I am not defensive I only say that after playing almost a month on a Korg I feel no need for more fills. I think that Korg owners don't have to use the fills as much as the Roland and Yamaha owners because the styles of Korg are not as monotonous as the ones on Roland and Yamaha. And I have noticed that many styles on Korg contains mini fill ins.



[This message has been edited by FransN (edited 08-15-2009).]

Which are fine until you play a twelve bar section, or any irregular (non 8 and 16) length structure. Then they start popping up when you DON'T need them.

What I'm talking about is the difference between going from Var4 to Var 1 and Var 4 to Var 4 (or 3). Basically, ONE of those has to have a bad transition, if not both...

Hi Diki,
fills is something I've never been particularly good with ( ie as far as programming)
The PA800 actually has some drum fill pads, so I guess they're designed to play over the top of the variation to give the impression of a fill.

My old DGX fills were nothing more than a drum fill, the rest of the instruments appeared to just keep playing the regular variation pattern with the drum fill.

I was never overly wrapped in some of the KN7 fills. I think it had 8 ?? but some of them were so busy, they didn't blend in either. I suppose it's got a lot to do with how they're programmed.

Extra fills would be great for the Korg, but not a deal breaker for me. It's got too much else to offer.

best wishes
Rikki

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Diki:
[B]Can you get the Pad to 'Replace' the Variation as well as add to it, James? I don't see how this could really be used to get a proper fill out of a Variation if it can't...

That I agree

Heres the story on the fills (we have gone over it before).

1) Yes a PA800/PA2XPRO (right out of the box) on some styles (Definetly only some styles...I think ones with guitar tracks in them) if the fill is pressed just anytime will sometimes immediately upon entry trigger a sound that does not seem to fit at that specific time. It can makes things sound a little OFF. This is because it triggers IMMEDIATELY and triggers at that point in the fill (that point in the pattern sequence), not the beginning of the fill. So, depending on the style..and what is at that spot in the fill...it is a problem. Once again only on some styles.

2) If prssed on the downbeat (red indicator on) it never has any issues because the fill starts at the beginning the way it was programmed and sounds fine. Seems to work fine for any variation also.

3) In Release 2.0 of PA800/Pa2XPRO (released this spring) Korg enhanced a programming parameter in style record mode(modify a style or make your own) called 'CUE MODE'. With that Parm, we can now EASILY change a style fill or a variation for that matter to begin on 'Next measure, first measure' = The style element enters at the beginning of the next measure, and begins from the first measure of the new pattern. This is for variations and fills.
So if you make this change...when you press a fill it does not start in the middle of its pattern (and play any sound that may not sound quite ok based on the timing of when you press the fill. I have changed a few styles that I use and it made a big improvement.

4) The trasitions from one variation to another is fine and you don't need a fill neccessarily. Sometimes I use one, sometimes not.

5) The CUE mode has 4 otions in it: Immediate first measure (only for fills), Immediate next measure (Only for fills) Next measure first measure (Fills & Vars), Mext measure current measure (Only on Vars)
So, per style, per style element you can setup whatever you want. This is a PRO workstation, hence, yes, there is LOTS of programming options. I like that.

Comment...Personally I think this area of the board could be a little better right out of the box (and more fills would be nice as well) ...but, with everything it offers I do not find it to be a big deal for me. For me (you may not see it this way) it is not a reason to not get one or change to anything else currently out there.

Lee S.

Yamaha as does other arranger manufacturers realize that the MOTL players are gigging musicians and are the same market like the TOTL WS user.
So price is a factor at that stage. If a person is considering a MOTL arranger, they are looking at price vs features. Now, given that MOTL arrangers today have probably the same or better quality and features than yesterday’s TOTL arrangers, a skillful gigging arranger player is perhaps the major market for the MOTL arranger because they don't have to have everything done for them and are willing to edit to make the arranger sound to their liking.

Just look at how many persons gig with an S900 or a PA 800.
The MS is even going to have MOTL arrangers.
And, I believe that if Roland stays in the arranger business, it will be a MOTL.


You see, before, the gigging musician, in order to get the better sounds and styles, they had to buy the TOTL. Today, now that the MOTL arranger has comparable sounds and styles to yesterday's TOTL, the gigging arranger player does not have to buy a TOTL.
So, the pool of persons left who would buy a TOTL arranger has dwindled and only people who would buy an arranger where price is not an option is left. That is why arranger manufacturers can up the price on the TOTL. But, as you said, that will not last for ever.



[This message has been edited by to the genesys (edited 08-15-2009).]

Diki I understand where you are coming from. I would love to have the 4 fills. That's why I "entertained' the T3 I feel the T3 has the perfect setup ... 4 varations ... 4 fills 1 break/fill. Even though I believe the PA "Sounds" better I would have taken the T3 over the PA if the Hamonizer and Vocal side of the T3 was up to "Pro" standards and it's not. That part of the T3 is very weak".

[This message has been edited by JCkeeys (edited 08-16-2009).]