I think that's been the whole point of what we have been saying about the Audya.

DON'T BUY IT YET.... Wait for the 'final' version, and find out if the exaggerated claims, hype and just plain misinformation turn out to be what we think they are.

However, this does NOT mean that we shouldn't continue to TRY and get some straight answers from the manufacturer, representatives and dealers (and shills) that are hanging around here.

The only people that should 'beta test' the Audya should be dealers and reps who are getting the thing at a MUCH lower price. For someone to pay full price just to TEST something out for the manufacturer is ridiculous...

Korg really has to increase the number of fill-ins... For var1 some times fill1 is too loud, they should at least provide a fill for each variation like others do.
In my view, the smartest was Roland with his fill-up, fill-down idea to provide smooth transitions from variation to variation, but... they always lacked the BREAK!!!

I don't use the programmed Intros very much, so I have a few styles where I have reprogrammed the Intros to be Break/Fills.

You gain one for each Variation (rather than one global B/F), but you have to trigger them just before you need them... I would imagine that most arrangers could be programmed this way if you don't use the Intros. Best thing about this system is that you can use ONE pedal to trigger it (if Intro can be one of your pedal choices), and it will automatically give you the B/F appropriate to the Variation you are in.

They are simple to do, as well. At their easiest, all you have to do is strip out ALL the data for a beat or two (after the first hit on all tracks - or just the drums and bass) of the normal fill for that Variation level (harder for Korg's with only two to chose from!) and probably strip out all but the bass and drums and maybe just one other part for the remainder of the fill. Takes a couple of minutes.

Another bad thing korg has is that when using a Multipad sound.....& then you try to hit endings....when the styles ends the mp "keeps playing" a measure or so after wards....unlike Yamaha which shuts off the MP when an Ending is used....really embarrassing on stage.....you have to be aware of this overflow & remember to shut it off manually which really SUX!!

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...

Korg should be able to solve the FILL issue with a simple update, where the FILL's would be triggered by pressing one of the four variation buttons. The MP issue shouldn't be a problem either!

Let's see what they do with this new survey strategy!

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.

Jose,
We at the Korg forum...now have 2 new pianos (The factory Grand piano RX isn't bad either, BUT it is not the default piano selected on performances, so not sure you heard it?).

We have a FREE new Steinway piano done by Rob Sheratt in the forum. He used a set of public domain Steinway samples he got from University of Iowa. It's good. uses 2 dynamic layers (FF, MF) and lots of special sounds (hammer, resonance etc) that were also part of the original factory RX piano. I beleive i uses about 75 MB of sample memory.

Also, we have Rob's Grand Piano RX2 he made from the original RX piano. It is super as well.

If you go to the Korg forum you can here them both.

If anyone wants...I will dig ut the URL's and put them here n this thread.

I am very satisfied with the pianos on the PA2.

And I am comparing them to my Kurz K2600X triple strike pianos.

Lee S.

Diki,
I do think in the future we will see more fills on PA...and I also believe they would have aleady changed it...BUT, reember someone has to frogram the fills for each style. Big job.

As to the MP keeps on playing...yes it does if the MP is a looping one. The real root cause is: the style is still playing! But the actual music data is done! So the fix is..if there are no more style sequence to play....stop the style (the MP will stop with it.

My God ...you should hear the new pianos we have now from Rob S. And we might get a commercial one (yes small cost) from Sharp of a 4 layer one! The capabilities of this thing is unbelievable! No it's not perfect...but who/what is? Any issues I have are very small as to the overall machine.

When I get a song or two down pat...I'll post them (musically I'm very intermediate)
Lee S.

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?