PDA

View Full Version : Discussion: Workstations vs Specialist Instruments


Grey Loki
02-29-2008, 07:28 AM
Alright folks - a few replies got posted into the Arranger Keyboards thread, so i'm gonna copy them to here and then we can carry on in a new thread, rather than spamming up the previous one.

I started off with:

I can't say I'm a major fan of arrangers - but I know Korg UK for one are putting more focus on theirs (the PA2x, pa800, pa500) than their synth line.

To hijack the thread slightly, I wish that this wasn't so.

People (that is, non-synthesizer-playing keyboardists) want more features for less money in their keyboards (and synthesizers, too), which means that manufacturers are shoving as much crap into their keyboards as possible in an attempt to cater to as wide an audience as possible, which at the same time keeps prices at around the same region.

What i'd like to see is more synth manufacturers bringing out cheaper well-made specialist units that can be then combined together into a rig, rather than shoving everything into a box and making a jack of all trades, and master of none.

Obviously, there are a few such things on the market (Waldorf's Blofeld springs immediately to mind, but only because i've been researching it recently), but the majority of specialist units are fairly old.

I just want to see some innovation - we have amazing technologies available to us at the moment, and I just don't see them being used; to use an over-used example, Korg's OASYS. Yeah, sure, it has everything packed in a box and is pretty cool and has a few improvements on existing technologies, but other than the fact that it's a massively powerful workstation, what's new?

If a few of you guys take interest in this, i'll start up a new topic tomorrow and we can have a good old-fashioned discussion about it ;)

Well said...

How ever, having just 1 keyboard can be very convenient - I think they should do both: all-in-one solution and specialized synths.

Receptor approach would be cool also... just upload your plug-ins to make your ultimate keyboard... but I still would prefer pure hardware synths - they have limitations and unique sounds, which is good... IMHO. Korg will always sound like Korg, like I expect, and Roland will always sound like Roland...

Yeah, a more "modular" approach would be great.

Like for example, let's say Yamaha in 2 or 3 years puts our the Motif EX (oh please do this!). They could start basically with a "Motif" body, but with an "S90" engine. In other words, just a tone generator. Then, just like a computer, you have expansion slots for various options which might include stuff like...

sequencer
sampler
synth engine expansions (a la the PLG line)
maybe an "arranger" module that would have style functions, etc... and work intelligently with the tone generator in choosing appropriate sounds by category and type.
extra DSP cards (effects, polyphony, etc...)
digital recording board (could be an add-on to the sampler board maybe)
connectivity expansions (USB, Firewire, S/PDIF/Lightpipe, etc...)
memory expansions (the 3 R's: ROM, RAM, and Removable)

All the control hardware would be in place from the start, or maybe they could have hardware expansions for that as well, for instance your sampler board, comes with the sampler controller interface, with bolts into a "blank" space on the front panel. Your sequencer board would come with all your transport controls. And everything could come with a firmware update/driver so that everything works smoothly.

Perferrably as much of this would be user-installable as possible (basically everything screws or slides in or out, adn gets connected with ribbon cables.

I think this would be a good way to keep costs down for the base version, and then users could add whichever options were useful to them, while avoiding features they wouldnt use. Possibly there could even be an option for a "separate" case for some of the stuff that would sit in a rack, on the floor, or on a desk to house some of these extra expansions (especially for smaller keybed models), with a special cable to connect it all.

Thats a very good idea, but the thing is - companies don't want to make the perfect instrument, they want to make money!

They just can't sell everything they got directly and then have nothing left to sell...
I'm sure - even with newest technology like XS, M3 or FG - there still lot's more, when they came from!

Recycling technology: that's the answer!
"Buying only thing you need" means spending less money for you - but for them, it means earning less money.

I think that while it may look to begin with that the big three would lose out because people won't be buying their massive workstations, after a time things will pick up - a lot of people don't get instruments such as the OASYS, or Yamaha's new Motif purely because of the price.

What if (as OM said) you could just get a modular shell for say, £500-£900 (or really, anything sub-£1000), and then add functions to it as you require, in the manner of the modular synthesizers of old.

Maybe even that approach is too much - a large array of small sub-£500 keyboards or external modules that did one thing WELL would be infinitely preferable to one massive workstation with pages upon pages of menus and submenus, and not enough controllers for it all.

Omega Monkey
03-01-2008, 08:42 AM
I dont think it necessarily has to be one or the other. I think if the manufacturers are making these "modular" components for use with a "workstation" platform, I think a lot of the R&D for that could be combined with more specialized "single" units (like a VA, PL, FM, etc...). A sort of pick and choose culture would certainly benefit the consumer, of course. But a happy consumer is a spending consumer, and I think people might end up spending even MORE (as a whole, not necessarily on average).

I think a lot of customers right now are put off by the prohibitive cost of a new full featured workstation. You're pretty much looking at a minimum of $2k right up front. If you could get into a "basic" model (ie an S series style rompler) for $1k-1.4k, without making the sacrifices of things like expressive capabilities (aftertouch, etc...), build quality, ROM size, and all those other things that go out the window in "consumer" level versions (TR, MO, "Nu"no), I think a lot more people could be brought into the keyboard ownership fold. Especially if they know that as their needs grow, so can their keyboard.

HammondToby
03-01-2008, 12:51 PM
Recently, I thought about my setup and decided, that I have to change it. I'm talking about the modern, light electronic keys, not the vintage stuff (Hammond & Co. will stay in the studio). So I figured out, what I want and what I really need live on stage. There was quite a gap between 'nice to have' and 'necessary'.

So, this is the plan for the next setup.

Keys:
Clavia Nord Stage 88 as Rhodes, organ, small va synth and master keyboard (I already own this one)
Roland V-Synth GT (can get a very good deal for this one)

Rack:
Roland Fantom XR (can get one used from a friend of mine)
Access Virus B (have on in the studio)
Mackie 1604 (I got this one too)

And that's about it. I was thinking about a Fantom G8, but I don't really need it and I want my set as light as possible. As you see, most of the keys are specialist units, except the Fantom. The Fantom will be used for strings, some pads and samples, not for sequencing or large multitimbral stacks.

For me, this is the logical choice, but the child in me screams for more... and the band account says 'stay calm and don't pay for things, you won't use'. Sadly, the bank account is right :wink: So: specialist units and a flexible, modular setup are my approach, but for other people, other ways may work better.

Best regards
HammondToby

eibbor
03-02-2008, 08:44 AM
I really like the modular idea, actually (what Omega Monkey brought up originally).

I would most definitely buy that over anything else.

I don't really like the idea of paying a crap load of money for loads of features I have no use for, like a sequencer or a sampler. Even my Juno-G has features I never wanted, and will never use. And, indeed, to make room for those useless to me features and still keep the price down, they made sacrifices elsewhere... sacrifices I would rather they hadn't made (aftertouch!).

However, I really like the idea of having one "do-it-all" keyboard, as opposed to all kinds of rack components, controllers, or whatever else floating around.

A truly modular approach would be great for that. You could quite literally get everything you want, and nothing you don't, and all of it crammed into one easy to coordinate and transport unit.

-=AnatomiC=-
03-02-2008, 08:53 AM
Yes, the dark side is strong in me too...

This is a short list of what I want:
Jp8000
Kaoss Pad III
Some kind of a drum computer, probably Korg electribe.
A portable workstation.
Virus TI
Wurlitzer
Fender Rhodes
Some racks... EQs, effects...
Couple of Moog Moogerfooger boxes
Pair of mackie SRMs
16 channel mixer...
A complete Doepfer modular...
Pretty much every vintage analog synth there is

But alas... who is going to pay for it? And you can't just keep adding things to your live rig - it will become too big and complicated. You will spend huge amount of time (not to mention money, rofl), just to find out how everything works, and just "play" with it, but you won't have any time for music!

So, I will stay practical: Just my FX8 + Radias, and maybe drumcomputer/KP3 (because I have to play solo) is more than enough. (and for sound reinforcement 2 mackies SRM450 - they are pretty cheap now, since new version came out recently + a small rack mixer 8 channel)

Off topic? I think not... just wanted to say, that all-in-one keyboards can be very convenient.
Okay - FX for example is a master of none (or is it?), but how much keyboards would I have to buy, to replace it? (Think practical!)
I don't even need Radias, but having a second board, can be very convenient also - it does give more power (more polyphony, other sounds, soft keys,etc), but it doesn't make really anything complicated + it's cool...

I think that, on stage, nothing can be more practical than just 2 keyboards + maybe some smaller toys.

-=AnatomiC=-
03-02-2008, 08:59 AM
I really like the modular idea, actually (what Omega Monkey brought up originally).

Sure, we all like it - but the first company to do it, will go bankrupt - that's for sure...

I had this idea also, btw...
Just some kind of keyboard with empty slots - and you just insert your modules in the front panel (for example, a touch screen, motorized faders, dynamic pad bank, etc etc) and also more expansion boards - cards with new synth engines etc)

Would be very cool... but what's stopping you from getting a MacBook, with software and Midi controllers?

Grey Loki
03-02-2008, 01:13 PM
Would be very cool... but what's stopping you from getting a MacBook, with software and Midi controllers?

The price - a well-specified macbook, plus software, plus controllers (as in, more than one controller as you stated - say, a set of trigger pads and an 88key controller) is going to set you back about £3000, and you'll be getting a heck of a lot of stuff that you'll never use - like for example, the Mac operating system.

Sure, you'd probably find a use for it, but buying a Mac, a VST host, VST instruments, and extra hardware just so that you can make some noises? Seems a bit wasteful to me. The same philosophy can be applied to workstations - for example, i've never used the 8 track HDR on my Fusion since I got it, even though it seems like a cool feature on paper, there's just no need for it - in a studio, there are better alternatives available, and live, it's just not used. It's such a small market of people that would require an all-in-one keyboard and HDR, that I would rather have not had the HDR and had £200 knocked off of the price.

eibbor
03-02-2008, 03:53 PM
I'm actually going to buy a Macbook for other reasons later this year... but I don't think I'd want to rely exclusively on softsynths and a bunch of controllers.

I somehow doubt that such a setup would be anywhere near ideal in a live situation.