Over the years, I have owned virtually every brand of keyboard instruments.
With all the newest technology, companies are bringing us very realistic sounds.
Most of us are not in a position to A, B the "new" with the "old", but I find myself favoring selected groups of the older sounds over the new...They seem to cut through mixes better, as well , they just plain sound better to me..

I am not just talking about Roland..

As for Roland arrangers, I still find my favorite sounds are resided in the G1000 bank of sounds..and many are in the G800 bank..
The VA sounds do not fulfil me as much[with the exception of the "Scat" voices, and a few acoustic instruments] as the prior banks I mentioned..
Along the same lines, the E-600 had the best acoustic piano to me[playable with dynamics]..

The early Kurz 12[I think that was the model] with 8 bit samples was warmer and sounded richer to me than the rack series that followed..And I just do not like the newer Kurz equipment as much..

Korg, the same, the older O1/W stuff sounds much better than the refined thin sounding samples Korg uses today[that depend highly on effects]..Korg's workstations do not have the same feel/warmth that the older boards had..

Rolands older JV series were richer/fuller than the newer line of stereo sampled instruments[XV/Fantom]

Yamaha with out being specific..same thing, especially when it come to stereo samples..

If you don't believe me..go back and play the older stuff..experiece the fatness/warmth of the Roland JX10/D50/D70..Korg O1/w series...Yamaha SY99 etc..

Don't get me wrong the new stuff is great...it's just that I am missing "old" sound that we use to love...is gone[maybe sterile is the word].

Anyone have any thoughts along these lines?

I know exactly what you mean Fran.
I had the 01wpro and the Trinity pro at the same time a few years ago and always found myself favouring the 01 for some reason. The sounds in there kicked some butt and had plenty of punch to them.
I've had the Fantom which was very good but didn't cut through like the older Roland stuff (eg.D50 was amazing at the time).
I love my Tyros 2 but the reason I didn't partx my G1000 for it was simply because nothing can replace the ease of it's use. There's a style for every occasion in there and there's one that will fit any type of song, the piano sample still sounds great and there's a nice warmth to it that seems to be lacking from arrangers coming out today.
I did like an 88 note Kurzweil synth I had (can't think of name but was a bigger versin of the K2000) had to get rid of it after a few years because it was far too heavy to be carrying about 4 nights a week and people moan about the weight of keyboards today.

yea, iwent thru all the new arrangers(spent
thousands of dollars). got rid of them for
one reason or another. just couldn't find that perfect all in one keyboard that met my needs. so here's what i ended up with after
all the frustration and wasted time programming.
1 korg i5s with my own style programming.
1 yamaha psr 1000 with some styles from
tyros and psr3000 reprogramed to fit
and i agree about the sounds of the new
stuff mot sounding as good.
i ab'd a roland sc33 piano against a
tyros,psr300,korg pa80,60,50 and fantom
and (to me and the tape play back there wasn't that much diference.)
i play for a over 45 crowd and the above
set up is saving me thousands and not
too much of a sacrifice in over all quality.
now on a side note:
i went to my club where i play and last night they had a guitar player with just a
old sounding drum machine (no midi files,
no laptop,no arranger, no bass) just a guitar and a drum machine. they still danced,
and had a good time and this guy get paid the
same as i. go fiqure :-) .....ti's not what you got..........

OK let�s put features and stuff aside and talk about sound for a minute.

There is a phenomenon that you haven't mentioned yet or talked about, but it is part of the equation.

Just like an old chair that you have become sooo accustomed to, we are sooo accustomed to the sound of a KB the longer we have it.
Because of that our brain tells us that this is what it supposed to sound like.

Believe it or not, but that is how our brain works.
I have been through this several times.
When you buy a new board you miss the old sounds and you are just not happy.
But as the weeks and month go by you become accustomed to the new sounds.
Then you go back to your old board and say to yourself mmmmh, pretty good for the time but... and you start liking the new sounds more. Why? Because you have gotten used to them.

And since you have gotten used to them, your brain tells you aah, this is what it supposed to sound like.

Then you hear another board from another company and your brain compares it and it says: that's not what it supposed to sound like.
And before you know it we have the old argument of which board is better.
Just like kids in the school yard.
Yeah not much different......

So in the end who cares as long as we are happy with what we got.
I know for most of us it is not easy to keep an open mind because of what I stated above.

If you bash any of the top brands right now, then you should really look at what I said and have your ears checked...

The G-70, PAX-1, E-80, T2 etc. are all great.
They have features and sounds that 10 years ago were unimaginable.

As I said it before: Of course I have my personal taste, but I always enjoy any contribution from any forum member and their board, no matter what brand.

I don't get it! What is everybody so afraid off if somebody likes another brand and wants to share this with us?????

Instead off being happy for him/her that they found what they looking for they get the run arounds like little children.

I scratch my head sometimes and I wonder if I'm dealing with educated adults here or with kids on the playground.....
Because that what this often reminds me off.

For me there is no greater joy then coming together here and share our music.

When we had our Synthzone jam up in San Jose CA, we were able to share our music from different brands with our fellow members. Oh, and what a blast we all had...
We all enjoyed each other so much and the music we shared.

So come on folks why can't we do this here on this board.
Come on what do you say....
A little love, kindness and compassion hasn't hurt anybody yet.

So I'll start first by thanking ALL of YOU for your continuing support and effort to share your music with the rest of us.

Jam on, and enjoy whatever you are playing.
It's ALL good.....

Eric


[This message has been edited by Eric, B (edited 05-13-2006).]

you're right about being use to a certain
sound,however the sounds i use are picked by
my clients not me. i find it interesting that
they almost always chose the older sounds claiming it sounds warmer, more realistic.
i have no favorite setup/sound/styles/or
arrangers. i think they all are fantastic and
more true are the talented people that play
them. so i don't mean to upset anyone as to
what arranger/sound/style is the better, like
life, music is so much about choices and preferences.

HI ERIK,
I had to play a piano a couple days ago for a couple hours and I had a hard time with it in the beginning because it didn't really sound like a piano and I couldn't figure out what was wrong with this high quality piano that WAS in tune. Besides that my wrists still ache.
I have 11 or 12 keyboards here in the studio and I have been playing the keyboards piano samples for so long that I have actually forgot what a real piano is supposed to sound like.
Your point above is well made. I have to agree.
Best,
Bebop

Eric, No that 's not it..

I actually had both old and new side by side for a while..I am use to the sounds of both[as an example the DisCover5 and G1000], and find my favorite sounding patches are the older technology.
I also had Roland XV5080, side by side with my JV stuff.
Same with the Fantom, Triton Studio..The new stuff seems to be thinner.
Sure we get use to what we own, but our ears still know the difference..and if we have both and prefer the old..our ears are telling us something..

'Old' ears?!

I actually agree with both Eric 'and' Fran . Play & enjoy whatever keyboard makes you happiest.

If you're a good keyboard player, your keyboard chops, artistry & musical expression will transcend just about any arranger keyboard out there. Some people may have the latest greatest arr keyboard out there but can't play worth a sh*t, while I've heard some amazing things performed by other guys on an inexpensive Casio arranger. We all need to keep our priorities in perspective. I keep wishing more people would post & share their music, to stimulate disccusion about general 'arranger keyboard playing techniques' rather than comparing how one keyboard sounds better' than the other. - Scott

[This message has been edited by Scottyee (edited 05-13-2006).]

Fran,

I used to have a friend in Germany who would give me a demo CD of the latest KB each time I came to Germany.

Among the demo CD's that I have is still one from the G-1000, and I must admitt it still sounds pretty darn good.

I often thought of you and whether you would be interested in having it, since the G-1000 is your baby.....
I didn't mention it before, because a lot of songs on the CD are German stuff....

Eric

Eric. I would love to hear it.
Maybe you could upload it to YouSendIt.com

Or convert to MP3...

Hi Fran,

the CD is 64+ minutes long.
Kinda hard to upload.
I was more like thinking of sending it to you; if you like.

If you are interested send me your address via e-mail.
I'll be happy to give (send) it to you.

Eric

[This message has been edited by Eric, B (edited 05-13-2006).]

Scott I totaly agree with you, talk is cheap, lets ALL start posting some Arranger KB Mp3 songs, demos, etc, etc, so we can listen, discuss & try to learn something about what it is we are all supposed to be talking about here on the general arranger keyboard forum. Theres no excuse now that you can use "YOU SEND IT" as a host site for your MP3 songs.....this mine is better then yours is really getting old.
Scott, BTW........it was nice to talk to you again the other day on the phone.....thanx for the chat

[This message has been edited by Dnj (edited 05-13-2006).]

Until recently, the best piano and vibe sounds I ever heard from a keyboard were those created by the Yamaha PSR-5700, a 50-pound brute that broke my back every time I hoisted it onto the stand. However, those were the only two sounds that were good.

Today's sounds, especially those sweet, live and super articulated voices, make the sounds of yesteryear pale by comparison. The sax sounds from keyboards manufactured a decade ago sounded more like someone playing a kazoo--they were awful. The guitar sounds fit into the same category, even when played by someone with incredible talent. Good organ sounds were out of the question, and things such as a growl sax, real sounding strings and live drum kits didn't exist.

New and inovative technology has made all this possible, and for the most part, affordable. Yes, that G-1000 may still sound great, especially when playing midi files. But, post an MP3 of a Bill Doggett (spelling) version Honky Tonk using that G-1000's sax V/S the T2's sax and there's no comparison. For me, I'll take the new technology and sounds of today.

Cheers,

Gary

------------------
Travlin' Easy

I have to agree with Gary.
I hope Vince Andreone doesn't mind me posting his version of Honky Tonk. It is performed on the Tyros. It is the best version I have heard. He sounds more like Bill Dogget than Bill Dogget.
http://psrtutorial.com/mp3/AA/VA%20Honky%20Tonk.mp3

Here is the G1000 playing Doggett's Honky Tonk...I think the G1000 sounds better than Bill's recording..
I still like the old..
I sent the file to Donny, he will show case the Tyros2....Remember we are trying to sound like Doggett...

No tweaking Donny...I didn't..If you do , I will have to do the same and re record..
http://download.yousendit.com/07EDC34830A96F4C

I do favor Fran's performance but that doesn't mean that the G1000 does a better job then the T2. Perhaps Fran's just the better player? Guess that's what makes the difference.

Taike

------------------
Khoi huk ngam sud tee huk kon diow.

Guys, that was a sequence I used..
My intention was to compare the old sounds against the new[DNJ will post the T2 with the same sequence]..This was my answer to Gary's challenge..

[This message has been edited by Fran Carango (edited 05-14-2006).]

http://download.yousendit.com/D848B70E072A47C8


Honky Tonk SMF as played on the T2 Mp3

Enjoy!!

[This message has been edited by Dnj (edited 05-14-2006).]

Thanks Donny....I rest my case!!!

Staying with the old verses new...I think that my G1000[old] for the most part sounds better than my DisCover5 [new]..

Would someone with a G70 record this same sequence and post it for us to compare..I would be happy to email you the sequence.

Likewise Korg PA1x..SD1..Genesys owners..

I thought the G1000 version sounded better.. quite a bit actually.... but I don't think using an unmodified midfile is a fair comparison in the first place. While I don't have a T2 to compare, I've never liked any Yamaha I've ever owned for midifile playback.

The Motif ES doesn't sound very good playing most of my commercial midifiles either, as the many of the GM sounds aren't very pleasing at all and while I've never owned a G1000 or similar Roland board, I've often heard that Roland's are one of the better brands for GM sounds. I'll go as far as to say that my old software Hypercanvas ( Edirol / Roland ) module sounds better than my ES when strictly speaking in terms of SMF playback.

Of my three hardware boards, for playback on the majority of my midifiles using GM only, I would say that I prefer my MZ2000, with the PA80 lagging behind a little, and my ES a distant third. Yet the ES overall has much more pleasing lead voices for me than the other two.

My point I guess is that these boards are designed specifically as arrangers and not midifile playback machines, and it's hard to judge them on the merit of SMF playback only, particularly when using only the GM wavetables in each. It is apparent to me that Yamaha probably never has paid a lot of attention to producing quality GM sounds.

While I'd someday like to see a Tyros II accompanying me to a gig, I'll also say I'm still happy with my two "old" arrangers as well.. the PA80 and the MZ, so if it never happens that I wind up with a brand new T2 or other latest and greatest, I'll be just fine anyway I think.

AJ



[This message has been edited by Bluezplayer (edited 05-14-2006).]

Fran,

Go ahead and email me the sequence if you'd like. I'll do a PA80 and MZ version along with an SGM180 soundfont version as well.


AJ

Fran,

My post was not a challenge and was not meant to be in any way, shape or form. The comparison I was hoping to hear was a live performance MP3 done using the G-1000 V/S the Tyros2 of the same song. The midi file you posted as an MP3 was one that I have as well and it really sounds great. However, I have no way of knowing what keyboard the file was created with, and if I recall, it's a GM file that had lots of edits and layers. This doesn't tell me a thing about the G-1000's voices V/S some of the new Yamaha voices. It just tells me the G-1000 does an excellent job of playing GM midi files, which most of us already knew. I guess my point is that those new, live, super articulated and sweet voices, IMO, put life into the sounds coming from the keyboard. When you can hear the breath in a sax, vibrato in the trumpet, reverb and fret noises in guitars, this is a dimension that, at leat to me, is very exciting and adds realism that was obviously missing in the older boards.

An awared winning sax player who was recently inducted into the Musician's Hall Of Fame in Baltimore said "I wiah I could get the same sounds from my real sax as the ones I hear coming from my Tyros. They're fantastic!"

Another classic example can be heard by just listening to a live performance by Don Mason, of which I had the distinct privelage a couple years ago. Don can do things with Yamaha's incredible guitars that makes most musicians envious. Granted, much of this can be attributed to his playing skill, but a significant portion of the sounds must be credited to the creativity of Yamaha's engineers who put the depth and quality into each of those voices.

I guess if all you're doing is playing GM midi files, the older keyboards will sound fantastic. However, for live performances I sincerely believe the newer keyboards will provide superior sounds.

Cheers,

Gary

------------------
Travlin' Easy

[This message has been edited by travlin'easy (edited 05-15-2006).]

Gary, I got what you mean..And I pretty much agree with you..As for Don playing those guitar parts...he makes every keyboard sound good..

I know what you are talking about in reference to the built in vibrato in the new stuff[especially Yamaha]..I much prefer to use after touch to bring in vibrato..it sounds more realistic to me, and allows me better control..

I will do a live Honky Tonk on the G1000 when I get a chance..I will try to simulate Doggett's tune[maybe I can send my version to Don, and he can add the guitar licks].

As we always say ..play what makes you happy..

Gary, can't the better sounds you are referring to, be applied to the sequence...I am sure the "live" and "cool" voices can...maybe this will illustrate the quality of the Yamaha [new] sounds..

[This message has been edited by Fran Carango (edited 05-15-2006).]

Fran,

Those specialized voices are limited to playback within the orriginating keyboard. Therefore, if the midi file was created on the Tyros2, when played back on the Tyros2 the sounds would be identical. However, when played back on a keyboad that did not contain those specific voices, the keyboard would substitute onboard voices, some that are so far off the wall you cannot imagine. An example of this is the anoying hand-clap that shows up on some files that used the brush-kit drums. Many of the older midi files are no longer compatible with the newer keyboards, which is another problem.

Gotta' go to work,

Gary

Listening to the Tyros2 recordings [maybe live is different], it seems like I am listening to a band..down the hall in another room...It is not the individual sounds that are at fault,,there seems to be no definition or separation of sound..

I just listened to DNJ's T2 demos..the arranger parts seem to be the section that lacks this definition/separation I am not hearing..On Donny's Tango demo it is less noticeable, because the style background is sparse compared to the other demos..

Guys, don't get all excited, I am not knocking the T2, I am trying to explain what I hear....Listen with an open mind..
To me , it sounds like the Tyros2 is so dependent on effects that the sounds[style] are lost[separation]...almost organish[?]..

No arguments...just help explain what is going on..

The isolated guitar patches sound great..The piano doesn't..I have heard a sax solo that sounded great[again isolated].

When it is all put together it doesn't work for me..

BTW, getting back to the original topic...Last month at our Solo Musicians meeting..A NJ guy brought in a Technics KN2000, to entertain during dinner and play for a couple lady vocalist..
Across the board it was not as good as the newer Technics stuff, butt for bass, drums and organ[even in arranger mode]..it sound great.
We had a couple top notch piano players sitting at a Yamaha grand...they eventually got up from the piano[didn't want to compete with what they were hearing from the KN2000]..

I played a KN2000 for a couple of years. It was WAY ahead of it's time. Good drums, organs and even guitars.
DonM

WOW!!! Ae we being way to critical here regading arranger KB sound? And if so WHY? are we trying to impress ourselves or an unknowing audience?

You are right Donny..Maybe I am too critical about something our audiences could never even give a thought ...

But like my original statement..newer is not always better...so I will keep my antique for a while..

The idea of the post was to generate conversation about old sounds verses the new sounds...nothing to do with brands..

Fran, just one thing, if you are ever performing on a cruise ship and it starts to sink, DON'T try to save the Roland. You will sink and be eaten by fish.

DonM

Don, I would hope that it floats..that way it could save several people...

One thing for sure ..it has already saved my butt a few times..

Ok, we can accept that it's just for fun and demonstration I think. Not saying any one board is better than another.. Remember these are recordings from a midifile and as such only the GM voices will play from each of the synths / arrangers I used anyway.

I recorded them exactly as they played from each module ( all on one track ). I did do some very basic mastering ( compression, normalization and slight eq ) to each afterwards, using the exact same settings for each file.

So... here are my recordings from each of the following:
http://www.megaupload.com/?d=MHZLMHQO SGM180 ( software soundfont )
http://www.megaupload.com/?d=X4OQHUYH MZ2000
http://www.megaupload.com/?d=RNDBY1S1 PA80
http://www.megaupload.com/?d=1I4SY6AX Motif ES

Personally, my favorites in order of preference are: ( I rated them 2 ways )

I bet I get some that disagree.. Which is why we say sound is subjective in the first place.

For the best in the lead voices ( Guitars and Saxes ) :

1- SGM180
2- MZ2000
3- PA80
4- Motif ES

For overall instrument sound quality and cohesive mix:


1. PA80
2. SGM180
3. MZ2000
4. Motif ES


I did not change any of the voices. If I had, I'm sure the ES would have moved up to or near the top in both categories.

AJ



[This message has been edited by Bluezplayer (edited 05-15-2006).]

AJ, thanks for your efforts..

I agree with your first opinions SGM180 is the best..On your second opinion I am inclined to pick the SGM180 over the PA80..

I also tried the SGM180 , but I thought the G1000 was better...
The SGM180 was better than my other soft synths though..

Overall, I think the G1000 wins easily...The Tyros2, I would place after all but the Motif[I thought it was poor]..

BTW..your test also confirms "newer is not always better" .

A 6year old MZ2000
a 5 year old PA80


[This message has been edited by Fran Carango (edited 05-15-2006).]

Thanks for the listen Fran. Yeah I'm a bit surprised that the MZ gave such a decent account of itself. Really, mainly the drums drop it in quality vs the other two I put up. ( I'm not even considering the ES here because it is so bad for midifile playback that it really kinda belongs in a world of it's own ). The lead/panel and non drum GM voices on the MZ are pretty danged good for an "old" board. Of course I always knew that anyway. It's actually a better complement to the PA80 for playing live than the ES is, since it does do midifiles fairly well. It's some of the styles that kinda kill it as an arranger, mainly because some of the drumkits aren't up to par.


Just for the heck of it..and in order to make it a "fair" fight, I took the liberty of remastering both Donny's and your original MP3s using similar settings to the files I made..( hope u guys don't mind ).

After listening to them.. I'm thinking of ditching all of my current boards and finding a G1000.... LOL.. No wonder you like the way midifiles sound coming through it though. The Tyros actually sounded better than I had expected it to, at least a whole lot better than it's workstation counterpart, the Motif ES.

Here they are:
http://www.megaupload.com/?d=O2KEXSFH Tyros 2

and
http://www.megaupload.com/?d=AURKGAJN G1000

Enjoy

AJ



[This message has been edited by Bluezplayer (edited 05-15-2006).]

AJ, after listening to your mastering job..I am impressed...The Tyros2 sounds better, but the G1000 sounds SUPER..

I might just go buy another G1000...believe it or not I may still be able to pick up a factory fresh G1000..They closed out to dealers at $1,000...but I would need to bump up the price if I can still buy it..

AJ, I don't know why no one is interested in this old/new comparison MP3's...I find it very interesting..Maybe if I owned a Tyros I wouldn't be excited to hear anymore..Also , G70, Genesys,SD1 and PA1X people didn't respond to my offer of the sequence to try on these new boards..

I know I proved it to myself many times over with my own gear..
Thanks again for your input..

BTW,,AJ, what did you do in the mastering of the pre recorded MP3's?

Your welcome Fran. I simply used Sonitus fx compressor and equalizer, along with a couple of native effects inside of Cool Edit pro, including normalizing each track to approx - 0.1 db. I did a quick generic setup, not paying particular attention to the differences in each file.

This was all in good fun of course, yet it does kinda remind me of several things.

One.. other than being a very decent controller, my Motif Es is no longer relevant to my setup. It's awful at playback of midifiles, equally as bad as the sound module for One man Band, and even though it has very good lead sounds overall, there isn't a single voice group in it that can give me better sounds than one of my software samplers or modules can. Even the organs, which are very good, still can't compare to B4, and the Electric pianos are also very good, but not as good as Plugsounds kb module or Eve. Forgetting what the "big guns" like FLR are using, Colossus and the like.. I have nothing that even compares to that...

Two: Roland is very deserving of the praise I've seen heaped upon them when it comes to midifile playback inside of their hardware machines.

Three: I think the SGM180 is nearly as good as anything I've heard for SMF playback, and it cost nearly $2000 USd less than my ES did. In a pinch the MZ does a decent job as well.

Four: I actually do like the Tyros, and am considering replacing my ES with one. I'd also at least consider replacing my PA80 with a G1000, but either way I'm still ok with the PA80 and I still prefer it's styles. I just don't like many of it's lead voices, except for the organs, harmonicas, strings, and of course the synths, as the I think they are among the best and fattest rompler synth sounds I've heard to date. I'm not considering any more PSR's at this point however, even though many may tell me I'm wrong, but I won't ever put up with the slushy keys again.

AJ


[This message has been edited by Bluezplayer (edited 05-15-2006).]

AJ, While we are talking about SGM180..Using Live Pro Synth, What is the procedure for changing fonts within the GM map?

I like most of the fonts in SGM180, but I want to build my own GM map with particular better sounding fonts..

Fran,

I know you can load different soundfonts in LSP and assign a bank to each, but I'm not sure if you can remap in it. Perhaps Frank or Rikki know better.

I've been slowly but surely modifying the soundfont itself, by changing the actual samples for certain GM instruments . It's a long process but one I hope will pay good dividends in the end. I use Creative's Vienna
SF studio to do this.

AJ

Yes, you can use Vienna or you can purchase Soundfaction Alive. It works directly with LiveSynth Pro. http://www.soundfaction.com/alive/

If the topic is still alive, and you are interested, please someone send me a mail so I can post a Hypersonic2 or Bandstand version of the song

trident@freemail.gr

Trident, I am sending now..

AJ

[This message has been edited by Bluezplayer (edited 05-16-2006).]

SGM180 sounds real good. Looking forward to hear Hypersonic 2's version.
Starkeeper

Thanks AJ,

Fran send it also.

Thanks Fran.

I intend to play the thing via Widows Media player and just record the output of Bandstand and Hypersonic2.

If you have anything to point out, let me know here on the forum.

We are waiting patiently...

Just for reference. No one has pointed out that DNJ's tyros II version was in mono. As were his impromptu demos. I don't know if he's coming out of just one side, or if he's mixing both sides into mono, but at any rate, it's mono. I would surmise that would make a huge difference in the Tyros II sounding more jumbled, or each instrument not having it's own voice or space in the mix.

DNJ recorded in Stereo!!

Did your ears, or the file properties tell you that? I'm telling you the sound of the mix is completely mono. No drums are panned, cymbals, the delay or reverb effects are completely mono. It's a stereo file that sounds completely mono, as did his impromptu demos in the other thread. Period.

The man tells me that!!!

I would like to add , all the other instruments recorded, used the same SMF..

[This message has been edited by Fran Carango (edited 05-16-2006).]

Well then, far be it from me to disagree with the honorable veterans of this forum. Since I work in a recording studio every day of my life, I thought I'd recognize a mono sound when I heard it. I guess not. I recant. It's stereo everybody; no matter what you hear.

What comes out loud and clear from this thread is the fact that the same SMF played on different manufacturers products is going to sound different......... BRILLIANT!!

What is the REALLY salient point is that, no matter what keyboard you have, an SMF, unless played on the specific keyboard it was produced on, is going to sound COMPLETELY different and will require editing. Now, just how quick and friendly is your keyboard at editing SMFs??

Roland had an edge in the compatibility stakes for quite a while, because firstly, all of their arrangers were based on the Sound Canvas engines (probably what the SMF was originally programmed for) and the change from RA90 to G800 to G1000 was fairly incremental. All you generally had to do was replace the program change for the old sax sound (for instance) with the new one, and the volumes would be consistent, and the reverb amounts and velocity responses of the drumkits remained pretty consistent, no matter which kit you used.

All this started to change with the VA series, and has completely changed with the G70. The voicing is now a combination of older Sound Canvas (and SC88, SC880Pro etc.) sounds, along with newer samples from the Fantom line and V-Drum series, and the reverb and effects architecture has been heavily changed. It is no longer a gimme to play a Roland SMF (or style) into the G70 and hear consistent results. This has been a large cause of the complaints about the G70s 'sound'. It now is necessary to edit your older SMFs and Styles before they sound their best on the G70 - EXTENSIVELY!

However............

Roland appear to be one of the few manufacturers to understand this and provide a method to quickly edit Styles and SMFs without having to resort to using a sequencer (hard or soft). The Makeup Tools section allows you to easily adjust not only the choice of sound for a Part, but it's reverb and effect sends, volume, pan, voice editing (cutoff, attack release etc.), but here's the important part - velocity offsets and compression! THIS is where, when using today's more elaborate, multi-velocity samples, it is ESSENTIAL to set the velocity of the part where it hits the vel-xover points at a musically sensible place.

Drum Kits can be adjusted the same way, allowing you a choice of different drums, editable reverb and effect send and the EXTREMELY important velocity offsets, especially in light of the multi-velocity V-Drum kits.

Finally, you have a Common Page where song tempo, key, global reverb and effect parameters, and, most importantly, an overall Song Volume parameter (you REALLY want to go back and adjust every part because the song is too loud??)..........

Now most of you are probably saying 'I can do this in my XYZ arranger' and it's true, you probably can. But spend a little time on a G70 (or E80) and you will probably find out how much easier Roland have made this critical function. And the easier something is, the more likely you are to USE IT!

As manufacturers have continued to one-up each other in the realism stakes, simple compatibility with GM files has mostly gone out the window. What is most important now is, how easy do they make it to fix the problem? Easy enough that you a willing to edit the hundreds of files you use?............. If your keyboard doesn't make this task easy enough that it is an utter chore, first take a look at the G70s system, then yell at YOUR keyboard's maker until they make it as easy for you.............

Maybe the SMF was created without extreme panning...Does your ears tell you if my G1000 was also recorded in mono?
Or AJ's work?

What's with the Veteran comment?

Why don't you record the tune is stereo, I would be glad to send the file to you...I am sure you are a Tyros owner..

The G1000 was definitely stereo. As was the SGM180 soundfont. Those were the only other in addition to DNJ's that i downloaded. No, I do not own a Tyros. I have listened to many a tyros demo though, and I can still tell mono sound when i hear it. DNJ's impromptu demos and his upload of this smf definitely sound mono.
As for the veteran comment, maybe it was uncalled for....maybe. It just seems odd to me that so many threads regarding mono versus stereo have been had here if nobody other than myself has noticed that DNJ's tyros II mp3 most definitely sounds mono.
Also, You'd asked that he do no tweaking to the smf before he recorded it. Now tell me, is my sense of pitch off too, or is your version in E and DNJ's version in D?

I think we are taking this a bit too seriously maybe ?.... Two quick points

One: All of the files were recorded on my equipment with the exception of the original G1000 and Tyros files. They were all given a minor bit of mastering as well, using very similar settings for each file, including the G1000 and Tyros. As far as stereo adjustment and panning, I changed nothing from any of them.

Two: It was just for the fun of it and wasn't really a competition in my mind in the first place, because if it were, I could have modified every voice on every board / module I have, and in the end, despite all the disdain I sometimes have for it, I can pretty much guarantee that the Motif ES would have sounded as good if not better than any of the others. All this really told us is how each board sounds playing a particular midifile. For someone like Fran, who I believe has said he sometimes uses midfiles in his live act though, this might be pretty important. I know speaking for myself, I wouldn't want to have to modify every midifile I've ever used for my own live act, nor do I want to modify every style I use with OMB to suit my particular synths or modules.

I could have also customized my own soft sounds / samples and modules, and I'm pretty certain that would have sounded better than at least any of the other ones I produced. I simply "let it fly" by playing the file as is on each of my sound generators and did nothing to modify any of them, with the exception of changing channel 10 on the ES to it's GM drums since it was not recognizing the drums and playing ac piano instead.

AJ



[This message has been edited by Bluezplayer (edited 05-16-2006).]

I checked all the recordings signal lines..they are all recorded in stereo...except Donny's Tyros2 and AJ's master of Donny's recording..

You were right..but you still need an attitude adjustment!!

I actually had no attitude my first post. And even my second, I'd asked if you heard it was stereo or just knew it was because the file properties said so? Rather than checking my assumption to be correct, you and I played the back and forth game until this most recent post. OK, maybe I need an ever so slight attitude adjustment, but I don't like to be told twice and thrice that i'm wrong before bothering to check that I'm right.

I rely on the one that did the recording. He thought he recorded in stereo from his Tyros2 into his laptop..besides I don't work in a recording studio every day of my life , like you..I did test on my own, and agreed with you..

This post sort of got out of context..but I still think it interesting,,I look forward to Tridents recordings of softsynths I am considering..

The postings also showed me the old can hang with the new...both sounds and people.

Well, my only reason for bringing it up in the first place was to put forth that a mono recording of tyros 2 might not suffice to make an opinion against stereo versions of other synths, be they newer or older. Also, (and please everybody don't take this the wrong way) but maybe that's why some people like the newer boards and some people don't. If mono sound and stereo sound isn't immediately apparent to some people, or maybe even most people, then it would make sense why they are not necessarily impressed with the new stereo sampled sounds on keyboards. For me though, and for others too, they make all the difference.

In many of the stores I've seen very capable arrangers plugged into mono keyboard amplifiers, utterly ruining the sound........

I admit, many of today's stereo whizz-bang arrangers have not had their samples checked for excellent mono compatibility, and most of their effects sections make use of phase differences to 'widen' the apparent soundstage when in stereo, resulting in an apparent change in effects depth when heard in mono.........

It just leads me to NEVER play in mono if I can possibly help it. If they are designed that way, that's the way they should be played. Only if we scream in a loud enough voice at the manufacturers to double check their mono compatibility will they pay attention, and then it won't matter what you are plugged into.........

Hi Rory. Not sure if you consider me one of "the honorable" here or not, but I definitely qualify as one of the veteran (long standing wise) SZ members, and noticed "RIGHT OFF" that Donny's songs were all in MONO , not stereo.

I concur that comparing Donny's mono version to everyone else's stereo versions an UNFAIR comparison. Lastly, but certainly not least, Donny's T2 songs are seriously lacking DSP/EFFECTS (reverb, chorus, etc), which puts them at a tremendously unfair disadvantage. I'm convinced that a T2 'stereo' version (including panning) and proper reverb effect& levels added, of which the other KB versions already appear to include, will raise the sound quality of the Tyros2 version to SURPASS the others. How's that for an 'attitude adjustment'?

- Scott

[This message has been edited by Scottyee (edited 05-16-2006).]

Scott, I am sending you the SMF.
Please record it for us..Please tweak it and do what ever you can to make it the best..
Then prove it to us by posting the link.
I am not as optimistic as you about the results..

Oh Boy ....maybe I made a mistake and unknowingly recorded in Mono/ its possible that in haste I used the wrong L/R T2 outputs?.........I will when I have time do some more demos & see whats the cuplprit...as far as any tweaking on the demos there was NONE.....out of the box styles & sounds.....Its also posible the signal got Summmed into mono in the LT?

Scott what outputs are you using to record out of the T2?

Ok.., if Donny would like to rerecord it in stereo, I'll happily remaster it again and repost. The settings I used for each task were fairly generic, and I saved them in one of my original files, so it won't be a problem on my end.

Or.. I can redo the file and with panning and some very light spatial effects I can produce a stereo effect. The downside is that you wouldn't get the original nuances from playing each original stereo voice and effect as it truly is when it is coming from the Tyros. OTOH, I highly doubt that with Yamaha's GM patches that it would matter that much anyway.

Still, in the end it's only going to tell us what the GM patches in each module sound like.

AJ

[This message has been edited by Bluezplayer (edited 05-16-2006).]

Hi Fran,
unless you have a creative soundcard you can't use Vienna. I can use it because I have a usb Audigy nx2 soundcard for my laptop as well as the software setup to run soundfonts (Forte, midiyoke etc etc)

Soundfaction alive does a great job if you want to build up a font of your own, or just replace the odd sound. You can just mix n match to your hearts content.
Bear in mind, bigger is not neccesarily better. The commercially sold ones don't always sound better than the freebies either.
I was auditioning about 8 different piano's from various gm fonts the other day for one of the biab midifiles. Surprisingly to my ears, the 2 that sounded the best was the 30+ mb piano from sgm180 and a 1 mb piano from one of the other freebie fonts. The ones from my commercial gm fonts , sounded lousy with that particular tune.
Beauty of the soundfont system is, I could create a font that can incorporate all 8 piano's into various banks or just ditch the ones I don't like.

I'm even considering recording my sd1 drums as a font.

The font system may be a bit old hat, but it sure is versatile.

AJ, I came across rather an interesting font the other day on ebay. One of your posts you mentioned something about Korg. Must admit at times I miss the amazing sounds of the Wavestation. You mentioned you had it and others in some sort of a softsynth?? I remember looking it up, but the price here, floored me.
Anyway I found a 650mb soundfont full of pads, bells, spooky etheral sounds etc. Wavestation it's not , but it's interesting.
I have to break it up as my current laptop can't play a 650mb font. For $24 and 8 hours of download time, I figure I didn't have anything to lose.
He's done some early model synths as well.

best wishes
Rikki

Guys, especially Fran,
sorry for the wait, but Bandstand was acting up on me last night. I even tried the "render to wav" function and the results had cracks in the sound etc.
I sincerely hope I will have them for you tomorrow around this hour, don't forget we have a great time difference, and I just started work now, it is 9.51am now here.

Don't expect miracles though, as Diki said, Roland seems to have an edge in SMF playback. I have found that when playing back midifiles I got off the net, they sound better in Hypercanvasn ot as individual instruments but as a whole.

Scott,

The Motif ES only allows for DSP fx on 8 of it's midi channels, ( in the default mode channels 1-8, and though this can be changed I didn't .. I let it ride ) and SGM180 has no built in effects at all other than some very simple reverb and chorus. There are no "master" settings on it.

It hardly matters anyway, as one thing should become apparent from a demonstration like this... that the Midi standard is anything but.. standard.

Rikki,

The Legacy edition is expensive compared to most other vst modules. In fact, off the top of my head, I will say it is the most expensive VST I've ever purchased, but I just had to have it. It includes versions of the MS20, Wavestation, Polysix, and M1. I had the latter two in their heydays. The Polysix was my first analogue synth, and it worked like a charm. My M1 however, was buggy. When it worked, it was a good board, but when the eeprom went bad in it, it cost big bucks to have it reprogrammed.

The Legacy is such a faithful reproduction of the originals, that I doubt anyone could ever tell the difference. The added benefit is that this "M1" fires up and works right every time I use it.

I have from time to time seen some similar soundfonts that you describe too. I have my doubts about whether I could use a 650 mb soundfont either though, but as you indicated, the price is right for the samples you get.

Regards

AJ


[This message has been edited by Bluezplayer (edited 05-17-2006).]

So the essence of this thread is 'I'm too lazy to tweak my SMFs, what keyboard sounds best out of the box?'.........

Re-read my earlier post........ this is what is really important.

Diki and others..
The stereo / mono issue can be a real problem..

I too with every chance I get prefer and play in stereo..Fortunately my keyboards sound good in mono and better in stereo.

There are situations[venues] we play that we have no choice but to play in mono..As an example..The AC casinos have very elaborate sound systems[$250,000]...because of the facility design, the system is designed basically as a mono system.

I play several clubs with great systems that only allow the audiences to hear mono...Hence lies the problem, especially Yamaha, which I believe relies heavily on stereo effects to give it's sounds character..Possibly Korg may have the same problem..they also rely on effects to broaden their sound. Maybe not as noticeable as the Yamaha line..

I think even the Roland stereo samples[as my DisCover5 and all the new Rolands], may suffer in mono also, but the sample wavs seem not to rely on the effects to make the voices sound great..

As I have mentioned several times I am not knocking any one instrument..just trying to point out situations where a great sounding board may not work in the real world because of "modern" technology.

LOL... Yep.. I surely resemble that remark Diki.. that definitely would be me ... too "lazy" to tweak all of the ( however many hundreds or even thousands ) midifiles I have.. for each Kb and soft setup that I have. This reply made me chuckle a bit if nothing else..

It probably takes me 10 minutes easily to fix one to sound "just right" on the Motif ES, by the time I tweak the mixer, voice and DSP settings, and decide which of the eight channels should get DSP fx at all..

Fortunately, I have an alternative that works just fine for me called SGM180. Notwithstanding that it's a freeware soundfont, it also sounds pretty right to me each and every time.

Participating in this discussion was educational for me in that it helped reiterate to me what I had already suspected. That SGM180 is currently among the best options I have, and since I don't really have the luxury of time to tweak each file I possess, with the spare time I do have, I'm instead trying to tweak SGM180 itself so that once I'm done I'm done.. I won't have to tweak every new midifile I get... at least that's the theory behind it.

Why ? I have a thing called a life, and like so many others in this world, mine is more than a bit busy. Trying to keep up with it and do it just a little more than half @$$ed right is what's most important to me... and while I'm somewhat passionate with this music stuff and I find it fun to debate over a little, it sure as heck ain't life and death.

AJ


[This message has been edited by Bluezplayer (edited 05-17-2006).]

AJ, I agree..why would anyone want to tweak our sequence library to conform with a sound source that is suppose to, but does not conform to GM..
All my softsynths[including SGM180] and hardware [Roland], play fine...I wouldn't even consider a product that can't conform to GM, GM2, and most important to me, GS...

I'm not quite sure that Diki was commenting on you, but it was a little confusing..

How did such an uncomplicated topic get so complicated?

Just a brief comment........ You want something smaller and more robust than a laptop to play SMF's? Try a SC880 Pro module or even an older M-GS64 rack module......

As good as the G1000 mp3 (same engine), bombproof, no latency issues (how do you deal with integrating your keyboard and laptop without soundcard delay issues?) and NO CRASHES....... EVER!

And, if you are using the sound-font as SMF playback ONLY, and you aren't using the sounds to play live (latency issues again), why not just record the SMF through the best gear you can beg borrow and steal and then just use MP3s? An iPod would be sufficient, I'd say (and a video one could display lyrics or leadsheets for you, too)

BTW,,,,,,,,,, no, I don't have a life; I have a JOB! It's my job to sound as good as they pay me to sound, and they pay me pretty well! So the several weeks it took to tweak my SMFs and styles from the G1000 over to the G70 was work that I consider I have been paid for. And considering that I used the G1000 for over 6 years as my main gig keyboard, and anticipate that I will get at least that from the G70, a month or so doesn't seem that long for all the use I will get from them.

Diki, are you saying you had to do a lot of tweaking to use the same files that played fine on the G1000..but not the same on the G70...

Please tell me..the G70 is still GS compatible? If not, I can see where it may not work for me [as the JV/XP/XV/Fantom..didn't..]only GM/GM2 compliant..

I understand Diki, and really I have no argument with you, but I also think that characterizing others who you don't know personally at all as lazy just because they don't see fit to work the way you do is maybe a wee off base. As I said before, I'm not at all sore about it, just chuckling a bit.

This forum is filled with many people who come from different arenas in life. Your reasoning and approach is totally different than mine, and neither is right or wrong. I have a job too, and many other things going on in my life, probably as much if not more than a lot of people in my age group. I don't mind at all... in fact, I embrace it. Still, strictly speaking for myself, I can think of more productive ways to spend my limited spare time than tweaking midifiles, which for the most part I rarely actually need to use in the first place.

BTW My steady paying job isn't music, and I don't regret that. In fact, I'm pretty happy doing what I do and I wouldn't want it any other way.. OTOH I've also never regretted the money that came my way for the jobs I have done.


AJ

Hi AJ,
quite frankly, if the Lecacy edition, were the type of sounds I used frequently, I'd have no hesitation in spending the money either.
I just came across these new age, spacey , soundtrack type of styles in biab 2006, and remembered how incredible some of the Wavestation sounds were. Some of the gm synth sounds leave a bit to be desired, so I'm hoping this 600mb+ soundfont, may fill a gap.
I also had the M1 rackmount, plus O1W & Wavestation. My MI worked beautifully ( probably didn't have as much use as yours haa haa) But what a great way to get all those synths back.

I finally bit the bullet & ordered a new laptop ( 2 gigs this time ).
My Dell ( 512mb) laptop is working again, but the desktop has packed it in now. The Dell's now my general , internet pc & the new one will be dedicated to music. Great excuse to get a new laptop

best wishes
Rikki.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Bluezplayer:
[B]
Rikki,

The Legacy edition is expensive compared to most other vst modules. In fact, off the top of my head, I will say it is the most expensive VST I've ever purchased, but I just had to have it. It includes versions of the MS20, Wavestation, Polysix, and M1. I had the latter two in their heydays. The Polysix was my first analogue synth, and it worked like a charm. My M1 however, was buggy. When it worked, it was a good board, but when the eeprom went bad in it, it cost big bucks to have it reprogrammed.

Yes, unfortunately (please see my earlier post to this thread with a more detailed explanation), the G70 does only a fair to poor job of playing unmodified SMFs compared to a G1000.

BUT.......... read my post again. Roland provide the fastest, easiest way to correct this problem. Let's face it, if all you want is a new keyboard that sounds EXACTLY like your G1000, why change at all..........?

If you want a new keyboard that sounds seriously better, you are gong to have to put some time in tweaking the files to make it sound as good as it can. Who, in their right mind, wants to run an SMF through (for instance) a MotifES and NOT use the best sound for each part? Well, OK, you're going to have to do some work.......... But doesn't the end justify the means?

Please don't over-react to my 'lazy' description of this problem. I fully understand that not everyone here is a full-time musician, and am sorry to describe the problem in such a confrontational way, but in all professions there is the 'easy' way and there is the 'best' way. The ones that rise to the top are the ones that take the path less travelled........

Once again I bring up the point that ANY SMF needs tweaking to sound it's best on anything but the original equipment...... but how easy does YOUR manufacturer make this process???

I argue that if your keyboard was as easy to adjust as a G70, you probably WOULD take the time.............

Ok, here are the files I finally uploaded.

This is the Hypersonic2 GM version: http://storeandserve.com/download/245678/honky_tonk_hypersonic_GM.mp3.html

This is the Bandstand GM version: http://storeandserve.com/download/245683/honky_tonk_bandstand_GM.mp3.html

This is Hypersonic2, with selected better quality instruments: http://storeandserve.com/download/245693/honky_tonk_hypersonic_SELECTION.mp3.html

Bandstand kept doing things in playback and I suspect there are a lot of stuck notes after the first minute. It tried to stream from the hard disk but my PC is full of garbage so it couldn't cope.

Hypersonic did fine. In the second version with the selected instruments, I let it play for a while and during playing changed the amp simulation on the Distortion guitar, and changed some drum kits. The instruments I selected may be not the best for the situation, I just searched and replaced the original GM with their high quality equivalents.

Here is a screenshot from Hypersonic2 so you know which instruments replaced which: http://storeandserve.com/download/245733/hypersonic_selection.jpg.html

I think Hypersonic sounds better, on both GM occasions I just loaded the file and let it play, while recording with Goldwave.

Cheers,
Theodore

Theodore, Thanks for taking the time to record these versions.
For me personally, it allowed me a chance to compare Banstand with what I am presently using.[Thinking about purchasing]..

I agree with you ..Of the recordings you did, I favor the Hypersonic GM version..

To date, including My recording, Donny's, AJ's and yours..I think overall, I still prefer the G1000 recording, followed by AJ's SGM180..then your Hypersonic GM version.
I guess this shows merit in softsynths[2 out the top 3, to me..are softsynths].
Thanks again for all you guy's taking the time to record...I really found it interesting, and fruitful for me..

Theodore, I spent more time listening to your recordings again..

I definitely like the Hypersonic better than Bandstand on this SMF..

I liked some of the changes you were making on Hypersonic[variations]..very interesting..
My thinking is it may not be as reliable to use Bandstand..the hanging notes would drive me crazy..
For my use , I do need a good GM choice. I would not entertain changing my thousands of files to accommodate a sound source..

It does seem to me that the Roland and SGM180, have a clarity that I prefer, but some on the instruments in Hypersonic merits my interest in checking it out in more detail..I may add Hypersonic to my arsenal..

Fran,
believe it or not, I have the feeling that when using Bandstand and listening to either:

a) PRO midifiles made from Roland itself, or
b) PRO made, 3rd party midifiles intented for use with Roland equipment (SC series etc, produced in the 90's),

without changing anything, Bandstand sounds better or maybe more acceptable or maybe more "Roland HyperCanvas-like" out of the box, compared to Hypersonic2 which sounds more Yamaha-like.

BUT (in capital letters),
a) you have to give it enough time to load the appropriate instruments before you start to play (about 20-30 seconds for the Honky Tonk midifile you sent me,
b) Pray and hope that there are no program changes halfway in the song, because they need time for the new instrument to load.
c) ther are not many instruments playing at once (which was the case with the Honky Tonk midifile) because it will try to use the hard drive with unpredictable results.

During playback of the Honky Tonk, memory consumption was showing about 120MB, and topping at about 45% processor time. ( all that in 48KHz playback, in 90 KHz it stutters profoundly in my system).

Someone with a better PC than mine, (Athlon 1400+, 768MB RAM, audiophile 24/96, lots of garbage programs inside) may find that Bandstand is behaving differently, but I write about what I see.

Bear in mind that it also has some settings I didn't touch, like an EQ for every channel with presets like "Rock" or "lowpass", and some of them sound good. It also has a very "Hypercanvas" like interface, with the same controls, (tracks are top to bottom instead of left to right, with chorus, reverb and level readily accessible).

Bandstand's GM drums are miles ahead that Hypersonic2's GM drums, although they have some quirks when I use certain Casio Styles. (the maracas or something similarly sounding are unbearably loud, they are louder than the snare drum!). Hypersonic avenges itself when you load other drum kits, but they miss some instruments like congas etc, as another Synthzone member pointed out.

Hypersonic has a very fast engine. It loads things fast, and some of the XXL instuments shown in the photo I provided are very big. It has an enormous selection of instruments like guitars and synths, though lacks in some areas, like woodwinds. Never stuttered, except in case i was trying to load a 30 MB instrument while 5-6 other equally large instruments where playing at the same time, but the wait is nowhere as long as Bandstand's.

What I dream of, is a utility which will take a midifile, and change the instruments automatically to the high quality equivalents of Hypersonic. This would provide excellent results. I think one such utility exists fot the Tyros or am i mistaken?

Ahh, I forgot, I tried to record MA-Audio Key Rig GM version also, it behaved very erraticaly, so I gave up. Sound quality was inferior to both the others according to my ears.

If you have any questions, I'd be happy to try to help.
Theodore

[This message has been edited by trident (edited 05-18-2006).]

trident & Fran as you know I have NI's Bandstand. I think it sounds fairly good and NI plans to update it this year some time to deal with some of the issues you have identified, such as loading times, etc. In addition, I am hoping they will allow the user to load wavetables such as SGM180 or others. I would like to have it designed so that I can change or replace any instrument I want.

With respect to the Bandstand Honky tonk mp3 demo I think there may be some issues with respect to the midi file, your software and your equipment, e.g., hanging notes, no drums, etc. If this were properly setup you would find Bandstand a fairly good software synth for auto accompaniment only. It should be a lot better once NI updates it and fixes some of the bugs.

Also when you use M. Bedesem's MidiPlayer you can quickly modify midi or style files to suit your particular wavetable. This includes changing your drum kits (midi note numbers).


[This message has been edited by Frank L. Rosenthal (edited 05-18-2006).]

Hi Theo,
do you happen to know if you can alter the drum mapping in Hypersonic2?/
Probably you'd be able to edit individual drum volumes etc
But can you actually alter the mapping ie move a bass drum C1 so that it plays on C0.
Better still can you create a complete new user drumset.
Reason I ask, is you could actually create your own xg mapped set ( no hassles with wrong drums playing, you could even alter individual volumes)

If you mainly use it to play casio styles , but with hypersonic sounds, It would be far easier to create a drum set/s that match your casio.

Any idea if there's a manual that I could download??

i'm 2 hours away from a music store & I'm not even sure if they stock it. I haven't been able to find out much about it except for the demo's you made.
I'm more interested in the technical aspect of what can & can't be done, because the sounds, sound good.

I like the flexibility of soundfonts because I can create my own drum sets.

I've got 100's of Non Gm songs that would take me forever to convert to gm, so I'm better off converting my soundsource to suit the songs rather than vice versa.
Soundfonts may be my only option, but it would be interesting to know if Hypersonic could be used.

best wishes
Rikki


[QUOTE]Originally posted by trident:

Frank,
there were drums in the Bandstand version, they simply were very low in volume compared to the other instruments and to have a "fair" comparison with Hypersonic2 I left the levels as they were. In the opposite, the sax was way high, didn't change that either.
I agree, Bandstand sounds good for accompaniment, definitely, and my PC is in crap state. literally. On the other hand, other softsynths don't seem to bother, only Bandstand does.


Rikki,
my Casio arranger conforms to the GM standard, so there is no use for me to do editing of any kind. I just play my arranger, and the softsynths take the midi output (along with the accompaniments) and play the sounds themselves. In a way, I have multiple better quality instruments substituting the crap internal suonds.

Give me some time and I will see about the manual.

Theodore

My thanks to all that participated in this thread..I think it was beneficial to all of us..

What? no G70 coming now?

Donny, I guess we will have to take another famous road trip to finally check out a G70..Another 5-6 hour trip..

KB ROAD TRIP???? Oh Yeah!!! ....just let me know & we're off baby!!!! lets check the G70 & the E80 too while we're there.......

BTW breakfast Monday?

And to wrap all this nonsence up about "Newer is not always better..."



Thanks for such an interesting topic Fran.


Best regards to you

Dennis L. Almond
aka...TwoNuts

trident,

interesting compasison. Bandstand vs. Hypersonic. Yes, the non-GM drums in Hypersonic do not have the complete drum-mapping with congas, bongos and stuff. Then again it seem you can combine percussion (they have special kits programmed) to go with the drum kit. Where the mapping of the drum kits end, the mappings of the percussion kit starts as if they split the keyboard in the middle. I guess this could be interestinb when you set the percussion track of your midifile to channel 9 and combine different percussion sits with different drum kits. Just a thought, I diid not have the time to try it out yet.

Still, are there any xg or psr patches for hypersonic to set up the sounds for yammie styles?

Best regards

Heinrich