Originally posted by Starkeeper:
I think the reason we don't have a soft synth arranger yet is because of weak software. Why would a soft synth arranger need a super powerfull pc? The keyboard mfg don't use powerfull chips, but they are not running windows. What is required is an O/S dedicated to music and ONE piece of software that runs the styles and the voices. The software could be configured to use various buttons on a controller that are not strictly MIDI controls, so that you don't have to use the notes on the keyboard for variations, start/stop, etc.
I think the Ekco is on that right track, although it's not an arranger. If a few more msg jump in, increase the innovation, and lower the price, we will have what we want.
I haven't heard anyone say the organs on their keyboards are better then N.I.B4. soft synth. Makes you wonder.
Starkeeper
Jos Maas already has the first half of the equation right. If only someone would take something like OMB and add a dedicated softsynth to it, you'd have a real software arranger that does not have to have every style or every patch tweaked to make it sound good. I wann tweak my synth sounds so I can make them stand out, but I don't need or want to have to tweak the basic rythym parts to get it to sound good.
I don't necessarily agree with you Star that the "big 3" won't get heavily involved. Korg has already gone "soft" with the new legacy collection, and if you read the news on the Motifator site and it's "lament" against soft synths vs hardware, it appears that the Yamaha designers are already conceding that there is a general trend toward softsynths that will not retreat, and that a future succesor to the Motif / Es will incorporate the technology. Roland is introducing it into their external hard disk recorders. The "big 3" already know....
AJ
[This message has been edited by Bluezplayer (edited 01-19-2004).]
Previous Topic
Index
