? 768/12= 64MB

these 2 posts below seem to contradict...
maybe someone can explain it better???

posted by LIONSTRACS
"Conclusion: the file that you have to load on DSP is already optimized and the RAM used will be the same as the file size loaded."

posted by Ketron_AJ
"Hard Drive/USB ------> Compressed [12:1] ------> Audya RAM."

Hey, maybe they have made a miracle with a special firmware, I really dont know how they can compress audio data 12:1 and play by midi.
this is all what I know from this DSP manufacture and drivers.

Just search in google: ATSAM9707 and ATSAM9708
9707= max ram size: 64Mbytes
9708= max ram size :256Mbytes

MAYBE we are totally wrong again...AJ told that thet have used a PC Pentium 4or dualcore with 1Gb RAM or more, remember?
Ask in AJ, for sure he know better.

what i do know is that according to AJ, Ketron uses a proprietary compression algorithm, software or whatever its called, which compresses somewhere around 12x

how it works, how it benefits loading samples to RAM, how many MB can actually be loaded/used is still a mystery... at least to me

Hi leezone.



I know AJ works for KETRON and the above quote was extracted from his post, but I have serious doubts that this is possible or even what he meant. There seems to be a lanuage barrier here as something so simple is not being explained.

I've never heard of lossless compression even remotely close to 12:1

If FLAC is what was used as was mentioned in that other thread, then you would be lucky to even reach 2:1

FLAC will only give you at best 25MB of more memory.

Ketron need to explain exactly what is happening here and just how much data you can load into the Audya.

Regards.
James.

Yes, FLAC is not optimal in many ways...

James, does my thought that "a simple piano or sax waveform, would compress better than a complex song" have any logic? If yes, maybe that is the way they do it.

Of course all of the thread is based on the condition "we at Ketron managed to compress losslesly on a 12:1 ratio", being true.

(true as in Boolean logic, I am not implyying they lie to us)

Domenico is right, you can load .INS files only, and it will take on RAM the size of the .INS file. So, since these files are uncompressed audio they are loaded as is.
Here is the waveform of the stereo piano.ins loaded as raw pcm data, you can see it's totally uncompressed (playing it I think it's sampled at 22050Hz, since if I play it at higher sampling frequency notes sounds too high).
http://www.4shared.com/file/89421025/c363c0d/wave.html

maybe someone with an AUDYA can try loading let's say 300MB of WAV samples and see if AUDYA can accept it, compress, load & play all samples...

these 300MB should compress to less than 30MB i assume?

Does anyone take into consideration that most arranger players have no idea what your talking about? Most people just want to play OOTB...I never load anything .



[This message has been edited by Dnj (edited 02-25-2009).]

Yeah sure, but then again I'm caught with the thinking that at 16bit recording at 44.1Khz still contains 44100 samples of 16 bit information regardless of what the actual recording is. So if it's lossless, how do they manage to retain all that data and achieve 12:1

I'm actually looking forward to finding out the answer to this one to be honest. It's quite an interesting subject.

Regards.
James.

posted by James:
"So if it's lossless, how do they manage to retain all that data and achieve 12:1

I'm actually looking forward to finding out the answer to this one to be honest. It's quite an interesting subject."


I too want to know.
And if it is 12:1 compression meaning you can load/use 500MB or more why not ADVERTIZE the CRAP out of it?
We'll see....

64 MB looks like a design flaw with the current memmory pricess, now matter how much compression there is....

[This message has been edited by Bachus (edited 02-25-2009).]

I think this machine will take more then 64MB but not yet, i dont think they will leave a
5000$ machine with only 64MB...it doesnt look right to me and there might be something.

only Ketron knows,

AJ did not say it would ever be more than 64MB, so that has me worried.

so we must wait and find out how this "compression" really works

with today's memory prices so low,

i think the AUDYA should have a minimum of 1GB of RAM

but maybe because the AUDYA has been a few years in the making it's only 64MB

BEST way would have been to make it expandable as is EVERY computer, give us some EMPTY slots to expand

Sorry, could someone post the relevant extract of the Manual or specs that can tell us if the Audya IS expandable?

Seriously, I want to know.

I'm afraid that, after the misinformation, half-truths and just plain outright erroneousness that accompanied the 'Guitar loop' fiasco from AJ and Nedim, why anyone is taking these so-called 'stats' from these guys at any kind of face value defeats me...

12-1 lossless compression, as Irishacts points out, is utter rubbish. If it worked, MP3's would already be history. 12-1 is about the compression reduction of a 128kbps MP3. Not exactly lossless, there...

The problem comes when these salesmen and company representatives are not held accountable for their misinformation. The average arranger user is NOT usually a tech geek, and spreading disinformation and just plain lies (I mean, how else can you look at this?) to gullible older citizens (as so many of us are! ) is, IMO, the hight of predatory behavior. Were it not for James, and Lee, and a few others, you all would be swallowing this bull hook, line and sinker.

If I were AJ, I would be sending my posts to Ketron Italy to get doublechecked for accuracy before posting here. After the guitar loop incident, it might help to actually have the FACTS before posting. Too many more of these gaffs (that invariably err on the side of making the Audya look better than it is - strange coincidence, that ) pretty much destroy any credibility.

Diki,

i was wondering were you were and was awaiting your thoughts on this.

we missed you, or at least i did :-)

Diki, as much as i'd love to believe this 12:1 compression, i too have my doubts.

but i will not say it is or is not so.

time will tell, and the truth will reveal itself soon enough...

Maybe AJ types with an accent...

Who really cares about numbers..wait till the finished product is available and in your hands...If it sounds good, and plays the way it should, forget how it is done or the number game again...

When we have the finished product, and it bugs you,,,jump on AJ and Ted at that time..

Maybe it's just a typo that AJ hasn't corrected, yet?

2-1 lossless compression is pretty much the industry standard for ROM (Roland have used it for years). Having it available for your OWN RAM sounds is novel, though. Any speed up of data loading is good, even though it doesn't improve the 64MB limit for RAM.

Next person that gets a hold of an Audya at a demo (or buys one), I'd be VERY interested to hear how long it takes to load that 64MB into RAM. If it is the order of just a few seconds (and the reports that the Audya does continue playing and working while it loads are correct - these days, I'm unfortunately unable to really trust what these guys ever say) that is still a VERY significant improvement, and might finally make serious sampler use in a typical arranger scenario a reality.

Well, Kingfrog for one..

Numbers, when you are talking about RAM and sampler use, is VERY important. If AJ's post wasn't a typo, and what it is is a fact (sadly, I am unable to believe it) it would revolutionize arranger use, not to mention the Internet, and the entire recorded music industry...

Imagine that MP3's weren't lossy... at the moment, 2-1 is all anyone, anywhere in the entire computing community has managed to squeeze out of lossless audio compression, Audio data, unlike computer data, has very little in the way of redundancy. To remove significant amounts of data, you HAVE to start significantly reducing the fidelity.

Let's put it this way... If Ketron had invented a lossless 12-1 codec, they wouldn't have wasted it on an arranger. They would have launched it on the entire audio world, MP3's would no longer exist, and they would all be billionaires!

File under fiction, I'm afraid...

Chevy, or ANYONE with AUDYA,
can you confirm what is going on with this compression thingy? how much can you really load into RAM?

You'd think that such a simple question is deserving of a simple answer...

You are getting very paranoid, i dont know why
but also remember, AJ also never said that it
wont go over 64MB, he said its only 64MB.

DOWN TO THE BOTTOM, EVERYONE STOP BEING PARANOID. WE ARE GOING OVER THE LIMITS
WITH SOME POSTS IN HERE, ESPECIALLY FEW USERS LIKE LEE, GONNA GET A HEART ATTACK
BRO, LETS WAIT, WE WAITED TILL NOW LETS WAIT FEW MORE WEEKS, MY AUDYA IS COMING,
I EVEN BOUGH A VIDEO CAMERA, WHEN I GET IT I WILL ANSWER YOU EVERY SINGLE QUESTION
WITH A VIDEO RESPONSE, TO ACTUALLY SEE OR HEAR...THATS IT, BE PATIENT, NONE OF YOU GOT
SCREWED BY KETRON, NONE OF YOU PAID 5000$ FOR IT YET, SO STOP CRYING AND WAIT.

[This message has been edited by Nedim (edited 02-27-2009).]

Can I suggest switching to decaf...?

Not me, you can be as Ignorant as you are or want
but you can clearly see the reality in here.

Hi Nedim.

It's not your job to save the day. You don't work for KETRON.

The keyboard has been released already and """""NOBODY"""" including AJ even knows what it real specs are.

Not even the official manual answers any important questions.

I hate saying this but too many things point to a company in trouble and a keyboard being pushed out the door here. There has been no training and no preparation put in place.

Regards.
James.

[This message has been edited by Irishacts (edited 02-28-2009).]

Im with you Nedim,

the official price is not set for Western Countries as yet, and I still believe it will be structured to what the country can afford, makes sense doesn't it, and also until its avaailable and with the new OS, dont be criticle, just be patient, we have waited this long, whats a few weeks

I think everyone can see the reality, Nedim.

Except you. Capitalize all you want. That only makes your ignorance more obvious. How's that Diminished audio loop coming along? Yep... didn't think so. The only one who has demonstrated a complete failure to understand the Audya so far has been you...

AJ/Ketron

can you please elaborate on this "compression" in question?

how many MB can i load at once?

Neither is it your or anyone else's job to down Ketron! So stop acting like children!!!

Henni

i'm just looking for the FACTS...
i wish Ketrom nothing but success...

so how many MB's ?

What freaken facts are we talking about? What freaken reality Dikki? Ok, i am all wrong, i
apologize to everyone in here but ... can ONE of you please tell me that HE paid 5000$ for
the AUDYA, has it at home and its not working properly? Just ONE please???!!! Once we
find Only ONE then we can start from there...please...i am waiting!

[This message has been edited by Nedim (edited 03-01-2009).]

Nedim,

the one fact i'm asking is:
how many MB's can the AUDYA load to RAM?
That's it.

the fact that the AUDYA has not been released to us here in the USA, does not mean that it has not been released in the European market.

does this mean that we will get the AUDYA with 1Gig RAM because they are still working on it, finishing it up?

so we should ALL wait till it's released (here in USA) to find out how much RAM it's capable of handling?

and what is 1, 2, 3, 4, weeks, or 2,3,4 more months gonna do to the AUDYA's already designed hardware?
is it goona change?
some things can change in a few weeks before it's released (here in USA) but NOT the RAM?

why the secrecy with RAM and it's compression capabilities?

are WE, the future AUDYA investors, not worthy or privy of this knowledge???

just by $.02

Nedim posted:
"can ONE of you please tell me that HE paid 5000$ for
the AUDYA, has it at home and its not working properly?"

Nedim, i think i speak for MOST here in saying that we want to know the FACTS BEFORE we spend $5,000 NOT AFTER,
we want to know that the AUDYA is "working properly", or shall i say, that the compression in the AUDYA IS as advertized, or shall i say as previously stated, 12:1
which should equate to approx. 768MB of RAM

Nedim... why not take your own advice, and simply shut up until you have your own Audya..?

You're litany of 'How DARE anyone that hasn't bought an Audya criticize it' is nonsense, unless it is also accompanied by 'How DARE you defend the Audya if you don't have one'...

So far, all your claims of things like 'the audio loops will be fine, there won't be any 'missing chords' yada yada yada have turned out to be completely false (not that you have made the slightest apology for spreading misinformation - there, doesn't that sound better than simply 'lying'? ). Now there's another hanging issue, that you don't have the first idea of what the facts are, but 'blabber' on regardless (your words!). How come it's only US that are supposed to remain silent until we know the facts?

You see, Nedim, actually, it IS our job here at SZ to keep the manufacturers, dealers and representatives honest, and to call 'bull' when we hear claims that are obviously false or grossly exaggerated. Which, sadly, has accompanied the Audya since it's first announcement what is it, about three years ago..? Although audio loops for guitar parts may be new for an arranger (new-ish!) they have been commonplace in the computer world for years. For Audya to claim something that has eluded even the best of software guitar players naturally raises warning flags.

Now we have a ridiculous claim of audio compression that runs counter to anyone with even a hair of common sense and computer experience. And here you are defending it. Is it that you DON'T have any computer experience and common sense, or is it more that you simply don't have a clue what you are talking about, and rather than wait for your Audya to find out the facts, find it easier to simply try to shout down the understandably skeptic..?

The trouble with that is that you would have had to have been right at least ONCE in the past. Which, so far, you haven't. Most of us can recognize a shill when we see one. So before you try to shout down the voices of reality, first of all, realize that most of us here are NOT stupid enough to shell out five grand just to find out what the 'gotchas' are. We want to know them in advance.

And secondly, few of us here work with the dealers or manufacturers, so we are not getting one of these at the discount you are undoubtedly getting. It's all well and good to get something at so low a price that when you decide it's not right for you, you can sell it at no loss, and probably still profit from it. Most of us HAVE to know all the about the thing BEFORE we buy it.

If this hasn't occurred to you yet, it doesn't help your credibility... (or lack thereof)


[This message has been edited by Diki (edited 03-01-2009).]

just wanted to let everyone know that one of the few places the AUDYA is not available
(maybe the only place) is here in the USA.
it is or has been available all over europe.
so i think it's ok to keep asking about this keyboard, as it's been released, just not here
unless of course the keyboard we here in the USA are getting is DIFFERENT from this one (hardware wise)

Thats not true, I've know for a fact that in Denmark Norway Sweden and many other country in eruopa the release date is
late march.

twiceduo,

notice what i said:

one of the FEW places the AUDYA is not available
(MAYBE the only place)

the words FEW and MAYBE were used for a reason,

Friend, i'll repeat again, stop listening to lies, noone in here knows better then AJ and me
where and when is the Audya released and as of now its not oficially released anywhere,
except on their website, nowhere else. I use harsh words cuz it makes me sick to my stomach
how certain people in here are ignorants and liars and how others are naive like hell. Its a bunch
of people having nothing else to do and just talking nonsense in here, nothing else.
As for compression, i dont know about Ratio and numbers, i am stupid but i know for a fact that
Audya loads only 96MB real life Waves into 64 MB Ketron RAM, now you figure out the Ratio.
Yes, you can take 96MB of waves and load into 64MB RAM.
And no, i am not deffending Ketron, it just happened for me to have the opportunity to have more
inside information on Korg and Ketron and i can only share what i am alowed to share.

Nedim,

i guess Portugal and Italy all got the UNOFFICIAL version of the AUDYA.

i would be mad as hell

oh, and as far as being able to load 96mb into 64mb of RAM,
that equates to a 1.5:1 ratio, NOT quite the 12:1 ratio that AJ mentioned

Bro, as i said, i am too stupid for quotations and calculations and numbers, it was never my
thing, all i know is that 64MB on AUDYA equals
96MB real life Wave files.

That leaves it short by 672 MB going on the official word from AJ's and his 12:1

I think he was “slightly” off....lol

I cant speak of AJ, he explained to me today what he meant by 12:1 but i didnt understand.

What did he say to you because your test proves him wrong.

Just repeat back exactly what he said and I'll work it out myself.

Regards.
James.

James, AJ told me about 96MB too, not only me but i cant remember what technically he told me
about the compression Ratio, i dont remember none
of it, he said its 12:1 but not loose, he explained but i am dumb...lol.

Thanks for that.
12:1 = 96MB is mathematically impossible and the two things he is saying are in complete conflict with each other.

Take his 12 and stick a decimal point in between the 1 and the 2 and you get for the first time a realistic figure that mathematically balances perfectly.

My bet is that the compression is at it's worst is 1.2:1 when loading lost of small files, and at it's best 1.5:1 when using longer samples.

And it just so happens 1.5:1 = 96MB which is in line with the test you just did.

lol... could it be that all this was just because AJ thought is was looking at 12 instead of 1.2

Regards.
James.

1.2 or 12
what's the difference? :-)
just a decimal

The largest amount of sample data (uncompressed/regular e.g a wave sample) that you can load into the AUDYA's memory is 96MB.

Trying to explain how this will fit in a 64MB chip and how we do it ... etc will only cause more confusion than understanding.

Hope this answers this question.

AJ

Not good enough AJ, I'm very disappointed in you.

As an official KETRON employee you should have known better than to say the Audya supported 12:1 lossless compression.

What's worse is you don't seem to even understand that you where wrong and are the cause of all the confusion here.

The only good thing here is this is the end of the story now and people can move on.

James.

So what we have is a keyboard technically with 64mb ram. But in theory 96mb useable
All this compression would be unecessary If the audya came with 1gb ram and was expandable as is every computer. I know this is not a computer but it does have a hard drive and CPU.

This freeking blows my mind...Memory is CHEAP today!

A new board and 64 MB of sample RAM...give me a break...my mid 90's Kurzweil K2600 had 128MB back then! I guess Ketron does not think we need to add many of our own samples??

My Korg PA2 has 256MB.

Next question...are the factory samples in ROM or RAM?

AJ???

Lee S.

Geez oh man! So much "babie's mama drama" going on with this unit. Is it out.., is not out..., the plot thickens. Reports say people own it, bought it, have paid for it.., yet the pro reps in the USA (the last place on the planet arrangers are truely seen for their true power and abilities) are speaking for the WHOLE world.

It won't be much longer and ya'll be fighting this one out on Jerry Springer..., or hittin M. Povich for the lie detector test....

I know many of you guys do have some serious and valid questions about this Ketron.., but you gotta admit that this drama is really quite funny when you truely break it down.

Holy Crap! We've got a Roswell conspiracy going on with the Ketron Audya. There are reports and sightings, fear is setting in, government officials are denying it.., those of us who accept the reported sightings and stories can only assume the Audya is "abdcuting people" because those who've got this mystery board aren't talking.

Just a lot of red carpet Hollywood drama I'm waiting for the short film to hit DVD

Irishacts

Where did I state "12:1 lossless compression" - mind you I don't recall using the word 'loossless'?

I was trying to explain how our 'zipper' works to store larger amounts of data on a smaller size chip, but when I found out it's bringing more confussion and less understanding, I decided to use numbers that many will understand.

Hope this explains that.

Thanks,

AJ

The search function is limited on this forum so without going to too much bother, I'll quote you on this one.



And according to Nedim you told him only yesterday too that it was 12:1 as you attempted to explain how it works to him.



This is totally unacceptable for an answer and false advertising. You cannot make up a figure off the top of your head AJ. You work for KETRON and you must be accurate in what you say with regards to selling a new keyboard.



It worries me that you have no concept of what you said.

James.