I am getting somewhat fed up with a couple of things.

Firstly, anyone who has anything negative to say about the MS, from listening to demos, official or otherwise, is immediately branded as someone that doesn't 'get' what an 'open' keyboard is all about. Nothing could be further from the truth. I (and probably a LOT of detractors) know EXACTLY what an 'open' keyboard is all about. The truth is, it is nothing more than a hardware, keyboard encased version of what we have been using for many years now... A computer. Running multiple simultaneous audio programs. There is absolutely nothing 'groundbreaking' about it whatsoever, other than the fact that it is in a keyboard form, and integration is tight between the hardware and software (which CAN be achieved in a computer).

It is possible that we are ALL thought of, here at SZ, as nothing more than retirees with Casio's and cheap PSR's (or Roland's or Korg's, don't get your dander up ) who barely understand the difference between MIDI and audio. You would think so from the 'you don't get it' comments about the MS. Rubbish! There is a quite sophisticated and knowledgeable base of posters here, who MUST be getting tee'd off at the constant harping about how dumb we are...!

The mistake comes from thinking that just because all the different elements have been assembled in a case with a keyboard stuck on it, it MUST be something new. IT ISN'T. I've been using ALL the different components (DAW, VST's, GIGA streaming, MP3 playback, audio time compression, software arrangers, etc., etc.) for years now. So have MANY of the posters here.

"Open' is being used as a mantra for those that think it must be better, because it is different. Open DOES have it's advantages, flexibility being the primary one. But a 'closed' system has many advantages, too... Chief of which (especially for arranger operation) is the VERY tight integration between styles and sounds. The styles are developed for the specific soundset of the arranger. That's what makes it sound so good. Translated styles, as hard as they may be tweaked, rarely, if ever, sound better on a non-native arranger. They can still sound good, yes, maybe even better than some of the built-in styles of the destination arranger, but rarely do they ever sound better than the arranger they come from.

So, 'open' or 'closed', they both have their strengths. But it IS possible to 'get it' and still realize that 'open' has it's problems. Chief of which, for Dom, is the fact that he can't afford to develop sounds and styles for the arranger section of this 'open' keyboard. So he steals them. Pure and simple.

And sadly, the very people that keep telling us we don't 'get it' are the very ones that fail to recognize the difference between sampling an acoustic instrument, or out of production synth, and sampling an in-production arranger (whose entire soundset WAS developed legally) so their unsuccessful product can salvage itself in the arranger market.

The differences between sampling and re-sampling have been explained in detail by Irishacts' James, and there appears to be NO wiggle room on this issue. Be careful, especially US readers, where intellectual property still IS protected to a far greater degree than other countries. MP3 sharing always WAS illegal, even during the Napster days. It just wasn't enforced quickly enough. But you ARE still liable for them if ever discovered. The same will apply to re-sampled soundsets, once the law gets off it's fat a$$! That hefty investment in an MS might not seem like such a good idea if you are forced to go back to Dom's soundset...
-----------------------------------------------
The second thing I'm ticked off at....?

Attacking the messenger, NOT the message. If the only ammunition you can come up with to refute the points that many of us have made on this issue is to ask us whether we are blameless first, before we can criticize a corporation for piracy, well, that, in my apparently 'arrogant' opinion, is simply side-stepping the issue.

If we have ALL got to be saints before we can expect ANY ethical behavior from our corporations, and even, dare I say it, our governments, well, we are in for some very tough times...!

But who knows, maybe that is why things ARE so messed up lately... I've got some illegal MP3's on my computer, so it's OK for my government to invade another country... I'M not perfect, why should they be?

Absurd, isn't it? But that's what our detractors are saying, in short. So get off MY case, and try to figure out whether what Dom is doing IS unethical (whether the law has caught up or not).

Sorry Mo, I just hijacked YOUR putdown and kept it going. We all like to think that OUR posts are the MOST clever, the MOST interesting, and sometimes get a little miffed when others don't share those feelings. The best evidence of that is when we keep "bumping" our own posts trying to keep them alive. Sound familiar?

chas

I think 'arrogance' is ignoring Nigel's request to drop this whole "sampling" issue.

Chas, you're presuming people post in order to be thought clever or interesting. Perhaps you got that impression of me somehow..but it is not what motivates me to post-

the only motivation I have is to learn, and/or to advise, as payback for all the great advice I have received on SZ. I bump a post occasionally not because my ego is let down from a meager response, but because I am disappointed that i didn't get the information I hoped to receive, and
hope i can stimulate some more input before the post drops away and disappears.

Perhaps you got the mistaken notion of my intentions due to the fact that some of my posts might by coincidence appear to actually be clever and/or interesting? Well, if so, that's very flattering, thanks for the compliment. But
for you to assume that's what i'm about without knowing
me displays extreme prejudice. Please desist.

------------------
Miami Mo

as long as i'm stuck here, hoisted by my own petard of
declaring the ongoing MS arguments a bore..

I've had my differences with Diki, but in all I have read I
have not seen one rational logical on-the-mark rebuttal
of the core of his argument. I'm not someone with the
technical sophistication of Diki or his opponents in this
debate, so I'm really not in any position to judge the MS
except to deflate the pretensions of the "non-plastic"
and "the future" aspects of the PR..for all I know i could
try this kb and become madly in love with it. I don't know
a vst from a pcb...but the concept of intellectual property
is what he is talking about, and I have not seen anyone
address his stance on this with any adequacy, and I can
understand his frustration with that, and his strident
reaction is not the issue. The issue is the issue.



------------------
Miami Mo

Wish I was that succinct...

Thanks, Mo.

In respect of Nigel’s thinking that the sampling issue has been talked about in other threads, I will not try to explain the issue again. I would only say that to say that
“And sadly, the very people that keep telling us we don't 'get it' are the very ones that fail to recognize the difference between sampling an acoustic instrument,
or out of production synth, and sampling an in-production arranger (whose entire soundset WAS developed legally) so their unsuccessful product can salvage
itself in the arranger market” only goes to show again that the detractors obviously do not get the point on sampling and resampling that was being made. It is not the “definition” and difference of what sampling and resampling is that was the issue (James correctly explained that in another thread). But the point that was being made was the “conceptual moral” similarities between sampling and resampling.
If that can not be understood, I will leave it alone.

If you research the term “unclean hands”, it would give some readers a greater understanding of the broader issues.

Secondly, to say that “I've been using ALL the different components (DAW, VST's, GIGA streaming, MP3 playback, audio time compression, software arrangers, etc.,
etc.) for years now. So have MANY of the posters here" to demonstrate that they understand what the mediastation is, only goes to prove the opposite. That is like saying I have loops on my computer so why do I need loops on my keyboard. I seriously doubt that the majority of us use a computer, keyboard controller, VSTs, host programs for sounds and samples, a style program and try to link them all together on a gig. No! We all want to carry one thing a keyboard. Some use just a G70, a T2, Genesys, SD1 and so on.

Now the MS offers the professional gigging OMB your computer set-up in a single keyboard. If you use VSTs, samples and other sounds from different sources, in an original style or song, when you go to gig you can use all of those sounds if you use the MS. So integration of sounds and styles is one thing that the MS offers that the traditional keyboards do not offer.

As to price, yes it may be little more that a traditional keyboard but after that you mostly would upgrade your sound palate and style palate which you would be doing any way with your studio. So you don’t have to keep changing keyboards every 2 years just to get a few more sounds and styles and you would not have to learn a whole new OS and lay out of the keyboard.

And that brings me to the next point, you actually get more for your money with a keyboard like the MS and other because you are not just getting an arranger or a synth workstation or a Computer DAW but all of them together. So to just compare a MS to a TOTL arranger is comparing apples and oranges.

I also find it strange that now we want to say “There is a quite sophisticated and knowledgeable base of posters here, who MUST be getting tee'd off at the constant harping about how dumb we are...!”
When that was the very point that was being made to put down the practicability of the MS and of style making. Some people only gave members the credit for being able to buy and expensive TOTL arranger, tern on the keyboard, press a few buttons and presto! They sound like a professional 12 member band that has been playing together for 10 years. So that is why the T2 and others in that class are appealing to them.

There were others of us that were trying to convey that there are competent professional arranger and keyboard players who are capable of taking a keyboard and making it sound good with our own personal touch. After all that is what persons with synth workstations have been doing for years.

Dom really has not had a competent musician doing a good professional demo. If he gets a recognizably good musician to play to mediastation, put it to the test in terms of reliability and usability, and it still sounds as it does now then Dom would have to do some more work.

But really, we have not heard the mediastation being used by a competent impartial open-minded musician.

Which brings us back to the original topic. Maybe when they show themselves in the UK more will be revealed about the MS and maybe we will have something to speculate and disagree about like the Audya.

Yeah, so do we . True, the issue is the issue......unless; the gist of the issue is open to interpretation. Also, the best way to lose sight of the "issue" is to have someone go on about it ad nauseum. It's probably how the original messenger got shot. Take the chord sequencer, for instance. Pretty much a one-person crusade; but that's because those of us that owned a g1000 for many years didn't "use the feature or recognize it's value". Apparently, we weren't bright enough. Heck, Fran used the thing (G1000) for like, what, 37 years, and the G800 for 22 years before that, and I haven't heard him complain too vociferously about it's demise.

The thing is, until there is a definitive (international) legal resolution, the moral and ethical issues raised (and there ARE moral and ethical issues involved) are always going to subjective.

It's not that the issue of "intellectual property" is not an important one; it's just that, as Nigel said, it would be best hashed out on a more appropriate board.

chas