In a way I think you're wrong, because "the ones who knows nothing" as you say, are not
the ones who buy upper end arrangers, and the developers satisfye the most by the line
of models, both in price level and number of choices during playing and buttonpushing.
The ones who know how to do something with the OS in the machine, are the engineers, not
the end users.
Users use the OS to gain what needed, but then again, some OS are worse than others to
reach what you want to do, if OS are buildt to do it in first place.

Myself, I was more into the buttonpushing years ago when gigging, and Technics sure was a
dream to work at. It's a mystery to me that noone "steal" the userfriendly OS and develope
it further.
Nowadays, I'm more comfortable to find a style and just play without have to act like an
dataguru before play anything at all. I'm not an pianist (not even any good player, that's
why I'm using arrangerkeyboard. The styles are my orchestra.

Cheers
GJ

Sounds wise they are close, but I'd have to give it to the Pa2X for having the clear edge because of DNC / RX Technology. It just sounds more real than the Audya. Ketron seem to have recycled a lot of PCM data which is partly why it doesn't sound so new and fresh.

Sound wise, the Audya sounds really great. You can't really criticise the factory sounds at all, they all sound great to be honest. They clearly recycled a lot of PCM data, but hey, if it ain't broke don't fix it. Comparing the sounds to the Pa2X.... it's not really fair because the Pa2X has DNC / RX Technology which allows it to sound very realistic with no effort on your behalf other than to just play the sounds. DNC is also not sample based like Mega Voices are on the Tyros. So it can use it's technology on any sound which is the clear winner if you ask me.

From a programming point of view.... NOTHING comes close to a KORG and there is nobody here that will disagree with me on that one because it's not an opinion, it's a fact. The sound engine is as deep as the top of the line KORG Workstations. If fact a single sound is a merger of Prog and Combi mode all in one. So in certain ways it even exceeds KORG's top workstations in a different way.

For styles, I think Ketron have the edge over everyone, not just KORG. Their style programmers just know how to write good foot tapping beats, so it's really a personal choice here for which you will perfer. From a programming point of view the Audya hasn't had the means to allow you to make your own styles and so I'm not really in a position to compare it to the Pa2X which has had a full style edit mode since day one.

Which is a major beef I have with the Audya. KETRON are clearly a company in serious trouble financially and this keyboard was pushed kicking and screaming out the door with entire systems missing and lots and lots of bugs. Even at this late stage it's still missing many basic functions the competition release a keyboard with, and the OS stability and hardware reliability is still very questionable. On top of that, this is a premium price keyboard.

I'm an OASYS user with is another premium price keyboard and if KORG had done what KETRON just did with the Audya, KORG Forums would be still on fire now from the war that would have took place. There are some things that are just not acceptable and KETRON using it's customers as beta testers and share holders is nothing short of embarrassing. They have no shame though.

All that said, if KETRON can keep going and somehow hold out, they will eventually finish the Audya and it should be a great keyboard by that time. I think though that they will drop it very quickly at that point because the only way for them to make a profit at this point is to finish it, take what they did and put it into another keyboard that costs less.

My 2 cents.

James



[This message has been edited by Irishacts (edited 11-01-2009).]

True, but the percentage of arranger players who want that much editing depth, is small, or Yamaha and Roland would have taken it up as well...they both have powerful workstations and synths from which they could "borrow".

Korg is basically going it alone in this area, and perhaps that's a good thing, as it helps them stand out a little from the others, and of course, snag the few (or perhaps, more than a few) users that are interested in, or must have, these features.

Choice is good.

Not at all... it's not just about what YOU can do with it, it's also about what the programmers working for KORG did with the sound engine to shape the sounds YOU are going to play.

For example, Yamaha have Mega Voices which is not a technology, it's just marketing hype for layered multisamples which are triggered off. The down side to this is the only sounds that can be Mega Voices are the ones Yamaha give you. The technology (Marketing Hype) is not transferable to all the other sounds because everything is based on the multisamples being there first.

Where on the other hand KORG's RX / DNC technology is an actual technology that applies to “””every sound””””. So out of the box, even if you do not program your own sounds, you are automatically using RX and DNC because the programmers at KORG have already done the work for you.

The Sound Engine in a KORG also allows KORG's sound designers to make sounds that are simply not possible to do on ANY other arranger. All this comes in the box ready to play by you with Zero programming.

People really need to open their eyes. Super advances sounds engines are not just tools for you to program. They already come full of content programmed by the experts and produce sounds that the competition can never do unless they too include a super deep sound engine.

Regards
James

Again, it's all well and good to have the accessibility to the sound engine, but, also again, very few people need or want that much editing.

Most arranger players, including the pros, are more than happy with basic tone editing and a simple ADSR...they might want to change a sound a tad, but since TOTL arrangers already come with superb sounds, out of the box, it becomes less necessary...remember, I'm talking arrangers here, not synth-workstations .

DNC is very nice, but it is far from sounding as good as SA1, or SA2...of course, these are my preferences (and why I use a Yamaha) you are a Korg user and are happy with the Korg sound so you choose (and promote) that sound...it's has very nice characteristics, but I can't say I'd want to hear it coming out of my speakers.

I'm more likely to lean toward Roland for alternate/complimentary sounds to my Yamaha...even though the former do not have DNC technology, they are warm and interesting.

James, you are a sound developer...extensive editing appeals to you...most workstation/arranger players use factory sounds, or buy patches....they might tweak a sound here and there.

The DX-7 was popular not for it's nightmarish interface, but for it's sound(s), and you could buy all you wanted...in fact, there were DX patch clubs that sprang up all around the place to cater to users.

I used to deal directly with a guy named Bo Tomlyn, from the USA to get patches for my Yamaha DX-5, and also for my clients.

I was too busy gigging and recording to spend time learning how to program the DX-5...I'm sure, many synth players today, feel much the same way.

Of course, that's a good thing for sound programmers like yourself.

Roland needs something to give them an edge again...like they had back in the day of the E-series...methinks they haven't got the resources right now to develop something like DNC and/or SA (and Mega).

A shame, because, I'd hate to see them out of the picture...as you know, competition is good for us all, and when/if Yamaha absorb or buy out Korg , that will leave us with very few choices.

BTW...watch out for Casio...you heard it here first.

[This message has been edited by ianmcnll (edited 11-01-2009).]

Irishacts, I think that was an honest review. Thank you,

Ultimately, there no best keyboard, only the way the user interprets it and how the keyboard fits their playing style. Some users are very advanced in editing sounds and styles and some just play it right out of the box. There is no wrong or right way to use an arranger. Diki loves his Roland, Ian loves his Yamaha, Those keyboards fit there needs, Gary still uses the psr3000 and does wonders with it. Don is starting to make the Audya his own and he did great with the SD5. I have a friend that can’t part with his Roland VA76. Many can argue whether the Audya was released too soon but it is here now and as the consumer there is always the option not to buy one. I can understand one frustration if they currently owns one and are having a hard time with it. But what I can’t understand why so many want to see Ketron fail, which will only hurt the follow synthzone members who own Ketron products. Also it seems that one individual has a personal vendetta against Ketron but prior to the audya release there were nothing but praises and complements.

I hope Ketron succeeds as I do Roland, its shame a company like Roland who were once pioneers in arrangers, seem not to care about arranger line anymore. I think the more arranger companies out there, it will only work out better for the customers.

MC the Yamaha owner.

300 new sounds, new styles, etc, is great and all

but we are forgetting one VERY IMPORTANT shortcoming on the AUDYA, which Nedim pointed out

the AUDYA has less than 64MB ram

UNLESS AUDYA ups this, makes this expandable to 2 GIG (preferably) it will have a HARD time keeping up with the "others"

wouldn't it be great to be able to load up more than 3 or 4 super voices without filling up the ram?

this RAM expansion MUST be addressed,
let US, the users, choose to install LOTS more
if you want 1GIG you buy it and ibstall
if you want 2GIG, and spend the extra $42 then you have the option....

Hi ianmcnll.

Bear with me for a moment and I will try explain this a different way that might be clearer.

Remember the sound engine is what drives the entire sound a keyboard produces regardless of make and model.

Now forget accessibility for you the end user for a moment. Even if KORG hid away all these advanced features from the end user and only used them themselves for making the factory sounds, the sound engine is infinitely more advanced than the competition so these guys can make it produce sounds no other keyboard can.

Why... because KETRON and every other arranger keyboard simply dosen't have a sound engine that can do that, so regardless of what level the sound designer is at. They simply don't have the tools to do what a KORG sound designer has access to.

So even if you will never use the sound engine to make your own sounds, the mere fact that the sound designers working for KORG had a sound engine that deep to work with in the first place means the factory presents will contain some pretty excising stuff that is simply impossible for another make of arranger keyboard to produce.

In short, regardless if you use the sound engine or not to make your own sounds, it's responsible for everything the keyboard produces and because it's so advanced, it can do things no other arranger can and that's what the KORG programmers will give you in the form of factory presets.

So even if you don't use it yourself, KORG did to produce the factory sounds.

Regards
James

James, I do understand where you are coming from....and yes, Korg does have some fantastic sounds because of their sound engine.

It's not just the accessibility, but what is produced from a powerful synth engine.

I got all that.

I'm familiar with synths...I don't think I'm quite a newbie...I buy, restore, and sell vintage synths for a hobby....but, I can always learn a thing or three...as I always say, "I'm not young enough to know everything."

Again, it still boils down the the overall sound or character of the synth engine, much as it used to be in the days of the Prophet-5, Jupiter 8, and CS-80...tone generators have their own overall character.

I also have owned several Korgs...DW-8000, 01W ProX, two M1's, an MS-20, Wavestation EX...ahhh, you get the idea.

I haven't played a recent Korg arranger, but I have played plenty of Trinity, Triton, and X50, so I "get" the gist of the Korg sound...it's not one I'm totally keen on for arranger play, and I prefer Yamaha and Roland...no big deal, just my ears like those sounds.

But, as I said earlier, most, if not the majority, of arranger players are comfortable with simple sound editing...Korg addresses those that want more, and yes, their arrangers do have extraordinary capabilities.

Quite frankly, even with all that depth in programming available, they don't sound any better than Yamaha or Roland...just different, if that makes any sense.

But having lots and lots of memory for additional sounds is not important for most arranger users.

Ask T3 or T2 users if they take advantage of the additional memory for additional sounds. Ask G70 users if they do the same.

It is only the Korg users who may use and create user sounds. But the Korg market is really different from the T3 or G70 user.