and



I just did an informal load-time test.

I started with software. Reason loads 497 MB in 31 seconds (16.03 MB/sec). Pretty fast!

I remember when I first bought my e6400, many years ago now, and how impressed I was with its fast load times. It loads 128 MB in 46 seconds (2.78 MB/sec). Much slower than Reason, as you predict above.

Then, I tried the OASYS. It loaded 464 MB in 31 seconds (14.97 MB/sec), almost as fast as Reason, and more than 5x faster than the e6400.

An advantage to the workstation approach is that, in comparison to even my streaming software instruments, changing sounds on the OASYS generally takes no time at all (since usually, the samples are already loaded - if the sounds use samples in the first place; I use the synth parts of the OASYS quite heavily).



and



In my experience, the opposite is the case. For instance, I know of two software instruments that deliver approximately equivalent sound quality to the OASYS: NI's Massive (on its highest quality setting), and Wayoutware's TimeWARP. Even on powerful computers, these deliver only a handful of notes. Compare this to OASYS's 172 voices of HD-1, PolysixEX, or CX-3, and 96 voices of AL-1.

It's also worth noting that higher sample rates may improve the sound quality of less sophisticated synth and effects algorithms, but they are no guarantee of superior performance. As has been noted in the past, the OASYS outperforms many other hardware and software instruments, including those which use higher sample rates, in various objective ways (such as the maximum resonant frequency of the modeled VA filters).

Aliasing oscillators are another frequent problem with digital synths, software and hardware alike. This can be reduced by using higher sample rates, but it is more effectively and (in my opinion) elegantly addressed by improving the algorithms themselves, as evidenced by the OASYS's extremely low aliasing even at a "mere" 48kHz.

There's also the OASYS's dynamic resource allocation between different synthesis algorithms, with protection against CPU overload glitches - something that no software system offers, as far as I know.



This is an understandable opinion, but not necessarily a universal one. For instance, I have a fairly well-appointed home studio (see http://www.danphillips.com/equipment.htm ). While I own several software synths and samplers, and enjoy them for various reasons, at the moment the only one I use frequently is Stylus RMX, which is really great for working with drum loops. My OASYS handles most of the synth duties, since in my opinion, it generally sounds better than the alternatives.

I've worked with people who did demo tracks using large streaming software libraries, and then switched to using OASYS sounds instead when they brought the tracks to my studio.



For backing tracks, for instance - very common in otherwise "live" performance.

While many people, including myself, use a computer-based DAW system, there are many others who want to separate their music-making from the computer; this is in strong evidence on the Korg Forums, for instance.

[edited, again, to remove weird copy/paste problem from the start of the message]

[This message has been edited by Dan Phillips (edited 06-30-2008).]

Scoopicman... Didn't realize that with respect to sample load times. Very cool. Of course, not reason enough for an $8000+ keyboard, but at least it's a start. I haven't heard anything about THAT technology trickling down to the M3, though. BTW, will the Oasys play while it loads? That's another thing all samplers should work on...

And sorry, but an $8000+ keyboard to record a sub-$2000 keyboard's sounds on, rather than an $800 laptop seems an extravagance. I could have an Oasys in front of me right now. It would still not persuade me to use it instead of a pro DAW. Just the quality of the plug-ins (I use UAD-1 cards for non-native stuff) and range of choice can't be matched by hardware, yet alone the 24 bit recording issues...

NIce if you have one, but I'll stick to more affordable superior alternatives, if you don't mind...

That's correct. Audio recording is handled by the main CPU system, along with the rest of the synths and effects.



I think two points became conflated here. I was responding to your statement that the OASYS was limited by a 16-bit sound card; this is not the case.

However, you're absolutely correct that the samples and audio recording are 16-bit. These are the only parts of the system which are 16-bit; all synthesis and effects processing (filters, amps, mixers, VA oscillators, physical models, etc.), including any processing of samples and audio tracks, is done at 32-bit floating point or better. A/D and D/A are 24-bit.



------------------
Dan Phillips
Product Manager, Korg R&D

Interesting - I just tried another set of samples, 709 MB, and they loaded in 32 seconds - only one second more than the previous test of ~460 MB, and 22.15 MB/sec. I think the load time must vary depending on the number of samples, as well as the size in MB; thinking about it, that makes some sense.



------------------
Dan Phillips
Product Manager, Korg R&D

Dan... an $8000+ keyboard to play a linear two track file? A $1600 PSR can do that.

And yes, while you CAN use an Oasys as a DAW and VSTi alternative, let's be realistic. I haven't seen one ProTools facility give up their HD Accel cards and Apogee converters, etc., to go the workstation route.

It just strikes me as neither flesh nor fowl. Neither powerful enough to replace a pro DAW (it's a pro price, it should have been a pro DAW), nor stripped down enough to act as a simple track playback for a live show. On the whole, a pro-priced piece of kit is going to end up in the hands of pros. Who already HAVE ProTools, or Logic or Cubase4, etc.. Why waste the R&D money on something 99% of all it's likely owners will already have something far superior?

Oasys2.... do away with the DAW. A simple two track player with markers will suffice. Then drop the $1500 all this programming must have cost you. $6500 sounds a LOT more affordable...

In fact, make a sampler that loads at Oasys speeds. Make it Akai compatible. One rack space, 128 voices. Clean up BIGTIME!

Yes, you can play while loading. BTW, $800 awful cheap for a laptop that will actually do anything, and the Virus TI keyboard is not sub $2K - Sweetwater and Musicians' Friend list it at $3,560. I think I've fallen prey to conspicuous consumption! (Sorry, I can't have my Virus value demeaned.)

Only KARMA and the HD-1 (ROMpler) architecture have passed on to the M3. It doesn't have Wave Sequencing and the other synth engines.

Anyway, I have Sonar 6, but have not recorded a song on it. I keep it as backup, as I intend to use it, someday. In the meantime, I'm one of those who uses hardware sequencers/recorders.

I know there have been complaints, but I'm one of the people who actually like the OASYS' sequencer/HDR. The fact that you can bus any track into a synth engine is one cool aspect of the bus system. I use the Vocoder, sequencer and bus system a little differently than your typical robot jox:

Voice controlled Choir

What I often like to do is setup 2 or 3 keyboards and just jam - laying down a soundscape. (you need at least 2 keyboards to do the riff for "Enjoy The Silence", so a DAW won't solve that for me. ha ha!) Anyway, the OASYS has Multi-Rec (not found on a lot of hardware, at least), which allows you to record up to 20 tracks (16 MIDI, 4 audio), simultaneously. For the 3 keyboards, I can record them, sing along - hear it all through the L/R outputs, but record what I want to isolated record busses.

Obviously, I've heard some outstanding work done with Logic and other DAWs. There's no denying that. As some of you know, better recordings may require multiple computers and sample libraries. I just asked someone what he was using and this was his reply:



That's a lot of dongles! (and money) I have 4 computers, including a dual Xeon beast. I'm not technology shy, but when it comes to music, I like to sit at a keyboard or two and do everything right there. I'm more likely to fix a part by physically replaying it, than editing - though I do both. I actually like the direction that keyboards, like the Roland Fantom G are taking (OS-wise).

See, I wasn't pulling your chain! I've been saying that, since I bought the String library, about 2 years ago.

I'm not sure what's intended by the above. You had asked why one might want audio recording on a workstation, and speculated that this would be useless in live situations; I explained that there are users who want non-computer music workstations, and that there are also uses in live situations for backing tracks (which aren't necessarily only two track files, btw).

I think it's clear that one would not by an OASYS for the audio recording feature alone. Indeed, as I've said, I don't personally use its audio recording or sequencing at all, other than for testing purposes; I use Digital Performer, and frequently talk about using the OASYS within the context of a larger studio.
I expect that most people, instead, buy it for its unique sounds and synthesis capabilities. That's certainly what I personally value about the instrument!



I'm nothing if not realistic. :-) I've been making professional music instruments for almost twenty years, and I use them in my own music as well. I don't think anyone at Korg has ever implied that a DAW studio would ditch their computer and use an OASYS instead; certainly I have never said anything like that. On the other hand, every serious Pro Tools facility I've seen uses hardware synths and outboard gear alongside their computer systems.

Btw - the idea of an OASYS as a "VSTi alternative" made me chuckle. :-)



I don't understand why audio playback features would have to be stripped down in order to make them applicable for live use. Just press play and you're good to go...



If you look around the net a bit, I think you'll find that there are many semi-pros and hobbyists, as well.



Users say that they want audio playback in their workstations, which is presumably why Korg has offered this feature for many years (dating back to the Trinity, in the mid-1990s), and why Roland offers it in their workstations as well.

One advantage of the OASYS system is that since the hardware already includes a hard drive, audio I/O, and a CPU, the DAW features cost only software engineering time. Which leads smoothly into...



While I can't get into details, that's probably more than the entire cost for the software as a whole, of which the DAW features were a fairly small portion. As has been discussed elsewhere, the prices of all Korg hardware products, including the OASYS, are based primarily on the cost of the hardware components.

------------------
Dan Phillips
Product Manager, Korg R&D

[This message has been edited by Dan Phillips (edited 06-30-2008).]

Well, biggest fault of Korg...


They did not make the OASYS harware (CPU, RAM, mainboard) upgradable... so they ended up with a less open system.

Wersi is much better on track, as both software system and hardware are open and still growing and developing.

Mediastation on the same way..but I think we are more fast for developing and add new features.

fortunally, we don't have the sampler loading time issue like this all keyboards, because we use the Streaming technology:
Steinway D grand, 1680Mb loaded with SATA-2 HD. 9 seconds!
500/600Mb single instrumens about 4 second.
less than 100Mb instruments in about 0.5 second.

Dan wrote:
In my experience, the opposite is the case. For instance, I know of two software instruments that deliver approximately equivalent sound quality to the OASYS: NI's Massive (on its highest quality setting), and Wayoutware's TimeWARP. Even on powerful computers, these deliver only a handful of notes. Compare this to OASYS's 172 voices of HD-1, PolysixEX, or CX-3, and 96 voices of AL-1.

well..for me the NI Massive and Galaxy M51 are the two VST that can compete with the all Oasys sounds: http://www.lionstracs.com/store/images/gui2007/m51galaxy.jpg http://www.lionstracs.com/store/images/2008/massive.jpg
Here no problems about Voice, because we can just upgrade the CPU to Quad core and Up to 16Gb RAM, then we can hosting a lot of this VST in realtime: http://www.lionstracs.com/store/information_pages.php?info_id=24

The PLUS now of mediastation is the Multiple ASIO Host support:
Under Single Host, ( up to 10 now)we can just press one MS KEY and the new ASIO host will be recalled and then switch patches are all in realtime.

New MS COMBI 3.0 manager: can forward the midi Outs to the all JACK Midi IN available, inlcuding the 10 ASIO host, just by the simple COMBI interface without use the Mouse and PC keyboard.
Added also the single GIGA Loader for each Layer, it mean that now in each COMBI Patch is possible loading the desidered GIGA file from the whole GIGA library.
With this new feature under COMBI we are now allowed to play in realtime UP to 8 layered zone with velocity switch feature and MIX each layer with the sounds take from the 10 ASIO host and GIGA library installed.
All in realtime by pressing one patch key, NO waiting time for loading!
It mean:all the keyboards now are smoked out.
IF the NI Massive and some other VST together can be compared with the Oasys...now with 10 ASIO Host and COMBI GIGA loader...

remain the DAW issue...
Qranger is a simple BUT amazing Audio-midi SEQ, unlimited on tracks, Full integrated on the MS engine and pannel keys features.
Qranger can be used like one Arranger styles player, BUT can be used under SEQ mode too, without Chords table.
It mean that we are allowed to compose standard songs DAW session BUT always controlled by the MS keys features Patterns markers.
IF is not enough is also available the Ardour:http://ardour.org/
Finally, really soon the 64studio developers will release the new Mediastation OS, based on the new Kubuntu 8.0: http://kubuntu.org/

This mean a Open system keyboard and the MS don't need to be discontinued at all..is only software and PC hardware parts to upgrade.

I'm not talk bad about the Oasys, because my partners already buy 2 Oasys too and I know well how is working: http://mediarec.it/

Enjoy what you play