[QUOTE]Originally posted by Booby:
[B]Hi,

> > I completely disagree on this. Let me show how Pa1X has over "most" of the competitors and even in comparison with the earlies "i":
- double sequencer
- touch screen display
- full spec sampler w/time slice
- full spec sound editor
- mp3 handling (w/option)
- cd burning (w/option)
- 8 programmable sliders/4 prog. switches
- names for STS
- a lot of specs of the SongBook
- full marker handling
- full karaoke compatibility (also w/mp3)
- a "pro" vocal/harmonizer
.... ehm, need more ? Can you show me a similar product including all these features ? i3 times are very far ideed.

----------------------------------------------
did I say or complain about the sounds?no.dual sq (which can do non stop cross fades in smf play back is good but can't beat the function where you can change a SMF drum style on fly (ie your old badly written drum track will be replaced by new drum style and variation(and change the style too)function which can be found on cheapo yams(psr 1500)is a major realtime arranger function that Korg lacks.
another biggie.lack arranger and SMF play back integration(can't do non stop ).
--------------------------------------------

> Pa1x,pa80,50(same old I 3 format,they forgot why I3 was a hit,the reason was the pro quality sounds , sequencer and hardware in a arranger KB in 93 when arrangers still are weak in real sounds-(still true to new Korgs),

this is completely subjective. I suggest you anyway to try again the solo sounds and drum kits in Pa1X and reconsider this ....

-----------------------------------------------
you have to re read my post.I said Korg has the best sounds.(that's why I have Korg) and one of the best sequencers .But they are weak on realtime arranger functions.
-----------------------------------------------
> but not because of real time arranger functions-in 1993 cheaper E 86 was more selling and popular because of direct disk play-something that I3 lacks(where in I 3 you have to load for minutes or use expensive ram card which can only hold 4 style and small song mem).

yes but these times are definitely passed.
Now Pa1X has about 1000 locations that seems to me enough (don't know about others but anyway don't need more)

---------------------------------------------
memory in I3 was an example.I 'm not refering to Pa1x(everyone knows that with USB to device and HD feaures ,most KBs have unlimited song/style storage.
---------------------------------------------
> the sounds and seq ,the hard ware make Korg sell but as you see in the realworld ,ARRANGER giggers are using yam(they know yam looks like a toy,hardware and durability is not as good,but the also know that arranger+smf plyback integration,natural fills,more reliable chord recognition,and ofcourse multi pads that can play loops(where even in PA series-pads does do nothing but a simple crash or single sounds.(except 1x_ with newer OS).

It's true that Yam is largely used but I know a lot of people using live as professionist Korg arranger, and also know several recording studios using Korg arrangers (in this case instead of others) because of its sounds and its fresh sounds styles to create backing tracks. Nobody is complaing about fill problems, smf playback and the like you mentioned. Maybe your real word is different from mine .... :-)

--------------------------------------------
Nobody is complaing about the fills problems?are you sure?this has been told million times.
ask Scott,DNJ,Gary to UD(most of who are arranger giggers(yes they use styles)than people who uses their arranger mostly for smf/karaoke playback or live with a band,or in studio where you can do multiple edits.

and I said (SMF+arranger integration )like I mentioned above.not SMF play back only.(I know dual seq do non stop playback).

-----------------------------------------
I respect you opinion, but it's clear, based on above mentioned facts, that no all people can agree with you.

most do (people who knows both inside out).
everybody love diffrent keys.but most really don't know real power of the other that they are missing.I like Korg for sounds,seq,hardware,durabilty, some contemp styles .(hate for arranger ability compared to yam)fills,poorer chord recognition,and reasons mentions above.

and I hate yam in reverse(toy like,thin sounds,less quality efx but hats off to them for their OS and some arranger functions).


I will be a Korg user(for reasons that I love) and not buy a G70 or Tyros(still think it's over priced) for now,but Korg should wake up.


and remember I 'm talking about ARRANGER function.that's why we are here.



[This message has been edited by jamman (edited 09-22-2005).]