I just had a brain fart here We talk about the so desired "Hybrid" of a full synth with arranger functions. I just got to thinking and didn't Yamaha actually come very close if not dead on with this in around 1996 with the release of the QS-300? Wasn't that synth basically like a QY unit with keys and more indepth voice editing?

Squeak

Your memory is good.

Yamaha QS300 Workstation Specifications

Type: Synth/ Workstation/ keyboard/
Synthesis Type: Digital AWM with 28 MB of ROM
Polyphony:
Max: 32
Typical in use: 16
Multi-timbral (number of parts): 24
Oscillators per Voice :
Min : 1
Max : 4
Controllers : Foot vol, foot cont, sustain
Effects :
Number of FX units : 3
Number of different effects : 42
Drum Section :
Number of Drum Kits : 10 (TGB 399 Mode)/11(xg mode)
Number of Drum sounds : 216TG/231XG
Keyboard :
Number of Keys : 61
Can send on 16 simultaneous MIDI channels
Responds to : velocity, after-touch
Sounds can be split by : velocity, keyboard
Memory :
Patches : 480(tgb300) 579 +128+128 user(xg)
Performances : 10 songs + 100 styles + 100 phrases
Inputs and Outputs :
Number of Audio Outs (excluding Phones) : 1(stereo)
Number of Audio Ins : 0
Number of MIDI Outs (excluding Thru) : 1
Number of MIDI Ins : 1

I had a very short run with one back in 1998, I can't remember all of its functions though. Sounds were fairly decent (up to date for the time. Sequencer was good. I think it had styles, phrases, ect. Good keybed, with aftertouch, Good quality construction, Screen was typical of the time, and I think remember reading a review a ways back about a owner comparing it to his PSR for chord work.

My guess is at the time (10 years ago) the stereotype on arrangers was much more harsh then. That has changed a lot over the years, but I would assume that the public wasn't ready for this type of keyboard yet just as they weren't ready for the Casio MZ-2000 when it was released. Many people probably saw styles on the QS and ignored the board.

It would be nice to see Yammie do it again. Basically they could do the same thing all over. Take the internal workings of the QY-100, beef up the sounds (by adding more of course), add a nice keybed, pitch/mod wheels, decent screen, ect and voila!

Squeak

[This message has been edited by squeak_D (edited 09-16-2005).]

IMHO, the best synth/arranger of its day was the Yamaha 9000Pro. When it was introduced (pre-Motif),it was the most capabile synth in Yamaha's lineup. It had 48MB ROM, large for the time, and plug-in slots for additional synth technologiesso it could do VA, PM, as well as Rompler stuff. It could sample and included vocal harmony. The build quality was high. It was a no-compromise instrument, so I guess it did not sell very well.

Clif,
How in depth was the voice editing on the 9000 Pro? How many elements per voice could you use to create user voices. Did it allow at least 4 elements per user voice, and could the user edit each element individually and set velocity curves.

Really if you think about it even the Casio MZ-2000 was a "hybrid". That board had an AWSOME synth engine (full editing-up to 4 elements). It even had aftertouch (a feature even the PSR-3000 doesn't have. When it was released it was basically up against the PSR-740 and in quite a few areas the MZ-2000 left the 740 in the dust (ESPECIALLY) in the recording department. The 740 couldn't even touch the MZ in terms of recording styles and user songs.

If the 9000 Pro had a full synth engine then I'd have to agree that the Pro was a "hybrid". Sadly though the pro took some negative hits because "idiot" online retailers were calling it the PSR-9000 Pro, even though Yamaha dropped the PSR from this model.

I even saw it in catalogs being called the PSR-9000 Pro.

Squeak

[This message has been edited by squeak_D (edited 09-16-2005).]

The 9000 Pro did have synthesis and editing capabilities, the synth engine was essentially an MU100R card inside the 9000 Pro and editing via the Pro's LCD screen wasn't easy. You could hook the 9000 Pro up to your computer and further edit the sounds with provided editing software but it would have been nice to have the 9000 Pro have full editing on board. Multi layer sounds each with their own envelopes, LFO, FX, filters, velocity, and more were possible.

With the PLG150-VL card installed the 9000 Pro had extensive synthesis capabilities but since the cards interface was very poorly supported (I stress poorly), editing via the 9000 Pro wasn't simple nor intuitive as it should have been. Once again you were forced to use computer software to edit with rather than edit directly from the 9000 Pro. When I spoke with Yamaha's Mark Anderson as to why they didn't develop the software further for better implementation of the PLG cards Mark told me Yamaha felt that users didn't want those features. I was a 9000 Pro owner/user and I wanted them. I doubt I was the only user who did want those features! I was left out in the cold and eventually Yamaha abandoned the 9000 Pro which was a real shame. The board sounded great, had an awesome key feel, expansion capabilities, and was built like a tank. Yamaha fell short with the 9000 Pro by not completing software fixes, limiting upgrades, and in general extremely poor customer support. Yamaha's poor support was enough for me to sell my 9000 Pro and move on to Technics which I really liked. Unfortunately Technics stopped making keyboards so I had to sell my Technics due to no future support. Many Technics users were sad to hear that Technics would no longer make instruments and had Technics kept going, I'm certain they would still be one of the top arranger keyboards made.

Even on today's flagship model, the Motif ES, editing abilities and midi implementation for the plug in cards is minimal at best. It seems to me that Yamaha has had a history of releasing add on cards that are capable of excellent sounds but that cannot be controlled or manipulated very well from inside the host.

I have both the acoustic modeling VL150 and Virtual analog AN150 cards in my ES, and while both are capable of very good sounds, I can't do any meaningful editing to either without using a computer. One of the attractions of a Virtual Analog is having the ability to edit and even warp sounds in real time. Unfortunately, you cannot go much beyond the standard ADSR for any of the cards from within the Motif ES.

I agree about the MZ Squeak. The synth engine wasn't as deep as what the AN150 and perhaps maybe even my PA80 are capable of, and like the PA80, it was only capable of wave ( sample ) based synthesis, but there was much better ability to control it in real time.

AJ