|
|
|
|
|
|
#258545 - 03/01/09 07:40 AM
Re: Got the Pa2x
|
Senior Member
Registered: 03/24/08
Posts: 1099
Loc: Myrtle beach SC
|
Originally posted by mrdave: Finally on friday I got my Pa2x and I can't stop playing it!! The synth sounds are awesome and full editable.
Just as an example I'm posting a guitar line done with an unplugged style just like I did with the Audya some time ago, just to show that MIDI can sound quite as good as audio loops without the chording problems audio has. Also I can change the guitar from steel to nylon or even electric using the same loop easilly just changing the MIDI instrument. http://www.4shared.com/file/90119995/6bf85888/Pa2xGuitar.html Enjoy it. I had one for four months and have always been a Korg fan. The wife still missed it (until the XS8 Arrived Friday). My issues were lack of style availability that's about it. Not a big fan of touch screens either but thats not a deal breaker. I know you can "roll your own" styles but I would rather do that with the ARPs on a WS. You will love that board if you enjoy tinkering with voices and sequences, I probably did not give it much of a chance since the T3 was being released and I thought it best to sell the PA2x while IT was back ordered many places before the T3 came out. Timimg was critical to get at least $2900 for the Korg I paid $3200 for. Truth be told. If the T3 did not come out when it did and I could not get the employee deal for 10% under cost. I probably would not have the Tyros and XS8 and would still have the Korg and by now been a Master on it instead of now going back to school (a very long semester) on the Motif. You will love that board. Enjoy. BTW did Korg lower their prices on the Arrangers like they do on the WS. I should know this since we carry the line now but we don't stock anything higher than the PA50 because it sells to those who are looking to save some money comparing to the the PSR700 even more now that Yamaha raised their prices. PA800 would be a tough sell vs the PSR900 for $500 more.
_________________________
Yamaha Tyros 4 Yamaha Motif XS8 Roland RD700 Casio PX-330 Martin DC Aura Breedlove ATlas Solo Bose MOD II PA
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#258546 - 03/01/09 08:40 AM
Re: Got the Pa2x
|
Member
Registered: 11/02/07
Posts: 90
Loc: Rimini, Italy
|
Originally posted by Jose Pereira: Hi mrdave mrdave, how you compare Audya´s Acoustic Piano to the PA2X piano´s? I played the PA2X for just 20 min especially the piano (my main instrument) and don´t liked so much (I hate the Tyros2 piano that I own too...) Why you choose the PA2X over the Audya? Jose Well... piano sound liking is very subjective, for me, as a personal taste by now the best piano I could get on arrangers came from the G70, but the Pa2X si pretty close and I feel comfortable with it. Instead I do not like the preset piano that come with the Audya, seems unnatural to me, while the 36MB supersolo version you can load in RAM is rather good, but you have to load it each time you turn on the instrument (there's the autoload function however) I already wrote in another post why I chosed the Pa2x, the main reasons are: 1) far better synth sounds and complete synth and style editing; 2) In general better sounds for right hand (this is subjective, for somebody Ketron sounds could be better, but not for me); 3) Price considering the feature set of the instruments, with Pa2x you get the 16 track sequencer that Audya lacks for 500€ less. (Note that Audya has things missing from Pa2x, like DJ Loops, Key tunes, 5 players, but I don't use these things anyway...);
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#258556 - 03/01/09 04:00 PM
Re: Got the Pa2x
|
Registered: 04/25/05
Posts: 14269
Loc: NW Florida
|
Oh, forgot to mention...
If you hit Break/Mute on a Roland, wait a beat or two, THEN hit Fill, the fill kicks in. Voila! Break/fill, and no programming needed (and once again, multiple B/F's, rather than just the one).
So far, this feature hasn't made me want to switch, but two fills compared to six would definitely make me less than contented with a Korg, despite it's many other superior features. I use fills on every verse, every song, every few bars. Something this fundamental NEEDS to have plenty of variation, IMO. Putting them (or at least pickups) in the style variation itself, on those longer variation styles Korg likes to do, only works well if you have regular four or eight bar phrases in the song itself. Get away from that robotic structure (as many songs do) and all of a sudden, those pickups don't occur in the right place.
JMO...
_________________________
An arranger is just a tool. What matters is what you build with it..!
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#258558 - 03/01/09 04:12 PM
Re: Got the Pa2x
|
Registered: 04/25/05
Posts: 14269
Loc: NW Florida
|
Perhaps they could take the lead, rather than just play catchup... A dedicated fill for EACH and every transition. 16, including Fill-to-same. That way, you guarantee no glitchy transitions. And, to be honest, it makes the style easier to program, not harder. The most difficult thing to do in style creation is designing fills that work for multiple source/destinations. As witness by how many of Korg's styles suffer from just the two fills. Creating a fill that only has to come from ONE place, and only go to ONE place is a piece of cake... It's only data. I see no reason why, if Korg are willing to address the fill issue at all (which they haven't in the past), why making a 16 fill arranger (or twelve, if you skip Fill-to-same) would be any harder than simply stepping up to six... Might as well leapfrog the competition while you are at it.
_________________________
An arranger is just a tool. What matters is what you build with it..!
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#258561 - 03/02/09 11:46 AM
Re: Got the Pa2x
|
Registered: 04/25/05
Posts: 14269
Loc: NW Florida
|
Originally posted by leeboy: BUT, remember someone has to program the fills for each style. Big job. Did you read this? "to be honest, it makes the style easier to program, not harder. The most difficult thing to do in style creation is designing fills that work for multiple source/destinations. As witness by how many of Korg's styles suffer from just the two fills. Creating a fill that only has to come from ONE place, and only go to ONE place is a piece of cake..." I honestly don't think that it would be the issue you worry about. For a start off it would be easy to program the fills to use just the two they now provide iF the style hasn't yet been written with the twelve fills (Roland, and I'm sure Yamaha already do this for legacy styles that don't have six fills), but the main thing is how much EASIER it gets to make fills when you don't have to try to make them work for a variety of destinations. A fill is a one bar event (at least for Roland). Not exactly a huge amount of data, especially if you consider the start of the fill will be very similar to the end of the source destination. Have you tried to make any styles..? I have, but never to my satisfaction. I can get the basic Variations OK, but making just a few fills that have to do lots of different transitions without unacceptable jumps is very difficult. I, for one, would prefer to have to make a lot more fills that I KNEW would only have to make the one transition than struggle with making a fill that worked for several. But six, or twelve, either of these numbers would be a HUGE improvement in the smoothness of Korg transitions. Let's face it, the jump to six would still be a tripling of the current number (if you discount the B/F), so just to draw even with the competition is going to involve more work for the style designers. Why not make it twelve, and gain the edge?
_________________________
An arranger is just a tool. What matters is what you build with it..!
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|