Korg Pa2x tone edit superior?

I have been hearing about the Korg PA2x...the ultimate synth edit capable arranger...From my past experience, and recent reading of the Korg manuals..I have the opinion , although the PA2x is great at editing sounds...it is surely not superior over all..In fact the Roland G70 has the exact editing capabilities in tone edits..and exceeds the Korg in drum edits..

Also on the plus column of the Roland..Effects that have always been a strength for Korg...again although good..do not match up to the G70 in effects edits and total number of effects units...The E80, even has more than it's counter G70..

I am not dishing out on the PA2x..in fact I like it...but I think it is a good idea to put this comparison out front...Maybe we can have a civil discussion here about our thoughts on the top models when it comes to editing sounds...

I believe this discussion would further establish why the top arrangers are the better machine over the respective "synth workstations"...I for one would never want a workstation (only) over the "arranger workstations"..

I also question why you folks think that the current workstation only boards incorporate "arranger" capabilities...They do NOT!!!..the exception is the MediaStation..that many knock as an arranger..yet except the thought that a workstation can do the job of a arranger...

Arpeggios can only fill a need to a point..and not very well...and if you think you would want to work gigs with just a workstation..especially if you are coming from a arranger background...I want to hear from you..(still have this bridge for sale.. ..)

The truth anyone that thinks the workstation rules..has not worked an arranger to it's up most capabilities...


So..what are your thoughts?

Well, for a start off, Fran, you really need to read the PA2 manual before you make comparisons. The PA2 has FULL, synth-like voice editing (full ADSR, for instance, Roland has ADR) LFO type as well as rate and depth and delay, and many other things. Basically, it is close to a full Triton voice editing. THEN, on top of all the additional power, Korg actually allows you to STORE a voice edit for later recall. Roland has no way to store your edits so that they become a USER Tone, for recall at any time. Want to use an edited Tone in a live setup? You have to repeat making all the edits! It's a PITA.

I have no idea what you are smoking, but to even SUGGEST that the G70 has anywhere near the Korg's tone edit capability only demonstrates your lack of knowledge. Sorry to be harsh here, but those are the facts.

Even the PA1 manual has over twenty pages about the voice editing. Try actually READING them before you make completely erroneous misstatements like that, dude...

As for arps being different to arranger usage, Well DUH! Of course it is different. But it depends on what kind of music you are making. Old school, bigband, jazz, etc., the arranger is going to rule. But chilldown, acid jazz, ambient, triphop, for those kinds of styles, the WS rules. You have got to look out past your own narrow range of styles before you can make such sweeping statements, Fran.



That's a pretty amazing statement from someone that so far has failed to show any mastery of the arranger himself. Or, for that matter, any music from the MS to show you have any right to claim its' superiority.

Personally, I think that anyone that actually DOES get a mastery of either form of keyboard is capable of wowing us all. It is still down to the player, IMO...

[This message has been edited by Diki (edited 08-20-2009).]

Diki..stop being a "Diki"...

I have not stated the "superiority of the MS"..your words ...

Also what Korg is using as LFO edits is so similar to Rolands "vibrato" edits...score even.."..and yes Korg has the very useful extra ADSR component..

Another thing we over emphasize..No storage of edits on Roland...Big deal..so we have to save in user programs..that unlimited area we have on the Rolands.. ..When you want to use as edited tones..just lock out the things you do not want to change..we still have the style selection buttons..

Diki try to be less aggressive in your comments...I do just fine with my skill levels..and I would bet anything I am a happier person then yourself..

BTW: yes I am sorta closed minded to "modern " music....could it be..that most of it just plain sucks...

Get my drift?

Now is there any one with constructive thoughts..

1,2,cha cha cha

Hi Fran.

The Pa2X has a full blown workstation under the hood. It is not a cut down version of KORG EDS engine. I know no arranger has a COMBI mode, but the Pa2X has something pretty darn close. You have 16 true oscillators that can all run independent of each other and emulate everything you get in a COMBI mode on top of the fact that they are basically 16 full program sounds under a single sound.

In short, it's pretty complex



That does not make any sense to me. Modulating pitch is Vibrato, where a LFO is a completely different animal altogether. The waveforms range from basic Sine waves to experimental waveforms so your looking at one heck of a deep engine here that can easily produce sounds that continuously evolve and even step.

Regards
James

[This message has been edited by Irishacts (edited 08-20-2009).]

Sound parameters Meaning
Attack Attack time. This is the time during which the
sound goes from zero (at the moment when
you strike a key) to it’s maximum level.
Decay Decay time. Time to go from the final Attack
level to the beginning of the Sustain.
Release Release time. This is the time during which the
sound goes from the sustaining phase, to zero.
The Release is triggered by releasing a key.
Cutoff Filter cutoff. This sets the sound brightness.
Resonance Use the Filter Resonance to boost the cutoff
frequency.
LFO Depth Intensity of the Vibrato (LFO).
LFO Speed Speed of the Vibrato (LFO).
LFO Delay Delay time before the Vibrato (LFO) begins,
after the sound starts.
Sty
Sty


James here is content taking from page 102 in the PA2x....Seems that Korg uses the Low freq oscillator..as a vibrato to me...

Hi Fran.



You can do that too, but you can also modulate the pitch or any element of the sound with a large array of functions. There's nothing really locked down to a specific way of working on a KORG. The engine is extremely flexible so you can get really imaginative and create some very unique sounds.

Also the LFO has an array of different wavesapes as I mentioned above, not just a Sine wave which you would use for a Vibrato. You can do all sort of crazy stuff.

You really have to think outside the box when working with a KORG because it's so flexible. It's a very deep engine.

Regards
James

James, I couldn't find any other parameters the LFO uses in the PA2x manual..Do you have a page number?

I am aware of parameters the LFO will modulate on full featured synthesis, but it appeared to me the Korg arranger does not include these additional parameters..

Hi Fran.

Look for anything listed as AMS (Alternate Modulation Source). In the advanced Edit manual I can see 5 of them on page 13 for starters. To the left you have the LFO somewhat like the Roland setup. In addition to that you have the AMS which allows you to route other modulators to this pitch parameter.

Now jump to page 16 and you can see AMS again. So you can actually route a modulator to the filters frequency and resonance. You can even reduce the intensity of your modulator so that it only slightly effects one item it's assigned to, and heavily effects the others.

If you keep flipping through the pages you will see AMS popping up all over the place. You will even see it popping up beside ADSR for different functions, not just the AMP.

Finally, jump page 29. It's an entire page of all the items you can call up under the AMS menu and assign.

Regards
James

Worth a look too... on page 24 halfway down on the left you can see all the different waveforms you can apply to your LFO to shape it.

This is a really cool feature when used with the AMS. It allows you shape the attack of notes to have them plucked, or blown like a Trumpet. Or just crazy Pads that evolve.

Hard to stop being a Diki when you can't stop being a Fran

Your complete lack of knowledge about the depth of Korg programming basically puts you in no position to draw any parallel to the G70's editing. There simply is no comparison whatsoever. And sorry, but i DO say this from experience and having read all the manuals, something that is pretty obvious you haven't. I have a G70 and a Triton (on which the PA series is based). There's fewer PARAMETERS that you can edit in a G70 voice than there are PAGES in the Korg's manuals detailing all the different things you can adjust. Velocity split points of individual oscillators, for instance (up to five, at least in the PA1X). Extensive editing of pitch envelopes (none whatsoever of either in the G70).

And don't get me started about User Drum Kits. You can't even MAKE a user Drum Kit on the G70, let alone edit the drum sounds themselves like you can on a Korg.

I'm sorry, but calling the G70 the equal of the Korg in these regards is no more accurate than saying the G70 is as good at voice editing as the MS is (or that the MS is a good arranger)...

And sorry, but the clunky workarounds for calling up a User Tone in the G70 is simply unacceptable. Remember, there is NO WAY to simply call up ONE. Let's say you have an edited synth lead sound in one UPG. Tell me how to bring this into another UPG without changing ALL the sounds... If you freeze the style and arranger parameters, and call up the UPG with the edited tone in, it replaces ALL your Keyboard sounds. This is unacceptable for live usage. Well, unacceptable for me. You don't seem to have a problem!

And sorry, you'll find me one of the happiest people on the planet... except when I have to listen to ill-informed self appointed 'experts' spouting complete misinformation on this forum. I don't mind admitting when another arranger has my personal choice well and truly beat at a certain aspect of operation. And this one, I'm sad to say, is certainly one of those...

G70 sound editing is as bare bones as you can get.

By the way, was that the ghost of John DiLeo I heard chiming in?

DIKI......

Hi Diki.



Yep, but don't forget OS 2.0. Everything was expanded free of charge to 16 OSC's / 16 of everything with that update.

Regards
James

Yep... OS2 only adds to what was an already comprehensive editing capability.

But the depth of Fran's involvement in clearing this up is my name? Not even a 'whoops, my bad!'...? Typical. Lie like a dog (OK, make misinformed statements like an 'expert', OK? ), then make jokes when you're busted on it.

FRAN....

John Dileo did tell me Diki is a fake and the biggest BS'er ever... on SZ.....

and he wouldn't lie...

Not even about who he was...

Look, all I'm trying to point out is that you can't make patently incorrect statements like that, and NOT have someone who actually DOES know about it to not call you out (you might have noticed I'm not the only one disagreeing with you, here ). There's a certain responsibility to not perpetuate BS on this forum, and calling the G70 the Korg's equal in the voice editing department certainly qualified as that!

Now, I'll go along with any statement about the G70's superiority in doing quick style and SMF editing. No doubt about that one! But give credit where it is due. No other arranger (apart from your mysteriously silent MS) has a fraction of the voice editing power of the Korg's...

BTW, just got my backup G70 from Vince today... along with a few SRX cards. Trying out the SR-G01 right now, not very impressed other than a few basses. I'll put the SRX-07 in tomorrow. Only thing better than a G70 is TWO G70's!

Ask John DiLeo... he wouldn't lie

Fran,
Are you reading version 2 manuals..the ones that have all the info on DNC sound functions?

There are 3 manuals. Users manual V2.01, Song book editor V1.3 and Advanced Edit (includes all the sound editing and sample mode V2.0. A total of over 480 pages.

Anyone that has not designed and built their own sound including DNC functions and created or heavily edited/changed a style on the PA2XPRO with V2 of the software does not understand the total functionality of this instrument.

Lee S.

I can state only one thing and i think i have enough experience in all this synths that you
mentioned above...G70 dont have even 70% of the abilities of what PA2X offers...YAMAHA not worth
to mention at all, Audya...i am about to cry, MS is same thing, take into consideration everything,
not just how open it is but many other factors as time, easy of use and else. Synths like PA series,
PSR series, the G series, Ketron SD series, Motif series and Triton series is machines that i own or
owned and each one i know by heart to the last parameter, the only machines that i can compare
the PA2Xpro in SOUND EDIT COMPLEXITY is MOTIF, TRITON or FANTOM, nothing else.
Lets be real, Ketron doesnt even have FX onboard...yes they do but they dont even affect the sound
at all, its funny, YAMAHA...everything has to be done thru stupid XG while Korg, everything and
anything you do with a software is all possible on the synth. I dont wanna get into details but since
i know all these machine i can sit down and write a full comparison on all of them by point.
If really read the PA2X manual he will understan...and half of it probably is not even there...

And please do not say its a cut down version of EDS, someone who doesnt know the machine can
only say that. It is the M3 into an arranger -KARMA, i own both and i know both by heart.
There is not a single different parameter in sound edit besides KARAM...FX are all the same,
routing is all the same, quality is all the same with one difference that PA2x has only 5FX processors.

Topics like this get me excited in a good way, i just wish everyone would know and understand
tha full capability of Korgs EDs and HI engine
like some of us in here do...

Nothing better said, no need for more discussions.

James,

Whats your thoughts on the reliability of the PA2XPRO based on reports on Korg forums
of faulty LEDs on early production models.

Frank

There was a run of bad LED boards that have since been fixed, so you are all set,

I have sold alot of Korgs and that problem has not come back

------------------
www.AudioworksCT.com
203.876.1133

Looking forward to hearing what you make of that.

It's not an issue any more. It was limited to a small number from a very early production run. Anyone effected received two replacement boards and free service & installation. KORG played for everything.

Regards
James

+1
Same here.
It's peoples complete lack of knowledge is why Yamaha can get away with bringing out the T3 after the T2. If KORG did that there would be a flame war on KORG Forums like never seen before.

Regards
James

Can't wait to get my hands on a korg PA2X. I only don't have the money yet

Yamaha has the right idea...make it easy not everyone wants to be bogged down with all that editing crap ,,,they just want to play.

Editing crap? I would like to create my own sound. All yamaha's sound the same.

[This message has been edited by FransN (edited 08-21-2009).]

With the Korg you don't have to do ANY editing crap and out of the box (other than turn on the master EQ) it is outstanding...but if you run into a need..then it's in there. There is even a BASIC mode you can put the menu system in...then it's even simpler.

Lee S.

That's the simple beauty of the Korg. The user has the choice.

The can edit to the 'nth degree, or just enjoy it totally o.o.t.b.

Personally I wish it was as easy as editing a Jx3p (or 8p), the synthesis back then was so much more straight forward, but the degree of control you can utilise on these machines (Korgs) is astounding.

NO other arranger comes close.
there's probably a few so-called "workstations" that come to mind as well that also do not come close. I think they come from Roland too

Wonderful!!

Korg has been on this track for many years. Even the i30 is an "Interactive Music Workstation" - tells you that right on the keyboard. And that's been around since 1998. Maybe the i2, i3 and other previous models were so designated.

Yamaha has many expert sound/style specialists creating these sounds which they never get the credit it deserves.. and they do a great job that's why they are #1 in the world in sales. Korg is a distant second IMO.....but does cater more to the eastern music needs & that's is where their editing strength is used more.

Yes Giner, everything was based on those. Its funny how some people talk about things they
have no clue about. And Diki, no, G70s DrumKit edit is no superior to a PA series, maybe to
the old I series but not to PA. As far as Yammy goes its just sad, you cant do $hit on the synth
itself, you need a computer and a stupid XG to do a basic thing...and i know what i am talking about!
As i said few time, maybe about REALTIME LIVE USE i cant say much but about programming...

I have been playing on stage Korg arrangers from their first early 80's models..thru the years I have become a big Yamaha fan simply due to Korgs OS of doing things & the sound just isn't to my liking for arranger play not to mention the fills quirks, and lack of aftermarket style support but if people enjoy it so be it.. For my needs YAMAHA serves me better even with some workarounds..

I believe you misread me. I stated that there is very LITTLE drumkit editing on a Roland (and no way to store a User Kit).

The things I find completely superior in Roland's is their Style and SMF header editing tools (Makeup Tools), and their Cover Tools section, which allows for a one button complete re-orchestration of a style.

Makeup Tools is by far the easiest thing I have ever seen for taking a style that doesn't sound very good, and tweaking it until it does. Patch, effects, pan, volume, dynamics (this one is the deal clincher), EQ, sound editing (basic though it is!), all of these can be addressed through the same page for every different sound the style uses. Then, for the style drum kit, there is an easy to use page where the style's drum sounds can be substituted, effects adjusted individually, EQ adjusted individually, and, most importantly for multi-velocity sample drum sounds, the velocity can adjusted (and makeup volume applied) so that the velocity x-over points hit correctly (assuming your style had any dynamics in the first place ).

Basically, everything you need, in one place, to turn a POS into a usable style. Same tools exist for all the Parts in an SMF, too...

Pretty good, eh? Maybe not revolutionary, but ultra convenient and well laid out. But the icing on the cake is the interaction with the Cover Tools.

Cover Tools takes a style, and automatically replaces all the sounds (or just the bass or drums) with sounds from specific genres. Up to 29 of them... Change a Jazz style to a Latin style with one button. Change a rock style to a techno style, one button. Change a Latin style to a disco style. One button... You get the picture. ALL the sounds changed, presto! Now, of course, this isn't always going to give great results. But often, you find intriguing possibilities, especially with the drums.

But here's the kicker. You take your new, exciting sounding style that might have a few clunker sounds, and bring it back to the Makeup Tools editor, correct what needs correcting, leave cool sounding stuff alone, and in a FRACTION of the time any other arranger takes, you have a fresh, exciting style to work with...

Voice editing is cool, and don't get me wrong, I'd LOVE to see something more comprehensive on Roland's. But things like this make the greater impact to my sound and style choice, and hence my overall show, than a few edited lead sounds...

Just in case we get a 'hit and run'. This is the sentence all the fuss is about

Yeah I really like the user friendliness of Roland's TOTL Boards (my first "real" board was a VA-7) and I wish I had the Cover/Makeup tools on my PA1-X.

If you combine that aspect of the G-70's ease of use with the Korg's "depth" and sampling capabilities you really WOULD have a killer Arranger.

In fact, the only reason I didn't go for the G-70 back when I bought a new board was the lack of sampling (I play my fair share of Dance/Top40/RnB) and the Keybed - a personal preference in the end, I much prefer the Korg's bed to the G-70, again **PERSONAL PREFERENCE**.

Unless Roland come up with something absolutely mind blowing with their next line of Boards, I'll be upgrading to the PA2x in the near(ish) future.....

Wrong Donny,
If you consider world wide sales Yamaha is #2.
Also, No it is not just or mostly Mid-Eastern folks that use all the in depth editing...Many of us all around the world use them a lot. In fact including me, I know of at least 5 people on out=r Korg Forum that have created fromscratch some of our own sounds...some using the new DNC functions.

On your other note...Yamaha has some great products and a great following. I myself do like a lot about the Yamaha's (OS is not one of them) but, I being a geek and musician prefer the Korg in general for many reasons. I had a T2 here side by side for 6 monthes and I tell you as far as most of th sounds and the general sound quality...the Korg blows it away. However, there are a few sounds I loved on the T2, that I am now recreating on the Korg.

Fran,
A brand new Irish Grand Piano sound set is due to be released to us all very soon. It is of the Steinway and has 4 samples per note (different velocitys) and has dynamic resonance, supports half pedaling and to me sounds absoluely beautiful.

It was put together by 2 of the Korg forum members, I am a beta tester along with others. It uses 160 MB of sample ram.
You can hear a demo of the beta version here: http://www.korgforums.com/forum/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=44820

It is being refined by the two developers now. By the way, the Grand Piano OTTB on the PA is pretty darn nice. But this Steinway is really super, especially for slow ballads, classical etc.

The tools to do this stuff on the PA are there, and many of us are learning how to do it. This is in response to your original post. Style editing and sequencer are also PRO level.

I'm not saying it is perfect or better for everyone...just that the programming and tools are top notch and I have not seen anything better...IMHO and in response to your original post.

Lee S.



[This message has been edited by leeboy (edited 08-21-2009).]

Hi James
any chance we'll see the piano adapted for PA800.

http://www.irishacts.com/

best wishes
Rikki



[This message has been edited by rikkisbears (edited 08-22-2009).]

Ok Diki, sorry my mistakes but as i know of some of the Roland machines have very detailed
editing, which Yamaha and the rest besides Korg cant dream off, i remember the G1000.

I am afraid the G1000 had no better editing that the G70 does (except perhaps for the routing of aftertouch, which lost a few important destinations - LFO speed being the main one for me)...

In point of fact, Roland arrangers have NEVER offered true voice editing. They merely allow offsets to the ROM programming of the voice.

Vibrato.... Rate Depth and Delay. No changing waveform TYPES, no changing destinations of the LFO's, no inversion of responses, nothing like that.

Filter and Amp envelopes.. A, D and R. And no independent envelopes for Amp and Filter, simply the same offsets for both. No inversion, no changing destinations, not even a sustain parameter.

Filter.... simple Cutoff and Resonance parameters. No changing slopes, poles or anything.

And that, my friend, is IT...

There is a simple parameter tied to some of the Fantom sounds (called a C1 parameter) that sometimes, on some patches, can do some additional work on more complex envelopes (changing an sfz's rate, e.g.) or cross fading two oscillators for a fast/slow Leslie sample fade, but once again, that's IT...

And, to add insult to injury, many of the sounds, especially those derived from more complex FantomX sounds, these barebones parameters don't even address them (different part structure, I would imagine)..

Eight parameters IN TOTAL (and one that only works on a few sounds) Barebones indeed..!

No oscillator control, no pitch control, no pitch envelopes, no LFO types, the list goes on and on. And then add to that, no User Tone storage. You have to edit the voice, and store it with your Registration (UPG), and if you want the same voice in another registration, you have to go in and repeat all your work...

Now, if you are willing to work with a sys-ex editor, you MIGHT be able to get to a few more parameters, but you can only alter them externally, and store the edit in a sequence to repeat the edit... It's just NOT a serious editing system...

But fair enough, Roland don't really mean it to be. They do provide well over a thousand sounds, and most of them are pretty spot on for most bread and potatoes sounds, and have a pretty huge collection of synth leads and pads that nine times out of ten will nail a sound you are needing. But if you want to create something utterly unique (and be able to store it for future recall), the G70 (and all the Roland's) are not really a good choice.

Me, when I need something unique for a production, I'll go to my Triton or Kurzweil (or VSTi's) and create it there. But most of the time onstage, I'm not shooting for that. I want easy sound selection, and easy editing. At least the ONE good thing about such a barebones editing system is, you hold one button for a second or so above the Part on/off switches, and the edit page comes up, and ALL the sliders now are assigned to those parameters. So, while you have little choice of what you can edit, it is REALLY easy to get to and adjust all that you CAN...

Probably a lot easier than adjusting a PA voice in the heat of performance. For me, that is sufficient. Better a few parameters easily got to than a plethora that take pages and pages of button pushing to get to... Live music making is still my priority when it comes to arrangers...

You want geek editing heaven? Get a K2600... Parameter nirvana You want to adjust something basic, quickly? Get a Roland!

You should see the editing Ketron has...even on Audya.