Posted by
CowboyNeal
on from the under-the-hood dept.
jgwong writes "Korg's newest keyboard, called OASYS, will run Linux with a propietary software developed by themselves. With a 10.4" touchscreen, CD burner and 16-track HD audio recording this looks pretty neat. No information about availability or price, though."
No, I just think repeatably asking people not to be jerks will eventually have some effect. I see posting without reading the article the same as arguing with someone at a book reading when you havn't read the book. It's just offensive.
-- How we know is more important than what we know.
I think it's obvious that he did RTFA, otherwise he wouldn't know it was a music keyboard. His point seemed to be though that it should have been noted that it was a music keyboard so that he wouldn't have had to waste his time even clicking on the link.
-- "People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain
I hate to break this to you, Mr. Grumpy, but he had to have RTFA. Otherwise the statement doesn't make sense.
And actually, this was my first impression as well. Here I was, imagining a keyboard running a small Linux Kernel with an LCD screen and a gratuitous CD burner. It sounded awesome. Imagine the scripting possibilities if you were running perl inside of your keyboard, with a small touch screen for feedback and possible alternative mouse input.
And then I get to TFA, only to find out it is like the music keyboard I just bought, but 100 times more expensive. And running Linux.
Yes it will : remember the Sharp Zaurus ? My SL-5500 was comfortably usable with Windows only, despite its being Linux-based. Korg folks just used a real-time patched Linux to pilot their keyboard but I am not sure they actually care a comma more.
The Korg OASYS project has been around for years though. They demonstrated this back at NAMM in the mid 90s IIRC. They said they were shelving the plans after a while because hardware was not fast enough to bring the performance they wanted. Now they have bogomips coming out of their ears it is good to see them eventually follow through.
Microsoft would allow the "Windows key"
You mean the "Tux Key".
To all linux distro makers: Please consider including little stickers to apply over former said key to turn it into latter said key.
Great, another running toilet keeping me awake. At least if it's running linux I can run sudo poweroff as opposed to trying to find the "start" icon or worse, lifting up the lid and fiddling the plunger.
Keyboard?
by
Lord+Byron+II
·
· Score: 1, Interesting
I really wish that the poster/editor had made an effort to designate that it was a *music* keyboard. I read it thinking it was for my computer, wondering what you would do with a LCD screen and if Microsoft would allow the "Windows key" to be on a board running Linux. =)
All well and good...
by
Xpilot
·
· Score: 4, Funny
...but does it run...Lin...uhhh... shoot.
Well, with the stability and reliability of Linux, Ashlee Simpson will never make a lip-sync gaffe again!
-- "Backups are for wimps. Real men upload their data to an FTP site and have everyone else mirror it." -- Linus Torvalds
Re:All well and good...
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Time to make a nit-picking ass of myself.
The mistake was caused by a Pro-Tools screwup, which runs on mac OS X...Arguably similar in stability and reliability to Linux...
Also, it should be noted that no matter how stable the digital vocal track is, she still can't sing.
Re:All well and good...
by
YrWrstNtmr
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
Well, with the stability and reliability of Linux, Ashlee Simpson will never make a lip-sync gaffe again!
Stable software does not overcome faulty wetware.
Re:All well and good...
by
Eric+Giguere
·
· Score: 1
Ashlee Simpson will never make a lip-sync gaffe again
I suspect it's more likely that she'll never do a live show again. From now on, all you'll see at her concerts are video screens. Actually, she'd probably love holographic projection (with a time delay for editing) if it ever gets invented.
Yes, but in all probability, it wasn't even a software mistake at all. More likely an engineer cued something up incorrectly. Perhaps they had all the tracks for both tracks (they typically do two performances on SNL) in the same session and they simply had the wrong one muted. And just so you know, ProTools runs on Windows, too.
Re:All well and good...
by
Rares+Marian
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
It's great that everyone thinks this is such a simple mistake nowadays but back when Milli Vanilli did it the backlash resulted in a suicide.
-- The message on the other side of this sig is false.
Re:All well and good...
by
Eric+Giguere
·
· Score: 1
she still can't sing
Doesn't seem to stop anyone else from becoming a "recording artist"! If her sister wasn't famous, she'd be nowhere. Not sure why her sister got famous, though. It's certainly not her brains.
-- EA David Gardner -"... but the consumers have proven that actually what they want is fun."
Re:All well and good...
by
RubberChainsaw
·
· Score: 2, Informative
It was only an attempted suicide. He didn't even succeed at killing himself by jumping from his apartment window.
-- I welcome our new 99% overlords.
Re:All well and good...
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
It's another when you have two models out there faking it up to someone elses work.
"Artists" do this now, IMO. Do they really write their own songs? Most of them can't sing worth a damn, either, and have some sort of DSP magic make them sound like a robot. They are all glitz and glitter and just barely enough talent to fool stupid people into buying thier CDs. The CDs aren't even that good, but people don't know that until after breaking the shrink wrap. The other day, just to see what this stuff was about, I listened to a couple sample clips of Ashlee Simpson at Amazon. Ten sample tracks, and they all sounded like clips from the same song...but they weren't. It was amazing. People pay money to listen to this. Absolutely amazing.
Re:All well and good...
by
blueish+yellow
·
· Score: 5, Funny
It's great that everyone thinks this is such a simple mistake nowadays but back when Milli Vanilli did it the backlash resulted in a suicide.
On the SI scale of humiliation what Ashlee Simspon did measures about 400 milliVanillis.
Yes, that seems to be the rule. However, you can still find a few pop singers that are actually good. One of my guilty pleasures is Anouk (beware: crappy IE-only website). Anouk is Dutch but sings in English. I doubt she writes most of her own stuff, but she really can sing with a unique voice. She even tours with a real, live band.
So it's more than a little pathetic that these "performers" can't even sing live, but not surprising. There's no way you can bounce around like they do and still draw enough oxygen to sing properly.
-- LOAD "SIG",8,1
Re:All well and good...
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
It's one think to pre record your own work and act it out live. It's another when you have two models out there faking it up to someone elses work.
With today's technology, it's no longer necessary to use someone else's work. You don't have to have singing ability to be able to make a studio recording any more.
-- Not Found
The requested URL/signature.html was not found on this server.
"If her sister wasn't famous, she'd be nowhere. Not sure why her sister got famous, though. It's certainly not her brains."
I saw and heard her (the older one) on television a few months ago and it quickly became apparent that the two big reasons for her stardom weren't her vocal cords.
--
I see even classic Slashdot is now pretty much unusable on dial up anymore.
But he did die a bit later from an accidental alcohol + pill overdose.
Reminds me of the George Carlin bit, about his dog Tippy: "Tippy committed suicide... well, we don't like to say it that way. We say 'he put himself to sleep'. But he ran out in from of a bakery truck, and that's f...in' suicide!"
Know what you mean...
by
TommydCat
·
· Score: 4, Funny
In my X setup, I see 101-key, 102-key, etc, but where's the 61-key option?
-- This comment does not necessarily represent the views and opinions of the author.
Re:Know what you mean...
by
BlueJay465
·
· Score: 1
yeah, and what about the 88-key hammer-weighted option? Korg makes some fine products, but this had better include all of the features including the Triton arpeggiator and the KARMA technology before I spend the money on a 'proprietary' system. Read between the lines folks, It is likely to be a Korg front end running on a linux shell, nothing more. Also check out the OpenLabs Neko64, for similar interest.
Having checked out the promotional video...
by
PornMaster
·
· Score: 4, Informative
It looks like the UI on the touch screen could use some work. It looks too much like a typical computer GUI, and ripe for fat-fingering and just simply not being intuitively instrument-like.
They tout the power of it being based upon a computer, but I think it'll be a few more generations of this before it really makes an impact.
Re:Having checked out the promotional video...
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Neither one of those is a GUI designed for application specific user interfaces, though. Korg should have used a toolkit like ViewTouch that runs on Linux, designed to help them develop their application-specific GUI. They even turned the ViewTouch name backwards, calling their display the TouchView. They may be good at music and synthesizers but they don't understand the easy way to build a great GUI. I guess we shouldn't have expected anybody at Korg to go to google and type in something like Linux Touchscreen GUI to find the tools they needed.
alt.binaries.warez.linux
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
What will happen if it gets cracked/copied. Assuming it's a fairly standard linux installation, it would not be hard to run the binary parts on a home computer....
GPL keyboard ?
by
thej1nx
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
Hmm concidering that they have proprietary software being commercially distributed, coupled up with Linux.. will they or won't they be bound by GPL to release the code for it ?
That only matters if they modify already existing GPL code and distribute it. Their custom stuff doesn't have to be GNU/Free.
Or how else did you think Mandrake, et. al were able to legally distribute Netscape?
Re:GPL keyboard ?
by
cipher+uk
·
· Score: 3, Informative
no. their proprietary software is not GPL'd so does not conform to the GPL license. just because it runs a linux kernel does not mean it needs to release the source code to its programs running on it.
it does however need to make the source to the GPL software on it easily available. an anonymous ftp server will furfill this requirement. shipping the source code with GPL'd works is not necessary. it just needs to be easily available.
ps. slashbots informed me of this.
Re:GPL keyboard ?
by
SuburbaniteFury
·
· Score: 4, Informative
Ahem.
"In addition, mere aggregation of another work not based on the Program
with the Program (or with a work based on the Program) on a volume of
a storage or distribution medium does not bring the other work under
the scope of this License."
Indeed. But what if they have modified the Linux kernel to make it run on the music keyboard ? Or will Linux run out of box on it, without any customizations to the kernel ?
I mean, they are technically commercially distributing their version of Linux. So, isn't GPL supposed to apply in this case at least ?
They have to provide a formal offer to give you the source code upon request. Seeing as this is a synthesiser it's quite possible you don't even have a computer let alone an internet connection, so an ftp site really doesn't cut it. If I send them a blank CD and a stamped return envelope requesting the source code they best be burning the linux source they used onto the CD and sending it back to me or I'll be telling Linus who will probably threaten to sue them just for shits and giggles.
-- How we know is more important than what we know.
If they modified the linux kernel they have to release that. The driver for the kernel to talk to the keyboard can stay closed, just like the nvidia or ATI binary-only drivers, but if they changed other parts of the kernel they have to release that.
As for the actual software doing the syth and interface and everything, that obviously has nothing to do with the kernel so can be under whatever license they want.
Why the hell should they? If their software isn't under the GPL they are under no obligation to release its code. Apply the question to the kernel they're using and you might have a case, but even then they don't have to redistribute it if they didn't modify it from the form they got it in.
Has ANYONE around here but me actually READ the GPL?
-- 'Standards' in computing only impress those who are impressed by things like 'standards'.
Hmm concidering that they have proprietary software being commercially distributed, coupled up with Linux.. will they or won't they be bound by GPL to release the code for it?
With the number of open source-friendly folks on Slashdot, it amazes me how often this question turns up in comments. You'd think/. crowd knows what the GPL is, and that most readers would have some basic knowledge about the GPL (and thus, be able to answer above question for themselves).
Never read a single copy of the GPL ?!? Just trolling around? Too lazy to go to GNU.org, and check it out?
Re:GPL keyboard ?
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
The misunderstandings of the GPL are amazing. They _DO_NOT_ have to provide any source code whatsoever if it is their own software compiled against the standard libraries for Linux that are LGPL'd. Does Oracle offer up their source code? BEA? PTC? No, of course they don't; they don't have to.
I think the consensus is that Slashdot readers are stupid. I mean, really really stupid. No, wait, that should be really truly super-duper amazingly stupendously unashamedly Homer-Simpson-is-a-god stupid.
I know what you think you are saying, but we're not talking about their software, we're talking about Linux. If they distribute Linux they must supply the source code to Linux. It's that simple.
-- How we know is more important than what we know.
Re:GPL keyboard ?
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
If they didn't modify or use GPL code in their proprietary software they don't have to do shit.
And that's damn fine with me.
Re:GPL keyboard ?
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
And even if they did modify the kernel, they are only reqired to distribute it to the people that the binary was distributed to... Of course, they have the option of turning around and giving it away for free--barring some sort of NDA.
Re:GPL keyboard ?
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
because you're going to have so much difficulty finding a copy of the linux source code if Korg don't make it available to you.
It's quite possible that Korg have ported it an architecture that has not previously been supported by Linux, or they've made some other changes. Maybe you don't get this whole Free Software thing, so you don't think it is important that you be free to modify the software on your synthesiser, but thankfully the people who work on Linux do and they require Korg to supply you with the source code if they want to distribute Linux.
-- How we know is more important than what we know.
Re:GPL keyboard ?
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Bzzt.
If they distribute, AND modify Linux, they have to offer the source.
In what universe? If they're passing on someone else's binary distribution that came with an offer to supply source code they can pass on the offer to supply source code as a third party, but if they're downloading the source code and making a binary distribution themselves they have to supply source code (be that through an offer to supply source at a later date or not).
-- How we know is more important than what we know.
An instrument like this usually has a sequencer, but it's pants in comparison to CuBase or Logic / etc, so yeh, most of the people who have this gear have both PCs and fast internet connections. Audio nerds need ways to move their data around too.
-- All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain.
It's also possible they used a standard architecture and the kernel is a stock one. I don't see any reason for them to distrubte anything if there's no evidence that they made changes to anything GPLed.
-- This is not the greatest sig in the world, no. This is just a tribute.
So you're suggesting that someone just happened to compile a kernel perfectly for their application and distribute it with an offer to supply the source and they can pass on the offer as a third party? Well I suppose anything is possible.
-- How we know is more important than what we know.
Is this really in the spirit of the GPL?
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0, Flamebait
Korg's newest keyboard, called OASYS, will run Linux with a propietary software developed by themselves.
Is this really in the spirit of the GPL? If what they say is right, then they can just run Linux on their proprietary hardware, with their proprietary software on top, and not have to release any code if they didn't make changes to the Linux underneath.
To me that stinks as much as MS using BSD code, and giving no credit or return for the effort.
Is there something we can do about this?
Re:Is this really in the spirit of the GPL?
by
Aneurysm9
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
Is there something we can do about this?
Yes! Celebrate! If they have made changes to the kernel they will have to release them and, hopefully, there will be something of benefit to other Linux audio projects in there. Even if they didn't make any changes, it is a major pro-audio component maker embracing Linux. We need more pro-audio software and hardware support for Linux. I hate it that I have to use Windoze to do postprocessing on recordings that I make, there's no reason Linux can't support VST plugins and (usable) low latency audio.
-- There was Cowboy Neal at the wheel of a bus to never-ever land.
Re:Is this really in the spirit of the GPL?
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 1, Informative
Linux does support VST plugins and low latency audio.
Check out vstserver and libfst. Both let you run vst plugins and instruments in Linux.
There is a compatability list at: http://www.djcj.org/LAU/ladspavst/
Reliable low latency audio is *expected* by most people who use Linux for music nowadays, not wished for.
Re:Is this really in the spirit of the GPL?
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Linux already supports VST plugins and usable low-latency audio.
LKMs can be closed. Nothing shady is going on here. Just ask Native Instruments (Traktor FS is linux-based, and they satisfy the terms by shipping the sources & license on the CD).
Re:Is this really in the spirit of the GPL?
by
NanoGator
·
· Score: 1
" there's no reason Linux can't support VST plugins and (usable) low latency audio."
No technical reason. The question is: Is the customer base big enough to support the development cost? Chicken and egg, yadda yadda yadda.
(For the record, I'd like to see better Linux support for the 3D stuff I do for a living. So please, don't feel my comment is meant to be a poke at Linux. I just know that unless it's an OSS effort, Linux needs a larger user base to get this sort of support.)
-- "Derp de derp."
Re:Is this really in the spirit of the GPL?
by
MarkTina
·
· Score: 1
Yup! It's a perfectly fine thing to do as well.
They've used their brains and instead of reinventing the wheel they've used existing technology (Linux) as their base, technology that has been released to the world with a license that allows and encourages them to do just that.
What does the Linux get out of it ? More publicity, more developers and potentially the odd tweak and bug fix here and there.
Loads of companies do it, some come out and say they do it, others do it and keep it discreet.
Re:Is this really in the spirit of the GPL?
by
grolschie
·
· Score: 1
>Is this really in the spirit of the GPL?
It sure is. One can presume it's merely running on Linux as an OS and that they have built their own hardware drivers.
There are plenty of closed source drivers for Linux, and and plenty of closed source programs that run on Linux. Why is this any different?
Re:Is this really in the spirit of the GPL?
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Is this really in the spirit of the GPL? If what they say is right, then they can just run Linux on their proprietary hardware, with their proprietary software on top, and not have to release any code if they didn't make changes to the Linux underneath.
To me that stinks as much as MS using BSD code, and giving no credit or return for the effort.
Reality check: Linux is free! THEY DON'T HAVE TO GIVE CREDIT! At your expense, they will sell a keyboard and make money, and those who made Linux will never see a dime.
If you want to SELL your contributions, then don't offer them up under the GPL.
Re:Is this really in the spirit of the GPL?
by
BlackHawk-666
·
· Score: 1
Yes, this is really the spirit of GPL. The GPL is about granting you freedoms, not taking them away. Only Stallman and his sympathisers would be upset by this. If they add value to the stack by putting proprietry software on top of the GPL set then that is within the scope of the GPL. How else can we make Linux based firewalls, routers, audio servers, etc? These are all devices which have a Linux base and potentially a closed upper stack.
-- All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain.
I have to admit I don't fully understand these all-powerful keyboards. Why not just use a computer? Software synthesis and recording? Better gui (larger real estate for sure), more choices. You could posit portability but I think my powerbook and my oxygen8 is more portable than this sucker. It's cool, it's geeky, but that does not make it worth the cash, especially if I'm just worried about getting things done. It seems to me all-in-one systems are more prone to breakin down. Modularity, right? It is pretty though.
Because setting up a PC and dealing with software crashes just isn't acceptable in a professional live music setting. I saw the Chemical brothers lose their entire library at a live show once and it meant an unexpected 15 minute second intermission. Luckily it wasn't an OS corruption issue, they just reset the looper and reloaded their samples. Not to mention the fact that these things are really friggin rugged to put up with the abuse from roadies. Oh yeah, and these things basically never break down. I don't think I've ever heard of a Korg Triton (previous DAW from Korg) breaking down.
-- There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
Re:purpose?
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
And you would play the music on what? The computer keyboard? Use an external keyboard, connected through MIDI, with a shitload of proprietary extensions, and proprietary software to understand them? And when you needed to play it live, you'd carry the keyboard _and_ the computer? And click on menus while playing, when you wanted to make some change? Yeah, right.
Nothing prevents you from using this keyboard with a computer. But it also gives you the option to do pretty much everything _without_ a computer (what am I saying - it _is_ a computer).
People who think that "modularity" is the ultimate feature are the reason why Black & Decker manages to sell its crap. People who actually need to get things done buy tools that can work by themselves (you won't see any cute "modular multi-tools" from DeWalt or Bosch, and you won't see any professional carpenter or stonemason using B&D).
If you're worried about the cash you'd probably have no use for this keyboard anyway.
Re:purpose?
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Yes, your laptop and a mini-keyboard is smaller.
No, it's not as effective. Well-made keyboards like this one have like a gazillion features that come in handy as you start playing with sound in *live* settings. In a studio, sure, you can spend hours and hours getting things right. Once you're on the stage, though, having all the controls to do your effects and cue various samples or looped sequences at your fingertips becomes mighty useful to continue doing the same things you did in the studio.
I totally agree with you except for two things (which sort of negates the whole "totally" thing I spoke of earlier).
First of all, it sucks enough carrying around a keyboard(s), cords, pedals, amps and a stand. Adding a laptop, powercord, midi cables, etc. on top of that may raise the suckage level enough for some that they would be willing to pay the high price.
My second disagreement is the oxygen8. If it doesn't have 88 keys on it, I don't want anything to do with it. I use every last one of those suckers. In fact, I had an 89th key installed in the middle of my keyboard just so I could rearrange some ELP tunes and play them in a way that Keith couldn't using my patented C1/2b key.
One of the main reasons that some keyboardists prefer this type of keyboard is that it is so versatile that it can replace the several keyboard setup that used to be (and sometimes still is) so prevalent.
Look at some of the keyboard heavy bands from the 1970's, such as Yes, Genesis, or Pink Floyd. The keyboardists always seemed to be surrounded by different keyboards, up to eight in the case of Tony Banks from Genesis. Contrast this with a modern example, say Jordan Rudess of Dream Theater, who uses a fairly new Kurzweil that can emulate all these keyboards in one instrument.
This can seriously cut down on transportation costs and instrument maintenance, although it does increase the amount of effort put into making sure the keyboard is programmed properly. Still, it's quite impressive to see a musician using one instrument in place of several.
your powerbook isnt built for the environment and handling these things are made for. They're meant to be, and will be, abused by travelling, roadies, the musicians etc. They're very reliable.
cash is little object to a working professional who needs to get things done, and reliably.
and swapping back and forth between a midiman and a powerbook hardly looks very professional, nor does it make for a fluid show... I know alot of guys who do it both ways. The ones with the big all-in-one keyboards typically are doing a much more interesting set.
Because their roadie proof. Single box, no interconnections from a keyboard to a computer to setup. Ruggidised compenents. Oh and a stable OS that is tuned for exactly the hardware of the keyboard, with only the necessary software etc. so the possibilities of embarassing crashes in the middle of a performance are very low.
Basically every night it can be plugged in by a thick as a brick roadie, and it will work and play flawlessly the whole night. Then it can be packed up again by the same roadie and shipped off to the next venue.
Use an external keyboard, connected through MIDI, with a shitload of proprietary extensions, and proprietary software to understand them? And when you needed to play it live, you'd carry the keyboard _and_ the computer? If you'd've clicked the link I gave, you'd see that the keyboard in question (the one I have, the one I use for live gigs) is small, light and connected via USB. And I write my own software. So. Basically what I'm saying is the equivalent of those who argue that rolling your own system is cheaper / better / etc. than buying an all-in-one. Whether or not I agree with them on that point (since I do use Apple), I think the argument carries some weight here. Everyone on this site already has a computer. For email and slashdot, who knows. And for cheap or free, they can get decent software and decent hardware to make close-to-professional sounding records. And put on pro-sounding gigs. Someone else who responded to me had the excellent point that large acts putting on live shows would have need for this, as it is designed for such and would almost never crash. Britney's team would probably use something like this. (Maybe not, U2 used to use 2 identical systems running Max/MSP... alas, I cannot find the article now; if you want it I will post it later). Saying if I'm worried about the cost means that I have no use for it anyway is silly. I have a use for it, but I can do the same, or more, with cheaper and more extensible solutions. So why wouldn't I?
Re:purpose?
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Modularity, right?
They do make 1U-4U synths/samplers/sequencers, but the kind of people who buy these music workstations are looking for integration. They want to make music, not worry about daisy-chaining modules and building racks. Take Apple's hardware for example.
That's interesting about the Chem. Bros. When was that? When I saw autechre, the used two powerbooks. Crashing, I now concede is the one thing I didn't think of. But it's a risk. And as one who makes electronic music, one I am willing to take.
I agree about the oxygen8 not having enough keys. However, that's what I have and use, so I wanted to speak from experience. There are otheroptions for more full-size keyboards. The second to last is full-size and semi-weighted. The last has hammer action! Though it is 600$US.
cash is little object to a working professional who needs to get things done, and reliably. Hmm. I wish this were true. I really do. But most of the other professionals I know have to work and make ends meet. Just like any other job. You could say that performance and reliability are a priority, so X company is going to be the most expensive servers and the full support to go with them.. But it's just not realistic. Look at Google; they are a great example of what I am talking about (in terms of modularity, not necessarily price / performance). Cheap(er) components, lots of them. Use redundancy and run them into the ground. One keels over, another takes its place. Maybe a lot of people (not necessarily you, as you seem to know people in the business) have an idea that it is glamorous and money is no object. Well that is true, but only for a very small percentage of the working musicians. Most of us aren't famous. Logistically, we could not be. So when this product comes out, I scratch my head because I already do all it can do (except linux, I use OSX) for cheaper. At well-run studios and even universities, they complain about the price of a ProTools system. Money is always an object, music is a business just like any other.
Are you comparing a 2 octave keyboard to a ~6.5 octave keyboard? And you're saying you can do more with the former? It seems to me you might have trouble with something smiple, like playing two notes simultaneously 4 octaves apart. That's just an example, and I don't know much about this new Korg. Now I'm not saying there is anything wrong with the Oxygen. If it works for you, that's great. But you can't push your solution as an all purpose replacement for a dedicated keyboard.
Lots of musicians are afraid of/confused by computers, and find an all-in-one solution like this keyboard much friendlier. There are quite a large number of dedicated hardware products available (disk based recorders, samplers, etc) that are easily duplicated with a PC or Mac and software.
This product is also (presumably) building on the legacy of the Korg Triton, which is a almost as much a fixture in large studios as an MPC or a Neve preamp.
In terms of input, the oxygen8 is cute and cool, but it is really more of a midi controller than a keyboard replacement. I would be hard pressed to do some real playing on that. On the other hand, when I want to do some real playing, I walk over to my 6'1 grand piano, which is the ultimate in portable:)
Most musicians use a combination of both. For live performance, hardware based devices (such as the OASYS or Kurzweil K series) are hands down the better option IMHO. When I've been out on stage, I always liked the comfort (and reliability) of having a bunch of devices around me that were designed specifically for that purpose. I would probably have my old iBook with me now for running some of the more automated parts, but my rig would look pretty much the same as before.
In some cases they are also much easier to use than computer based gear, most often because the interface is laid all out in front of you in the shape of knobs, sliders and the like. If you are wanting to work quickly, this is very handy. With all of that said, I wouldn't be without my Mac *or* the outboard gear. They each have their place for the pro or semi pro (like me).
Cleveland a couple years ago at an event called rave on the river (or something similar). From what they said they accidently dumped the memory on looper and had to reload em all, it looked like they were using a zip disk which explains a lot of why it was so slow.
-- There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
The only people that will balk at the price are people that don't need it and wouldn't buy it in the first place. Remember the Fairchild? It managed to find a niche, despite being about $25,000 (in the early 80's!).
-- 'Standards' in computing only impress those who are impressed by things like 'standards'.
I was actually about to comment about Jordan Rudess... I've talked to him extensively about some keyboard stuff - I know him in person. Anyway, he uses one keyboard but has several different modules - he uses the K2600 only as a controller for a K2600 rack module, Triton rack module, Korg Karma, and a mini moog. He's got a pretty neat setup... Another neat fact is that he has it on a huge UPS system so if the power goes out he can keep playing for 30 minutes... I don't see the point for that, but it's neat.
Jordan uses the Kurzweil as a controller only. They control rack-mount synthesisers (I believe 3 tritons and some other ones i cna't remember), and all the programs on those are switched with one button on a footswitch.
-- This is not the greatest sig in the world, no. This is just a tribute.
Re:purpose?
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
One piece of equipment doing the job of two, with many of the controls available immediately at hand. A full keyboard that can be used to perform live.
You could tell me that you perform live with a two octave keyboard, but I wouldn't believe you.
To be fair I know several professionals that successfully use a Powerbook on stage with their keys namely David Sancious and Kipper from Sting, Stevie Wonder and Herbie Hancock. In fact, Herbie uses the Powerbook exclusively for sounds, sequences and overall control.
BTW Roadies rarely play with anything backline related, that's why god invetned techs. From my experience, PB's hold up rather well. Go to a large show, 90% of the road crew is using one.
As far as cash, back when the OASYS was conceived, the rough street price was figured to $10K. Spendy, but may be viable for some guys.
I will agree will the Oxygen8 on stage. Not too cool, but satisfactory for lead parts.
This keyboard is the culmination of YEARS of synthesis. In fact 10 years in the making. I was so upset when I heard that the OASYS was cancelled years ago and then was converted into an audio recording device. If it were economically feasible I'd sell off at least two of my boards to get the OASYS, namely my O1/W and my Wavestation. I know there won't be a chance in hell that it'll be affordable, but I'm super happy it has been completed. Essentially this is the same combo you're using, just a bit larger witha touch screen. I appreciate Logic with a controller, but I really think some keyboards can't be emulated well.
Jordan Rudess is amazing. Does he have two identical racks so that if one fails for some reason he can just hit a switch and keep going?
I remember reading in DTIFC (sucks that the next issue is the last) that he is able to use the one keyboard by programming all the settings changes before the show and tapping a foot controller to go through them. That's just... wow.
I wish I had that much money to spend on a keyboard:)
--
HAL 7000, fewer features than the HAL 9000, but just as homicidal!
Re:purpose?
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
You could posit portability but I think my powerbook and my oxygen8 is more portable than this sucker.
Sure, but the oxygen8 has only 2 octaves of keys. It's fine for plunking out little loops for recombining later, but serious keyboard players generally want something with more range.
And if you have the same number of keys on the keyboard, a keyboard alone is generally going to be smaller than keyboard+Powerbook.
It seems to me all-in-one systems are more prone to breakin down.
I don't actually know, but that thought did occur to me, as well. And a computer is the ultimate all-in-one system.
Thought experiment: I'll go ask everybody in my local orchestra if they would feel safer if they had to plug their instrument into a laptop, and have the laptop work perfectly, in order to get any sound out. I'm going to guess not many of them will.
If you're a computer geek and you're going to spend time with your laptop, anyway, that's great for you. I, however, often just want to sit down and play some notes.
(Yeah, I'm old-skool. I don't have a laptop hooked up to my stereo, my TV, or my camera when I'm using them.)
Re:purpose?
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
The UPS has to be so he doesn't lose his settings and have to "cycle through" presets to get back to where he is in the set.
And course losing power can be simple as someone kicking out his plug, which means it really IS useful to be able keep playing until the end of the song...
You're wrong. Jordan doesn't use his Kurzweil as only a controller, but also as an extremely capable synthesizer and sampler. The entire Rudess/Morganstein Project was nothing more than Rod on drums and Jordan on a K2500XS. About 90% of the album was recorded "live", with the exception of overdubs for some of the lead solos. I have a number of the Kurzweil Setups for my K2600XS from the RMP as well as some of his work with Dream Theater. It's nice to know these guys personally.;)
Because this thing really does "just work": you plug it in and all the keyboard and all the computer functionality is there.
Your Powerbook requires software installation, interface cables, multiple power connectors, a separate stand to hold the powerbook, probably a laptop security cable (so it doesn't get snarfed), software installation, and all the other complexities that come with running a general purpose laptop.
It's cool, it's geeky, but that does not make it worth the cash, especially if I'm just worried about getting things done.
No, the "geeky" thing to do is to become a computer operator in order to play the keyboard. For getting things done, solutions that work out of the box with no fiddling are the better choice.
Re:purpose?
by
Atsi+Otani
·
· Score: 2, Informative
As other people have mentioned, a powerbook and oxygen8 will suck for live use. You want something with minimum setup hassle and top-notch reliability.
On the other hand, I don't understand what Korg is trying to do with this keyboard. Sequencing and recording is easier with a computer nowdays, so their workstation approach seems like an unnnecessary feature that increases the price (have to mention that it was a great thing to do in the Korg M1 days).
Additionally, I don't get what they're trying to do with the synthesis. It seems they're trying to market this as an "open architecture synthesis" board, but it doesn't look like anything new. It looks like a CX-3, analog modelling synth and PCM synth bundled in one box, and I don't see the point of doing that. For example, I don't want to play organ and piano on the same keyboard - I want weighted keys for piano and synth keys for organ. If I had 8,000$ to spend on keyboards, I would buy two or three different boards that can do one thing good. Yeah, it's going to suck dragging them around, but you aren't going to have to worry about running out of keys when you have to play organ and piano in the same song.
Yeah he has two of everything in the rack... Though in the event of a failure of one he has to switch cables... You'd think he'd have some cool rig in case that happened.:P He also has a second korg karma just incase. (since they only come in keyboards, he has it sit on top of his rack) It's a neat setup... Petrucci's setup is pretty crazy itself, I can tell ya a bit about that if you want.
Might as well comment on that - Petrucci uses a setup almost identical to Jordan's, cept he has 8 different tone switches on a pedalboard, and two other switches that he uses to switch from song to song. It's kind of like a patch library on a keyboard - each song is a bank, has its own tones in it. Choose a tone, and it tells his amps how to set themselves up.
> I saw the Chemical brothers lose their entire library at a live show once and it meant an unexpected 15 minute second intermission.
If they actually played music then that wouldn't have been an issue. Traditionally amps and guitars can have problems, but all good players have backup guitars and amps to pull out in a flash.
Les Paul Guitar -> Cable -> Cranked Marshall Amp -> Rockin' Roll!
Yes, because controlling two keyboards and a looper while keeping in sync with a partner with two turn tables is so much less musical.....
Just because you don't like a genre of music doesn't mean that it doesn't take creative energy and work to produce. The exception being produced pop idiots who lip sync their studio mastered wonders or who are overdubbed at every live event because they really can't sing.
-- There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
Re:purpose?
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
The newly reconstituted Duran Duran (all original band members) released their first video with Nick Rhodes playing a USB keyboard tied into a PowerBook G4. Nick was on the bleeding edge of the sampling craze back in the day.
Hey there Kurzweilfreak, I don't suppose you could suggest a good librarian / editor for the K2000R can you? I picked one up super cheap but it's midway down my rack and a pain to edit like that and I *really* want to learn to harness the sound power of this machine. I can't afford Logic or the Mac I'd need to run it on, and the patch editors I found online are all pretty crap. MidiQuest doesn't seem to be able to handle it either, or any of my equipment properly. So, any further suggestions would be well received.
-- All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain.
Re:purpose?
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
No gui can compete with real knobs - seriously. With mouse you can drag one controller at a time, but a knob can be turned with one finger (assuming they're logically positioned). I can play with one hand and simultaneously turn knobs, just imagine trying to hit a slider/knob with mouse while not looking at the screen.
No one ever really made a librarian/editor program that was actually useful for the K2x00 series, unfortunately. If you're on a PC, you might try to find a really really old copy of Sounddiver, as they had a K2000.dll for it, but current versions of Sounddiver are Mac-only. My suggestion would be to move it up in your rack.:(
I'm a daily Kurzweil user and I'm the keyboard department manager of the piano store I work for, specializing in all things Kurzweil, so any and all questions can go to my email or ask me directly on AIM at Togakure99.:)
Self-contained keyboards are portable and more stable. I don't want to lug a big keyboard and a computer and all the requisite wires to a gig, hook them up, plug them in, start playing, and then find out that something wasn't hooked up right, or that my computer is feeling buggy that day.
Your powerbook doesn't have any midi interfaces to begin with. You can buy one that will plug into the firewire, but then that's an extra piece of hardware or two, plus more software putting a bigger load on your processor which increases the number of things that can go wrong by an unacceptable amount.
Your point that modularity is good for long-term maintanance in general is probibly a good one, but in the musical performing arts, what counts is sounding good right now. Telling your audiance that something went wrong with one of your components, and bending over to tinker with wires for half an hour in the middle of a show is not "sounding good."
Up the rack it goes then. My chances of getting an old PC copy of SoundDiver are slim, and buying a Mac just for that is out of the question.
There may be some questions heading your way (thanks for the offer BTW), the Kurweil has amazing depth to it from the look of the manuals, and I really want to see what I can make it do.
-- All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain.
The site sucks
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Microsoft VBScript runtime
error '800a000d'
Type mismatch: '[string: "."]'
E:\WWW\KORG.COM\GEAR\../include/browser.asp, line 27
... there are people still using Lynx, you know
Re:The site sucks
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Imagine a Beowulf cluster of these!
by
Darth+McBride
·
· Score: 1
Oh wait. I think Depeche Mode already did that...
"You'll dance to anything by Depeche Commode!" - The Dead Milkmen
Re:Imagine a Beowulf cluster of these!
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
yea for reals. Dodger Stadium concert in 1990-1991 timeframe (they had to try and out do their prior appearance in the area, which was, of course, Depeche Mode 101 at The Rose Bowl --whoo ahh and someone booked Electronic as their opening act...Electronic was bits of New Order and The Pet Shop Boys stuck together). It was, however, freakin' awesome to see Alan Wilder power up rack after rack of equipment behind him during "Enjoy the Silence". Unlike virtually all of their prior concerts, he and Martin basically had a single streamlined keyboard and stood infront of equipment racks. As they shifted from hardware to software it probably inundated Alan with too much work, which was the #1 reason he cited for bailing on them. On the other hand, the high tech stuff they used at that show really sucked when it came time to play the National Anthem of The OC (at that time), "Just Can't Get Enough". Some cheesy 80s party music _must_ be played on the original Yamaha (DX7), Korg (DDD1) or Faralights to be appreciated. The later stuff from the Emu-IIs and Ensoniq Mirages can be faithfully reproduced by PowerBooks.
As for The Dead Milkmen, I heard they are (serious) commentators on some TV News program now. But Dave-o, Martin and Fletch are still goin' at it. I hope they get Alan (who is Recoil) to come back and do a follow-up to their masterpieces like "Shoes" and "Enjoy the Silence". Too many youngsters getting the wrong idea about Depeche Mode. (In fact, that Dodger Stadium concert in 90 was filled with children under the age of 12 --I'd never seen that going back to 82...DM was always an ultra sexy super modern experience.) Damn, just occurred to me that those kids have grown up and are here on slashdot now proclaiming to be masters of the universe...
You Know What You're Doing
by
CDMA_Demo
·
· Score: 1
Take off all Kbs
Re:You Know What You're Doing
by
TommydCat
·
· Score: 1
-- This comment does not necessarily represent the views and opinions of the author.
Re:You Know What You're Doing
by
mr_jrt
·
· Score: 1
For great justice?
-- Boo.
Fujitsu might be annoyed
by
Neo-Rio-101
·
· Score: 1
Fujitsu has an office suite software package caled OASYS. It only sells in Japan as far as I know.
--
READY.
PRINT ""+-0
Re:Fujitsu might be annoyed
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
No, it's actually the same thing. Japanese culture is different.
Re:Fujitsu might be annoyed
by
Monkelectric
·
· Score: 1
the (korg) OASYS architecture has been around since early 2000 actually....
--
Religion is a gateway psychosis. -- Dave Foley
Re:Fujitsu might be annoyed
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Korg's OASYS technology has been around for quite a while. A few years back they sold it as a PCI expansion card so I don't think Fujitsu will mind.
Re:Fujitsu might be annoyed
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Given that this new board is said to be going for $8000 it might only sell in Japan too.
Cool
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
I doubt this will benefit existing Linux-using musicians, though. Audio gear manufacturers like Korg tend to use specialized DSP chips and crap. It's not like you'd be able to copy the files to your Linux box and start banging out beats on your soundblaster.
Re:All I Can Say Is ...
by
Monkelectric
·
· Score: 1
Anytime is a good time to upgrade a Roland. Their stuff from 10 years ago rocks, but, holy crap does everything else suck.
--
Religion is a gateway psychosis. -- Dave Foley
Re:All I Can Say Is ...
by
helixcode123
·
· Score: 1
Anytime is a good time to upgrade a Roland. Their stuff from 10 years ago rocks, but, holy crap does everything else suck.
I'm really happy with my Roland XP-80, which I've been
gigging with since 1996. I seem to upgrade
keyboards about once a decade, but I haven't
seen anything yet that really floats my boat.
The XP is easy to program and reliable.
And it has a floppy disk drive!! (It's also
way more functional than my old Juno-60:-)
Doomed to Fail
by
copponex
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
I work at a pro audio store, and I can tell already that this thing is doomed to fail. I remember someone trying to get us to resell a dual opteron with Windows XP integrated into a keyboard. It was awkward and too expensive for the $4500 price tag it commanded.
Modularity is much more popular in recording studios. Buy a Mac Mini and an MBox, and you've still got $3,000 to spend on good mics, a good channel strip, and a decent keyboard controller with MIDI triggered sound collections. Plus you've got a real interface with a decent screen size, without the "benefit" of being locked into a dead-end all-in-one solution. That's why Pro Tools HD systems and Apple Logic Pro setups are in 90% of the studios instead of crappy Roland workstations or Mackie d8bs.
I have to agree. It's the same reason why the TV/VCR or TV/DVD combos aren't a great idea for most people. Do you really want to lose your TV when you send the player out be repaired? I don't think so. Those kinds of devices appeal to a niche market.
The Opteron keyboard is the OpenLabs Neko. I've seen it (met its designers too).
Its meant for a live setting - rugged and much easier to set up than the slapped together rigs I run into all the time. One big box to keep an eye on and pack is less likely to be damaged and lost than a bunch of little boxes full of consumer-ish hardware that wasn't meant for that kind of harsh, smoky, bump and drop environment.
If anyone's curious it runs XP-64 and has 8 gigs of ram in the high end version...
---I have to agree. It's the same reason why the TV/VCR or TV/DVD combos aren't a great idea for most people.
Sheesh. Most people I know (and that is a great many) have a TV, VCR and a DVD player. The few people with combo units vcr/dvd player bought them after their vcr broke.
---Do you really want to lose your TV when you send the player out be repaired? I don't think so. Those kinds of devices appeal to a niche market.
Repaired? Who repairs consumer stuff these days? You throw it out and buy a new one. VCR's in Wal-Mart are 20-30$ and DVD players are 25-35$. Cheap cheap cheap. Yes, we live in the great throwaway society.. Well, what do you expect when a repair-kit costs 20$ and the new "drive" costs 15$ more and you can drive to pick it up?
--
Mod parent up! by Anonymous Coward (Score:1) Thurs, Nov 31, @13:37
I operate a recording studio for a living, we still use vaccum tubes and analog tape, as well as a G4/OSX Protools HD system. I meet large numbers of musicians. One thing I've noticed is that many musicians are intimidated by the perceived complexity of computer based DAW systems and apps like Logic or ProTools. For some reason some people would rather suffer through the poor UI offered by most powerful keyboard sequencers. I think Logic Audio has a friendlier UI than a Korg Triton or an MPC2000. My point here is that I think there is always a market for Korg's high end sequencing keyboards with touchscreen interfaces. All the guys that are hopelessly sick of their Tritons will buy them up quick, and probably never be aware that they are Linux users.
I'm guessing that it's meant to be more of a live instrument than a studio instrument. As far as I know, the only way to destroy a Korg board is to launch it into the sun. Try letting the roadies throw your Mac Mini and the 21" lcd into the back of a van...
You must reemeber that the idiot that started that company that made the Pentium based keyboard had NEVER made a keyboard before. For an unestablished company to command $4500 is little risky, however; Korg can get away with it. This board is a culmination of their entire existance all rolled up into pne board. Truly, if I could afford to get one I would since it would replace my O1/W and my Wavestation. Kurzweil can get $5K for their stuff and it's not nearly as robust as the OASYS seems to be!
I actually am a REAL musician and I do make money from my project studio. You do realize it's possible to do that, don't you?
I may not have directly said it in my post, but I'll make it clear: Just because one chooses components over all-in-one units does not make it inferior - particularly when research is done prior to purchase.
Again, Wow. Go outside and take a break or something.
Re:It's 8 frickin' grand...
by
Monkelectric
·
· Score: 1
Yep, korg has proved time and time again that they dont get it (and Im a HUGE fan of theirs, I own about 10 korg products).
They don't understand that the move in studios is to small, cheap, modular systems. Romplers are largely *over*, and so are monolithic synths. Thats why *EVERY* other manufacturer has either gone out of business or to small synths that can integrate with a pc. Couple that with the fact that the OASYS arichitecture is several years old already, and im afraid you have an overpriced piece of technology that was outdated years before it Sam Ash.
I can imagine the scene in the korg boardroom (Austion powers):
"Gentlemen, as you know, The year is 1992, audio synthesis technology is at its infancy, and we plan to revolutionze the industry with the mother of all synths!"
evil henchmen, "But sir, its 2004 and the average price of a synthesizer has dropped from the 2000 - 4000$ range to the 500 - 1000$ range."
"Well then what should we do?...
blank stares
"AH hell we'll do what we always do, throw a bunch of DSPs in a box, attach a keyboard and charge a lot of money."
--
Religion is a gateway psychosis. -- Dave Foley
Re:It's 8 frickin' grand...
by
electr01nik
·
· Score: 1
which really isn't anything for a sucessful project studio, or a small-to-medium sized profession studio. And not to start a hardware vs. software debate, there is a device made by Symbolic sound called the Capybara system.
So lets load it up then...
Basic Kyma System - $3470
A basic Kyma System includes a CD-ROM containing the Kyma X software (for both Windows and Macintosh platforms) with over 1000 presets and 350 prototypes, the Kyma X Revealed! book, a Kyma FireWire interface with 3 meter FireWire cable and 0.5 meter Capybara cable, a Capybara320 sound computation engine with four processors and 96 megabytes of sample RAM, four channel 24-bit A/D and D/A converters (up to 100 KHz sample rate), dual two channel 24-bit AES/EBU digital audio interface (up to 100 KHz sample rate), word clock input, VITC and LTC time code inputs and outputs, and MIDI In/Out/Thru. Available with desktop or rack-mount side-panels.
Upgrade to 4 Audio Channels - $995
An I/O module adds 4 more channels of 24-bit 100 KHz A/D, D/A, and AES/EBU audio I/O to a basic Kyma System (for a total of 8 channels). One (1) is the maximum number of I/O modules that can be added to a single Capybara.
Each card provides two additional processors and 48 megabytes of sample RAM. Up to 12 expansion cards can be added to a Capybara320, giving a maximum of 28 processors and 672 megabytes of RAM. (There is a 10% discount for orders of 4 or more cards.)
Total price - $10,891.00
But what does that all mean...
Basic Configuration
4 processors
96 MB sample RAM
12 expansion slots
I/O and external sync (see below)
External rackmount or desktop case (protects the DSPs and converters from the electrically noisy environment inside your personal computer, and leaves valuable slot-space free to use for other cards on your host computer)
Expansion Card
2 processors
48 MB sample RAM (per card)
Up to 12 cards can be added
Inputs and Outputs
4-8 channels
24-bit 32-100 kHz sample rate
Balanced Analog & Digital (AES/EBU or S/PDIF), XLR connectors
MIDI in / out / thru
Converters
Measurements are in A-weighted dB and were made with an Audio Precision Portable One Dual Domain audio analyzer.
48 kHz SNR DNR
A/D
110 dB
110 dB
D/A
105 dB
107 dB
External Synchronization
Word Clock input
VITC & LTC time code input
Benchmarks
To give some idea of the Capybara320's capabilities:
You can create a real-time 66-band vocoder on a basic system. On a fully loaded system, you can create a 600-band real time vocoder.
On a basic system, you can perform additive synthesis with 192 sine wave partials, each sine having its own independent frequency and amplitude envelope with any number of breakpoints in it. On a fully loaded system, you can perform real-time additive synthesis with 1743 partials.
You can generate a granular synthesis cloud with 93 simultaneous grains on a basic system. A fully loaded system can generate clouds of 837 simultaneous grains.
You can use 60 voices of samples on a basic system, and a fully loaded system gives you 545 voices.
this is a serious synthesis and sound design workstation, and trust me when I say that the price is well-justified for the performance, capabilities, and IMHO, ease of use (i was a TA @ clark University computer music studio, and used one on nearly a daily basis.)
Then could you please explain what the Roland V-Synth V2 and Alesis FusionSynth or others are?
And what's this Korg Electribe series about?
Just curious. By the way, what 10 Korg products do you own? My only piece of Korg gear is an Poly62.
Re:It's 8 frickin' grand...
by
Monkelectric
·
· Score: 1
Currently I own:
Korg Trtion Rack
Korg N5ex
Triton Expansions 1 thru 7, and the SCSI expansion
I used to own:
Korg N5
One of their guitar rigs (which I replaced with a digitech 2120)
I plan to buy this quarter:
Korg TR Rack
Korg Oasys PCI card:)
So long story short, a bit of experience with korg products:) I still stick by my statement, regardles of what Roland and Alesis are doing -- huge synths are the *past*.
So long story short, a bit of experience with korg products:) I still stick by my statement, regardles of what Roland and Alesis are doing -- huge synths are the *past*.
It seems so.:)
I don't however think that workstations belong to the past. As long as the big companies keep creating new workstations and keep making money off them, they'll keep belonging to the present.
What do you think is the future (and the present)?
Re:It's 8 frickin' grand...
by
Monkelectric
·
· Score: 1
IMHO, most of the people I know with small studios want Computer integration, good latecny, and for gods sake they want to get rid of MIDI and recording digital synths with expensive 120db SNR inputs:)
In the short term Access is doing a great job of working towards tha.
Long term, the companies need to standardize a synth *networking protocol* (they tried a few years ago with a standard called MLAN) that provides low or zero latency and digitial transmission of Note Data, Syth Channels back to a sequencer/console, and SYNTH CONFIGURATION DATA! Once a standard is in place, they can start integrating it into *big* recording consoles -- whose development tends to move at a glacial pace.
Rumor has it that it's going to be priced around $8000 US. Which is pretty outrageous given that you gan do the same with a PC and some software plus a midi controller for a fraction of that. Not to mention that Alesis is releasing a similarly spec'd beast expected to retail closer to $2000.
> Rumor has it that it's going to be priced around $8000 US. Which is pretty outrageous given that you gan do the same with a PC and some software plus a midi controller for a fraction of that.
There's one big caveat, Alesis has a history of putting out horrible sounding keyboards, Korg does not. You must put into consideration the control, synthesis power and versatility that this board will offer. The keyboard itself will feel good, sound good and have features for the professional. I have a ton more faith in Korg than I do Alesis. The Q-series and the Quardrasynth was not anything to jump up and down about. The hey day of keyboards may be over, but this sounds like a ten year old dream finally realized.
now can they make a sound card that works well with Linux?
Source Code?
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Does this mean that much like Cisco open sourced the WRT54G source code, that the Korg will be open source?
Fantastic!!
Woot!
Re:Source Code?
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
No. Their shit isn't GPL'ed. Sorry, communist.
Why on earth would you need a screen
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Why on earth would you need a screen on your keyboard? Whats this screen suppose to show? Your current keysetup? The last keystrokes you hit?
Why does it have cdburner? Does it have keylogger and burn what you type to the cd?
Sorry I'll stick with my standard microsoft natural keyboard.
Re:Why on earth would you need a screen
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
"Why does it have cdburner? "
I guess some people would like to press a button and record their music on an audio CD, even if it's just messing around with a piano patch. It's not such a crazy thing to do. Many of us musicans are not such technical people, and having a recording of an idea in a format you can take and play in pretty much any house in the world is a useful thing.
Re:Why on earth would you need a screen
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
no, you're not funny.
Re:Why on earth would you need a screen
by
wheatwilliams
·
· Score: 1
Dude, read the documentation.
This keyboard is also a multitrack audio recording studio. You'll be plugging in microphones and guitars and recording them along with the keyboard parts.
Why does it have an LCD display? So you can graphically edit the audio you record. So you can program the synthesizer functions. So you can manage huge multi-gigabyte libraries of samples and loops and sounds. So you can sync up video and record musical soundtracks for TV and film.
Why does it have a CD burner? You record music in the keyboard's hard drive, and when you are done, you mix it down and master it to a CD. So you can make records and sell CDs. CDs were for music before they were for computer data, remember? Seems perfectly obvious to me.
This is not just a synthesizer or sampler. It's a complete portable recording studio.
By the way, the thing is expected to list for US$7,000.
At that price it damn well better burn its own CDs.
Re:Why on earth would you need a screen
by
wheatwilliams
·
· Score: 1
Let me get this straight. The person who made the previous post did not realize that he was writing about a musical instrument--a synthesizer.
He thought he was writing about the computer input device that you type on.
Geez. Read up a little before you post.
Korg has been one of the leading electronic musical instrument companies for the last 30 years. Haven't heard of them?
I get it now!
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Propietary software is okay, as long as it is linux!
How about getting just the proprietary SW, and a Korg soundcard, and a MIDI keyboard (only - just the keys outputting MIDI data)? Maybe they'd prefer to bundle the proprietary SW with the Korg soundcard, the way they sell keyboardless MIDI "brains", without worrying about piracy? Every Linux box (and some still infected with Windows;) could be in their target market. We've already got the HW that runs the Linux and their SW; why raise their prices by selling it to us again?
--
--
make install -not war
Re:unbundling
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
It's not just a PC with a soundcard running Linux. It's got dedicated, specialized hardware (like DSPs) and a well designed touchable interface (read: real, rugged knobs and sliders).
Plus, it's impossible to write software that works with every linux distro/config. This way, they only have to bother with one.
The DSPs and other specialized HW are what I'm referring to as "soundcard". Of course it's not just a SoundBlaster-compatible soundcard; we've almost all already got one of those, too, so I wouldn't have asked for one. Again, the idea is to get something like the Korg M1 brain that revolutionized synth racks back in the 1990s. The physical interface is also available separately, with flying faders etc, in modular configs. Korg could also choose a single distro under which to run. The inevitable questions will come about which distro they chose, and whether they're distributing an altered version on these keyboards, without distributing source (in violation of the GPL), in addition to their proprietary app (not necessarily covered by GPL, unless they choose to do so).
--
--
make install -not war
Re:unbundling
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Considering that OASYS was originally a pci card, I don't think Korg would break a design that they have invested in. http://www.korg.com/oasyspci.htm It could even be a copy protected Live CD. The computer would be dedicated as a softsynth after all...
It bombed, partly because I think it was ahead of it's time.
Why would they name it the same...
by
DAE51D
·
· Score: 0
...as a product they already had that failed?!
http://www.korg.com/oasyspci.htm
Re:Why would they name it the same...
by
midifarm
·
· Score: 1
A little history for you... About 10 years ago, around the time of the O1/W, there was a super secret project in the works at Korg called the SuperSynth. This board was to include all sorts of real time controls, a qwerty keyboard, large touch screen display, vector AI2 and sample based synthesis, basically everything imaginable. At NAMM one year, they held a private showing of said keyboard under the name OASYS. The target was going to be the Waldorf Wave guys, the big wigs of the industry priced around $10K. So to us, it was supposed to come out at the next winter NAMM. The next show comes around and lo and behold OASYS is in the Korg booth, but it's NOT what we think it is. It's the product to which you were referring. After inquiring, I learned that the project was mostly scrapped and that's when Korg started going in a more consumer friendly direction. Apparently the marketing guys upstairs stole the project's name for said failed project. Somehow, this project got revived and I'm all of a sudden feeling nostalgic. Now where's that lottery ticket?
Peace
Foot in the door for Linux
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
Korg first annoucned the OASYS in the early 1990s, long before the Trinity (predecessor of the Triton) hit the market. For a while the OASYS was a DSP card, too. Now it's 3 of their synths rolled into one with a touchscreen. Nothing worth writing home about, if it weren't for their use of Linux as its OS. If they've managed to make it fast-booting, and made fast patch-changing possible, they might not have a winner (boot and patch-changing times on synth workstations are slooooooooooooooooooooow), but it'll certainly lay the foundation for future development. The use of Linux is surprising, as everybody would have banked on Windows, thanks to their Legacy Cell plug-in suite. Will it be a success? That depends if it can stay below the $3500 street price barrier. I've worked in music retail for years, and for 99% of clientel an item like this doesn't exist if it's over 3500 smackers, no matter how good it is.
I wouldn't have banked on Windows. As an owner of the Korg Oasys PCI card, I had hoped and waited and waited for a Windows XP driver that was never ever made. The newest thing I could get it to work on was with Windows ME, so I assume that they
just gave up on MS altogether and figured that Linux is more like MacOS these days and that would be their new platform....
...that there aren't more "geeks" who got into computers by way of artistic endeavors. I mean, what the hell man? I got into computers in order to do electronic music, so I knew exactly what the subject line meant. This is why I no longer consider myself a "geek". Sure, I do a lot of stuff that ould be considered geek-like. I love to compile all my software from source and hate RPMs. I try to automate as much as possible at home using Linux. My desktop systems are all Linux based. I run my own web, mail, and DNS servers. But I really only got into computers less than ten years ago. Before that I just used them to make music. First it was the Atari ST (excellent MIDI capabilities and software that blew everything else away at the time) that I used to really compose music in the traditional sense and then sequence it. I wasn't into the MOD scene because I don't work that way. I actually sit down at a MIDI keyboard and really play. Then in college I moved onto the Macs they had on campus (I still used the ST in my apartment). When I graduated in late 1994, I couldn't afford a Mac so I moved to Windows 3.1 which sucked massive ass at the time regarding MIDI and audio. Even Windows 95 and NT 4.0 sucked majorly where real music prodution was concerned. But I still couldn't afford a Mac. Finally in 1997 I got a job involving computers and started getting seriously interested. That's also when I moved to Linux full time. So yeah... I do geeky things, but I do them because they still support my music habit. I would have to say I'm primarily an artist who considers computers one of my instruments for creative outlet. Using the Planet CCRMA software and the ALSA driver for my Layla 20 digital audio interface, I've been able to do some more work in Linux now. It's always a shock to me that there aren't more people like me since almost everyone I knew who was an electronic musician in the 80s and 90s became a "computer guy" in the late 90s and early 2000s.
-- -"...bad old ideas look confusingly fresh when they are packaged as technology" - Jaron Lanier (Digital Maoism on Edge.o
Re:I'm Still Amazed...
by
son_of_asdf
·
· Score: 1
Right there with you on that one. The whole reason that I got in to working with computers was so that I could do MIDI sequencing. 15 years later I'm making a living working with the things, as opposed to with my guitars and keyboards, but that's just fine. Being a musician is a crappy way to make a living unless you're on the top of the muckheap anyway.
Linux Pro Audio has come a long way in the last few years, especially with the advent of astounding projects like ALSA, JACK, and Ardour. If only we could get one of the biggies (i.e. Digidesign, MOTU) to make the leap of faith needed to build upon the incredible audio platform that Linux can offer, life would be better for musicians everywhere. I wouldn't even insist that they GPL thier core software; just the driver development and plugin architecture work would provide Linux Pro Audio with immeasurable benefits.
You don't consider youself a geek/nerd for being into electronic music????
I've found this to be very true:-
http://www.users.bigpond.com/adriansbruce/cartoons/nerd!.jpg
and believe me, I've had a lot to do with electronic music and other artistic endeavors, like the above cartoon, and know the above to be very true of myself!!!!
Re:I'm Still Amazed...
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
yeah, same story here, sort of. I'm trained as a graphic designer who graduated from college during the bubble. The most interesting employment I found at the time was with a software company, and from there, it was all a new game. Originally began as a visual designer, moved into interaction/task analysis, and now do UI design for several products in a smallish software shop. I get the chance to work with smart people who respect what I add to the equation, and it's more of a contribution to "design" than being a "graphic" designer would ever be. I'm no engineer, but I can program as much as I need to and not get laughed at. And I enjoy the hell out of the challenges that come with the problem set.
I see lots of devleopers trying to pawn themselves off as UI designers, but rarely do I see UI designers willing to go deeper than photshop mockups. I personally don't get it...
No, it isn't just you. I just hope that whoever designs their webpages has no influence whatever over their actual products. Or anything else used by humans.
--
I see even classic Slashdot is now pretty much unusable on dial up anymore.
The website says that this keyboard includes "ground-breaking KARMA® technology". If I buy one will I get modded +5?
Ahh, Sweet Synthesizers
by
Omniscientist
·
· Score: 1
I've always been a fan of top notch high quality synthesizers. When I was younger I played alot of the piano, so naturally sweet synthesizers was the cool, geeky thing to pursue. KORG has always made some of the best synths, however the ones worth buying have always been very expensive.
It is nice to know that an important player in the synthesizer biz is starting to use Linux, mainly because I am a lover of Linux and I want to see the technology spread. However, when we're dealing with synthesizers, I cannot see moving to an open source OS for a synthesizer making that huge of a difference, except for one big thing. The most important parts are the keyboard itself, the sounds, the mixing capabilities, various added features such as looping and creating new sounds, etc; all which can be achieved regardless of the OS. What I hope the inclusion of Linux will affect is the price. Naturally a free OS should cause the price to go down.
I'm using Mozilla 1.7.5 on Linux and the "SHOP ONLINE" button doesn't work on the website (hmm...that's funny), so I can't check the price. If anyone can find out the price of this thing, is it cheaper than other synths with similiar capabilities?
Are music keyboards becoming a commodity?
by
njyoder
·
· Score: 0
What I'm wondering is, what really differentiates keyboards nowadays? Sure, you can slap on a pretty interface an dall, but the music you make will still sound the same won't it? Isn't there open source software that can replicate all the same stuff? I can understand how it was years ago, with crappier sound technology and slower computers, but not now. I remember a "learning keyboard" thing for the mac years ago, can't remember what it was called, but surely that and all the korg stuff can be replicated perfectly?
Re:Are music keyboards becoming a commodity?
by
midifarm
·
· Score: 1
Unfortunately they're not a commadity. It's still based upo how it sounds, how it feels, it's ease of use and it's options. There are some software synths that can do certain things well, but nothing has been able to replace nor sound as good as some of those older synths, until now perhaps. There's a lost art of sound manipulation and creativity that has gone to the strict playing of presets. This may be the jolt the industry needs.
This keyboard can't be pirated, in the way that software can. Ergo, there's money to be made. Perhaps you won't get it into the hands of as many people, but at least those people will have actually paid you.
Also, not every musician is a computer geek. I've met quite a few who were terrified by them, even though they were happy getting around equally complex audio hardware.
My first - and only - 'high-end' keyboard was a Roland.
I was living in England at the time, and me and my band-mates took to hanging out in Cambridge and prowling the music stores looking for deals. I wanted, but could not afford a top of the line Yamaha DX-1 - so instead settled for a Roland JX-3P. This was 1983/84 timeframe. Rumor had it that Thomas Dolby acquired his keyboards from the same shop (but that is highly speculative - although interestingly the linked article does mention him - so my machine could have been from the same lot:p ). I never did buy the DCO controller unit - and spent many hours programming the thing through the push button interface (perhaps why I ended up becoming a computer programmer?). It also included a pitch bender (to get the effect equivalent to slurring notes) and a rudimentary midi interface - which I never used.
I remember seeing a Moog synth - a Prodigy in the same store - slightly used - and I kick myself for not getting that one instead - again lacked the cash flow. I did purchase a BOSS DR 110 drum machine which I used for composing, and when our drummer would crap out on us; I ended up loaning that to a friend in later years - and never saw it again (friend having moved with no return address). Also acquired a BOSS DM-3 Analog Delay floor switch unit - used that as a general purpose delay for all kinds of ambient effects - and still own it today (great little unit) and use it with my guitar.
When I came back to the states I got an electrician to modify the power supply on the keyboard to handle US power. After a few years I gave it to my sister who was studying music in college at the time. No idea where it is or what it is doing now...(sigh)
This new Korg sounds interesting (combining both my love of computers and music in one device). I wonder if I will have to sell my firstborn to afford it? Has anyone priced these? Would it be better for me just to get a good midi capable soundcard and some computer software combined with a cheaper keyboard?
--
Lodragan Draoidh The more you explain it, the more I don't understand it. - Mark Twain
Cool, but...
by
catdevnull
·
· Score: 0, Redundant
With all of the software out there that does this for you on your computer, it seems a bit redundant to spend a bunch of money on a single piece of hardware. 10 years ago, I could see how this would penetrate the market, but it's cheaper, easier, and more expandable to use your computer with a simple MIDI controller to do all this.
As a composer, I've relied heavily upon synthesis to demonstrate and proof projects and to generate more commercial projects as well. With the sample banks, synth software, and loop libraries available for products like Acid, Live, Logic, Digital Performer, Reason, etc., it seems unlikely that anyone would would want to buy a single device--unless it's for performance. Not that it isn't cool. I like it. I'm just wondering about the target demographic. It seems that for the same price, I can buy a full 88-Key weighted key controller and the software for my computer that gives me tons more options in an interface idiom with which I'm already familiar.
Now, this thing would be REALLY badass if it has an ethernet port and an interactive login:-)
If it could be added as another processor or module to an existing studio environment with tons of "plays nice with others" bells and whistles, I see even more value on the high-end studio and/or for the stage.
--
I might know what I'm talkin' about, but then again, this is Slashdot...
MIDI is serial
by
tepples
·
· Score: 2, Informative
It's MIDI, which is unidirectional serial at 31.25 kbps with.
You fail to understand, it is a cording keyboard. I don't think x.org supports it yet though.
Someone who's more familiar with music equipment
by
tepples
·
· Score: 1
Of course computer geeks aren't going to associate linux and keyboard with a synthesizer.
I saw "Korg" and thought music equipment. In the context of music equipment, I saw "keyboard" and thought MIDI controller. I read the blurb and realized that it was a controller-synthesizer.
This is not really new
by
DaveCBio
·
· Score: 2, Informative
OASYS has been around for years - http://www.korg.com/oasyspci.htm
If I was going to get something like this I would probably go this route so I would be able to run my exisitng software - http://www.openlabs.com/
Korg isn't the only one running Linux for audio hardware - http://www.museresearch.com/receptor_overview.php
Being in audio I don't really see the advantages of systems like this over a good PC, control surface and a MIDI keyboard. That is unless you are using it for live gigs.
I dont know about cluster, but connecting a bunch of them together on ethernet or something sure sounds like a fun thing to do. I was looking at the ports that were provided behind the synth. Found nothing too exciting except for a bunch of USB ports for getting your data out.
Re:Beowulf?
by
kurzweilfreak
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Exciting would be something like mLAN on the Yamaha MotifES, kurzweil KSP8, or other equipment. mLan is poised to be the next MIDI, if only Yamaha would get it working as they promised it eventually would: Audio and MIDI, all devices connected and working together over one Firewire cable. Anyone other musicians have any thoughts on mLAN?
--
kurzweil_freak
5th Kyu Genbukan Ninpo/KJJR student
Be the darkness that allows the light to shine.
Beat to the Punch Again!
by
Linuxathome
·
· Score: 1
Darn it! When can linux ever be touted as the innovator?
Korg OASYS.. is this 1994??
by
naelurec
·
· Score: 1
Korg announced the OASYS back in 1994... Interesting that they stuck with the name for this product.. However, I think this type of super-workstation keyboard is past its prime.. like others have said, most studios seem to be doing a significant amount of processing via software placing most of the $$ into mics/sound reinforcement/etc.. For gigging.. does anyone seriously want to cart one of these monsters around? No thanks.
Network with a guitar?
by
Linuxathome
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
Re:Network with a guitar?
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Not off the shelf. MaGIC just hasn't been adopted enough to make it an issue.
Sheesh
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
With a "TouchView" display, no less.
Gee, that reminds me of ViewTouch, a trademarked term for touchscreen software that's almost 20 years old.
RE: impact of this synth
by
King_TJ
·
· Score: 2, Informative
No way! As soon as I saw this and read the list of specs, I realized this is going to put a big nail in the coffin of the whole Korg Triton line of synth workstations!
The Triton made a *huge* impact in the music synth scene, with almost every major act wanting to be seen with one on stage or in their studio in photos, etc. I see no reason the Oasys won't be the same - serving as the logical upgrade path for Triton users.
I realize most of the Slashdot readers aren't necessarily that interested in following musical instruments.... but it happens I do (and I've owned 2 different Triton models in the past, as well as a Yamaha Motif).
The first thing you have to understand about synthesizers is their market. Most high-end synth purchasers are pretty techno-savvy, actually - but not necessarily experts with modern PC operating systems. They're the types who aren't scared by electronics with many levels of programmable options and parameters, but their focus is only on learning these things if it directly benefits their ability to create/compose better music. They'll use PCs and MIDI, but will pay a premium for a pre-built custom system that is already configured with optimized sound drivers for low latency, etc. etc. They don't want to mess around with all of that themselves.
(By the same token, they're still using these dedicated music workstations rather than keyboard MIDI controllers and software synth programs because of the stability. They don't want something that requires a long "boot up" time, and then might crash in the middle of a performance.)
The Triton used a fairly MS-DOS like filesystem with short filenames and such - but synth owners seemed happy enough with it. I doubt Korg would see a reason to change it much on the Oasys.
This is not unexpected News
by
Ralph+Spoilsport
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
As a professional electronic musician (among other things as an interdisciplinary artist) I can comment on this development.
Basically, the Keyboard People are fucked.
Strike that. They are FUCKED.
Why? As one poster noted above: Software.
Software synthesis already outstrips most anything you can do in a keyboard, and at a much lower cost.
I remember back i nthe ancient 1980s, when a cheezy ass sampler (by todays standards) cost $2000+. In Reason, which costs about $400, you can fill an entire virtual rack with samplers far in excess of what availed then. you want 11 samplers stacked? If you had $25,000 - SURE. In Reason, when you're done, you simply open up a new blank Rack, and fill it with more/other goodies from the drop down menu. Back then, you'd have to sell all those samplers...
It comes with drum machines, samplers, processors, mixers, synthesizers of several different stripes, and on and on.
This, in combination with Reason, offers truly terrifying amounts of musical development and creativity. Recently, Live was upgraded to include MIDI, and a basic drum machine, so now it is even more deadly as a combo with Reason. Live is a Loop based compositional system, but with its new MIDI capabilities, it is now a much more powerful beast. It costs about $350, IIRC.
This, in combination with Live and Reason, makes ANYTHING coming out of Korg pretty much superfluous. With Live and Reason, you have composition systems and tonnes of "Gear". With Max/MSP you make your own gear, and it can be just as weird as you want it to be. Max/MSP isn't a synth, it's a software development environment that resembles an evil cross between Visual Basic and tinkertoys. It's available on Mac and (finally) Windows, and it totally fuckin' rocks. If you wondered how freeks like Autechre makes all that jiggety noise, look no further than:
Max/MSP.
so, lets run some totals:
My guess is the Oasys will likely come in around at a $2500 price point.
I often shop at Musicians Friend so my prices are from there as of today, Jan 20th. They aren't the best, or the worst. It's just a data point.
Reason: on sale: $199
Ableton Live: $399
Max/MSP with Jitter (video libraries): $799
Edirol PCRA-30 keyboard with Audio In: $299
And a computer I found at PC MALL - an IBM Thinkpad:
Intel P4, 2.8GHz processor, 256MB RAM, 40GB Hard Drive, CD-RW/DVD Combo drive,15" XGA Display, XP-Pro, etc.
Which has PLENTY of power for audio. and it's on sale for $1,198.
So, throw in another hundred bucks for a kbd stand and what not and the total is around:
$2900
Which is probably a bit more than the OASYS will sell for. Since Max/MSP is for Advanced User GEEKS, and Jitter is even geekier, cut the $799 out and you have an entire electronic music studio that KICKS ASS for about $2200.
...for a system that will totally thrash the OASYS up and down the street. Cheerfully.
Now: will your system CRASH? Yes. Will the OASYS? Probably not. If you're worried about that, then get a Powerbook or a Linux Book or whatever-the-fuck-book that flips your crank. They don't Blue Screen as much as Windoze box, but there are other issues involved. All in all, unless you're planning to spend a lot of time on stage, you're better off with the compter based system.
In a few years you will have run through most of what the OASYS does. In a few years... I *shudder* to think what Reason and Live will be like...
Basically Hardware Synth manufactueres are doomed. The only ones who will survive are the ones making the uber-geek analogue gear, and they will basically be little more than boutique operations for purists.
RS
-- Shoes for Industry. Shoes for the Dead.
Re:This is not unexpected News
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Play on a real Hammond B3, Moog, Rhodes piano or church organ, and you will play totally differently on each. Open a different soft synth and you are still at the same damn midi keyboard.
Re:This is not unexpected News
by
SushiFugu
·
· Score: 1
My guess is the Oasys will likely come in around at a $2500 price point.
Re:This is not unexpected News
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Do you have any mp3's posted of your tracks, RS? Are you listed in Discogs?
Re:This is not unexpected News
by
electr01nik
·
· Score: 2, Informative
One thing, however, is you failed to mention latency. For those that don't know what latency is, it's the time between when you, for example, press a key on your MIDI controller and hear a sound coming out of the software synth on your computer. I own a Digidesign mBox, and if I set the buffers down to 128, I get only 6ms of latency, which I find acceptable in most cases. However the tradeoff is that the lower the # of buffers you have, the more the CPU has to work. The device drivers you use (MME, DirectX, ASIO, whatever Logic Audio for the PC had, before emagic was bought by apple...EASI i think it was called) play a big role in determining latency. In contrast, the MME driver for my soundcard (Realtek AC'97) has 23ms of latency with the buffers set at 1024 (they won't go any lower than that). The directX drivers for the same device give 5ms of latency with buffers @ 256. Yes I realize that that is better than the mBox, but the DirectX driver doesn't have the support for 16 internal tracks like the mBox does.
Latency is always a factor, whether the platform be hardware or software. A hardware synth still has latency, but you most likely won't notice it, but nevertheless, it can be measured. As hardware devices are slowly migrated into software counterparts for PCs, these things need to be taken into account. Fewer buffers mean less latency, but the trade-off is the CPU has to work harder. Add more soft-devices into the fray (reason modules, abelton loops, VST plugins/insturments, audio tracks), thus increasing the number of voices, and the CPU has to work even harder. It's not an exact science, but there are some of us who prefer to shell out the extra $2-300 for a dedicated hardware synth/rack module/drum-machine so to not have to deal with the latency that plague many of their software counterparts. Dedicated hardware, IMO, performs better than 'hardware' designed to run in a software environment which may or may not be 'prepared' to handle it, or has to overcompensate because of limitations in the respective OS.
Now if they could do something about the General MIDI spec...then we would be making progress.
Re:This is not unexpected News
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
dude, all due respect you're pretty full of bs.
firstly the sounds coming out of each keyboard or synth are unique because of the signal paths, d/a converters that are in them. So just because my nord rack 2x has certain features, doesnt mean that great emulations of it such as discovery are going to sound quite the same.
Then you have customised interface, most of the real musicians i know don't like to click mouses around and even with dedicated controllers that can control most software, you will not get the same experience as a keyboard with a control panel laid out for its optimal use.
On top of that you have analogue!! No software will ever sound exactly the same as my Alesis Andromeda or a minimoog because analogue digital kapiche?
What's more is hybrid analogue and digital synths like the Waldorf Q+ which has a digital oscillators and envelopes etc but with real analogue filters.
The part where you really missed the point was where you forgot about the musician who likes to take one single item to the live recording, or gig and it happens to be the same single unit that the music was created and recorded on.
Re:This is not unexpected News
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Right now, we're seeing propritary software overtake proprietary electronic hardware for a lot of music production. There are, however, some disadvantages:
* Most software is Windows-only. Windows and Mac, if you're lucky. Good luck getting a Linux version.
* Greater delay
* Silly software protection that makes all those software synths useless when you upgrade your computer.
* Less stability
I have a Casio CZ-1000 I bought over 18 years ago that still works today. Why do I get the feeling that these new software synths will not function 18 years form now.
Re:This is not unexpected News
by
killjoe
·
· Score: 1
And to think thelonious monk only needed a lousy piano to make amazing music.
-- evil is as evil does
Re:This is not unexpected News
by
madprof
·
· Score: 1
Korg, Yamaha, Roland etc. have been selling embedded systems that act like synthesizers for years. They won't die out because they will continue to utilise their experience to make software for PCs (as they do) and all-in-one units that are very easy to use in studios.
The value of a tool is how easily it allows the musician to create and that's why I'm still using Creator on an Atari ST. Some stuff is not easy to do but then creativity can flourish when faced with restrictions on working practices. You find innovative ways around things.
Now all I need is some talent!
Re:This is not unexpected News
by
midifarm
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
Interesting that you brought up MAX. Stephen Kay, creator of KARMA and a slew of programming for Korg for 15+ years, wrote KARMA using MAX on his Mac. The main cost will be the highly refined control suface that I'm sure Korg will attach to it. A 76-key and 88-key version is slated with more buttons and sliders etc than a JD-800. I would probably pay $800 for OASYS in software form, if it ran on a Mac. It won't happen, but I'm happy to see the keyboard I dreamed about for years coming to fruition.
Peace
Re:This is not unexpected News
by
njyoder
·
· Score: 0
Actually, you're wrong about analog. There's absolutely no reason why software can't generate an exactly identical waveform to what your analog deal will generate. The only difference is teh sound card and speakers. In the case of the sound card there are better professional ones and speakers...just get decent onees.
Re:This is not unexpected News
by
objekt
·
· Score: 1
"Open a different soft synth and you are still at the same damn midi keyboard."
Then buy a different midi controller.
And FWIW, I play differently depending on the patch.
-- --
Boycott Shell
Re:This is not unexpected News
by
FiloEleven
·
· Score: 1
Have you heard of Pure Data, or Pd? It's an open-source project that may someday serve as an alternative to MAX. I haven't used either of them, but as I'm not sure I want to go for the low-end build-your-own-instrument route I'm going to start off with Pd. I would be interested in finding out how Pd compares to MAX, if anyone has used both.
PD is fine - it works, but the documentation is lousy, and the community is vastly smaller and tends to be more academic than practical.
Consequently, support is much dodgier than with C74.
Obviously you're not used to real road shows where "roadies" are used. Roadies NEVER play with the instruments themselves, that's what backline guys are for and they're usually better at taking care of teh gear than the actual musicians. Roadies aren't what they used to be. More or less they supervise and direct the local union grunts as to stage construction etc.
I fear that the OASYS will require boot time, so the idea of turning it on and off, working flawlessly the whole night seems to be a pipe dream. I'm imagining the true beauty of the board will be in the various control and actual synthesis that will be achieved through the power of it's core.
This board is a dream 10 years in the making, glad to see it coming to fruition.
I was really trying to make the point that this thing could be packed in a crate and shipped without to much risk of it suffering damage, even if it accidently got dropped of the ramp while they are loading the truck or some other stupid event. A laptop is more likely to be fragile. Also it could be the musicians personal computer, and so may not be solely dedicated to the task of an instrument, which risks the thing having a driver conflict or virus or what ever preventing it working on any particular random night. Not pretty if you have an audience. I have been to enough laptop live PA's of various electronic artists to see the occasional embarassing situation of a laptop refusing to cooperate, or a program crashing in the middle of a performance. This happens rarely as the guys doing this are good at administering their computers, and the more experienced the better they are at it, but it does still happen. Obviously you can have a dedicated system for performances, but then the question of why not buy an off the shelf solution like this keyboard?
You are right that this makes sure all the controls are easily accessible from the keyboard.
As for boot up, I think it could be made to be pretty short being essentially an embedded device, and not a general purpose computer, and it should just work all night flawlessly or it will get a reputation for being a crap piece of equipment.
Re: impact of this synth
by
crackshoe
·
· Score: 1
Nothing, at least for quite a while, will kill the Triton. Listen to any hip hop / RnB record - most of the sounds you hear outside of samples will be the stock sound from an Akai mpc2000xl or the Triton. With any luck, the Oasys will pick up a decent part of the market (i say this since i sell pro audio gear) but tritons are a long way from being booted - studios still come in looking for asr10's and the like, discontinued keyboards, simply becasue thats what they're comfortable using, and would often trawl dozens of stores and ebay before even considering an upgrade.
-- Don't worry - its just stigmata. Pass me a napkin and don't you dare tell my mother.
I still have my Trinity, and I will say that the tabs are probably a very nice improvement. The Trinity, as awesome as it is, does most of its navigation through buttons off to the side. There are tabs, but only for specific pieces of the UI.
As far as "instrument-like" goes, I'm not sure that has ever been the intent of an "electronic" keyboard. Electronic musicians are very very much used to dials and buttons. The tabs are already a dramatic departure from the older analog stuff.
Looking back
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 1, Insightful
That was a cheap shot, and quite nearsighted. Worthy of a Troll.
Bear with me folks, it's long winded.
As a musician for 25 years I won't argue that Mac is the defacto platform for professional digital audio processing. It's been that way since the first Apple Macintosh hit the market. Ten years ago was not the time for a professional musician to use a Wintel platform. It was best to use a Mac, even in the amateur circles. In 1995, Micro$oft released an operating system that had some potential, but like anything new from this company, the platform was plagued with issues ranging from incompatibility with audio hardware, poor ports of applications and buggy programs by independent and well meaning and well motivated programmers to make useful software. Much like it is today. While it wasn't paradise, every year saw improvement both in hardware and software.
Many things changed when ProTools was ported to Windoze. HOORAY! Wintel had a platform that was acceptible to Digidesign. Hail the inexpensive digital studio. But it wasn't just in LA or Seattle recording studios. Now, Mr. Grunge Rocker could actually afford the hardware and software for the garage rather than pay an engineer for the time to use thier studio. It was by no means perfect, it worked when the OS didn't crash. Yet again, every year got better hardware and better software (yes, even Winslows). The key here is that a choice finally existed. Decisions began to be based on budget.
Today, most of the hardware that ProTools and many other digital audio platforms use is compatible with both Mac and Winblows. In fact, much of the hardware is designed with Winhose in mind. The bonus is that the OS is a lot more stable than ten years ago. Not 100% perfect when used for other applications, but if recording, mixing and mastering is all the system is used for, the price point cannot be beat, and the stability is for all purposes perfect. Thus the Wintel architecture is used in professional and home studios all over the world today. Few are going to buy a Mac then recording hardware and software to put it all together when they can shave a few hundred off the bottom line by buying a comparible PC platform. Budgets are such a concern that many choose to use digital recording consoles over PCs and Macs. Less options, fewer upgrade choices but inexpensive in comparison.
In the case of computers, it is a market driven economy. There will always be the need for more tracks, better signal processing new features. This is why companies like Digidesign and Steinberg develop for the Win32 platform. Yes, the cream of the crop is still on Mac but not ONLY on Mac. Such is the state of today.
Speaking from experience, this is where I took my foray into the digital realm in the home. I am not an electronic musician, though I occasionaly use sequencers and samplers. I play real strings on real frets, with real, live drums and cymbals. Everything is miked. I use ProTools and Cubase on Windoze. Why? Because it's affordable and I don't have to pay the recording studio a fortune to get a good recording.
This all happened in the last ten years. But what about the next ten years? Since we're on the subject of Korg, let's start there.
If Korg's innovation is to continue, they, like anyone else, has to find creative ways to develop products. Both Micro$oft and Apple would have huge licencing fees for embedded operating systems. Both would be too bloated for what is needed. What we're talking about here is the need for instruments to have extremely low latency times and do very specific functions. No eye candy involved. It has to work when the stage lights come up or the click track starts. Korg is a respected company in the music industry. I have used many of their products in the last 20 years. I still own an M1 and my Triton rackmount still gets heavy usage with my guitar synth. This is a company that has a reputation to uphold and if they think that Linux is the answer I won't even question why. IMHO, if anything it VALIDATES *
Get some perspective
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Wow, I see people bitching and moaning about the cost of this thing, fine, then don't buy it. Granted the price is on the steep side but at least it's not going to cost more than new houses costed when the 'Fairlight' music systems were king. Now that _WAS_ expensive.
Will anyone else be surprised..
by
kronstadt
·
· Score: 1
..if they sell less than 10 of these things? From what I hear, these things are going to be priced at $8000. On top of that, the demos sounded dreadful.
For this amount of money you can buy a laptop, a professional quality MIDI keyboard, sequencer/host software, a whole bunch of VST instruments and effects, and some top of the line sampling libraries. You could even go the Digidesign/Creamware route pretty hard. In return, you don't have to rely on Korg for hardware / software upgrades, and you can have a some musical instruments that sound at least halfway decent.
Perhaps $8000 will buy me a day's worth of whatever Korg's marketing dept was smoking.
Re:Will anyone else be surprised..
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
if you are at the NAMM show, try going by the booth when Stephen Kay (programmer of the keyboard's KARMA2 function) is giving his demo. He actually knows how to use it.;-) I think he is there at 10:30am and 5pm but I am not sure. Best wishes.
... I realized this is going to put a big nail in the coffin of the whole Korg Triton line of synth workstations!
Thus making second-hand Tritons affordable for those of us who don't have the backing of the latest hit-factory producer.
Re:To which I say "YAY!"
by
BlackHawk-666
·
· Score: 2, Informative
It does seem the next logical step up. I absolutely love my Triton, even if I don't like the "politeness" it seems to impart to all the sounds it makes. Polite that is in comparison to some Waldorf gear. I'd definitely sell mine Triton and get one of these if they come in under £2000 (GBP), but that's mainly because I'd need to recoup some of the cost of the Triton to get one of these and because I don't have room for two keyboards in my bedroom (it's a hobby for me, a bloody expensive one, but a hobby none the less).
NOTE: the main reason I lvoe the Triton is it's big touch sensitive screen, tweakable controllers, and the immedicay of working with it and playing - even if you only want to play for 2 minutes it's not a bother to start her up. Oh yeh, let's not forget the pads, it does great pads.
-- All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain.
Re:To which I say "YAY!"
by
Gordonjcp
·
· Score: 1
I know it's a cliche, but I just can't get away from my Juno 106 (actually an HS-60) for pads. That said, I've had some cracking D50-like pads out of my Ensoniq ESQ-1, with its analogue filters and grungy 8-bit samples. And the effects section in the Korg Polysix...
Yet another inflexible solution
by
martinoforum
·
· Score: 1
When will one of the big audio equipment guys pull their fingers out of their arses and build a Linux-based system based on standard upgradable components with a light GUI (read: X can go fuck itself, it's way too much for this kind of thing) that runs virtual instruments, possibly with a VSTi compatibility layer and a good inbuilt host?
I'd buy one in a second. Music is a server application, not a GUI one - it gets input via external controllers and reponds by either writing data to disk or shoving it out through the sound card.
Any musicians wouldn't pay a couple of grand for a box that could be a drum brain, guitar FX processor, hard disk recorder, digital mixer and god knows what else in a single box? More importantly, one that would boot up quickly, had the ability to build performance live CDs in case of a disk crash and ran a minimal embedded Linux so you didn't have to worry about BSODs or anything else ugly caused by having too much pointless, unrelated crap running in the OS when you're trying to engage in real-time audio use?
It's only a matter of time before somebody does this, IMHO. The problem is, I suspect, that nobody wants to be the IBM who spends all the R&D money - they want to be the clone manufacturers, so they're waiting for a start-up to do it first so they can undercut them and grab the marketplace. The clear expenses here is going to be developing the OS, compatibility layers and API interfaces, and those aren't historically things that the big audio companies like Roland and Yamaha have done a very good job of.
We really do need a standard for this though. It just needs to be a rack-mounted box to replace the hardware sampler in my rig, if it sells for $3000 or so and provides similar performance and better stability, solidity and boot times than my Windows box I can build for $2000 then I will be one of the first in the queue in the shop...
This is an absolute killer app that could break Linux in the music world. I don't see any other way it will get in there, considering the lead the Windows and Mac big boys have in the software department.
Re:Yet another inflexible solution
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Because a $499 MacMini with $49 iMic and some bitchen software is so much cooler. You can embed it inside a keyboard and plug-in an external LCD (touchscreen or attach a trackball to side of keyboard).
It runs Linux, so the typical knee-jerk response is "the GUI can't be any good". Please spare us that kind of bullshit. Korg has been in the business for a long time--and I would trust them to put together a GUI that works for their market.
As for the computer part of it, people constantly hook up keyboards to computers; the target market for this device probably is used to computers and computer interfaces. I suspect they would buy this because it's easier to set up and transport than the typical keyboard/computer combo.
Yeah, check out Lionstracs Mediastation
by
dolson
·
· Score: 1
These guys have been in the making for a while now, but they seem to be more open-source oriented.
Supposedly shipping in March.
what a complete waste of money
by
oblique303
·
· Score: 1
Okay, when are manufacturers like Korg going to realize that the all-in-one keyboard workstation market is dying, if not almost totally dead.
Workstations like this are totally inflexible, proprietary solutions that lock you into a single vendor (I find it ironic that Korg refers to this thing as an "Open Architecture" workstation, considering it runs proprietary software and has no published standard for 3rd parties to write extensions).
Also, Regarding price: A friend of mine is at NAMM right now, and mentioned the retail for this thing is supposed to be about $8 grand. total waste of cash.
For $8,000, you can buy a totally decked out machine running Cubase, Logic, or Pro Tools, along with a top-quality AD/DA converter, external controller (Mackie Control, Logic Control, etc), and a quality 66+key midi controller.
*and*, you have an upgrade path.
not only do proprietary all-in-one solutions like OASYS not give you a hardware upgrade path, but history has shown that all-in-one solutions usually end up doing everything in a mediocre fashion, rather than a few things well.
most professional music producers choose the best-of-breed solution for each aspect of the production process (midi sequencing, FX hardware/software, AD/DA converters, reverbs, etc).
this thing is just, well.. stupid.
Re:what a complete waste of money
by
torpor
·
· Score: 1
Workstations like this are totally inflexible, proprietary solutions that lock you into a single vendor (I find it ironic that Korg refers to this thing as an "Open Architecture" workstation, considering it runs proprietary software and has no published standard for 3rd parties to write extensions).
as a professional synth developer, i can tell you that OASYS is more open than other architectures.. we could write new synths for OASYS customers, and probably would do so... if there were any...
chicken and egg.
-- ; -- the corruption of government starts with its secrets. a truly free people keep no secrets.
--
This is not expensive
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
C'mon, you can't call this expensive. They've used Linux to cut the costs considerably. Imagine if they had used Windows instead, then the M$ tax would have pushed the price to at least $8025. That's expensive!
Music workstations are so 90'ies...
You can do the same things (although much easier) on a decent laptop with some extra equipment (like an M-Audio Ozonic...). Why tie yourself (and your money) to something expensive with a crippled userinterface?
That's not accurate either
by
commodoresloat
·
· Score: 1
Someone else actually jumped out the window. Milli (or was it Vanilli?) just pretended to...
I've set up a lot of studio and...
by
NeedleSurfer
·
· Score: 1
Korg have been part of them pretty often (I build project studios, home studios for musicians and artists and I've build 2 commercial studios with a team, you dont do these alone!). Musicians like the rich sound these machines are capable of producing, the Prodigy, their first physical modeling synth, emulating, you guessed it, analog synth of the old school era, was a blast to hear, it sounded so rich the Prophet 5 in unisson mode couldn't reach such richness and the bottom was incredible, bass so defined you could feel them clear on you plexus. Of course Korg is mostly none for its workstation not synth, the M1 being the most popular of them, 01w-fd following close.
Now, later on they released the Triton... man that was a mess, one of the worts workstation ever. It sounded very well but thats it. The interface was awfull, I even had a musician who was asking me to go to her house everytime she would play music so I can operate the Triton (RTFM wasnt her moto I guess...). I did for a while and stopped, felt like a ridiculous thing to do and I didnt like it at all. But it tells you a lot on the way Korg has taken this very day they built the Triton: their synth would be more like computer than synth, you would need to learn an OS to make music. They just have achieved the peak of their research... Linux in a synth. I bet this will be invisible to the user but honestly what is the point??!!
This is like guys asking for shareware fee on a software he made because it hasnt been made with a langage usually used to do it: look i made a text editor in Flash, Flash aint suppose to do that, there is a lot of work in here, it is worth at least 20$; no its not, its a piece of shit and the day ill pay for a non-working piece of software just because some geeks programmed it in a alternate non-appropriate langage is far far away.
Same goes for a synth, why the ** did they had to adapt Linux to make it run on a synth? Just because it can be done doesnt mean it has to, like Chris Rock would say: you CAN drive your car with your feet but that dont mean its a good fuckin idea!
And before you mod me down consider this: NOT a single musician in the world will view this has good news, no one, cause they make music they dont give a f* how it work, it just need to. Most of them already think samplers, synth and sequencers are way too complicated... Even if you tell them they wont have to deal with Linux in itself this will be viewed as being bad. Consider these are the same people who wouldnt come near a PC and they already think their Mac is too complicated, these people are affraid, litteraly of technology, even the techno kids that seems to know it all lose his temper and show his total inaptitude with real tech as soon as you let them loose in the computer and/or studio and something start to go wrong... techno kids! pffff; they know a bleep when they hear it, can discuss it for hours, don't know the fuck what it is... those twits are the pain of the modern studio world (one of them once told me he recorded all his CD in surround, I rest my case) but thats not the subject.
A Beowulf cluster of these...
by
quarkscat
·
· Score: 1
would be called... an ORCHESTRA!
FTA, a pretty slick piece of work. I want one (at least), but I am certain I will not find the purchase price in my sofa cushions... (sob)
Runs off a "fast" Pentium4, using what appears to be a semistandard MiniITX type board they are tapping for VGA and MIDI (via parallel interface). I've seen them plug in a USB keyboard to drive the system and perform a bug patch/software update after the show today. I don't know if this will be a feature that is enabled in the final product. It might be nice as a method of data entry, though. The synths are all software based, but I'm not sure how 'open' it actually is.There are 2 combo inputs with mic pre's and two additional 1/4" inputs, more would have been nice. I'd also probably prefer more footswitch/pedal inputs, and a 88 waterfall-key version would be incredible. It's a bit expensive at around $8,000 but looks pretty damn sweet. The KARMA 2 function is quite powerful. More information and high resolution photos forthcoming.
I remembe an old FAILED korg project called OASIS.. it was usual korg's many thousand dollars costing crap, just like zilog80-based trinity (slow&glitchy) tritons and the like things. All KORG stuff sounds features and looks are based to make good first impression. It failed due to the high price and th fact that it sounded good only when heavily tweaked. In fact, there was no way to tweak it (everything hidden and proprietary), and only "tweaks" were the DEMO sounds (formant-synthesis-based "arabian singer" one of the best of them). Sadly, most of the sound resembled simple wavetable stuff with some radical filtering or ringing applyed to them. KURZWEILs was having such sounds for many years at that time. (bonus point to them - they use their own ASICs and ideas as well es DIGITECH effects processors inside)
Korgs are mostly based on off-the-shelves texas instruments DSPs + from zilog80 to hitachi conroller, as well as other low-performance components. Also funny is their joint-venture with YAMAHA, another fantastic-sound-just-with-a-perss-of-a-single-butt on (for YAMAHAS these buttons are oftenly colored yellow!) music equipent manufacturer. Sometimes when you open a KORG you see (c)YAMAHA parts, and sometimes when you see YAMAHA keyboard you hear KORG's arranger patterns and timbres.
I expect this OASYS to be another failure, because it's just a PC with Linux and simplified old hardware OASIS card, and a hardware dongle for the software.
For those that have to ask...
by
iBod
·
· Score: 1
...why not just use a (Windows/Apple/Linux) box with some tacky, crashy 'software studio' suit, and a pathetic, icky-little plastic keyboard?
Well, I love just bashing my old (1999 vintage) 88-note Korg Trinity Pro keyboard/studio at times when *I DO NOT WANT* to look at another stupid fucking, crashing, no-drivers, whatever OS computer.
You just turn on a KORG workstation (or indeed a Roland or a Yamaha or a Kurzweil) and it simply works!
It lets you get on with the job of making music without having to grapple with stupid, half-assed, flakey, software!
Korg (and others) make subperb performance instruments, for those who want to make music, rather than futz around with computers.
So yeah - it is worth the price - if your time is.
If you don't know what it is to be in fits of panic, anxiety and agony before performing on stage, then please don't comment!
"Hey, what's up." "What's up." "Do you have a studio?" "Yeah." "Are you a producer?" "Yeah." "Me too. Do you want fries with that?"
I'd say a talented artist with an Mbox is a lot better off than the half trillion "producers" who have MPCs and make same old tired shit that I get to hear every day.
Do you know how many $50,000 to $100,000 setups we sell a year? Do you know how many of those end up in "hits"? Having expensive gear does not make you talented. Nor does saying that you're a producer.
I'd wager, with 90% certainty, that you aren't shit. So tell me your setup, and how that gear makes you more talented. I'd love to hear about it.
according to http://www.sweetwater.com/feature/korg/
yow. good luck selling that.
-- everything is closer than you think.
What about a Real-Time Solution?
by
Limey64
·
· Score: 1
I'm sure this is a great product, however:
As a Triton owner, I've noticed some non-deterministic delays in respnose to control settings. This would seem to be another step backwards as far as control latency is concerned. What about a RT OS solution to music software?
As a live music performer, I'm not sure I could trust such a beast, regardless of it's sex appeal.
Re:What about a Real-Time Solution?
by
rebelcool
·
· Score: 1
It is a concern. The problem is that programming RT software is extremely time consuming and expensive. It would make the cost exorbitant and unrealistic.
Some of these machines, like the openlabs neko, have something like 8 gigs of ram in them and load everything into memory to minimize delays. Granted, it doesnt *guarantee* lack of delay, but I've not heard any complaints.
--
-
Price
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
$8,000 for the 76-key version, $8,500 for the 88-key version.
Better buy yourselves a master keyboard, a desktop, a laptop, speakers, freedom fries and a magjick pop-hit shtick.
Oh, I'm not saying the Triton will quickly become undesirable or "unused" by professionals! I'm just saying, music synths tend to follow a 2 or 3 year upgrade cycle (sometimes shorter!). It's pretty rare to see a manufacturer still selling a synth as their latest model after it's been out 3 or 4 years....
The Triton has had a long, fruitful life - but it's shown signs of stagnation recently. (That whole Triton LE thing smacked of an attempt to hook a marketplace that wasn't willing to shell out the $'s for the "real" Triton Classic model, but still liked the sounds.) The latest iteration of the Triton, the "Triton Extreme" seems somewhat gimmicky. I mean, sure - we want tubes in our guitar amps, but a tube in our synths? Heck - they even had to put a hidden blue LED in the thing to simulate the tube's glow, because the actual tube in it doesn't even light up enough to look cool through a transparent window!
I figured Korg better have something seriously innovative up its sleeve, if they want to remain on top of the music workstation market... More Triton rehashes aren't going to cut it forever.
Slashdot Mirror
PS/2, AT, or USB?
I really wish that the poster/editor had made an effort to designate that it was a *music* keyboard. I read it thinking it was for my computer, wondering what you would do with a LCD screen and if Microsoft would allow the "Windows key" to be on a board running Linux. =)
...but does it run...Lin...uhhh... shoot.
Well, with the stability and reliability of Linux, Ashlee Simpson will never make a lip-sync gaffe again!
"Backups are for wimps. Real men upload their data to an FTP site and have everyone else mirror it." -- Linus Torvalds
In my X setup, I see 101-key, 102-key, etc, but where's the 61-key option?
This comment does not necessarily represent the views and opinions of the author.
It looks like the UI on the touch screen could use some work. It looks too much like a typical computer GUI, and ripe for fat-fingering and just simply not being intuitively instrument-like.
They tout the power of it being based upon a computer, but I think it'll be a few more generations of this before it really makes an impact.
500GB of disk, 5TB of transfer, $5.95/mo
What will happen if it gets cracked/copied.
Assuming it's a fairly standard linux installation, it would not be hard to run the binary parts on a home computer....
Or will they skip on providing any CDs ?
Korg's newest keyboard, called OASYS, will run Linux with a propietary software developed by themselves.
Is this really in the spirit of the GPL? If what they say is right, then they can just run Linux on their proprietary hardware, with their proprietary software on top, and not have to release any code if they didn't make changes to the Linux underneath.
To me that stinks as much as MS using BSD code, and giving no credit or return for the effort.
Is there something we can do about this?
I have to admit I don't fully understand these all-powerful keyboards. Why not just use a computer? Software synthesis and recording? Better gui (larger real estate for sure), more choices. You could posit portability but I think my powerbook and my oxygen8 is more portable than this sucker. It's cool, it's geeky, but that does not make it worth the cash, especially if I'm just worried about getting things done. It seems to me all-in-one systems are more prone to breakin down. Modularity, right? It is pretty though.
Of course, being called "OASYS", that means all your songs will end up sounding like a mix of two Beatles' songs with a bit played backwards.
man, that was NOT what I pictured...
"why would it need a 10" LCD...???"
Check out my sysadmin blog!
Oh wait. I think Depeche Mode already did that...
"You'll dance to anything by Depeche Commode!" - The Dead Milkmen
Take off all Kbs
Fujitsu has an office suite software package caled OASYS. It only sells in Japan as far as I know.
READY.
PRINT ""+-0
I doubt this will benefit existing Linux-using musicians, though. Audio gear manufacturers like Korg tend to use specialized DSP chips and crap. It's not like you'd be able to copy the files to your Linux box and start banging out beats on your soundblaster.
I WANT ONE!
Time to upgrade my Roland.
I work at a pro audio store, and I can tell already that this thing is doomed to fail. I remember someone trying to get us to resell a dual opteron with Windows XP integrated into a keyboard. It was awkward and too expensive for the $4500 price tag it commanded.
Modularity is much more popular in recording studios. Buy a Mac Mini and an MBox, and you've still got $3,000 to spend on good mics, a good channel strip, and a decent keyboard controller with MIDI triggered sound collections. Plus you've got a real interface with a decent screen size, without the "benefit" of being locked into a dead-end all-in-one solution. That's why Pro Tools HD systems and Apple Logic Pro setups are in 90% of the studios instead of crappy Roland workstations or Mackie d8bs.
Seriously, the hardware looks nice and all, but you could piece together a comparable system with components for half the cost.
Really.
Rumor has it that it's going to be priced around $8000 US. Which is pretty outrageous given that you gan do the same with a PC and some software plus a midi controller for a fraction of that. Not to mention that Alesis is releasing a similarly spec'd beast expected to retail closer to $2000.
now can they make a sound card that works well with Linux?
Does this mean that much like Cisco open sourced the WRT54G source code, that the Korg will be open source?
Fantastic!!
Woot!
Why does it have cdburner? Does it have keylogger and burn what you type to the cd?
Sorry I'll stick with my standard microsoft natural keyboard.
Propietary software is okay, as long as it is linux!
How about getting just the proprietary SW, and a Korg soundcard, and a MIDI keyboard (only - just the keys outputting MIDI data)? Maybe they'd prefer to bundle the proprietary SW with the Korg soundcard, the way they sell keyboardless MIDI "brains", without worrying about piracy? Every Linux box (and some still infected with Windows ;) could be in their target market. We've already got the HW that runs the Linux and their SW; why raise their prices by selling it to us again?
--
make install -not war
...as a product they already had that failed?!
http://www.korg.com/oasyspci.htm
Korg first annoucned the OASYS in the early 1990s, long before the Trinity (predecessor of the Triton) hit the market. For a while the OASYS was a DSP card, too. Now it's 3 of their synths rolled into one with a touchscreen. Nothing worth writing home about, if it weren't for their use of Linux as its OS. If they've managed to make it fast-booting, and made fast patch-changing possible, they might not have a winner (boot and patch-changing times on synth workstations are slooooooooooooooooooooow), but it'll certainly lay the foundation for future development. The use of Linux is surprising, as everybody would have banked on Windows, thanks to their Legacy Cell plug-in suite.
Will it be a success? That depends if it can stay below the $3500 street price barrier. I've worked in music retail for years, and for 99% of clientel an item like this doesn't exist if it's over 3500 smackers, no matter how good it is.
I for one welcome our keyboard playing overlords.....
... except for that Yanni guy.
...that there aren't more "geeks" who got into computers by way of artistic endeavors. I mean, what the hell man? I got into computers in order to do electronic music, so I knew exactly what the subject line meant. This is why I no longer consider myself a "geek". Sure, I do a lot of stuff that ould be considered geek-like. I love to compile all my software from source and hate RPMs. I try to automate as much as possible at home using Linux. My desktop systems are all Linux based. I run my own web, mail, and DNS servers. But I really only got into computers less than ten years ago. Before that I just used them to make music. First it was the Atari ST (excellent MIDI capabilities and software that blew everything else away at the time) that I used to really compose music in the traditional sense and then sequence it. I wasn't into the MOD scene because I don't work that way. I actually sit down at a MIDI keyboard and really play. Then in college I moved onto the Macs they had on campus (I still used the ST in my apartment). When I graduated in late 1994, I couldn't afford a Mac so I moved to Windows 3.1 which sucked massive ass at the time regarding MIDI and audio. Even Windows 95 and NT 4.0 sucked majorly where real music prodution was concerned. But I still couldn't afford a Mac. Finally in 1997 I got a job involving computers and started getting seriously interested. That's also when I moved to Linux full time. So yeah... I do geeky things, but I do them because they still support my music habit. I would have to say I'm primarily an artist who considers computers one of my instruments for creative outlet. Using the Planet CCRMA software and the ALSA driver for my Layla 20 digital audio interface, I've been able to do some more work in Linux now. It's always a shock to me that there aren't more people like me since almost everyone I knew who was an electronic musician in the 80s and 90s became a "computer guy" in the late 90s and early 2000s.
-"...bad old ideas look confusingly fresh when they are packaged as technology" - Jaron Lanier (Digital Maoism on Edge.o
Everytime I think I've figured them out, those Klingons surprise yet again. Who knew they worked on Keyboards AND Linux. Magnificent bastards!
If Nalgene water bottles are outlawed, only outlaws will have Nalgene water bottles.
... or is that little JavaScript-driven hover-scrollbox to read the specs one of the worst information display tools ever?
I want to read the frigging specs, not do the hover-unhover stupid graphic in a miniscule window trick...
There's so little difference between politics and jihad lately...
The website says that this keyboard includes "ground-breaking KARMA® technology". If I buy one will I get modded +5?
It is nice to know that an important player in the synthesizer biz is starting to use Linux, mainly because I am a lover of Linux and I want to see the technology spread. However, when we're dealing with synthesizers, I cannot see moving to an open source OS for a synthesizer making that huge of a difference, except for one big thing. The most important parts are the keyboard itself, the sounds, the mixing capabilities, various added features such as looping and creating new sounds, etc; all which can be achieved regardless of the OS. What I hope the inclusion of Linux will affect is the price. Naturally a free OS should cause the price to go down.
I'm using Mozilla 1.7.5 on Linux and the "SHOP ONLINE" button doesn't work on the website (hmm...that's funny), so I can't check the price. If anyone can find out the price of this thing, is it cheaper than other synths with similiar capabilities?
What I'm wondering is, what really differentiates keyboards nowadays? Sure, you can slap on a pretty interface an dall, but the music you make will still sound the same won't it? Isn't there open source software that can replicate all the same stuff? I can understand how it was years ago, with crappier sound technology and slower computers, but not now. I remember a "learning keyboard" thing for the mac years ago, can't remember what it was called, but surely that and all the korg stuff can be replicated perfectly?
This keyboard can't be pirated, in the way that software can. Ergo, there's money to be made. Perhaps you won't get it into the hands of as many people, but at least those people will have actually paid you.
Also, not every musician is a computer geek. I've met quite a few who were terrified by them, even though they were happy getting around equally complex audio hardware.
My first - and only - 'high-end' keyboard was a Roland.
:p ). I never did buy the DCO controller unit - and spent many hours programming the thing through the push button interface (perhaps why I ended up becoming a computer programmer?). It also included a pitch bender (to get the effect equivalent to slurring notes) and a rudimentary midi interface - which I never used.
I was living in England at the time, and me and my band-mates took to hanging out in Cambridge and prowling the music stores looking for deals. I wanted, but could not afford a top of the line Yamaha DX-1 - so instead settled for a Roland JX-3P. This was 1983/84 timeframe. Rumor had it that Thomas Dolby acquired his keyboards from the same shop (but that is highly speculative - although interestingly the linked article does mention him - so my machine could have been from the same lot
I remember seeing a Moog synth - a Prodigy in the same store - slightly used - and I kick myself for not getting that one instead - again lacked the cash flow. I did purchase a BOSS DR 110 drum machine which I used for composing, and when our drummer would crap out on us; I ended up loaning that to a friend in later years - and never saw it again (friend having moved with no return address). Also acquired a BOSS DM-3 Analog Delay floor switch unit - used that as a general purpose delay for all kinds of ambient effects - and still own it today (great little unit) and use it with my guitar.
When I came back to the states I got an electrician to modify the power supply on the keyboard to handle US power. After a few years I gave it to my sister who was studying music in college at the time. No idea where it is or what it is doing now...(sigh)
This new Korg sounds interesting (combining both my love of computers and music in one device). I wonder if I will have to sell my firstborn to afford it? Has anyone priced these? Would it be better for me just to get a good midi capable soundcard and some computer software combined with a cheaper keyboard?
Lodragan Draoidh
The more you explain it, the more I don't understand it. - Mark Twain
There is a relevant cliché here:
Does it record Ogg?
With all of the software out there that does this for you on your computer, it seems a bit redundant to spend a bunch of money on a single piece of hardware. 10 years ago, I could see how this would penetrate the market, but it's cheaper, easier, and more expandable to use your computer with a simple MIDI controller to do all this.
:-)
As a composer, I've relied heavily upon synthesis to demonstrate and proof projects and to generate more commercial projects as well. With the sample banks, synth software, and loop libraries available for products like Acid, Live, Logic, Digital Performer, Reason, etc., it seems unlikely that anyone would would want to buy a single device--unless it's for performance. Not that it isn't cool. I like it. I'm just wondering about the target demographic. It seems that for the same price, I can buy a full 88-Key weighted key controller and the software for my computer that gives me tons more options in an interface idiom with which I'm already familiar.
Now, this thing would be REALLY badass if it has an ethernet port and an interactive login
If it could be added as another processor or module to an existing studio environment with tons of "plays nice with others" bells and whistles, I see even more value on the high-end studio and/or for the stage.
I might know what I'm talkin' about, but then again, this is Slashdot...
It's MIDI, which is unidirectional serial at 31.25 kbps with.
You fail to understand, it is a cording keyboard. I don't think x.org supports it yet though.
Of course computer geeks aren't going to associate linux and keyboard with a synthesizer.
I saw "Korg" and thought music equipment. In the context of music equipment, I saw "keyboard" and thought MIDI controller. I read the blurb and realized that it was a controller-synthesizer.
And even if they did modify the kernel, they are only reqired to distribute it to the people that the binary was distributed to
That's true only if the source always accompanies the binary, such as on a CD boxed with each synth. Otherwise, they have to make the offer available to "any third party".
OASYS has been around for years - http://www.korg.com/oasyspci.htm
If I was going to get something like this I would probably go this route so I would be able to run my exisitng software - http://www.openlabs.com/
Korg isn't the only one running Linux for audio hardware - http://www.museresearch.com/receptor_overview.php
Being in audio I don't really see the advantages of systems like this over a good PC, control surface and a MIDI keyboard. That is unless you are using it for live gigs.
but does it run...Lin...uhhh... shoot.
But can you put them in a Beowulf cluster for more polyphony or richer effects?
Darn it! When can linux ever be touted as the innovator?
Linux at home
Korg announced the OASYS back in 1994 ... Interesting that they stuck with the name for this product.. However, I think this type of super-workstation keyboard is past its prime .. like others have said, most studios seem to be doing a significant amount of processing via software placing most of the $$ into mics/sound reinforcement/etc.. For gigging .. does anyone seriously want to cart one of these monsters around? No thanks.
Can it be networked with the Gibson guitar with built-in ethernet?
Linux at home
With a "TouchView" display, no less.
Gee, that reminds me of ViewTouch, a trademarked term for touchscreen software that's almost 20 years old.
No way! As soon as I saw this and read the list of specs, I realized this is going to put a big nail in the coffin of the whole Korg Triton line of synth workstations!
.... but it happens I do (and I've owned 2 different Triton models in the past, as well as a Yamaha Motif).
The Triton made a *huge* impact in the music synth scene, with almost every major act wanting to be seen with one on stage or in their studio in photos, etc. I see no reason the Oasys won't be the same - serving as the logical upgrade path for Triton users.
I realize most of the Slashdot readers aren't necessarily that interested in following musical instruments
The first thing you have to understand about synthesizers is their market. Most high-end synth purchasers are pretty techno-savvy, actually - but not necessarily experts with modern PC operating systems. They're the types who aren't scared by electronics with many levels of programmable options and parameters, but their focus is only on learning these things if it directly benefits their ability to create/compose better music. They'll use PCs and MIDI, but will pay a premium for a pre-built custom system that is already configured with optimized sound drivers for low latency, etc. etc. They don't want to mess around with all of that themselves.
(By the same token, they're still using these dedicated music workstations rather than keyboard MIDI controllers and software synth programs because of the stability. They don't want something that requires a long "boot up" time, and then might crash in the middle of a performance.)
The Triton used a fairly MS-DOS like filesystem with short filenames and such - but synth owners seemed happy enough with it. I doubt Korg would see a reason to change it much on the Oasys.
Basically, the Keyboard People are fucked.
Strike that. They are FUCKED.
Why? As one poster noted above: Software.
Software synthesis already outstrips most anything you can do in a keyboard, and at a much lower cost.
Exhibit A:
REASON
I remember back i nthe ancient 1980s, when a cheezy ass sampler (by todays standards) cost $2000+. In Reason, which costs about $400, you can fill an entire virtual rack with samplers far in excess of what availed then. you want 11 samplers stacked? If you had $25,000 - SURE. In Reason, when you're done, you simply open up a new blank Rack, and fill it with more/other goodies from the drop down menu. Back then, you'd have to sell all those samplers...
It comes with drum machines, samplers, processors, mixers, synthesizers of several different stripes, and on and on.
Second Exhibit: ABLETON LIVE
This, in combination with Reason, offers truly terrifying amounts of musical development and creativity. Recently, Live was upgraded to include MIDI, and a basic drum machine, so now it is even more deadly as a combo with Reason. Live is a Loop based compositional system, but with its new MIDI capabilities, it is now a much more powerful beast. It costs about $350, IIRC.
Exhibit Three: Max/MSP
This, in combination with Live and Reason, makes ANYTHING coming out of Korg pretty much superfluous. With Live and Reason, you have composition systems and tonnes of "Gear". With Max/MSP you make your own gear, and it can be just as weird as you want it to be. Max/MSP isn't a synth, it's a software development environment that resembles an evil cross between Visual Basic and tinkertoys. It's available on Mac and (finally) Windows, and it totally fuckin' rocks. If you wondered how freeks like Autechre makes all that jiggety noise, look no further than:
Max/MSP.
so, lets run some totals:
My guess is the Oasys will likely come in around at a $2500 price point.
I often shop at Musicians Friend so my prices are from there as of today, Jan 20th. They aren't the best, or the worst. It's just a data point.
Reason: on sale: $199
Ableton Live: $399
Max/MSP with Jitter (video libraries): $799
Edirol PCRA-30 keyboard with Audio In: $299
And a computer I found at PC MALL - an IBM Thinkpad:
Intel P4, 2.8GHz processor, 256MB RAM, 40GB Hard Drive, CD-RW/DVD Combo drive,15" XGA Display, XP-Pro, etc.
Which has PLENTY of power for audio. and it's on sale for $1,198.
So, throw in another hundred bucks for a kbd stand and what not and the total is around:
$2900
Which is probably a bit more than the OASYS will sell for. Since Max/MSP is for Advanced User GEEKS, and Jitter is even geekier, cut the $799 out and you have an entire electronic music studio that KICKS ASS for about $2200.
Now: will your system CRASH? Yes. Will the OASYS? Probably not. If you're worried about that, then get a Powerbook or a Linux Book or whatever-the-fuck-book that flips your crank. They don't Blue Screen as much as Windoze box, but there are other issues involved. All in all, unless you're planning to spend a lot of time on stage, you're better off with the compter based system.
In a few years you will have run through most of what the OASYS does. In a few years... I *shudder* to think what Reason and Live will be like...
Basically Hardware Synth manufactueres are doomed. The only ones who will survive are the ones making the uber-geek analogue gear, and they will basically be little more than boutique operations for purists.
RS
Shoes for Industry. Shoes for the Dead.
Is this thing actually for sale? The OASYS has been the Duke Nukem Forever of the audio world for at least five years.
and does it come in dvorak?
When you're afraid to download music illegally in your own home, then the terrorists have won!
I fear that the OASYS will require boot time, so the idea of turning it on and off, working flawlessly the whole night seems to be a pipe dream. I'm imagining the true beauty of the board will be in the various control and actual synthesis that will be achieved through the power of it's core.
This board is a dream 10 years in the making, glad to see it coming to fruition.
Peace
Nothing, at least for quite a while, will kill the Triton. Listen to any hip hop / RnB record - most of the sounds you hear outside of samples will be the stock sound from an Akai mpc2000xl or the Triton. With any luck, the Oasys will pick up a decent part of the market (i say this since i sell pro audio gear) but tritons are a long way from being booted - studios still come in looking for asr10's and the like, discontinued keyboards, simply becasue thats what they're comfortable using, and would often trawl dozens of stores and ebay before even considering an upgrade.
Don't worry - its just stigmata. Pass me a napkin and don't you dare tell my mother.
I still have my Trinity, and I will say that the tabs are probably a very nice improvement. The Trinity, as awesome as it is, does most of its navigation through buttons off to the side. There are tabs, but only for specific pieces of the UI.
As far as "instrument-like" goes, I'm not sure that has ever been the intent of an "electronic" keyboard. Electronic musicians are very very much used to dials and buttons. The tabs are already a dramatic departure from the older analog stuff.
That was a cheap shot, and quite nearsighted. Worthy of a Troll.
Bear with me folks, it's long winded.
As a musician for 25 years I won't argue that Mac is the defacto platform for professional digital audio processing. It's been that way since the first Apple Macintosh hit the market. Ten years ago was not the time for a professional musician to use a Wintel platform. It was best to use a Mac, even in the amateur circles. In 1995, Micro$oft released an operating system that had some potential, but like anything new from this company, the platform was plagued with issues ranging from incompatibility with audio hardware, poor ports of applications and buggy programs by independent and well meaning and well motivated programmers to make useful software. Much like it is today. While it wasn't paradise, every year saw improvement both in hardware and software.
Many things changed when ProTools was ported to Windoze. HOORAY! Wintel had a platform that was acceptible to Digidesign. Hail the inexpensive digital studio. But it wasn't just in LA or Seattle recording studios. Now, Mr. Grunge Rocker could actually afford the hardware and software for the garage rather than pay an engineer for the time to use thier studio. It was by no means perfect, it worked when the OS didn't crash. Yet again, every year got better hardware and better software (yes, even Winslows). The key here is that a choice finally existed. Decisions began to be based on budget.
Today, most of the hardware that ProTools and many other digital audio platforms use is compatible with both Mac and Winblows. In fact, much of the hardware is designed with Winhose in mind. The bonus is that the OS is a lot more stable than ten years ago. Not 100% perfect when used for other applications, but if recording, mixing and mastering is all the system is used for, the price point cannot be beat, and the stability is for all purposes perfect. Thus the Wintel architecture is used in professional and home studios all over the world today. Few are going to buy a Mac then recording hardware and software to put it all together when they can shave a few hundred off the bottom line by buying a comparible PC platform. Budgets are such a concern that many choose to use digital recording consoles over PCs and Macs. Less options, fewer upgrade choices but inexpensive in comparison.
In the case of computers, it is a market driven economy. There will always be the need for more tracks, better signal processing new features. This is why companies like Digidesign and Steinberg develop for the Win32 platform. Yes, the cream of the crop is still on Mac but not ONLY on Mac. Such is the state of today.
Speaking from experience, this is where I took my foray into the digital realm in the home. I am not an electronic musician, though I occasionaly use sequencers and samplers. I play real strings on real frets, with real, live drums and cymbals. Everything is miked. I use ProTools and Cubase on Windoze. Why? Because it's affordable and I don't have to pay the recording studio a fortune to get a good recording.
This all happened in the last ten years. But what about the next ten years? Since we're on the subject of Korg, let's start there.
If Korg's innovation is to continue, they, like anyone else, has to find creative ways to develop products. Both Micro$oft and Apple would have huge licencing fees for embedded operating systems. Both would be too bloated for what is needed. What we're talking about here is the need for instruments to have extremely low latency times and do very specific functions. No eye candy involved. It has to work when the stage lights come up or the click track starts. Korg is a respected company in the music industry. I have used many of their products in the last 20 years. I still own an M1 and my Triton rackmount still gets heavy usage with my guitar synth. This is a company that has a reputation to uphold and if they think that Linux is the answer I won't even question why. IMHO, if anything it VALIDATES *
...this one goes to 11!
Why, oh why, didn't I take the Blue Pill?
Wow, I see people bitching and moaning about the cost of this thing, fine, then don't buy it. Granted the price is on the steep side but at least it's not going to cost more than new houses costed when the 'Fairlight' music systems were king. Now that _WAS_ expensive.
..if they sell less than 10 of these things? From what I hear, these things are going to be priced at $8000. On top of that, the demos sounded dreadful.
For this amount of money you can buy a laptop, a professional quality MIDI keyboard, sequencer/host software, a whole bunch of VST instruments and effects, and some top of the line sampling libraries. You could even go the Digidesign/Creamware route pretty hard. In return, you don't have to rely on Korg for hardware / software upgrades, and you can have a some musical instruments that sound at least halfway decent.
Perhaps $8000 will buy me a day's worth of whatever Korg's marketing dept was smoking.
Thus making second-hand Tritons affordable for those of us who don't have the backing of the latest hit-factory producer.
When will one of the big audio equipment guys pull their fingers out of their arses and build a Linux-based system based on standard upgradable components with a light GUI (read: X can go fuck itself, it's way too much for this kind of thing) that runs virtual instruments, possibly with a VSTi compatibility layer and a good inbuilt host?
I'd buy one in a second. Music is a server application, not a GUI one - it gets input via external controllers and reponds by either writing data to disk or shoving it out through the sound card.
Any musicians wouldn't pay a couple of grand for a box that could be a drum brain, guitar FX processor, hard disk recorder, digital mixer and god knows what else in a single box? More importantly, one that would boot up quickly, had the ability to build performance live CDs in case of a disk crash and ran a minimal embedded Linux so you didn't have to worry about BSODs or anything else ugly caused by having too much pointless, unrelated crap running in the OS when you're trying to engage in real-time audio use?
It's only a matter of time before somebody does this, IMHO. The problem is, I suspect, that nobody wants to be the IBM who spends all the R&D money - they want to be the clone manufacturers, so they're waiting for a start-up to do it first so they can undercut them and grab the marketplace. The clear expenses here is going to be developing the OS, compatibility layers and API interfaces, and those aren't historically things that the big audio companies like Roland and Yamaha have done a very good job of.
We really do need a standard for this though. It just needs to be a rack-mounted box to replace the hardware sampler in my rig, if it sells for $3000 or so and provides similar performance and better stability, solidity and boot times than my Windows box I can build for $2000 then I will be one of the first in the queue in the shop...
This is an absolute killer app that could break Linux in the music world. I don't see any other way it will get in there, considering the lead the Windows and Mac big boys have in the software department.
It runs Linux, so the typical knee-jerk response is "the GUI can't be any good". Please spare us that kind of bullshit. Korg has been in the business for a long time--and I would trust them to put together a GUI that works for their market.
As for the computer part of it, people constantly hook up keyboards to computers; the target market for this device probably is used to computers and computer interfaces. I suspect they would buy this because it's easier to set up and transport than the typical keyboard/computer combo.
Check out this link.
These guys have been in the making for a while now, but they seem to be more open-source oriented.
Supposedly shipping in March.
Okay, when are manufacturers like Korg going to realize that the all-in-one keyboard workstation market is dying, if not almost totally dead.
Workstations like this are totally inflexible, proprietary solutions that lock you into a single vendor (I find it ironic that Korg refers to this thing as an "Open Architecture" workstation, considering it runs proprietary software and has no published standard for 3rd parties to write extensions).
Also, Regarding price:
A friend of mine is at NAMM right now, and mentioned the retail for this thing is supposed to be about $8 grand. total waste of cash.
For $8,000, you can buy a totally decked out machine running Cubase, Logic, or Pro Tools, along with a top-quality AD/DA converter, external controller (Mackie Control, Logic Control, etc), and a quality 66+key midi controller.
*and*, you have an upgrade path.
not only do proprietary all-in-one solutions like OASYS not give you a hardware upgrade path, but history has shown that all-in-one solutions usually end up doing everything in a mediocre fashion, rather than a few things well.
most professional music producers choose the best-of-breed solution for each aspect of the production process (midi sequencing, FX hardware/software, AD/DA converters, reverbs, etc).
this thing is just, well.. stupid.
C'mon, you can't call this expensive. They've used Linux to cut the costs considerably. Imagine if they had used Windows instead, then the M$ tax would have pushed the price to at least $8025. That's expensive!
Has had this sort of thing for a while
Get your Unix fortune now!
Music workstations are so 90'ies... You can do the same things (although much easier) on a decent laptop with some extra equipment (like an M-Audio Ozonic...). Why tie yourself (and your money) to something expensive with a crippled userinterface?
Someone else actually jumped out the window. Milli (or was it Vanilli?) just pretended to...
Korg have been part of them pretty often (I build project studios, home studios for musicians and artists and I've build 2 commercial studios with a team, you dont do these alone!). Musicians like the rich sound these machines are capable of producing, the Prodigy, their first physical modeling synth, emulating, you guessed it, analog synth of the old school era, was a blast to hear, it sounded so rich the Prophet 5 in unisson mode couldn't reach such richness and the bottom was incredible, bass so defined you could feel them clear on you plexus. Of course Korg is mostly none for its workstation not synth, the M1 being the most popular of them, 01w-fd following close.
Now, later on they released the Triton... man that was a mess, one of the worts workstation ever. It sounded very well but thats it. The interface was awfull, I even had a musician who was asking me to go to her house everytime she would play music so I can operate the Triton (RTFM wasnt her moto I guess...). I did for a while and stopped, felt like a ridiculous thing to do and I didnt like it at all. But it tells you a lot on the way Korg has taken this very day they built the Triton: their synth would be more like computer than synth, you would need to learn an OS to make music. They just have achieved the peak of their research... Linux in a synth. I bet this will be invisible to the user but honestly what is the point??!!
This is like guys asking for shareware fee on a software he made because it hasnt been made with a langage usually used to do it: look i made a text editor in Flash, Flash aint suppose to do that, there is a lot of work in here, it is worth at least 20$; no its not, its a piece of shit and the day ill pay for a non-working piece of software just because some geeks programmed it in a alternate non-appropriate langage is far far away.
Same goes for a synth, why the ** did they had to adapt Linux to make it run on a synth? Just because it can be done doesnt mean it has to, like Chris Rock would say: you CAN drive your car with your feet but that dont mean its a good fuckin idea!
And before you mod me down consider this: NOT a single musician in the world will view this has good news, no one, cause they make music they dont give a f* how it work, it just need to. Most of them already think samplers, synth and sequencers are way too complicated... Even if you tell them they wont have to deal with Linux in itself this will be viewed as being bad. Consider these are the same people who wouldnt come near a PC and they already think their Mac is too complicated, these people are affraid, litteraly of technology, even the techno kids that seems to know it all lose his temper and show his total inaptitude with real tech as soon as you let them loose in the computer and/or studio and something start to go wrong... techno kids! pffff; they know a bleep when they hear it, can discuss it for hours, don't know the fuck what it is... those twits are the pain of the modern studio world (one of them once told me he recorded all his CD in surround, I rest my case) but thats not the subject.
would be called... an ORCHESTRA!
... (sob)
FTA, a pretty slick piece of work.
I want one (at least), but I am
certain I will not find the purchase
price in my sofa cushions
Runs off a "fast" Pentium4, using what appears to be a semistandard MiniITX type board they are tapping for VGA and MIDI (via parallel interface). I've seen them plug in a USB keyboard to drive the system and perform a bug patch/software update after the show today. I don't know if this will be a feature that is enabled in the final product. It might be nice as a method of data entry, though. The synths are all software based, but I'm not sure how 'open' it actually is.There are 2 combo inputs with mic pre's and two additional 1/4" inputs, more would have been nice. I'd also probably prefer more footswitch/pedal inputs, and a 88 waterfall-key version would be incredible. It's a bit expensive at around $8,000 but looks pretty damn sweet. The KARMA 2 function is quite powerful. More information and high resolution photos forthcoming.
I remembe an old FAILED korg project called OASIS.. it was usual korg's many thousand dollars costing crap, just like zilog80-based trinity (slow&glitchy) tritons and the like things. All KORG stuff sounds features and looks are based to make good first impression. It failed due to the high price and th fact that it sounded good only when heavily tweaked. In fact, there was no way to tweak it (everything hidden and proprietary), and only "tweaks" were the DEMO sounds (formant-synthesis-based "arabian singer" one of the best of them). Sadly, most of the sound resembled simple wavetable stuff with some radical filtering or ringing applyed to them. KURZWEILs was having such sounds for many years at that time. (bonus point to them - they use their own ASICs and ideas as well es DIGITECH effects processors inside)
t on (for YAMAHAS these buttons are oftenly colored yellow!) music equipent manufacturer. Sometimes when you open a KORG you see (c)YAMAHA parts, and sometimes when you see YAMAHA keyboard you hear KORG's arranger patterns and timbres.
Korgs are mostly based on off-the-shelves texas instruments DSPs + from zilog80 to hitachi conroller, as well as other low-performance components. Also funny is their joint-venture with YAMAHA, another fantastic-sound-just-with-a-perss-of-a-single-but
I expect this OASYS to be another failure, because it's just a PC with Linux and simplified old hardware OASIS card, and a hardware dongle for the software.
Oasys of Korg. Synthesis is fugue-tile.
...why not just use a (Windows/Apple/Linux) box with some tacky, crashy 'software studio' suit, and a pathetic, icky-little plastic keyboard?
Well, I love just bashing my old (1999 vintage) 88-note Korg Trinity Pro keyboard/studio at times when *I DO NOT WANT* to look at another stupid fucking, crashing, no-drivers, whatever OS computer.
You just turn on a KORG workstation (or indeed a Roland or a Yamaha or a Kurzweil) and it simply works!
It lets you get on with the job of making music without having to grapple with stupid, half-assed, flakey, software!
Korg (and others) make subperb performance instruments, for those who want to make music, rather than futz around with computers.
So yeah - it is worth the price - if your time is.
If you don't know what it is to be in fits of panic, anxiety and agony before performing on stage, then please don't comment!
iBod
"Hey, what's up."
"What's up."
"Do you have a studio?"
"Yeah."
"Are you a producer?"
"Yeah."
"Me too. Do you want fries with that?"
I'd say a talented artist with an Mbox is a lot better off than the half trillion "producers" who have MPCs and make same old tired shit that I get to hear every day.
Do you know how many $50,000 to $100,000 setups we sell a year? Do you know how many of those end up in "hits"? Having expensive gear does not make you talented. Nor does saying that you're a producer.
I'd wager, with 90% certainty, that you aren't shit. So tell me your setup, and how that gear makes you more talented. I'd love to hear about it.
according to http://www.sweetwater.com/feature/korg/
yow. good luck selling that.
everything is closer than you think.
I'm sure this is a great product, however: As a Triton owner, I've noticed some non-deterministic delays in respnose to control settings. This would seem to be another step backwards as far as control latency is concerned. What about a RT OS solution to music software? As a live music performer, I'm not sure I could trust such a beast, regardless of it's sex appeal.
$8,000 for the 76-key version, $8,500 for the 88-key version.
Better buy yourselves a master keyboard, a desktop, a laptop, speakers, freedom fries and a magjick pop-hit shtick.
Oh, I'm not saying the Triton will quickly become undesirable or "unused" by professionals! I'm just saying, music synths tend to follow a 2 or 3 year upgrade cycle (sometimes shorter!). It's pretty rare to see a manufacturer still selling a synth as their latest model after it's been out 3 or 4 years....
The Triton has had a long, fruitful life - but it's shown signs of stagnation recently. (That whole Triton LE thing smacked of an attempt to hook a marketplace that wasn't willing to shell out the $'s for the "real" Triton Classic model, but still liked the sounds.) The latest iteration of the Triton, the "Triton Extreme" seems somewhat gimmicky. I mean, sure - we want tubes in our guitar amps, but a tube in our synths? Heck - they even had to put a hidden blue LED in the thing to simulate the tube's glow, because the actual tube in it doesn't even light up enough to look cool through a transparent window!
I figured Korg better have something seriously innovative up its sleeve, if they want to remain on top of the music workstation market... More Triton rehashes aren't going to cut it forever.
Analog emulation will never, ever match the sound of the mini-moog, arp odyessey, prophet-5, etc. etc.