Originally posted by kbrkr:
And in closing, how does the technology that was introduced with the Oasys translate into an Arranger Keyboard? I own the Pa2xpro. I owned then returned the Korg M3. Both of those have chipsets with Oasys lineage.
However, there are not many features of the Oasys that have propagated to the Pa2 other than maybe the fidelity of the chip and some of the soundset.
The Pa2xPro and the M3 share a chipset, but the OASYS hardware is completely different. It doesn't use a Korg chipset for audio at all; instead, it is entirely based on software running on the P4 CPU. One of the OASYS synthesis engines, the HD-1, was designed to be similar to the M3's chipset (which was in development at the same time as the OASYS), and in many ways sounds similar.
However, the HD-1 also offers various advantages over its chipset-based siblings, including faster & smoother envelopes, LFOs, etc., lossless compression of sample data, improved sample transposition, wave sequencing, per-voice vector, etc.
The software-based nature of the OASYS allows completely different synthesis engines to be implemented, as well. In the OASYS, these are called Expansion Instruments (EXi). These EXi include a tonewheel organ model, a plucked string physical model, a waveshaping/FM/PCM-processing modular synth, and three VA synths with different oscillators and filters. One of these VA synths is called the AL-1.
The RADIAS synth board, available as an option for the M3, includes as one of its synth types a VA oscillator based on the AL-1, although without the AL-1's low-aliasing oscillator sync. Some of the filters are also similar.
Originally posted by kbrkr:
I would love to hear Korg's take on R&D philosophy when it comes to arrangers vs. workstations and how the two teams either play nice or not at all.
Our teams work together as much as possible.
Best regards,
Dan
Previous Topic
Index
