Sea of knobs or Menu Dive

[Docbop]

From a recent thread and thinking about what I've noticed in keyboards over last couple years wonder what peoples preference is.

 

Stage pianos seem to be where the big change is going on. The Nord's like the Stage 3 are very popular for gigging and making quick changes, this because so much is controllable from the knobs and sliders on top. Other stage pianos you need to go menu diving and from what I can tell via menu can do a bit more. But trend for Yamaha last couple years is to switch to the Nord model and go with more knobs and sliders in category groups. So lots of immediate direct control with knobs and with menus you can pre setup setlists and shows. So which approach do you prefer?

 

Now workstations seem to be going the other way with fewer knobs and sliders mainly in order to cut costs/price, but people are buying the less expensive models and using them. Workstations live in two worlds one for stage performance and second for sound design and composition. Now with workstation it all about pre-programming sets and shows so is fewer knobs a hindrance in performance? For the person doing more sound design and composing are less knobs and slider a speed bump for getting work done.

 

Just wondered what people like more physical controls for direct changes or menu diving that changing more aspects.

 

Kind of a sub question.... For those that were mainly gigging keyboardists has the last year of no gigs started you thinking about your gear differently and what you want from it. Or did you take the attitude of just going to wait things out until gigging returns.

[MathOfInsects]

I'll jump right in. The "gig-whore" in me still likes knobby interfaces. I want to be able to make all adjustments on the fly, in real time, so I can be completely present-tense during gigs.

 

For "head in the monitor, microtweaking patches" gigs--like my Pink Floyd band--I am fine with menu-diving. I want control over all the variables, and whatever it takes to give me that control is fine with me.

 

So I am bravely and decisively taking both sides.

[Stokely]

I'll take both sides too. No doubt I appreciated being able to tweak effects and other settings on my electro, and on my old Virus--and new Summit--I don't need as many patches because I can just adjust more things quickly (e.g. release time so I can use the same patch on two songs etc). I find that tweaking patches live becomes a creative thing, I do what I feel like at the time (present tense as mentioned above). I often pick new patches for songs from gig to gig, we are very loose in that regard.

 

Then again, sometimes it's hard to see the knobs, and making them all reachable can be tough if they are a bottom keyboard out of two or three

 

One little minor annoyance with my Summit is that it's so covered with knobs that you kind of grab them when you pick it up. I wish there was a bit more of a back edge. My Modx7 actually has a back lip that I use to one-hand it out of its case and off it's stand!

[ABECK]

I'm more interested in knobbage for sound design rather than live performance. I do a lot of cover gigs, so creating patches to emulate classic songs is where I spend most of my tweaking time. Typically I don't need to have access to everything during a gig. Easy access to parts within a performance (splits, layers, levels) is more important for my gigs than changing the decay level of filter envelope #2.

 

That being said, I can't stand editing patch parameters on a computer screen. To that end, knob me!

[Moonglow]

I like screwing around with knobs as little as possible on gigs, there is enough stuff to go wrong. I am solidly (using Korg-speak) a Set List guy, which allows me to have everything precisely how I want it every gig. I typically will only use the sliders on my Kronos for minor volume adjustments, as needed. Not that I don't enjoy messing around with knobs, it's great fun, but for the bands I play in I need consistency from show to show...which may relate the OP's question to the type of music performed, or perhaps one's need for change/spontaneity.

[ProfD]

Whether it's a DP or a synth, I prefer knobbage since altering a sound based on what I feel/hear is a part of my playing/performance style.

[AnotherScott]

Another both-sideser here. And like Abeck, I find the biggest benefits of a direct/knobby interface are in how quickly you can program your sounds. I don't tend to touch them much during performance. Though there could be a chicken-and-egg situation here... if more of my boards had lent itself to it, in a fun and productive way, maybe I'd have developed a habit of more real-time tweaking. Though realistically, there are limits simply because I rarely have a free hand for long!

[eric]

I like all the knobs to avoid menu diving. I taught myself synthesis on a Roland JX-8P (without the PG-800 back in 1985) and that was about the most painful hunt and peck menu diving known to man, probably second only to the Yamaha DX-7. I acquired a Juno-106 and preferred all the sliders for a more intuitive way of creating and tweaking synth sounds.

 

Fast forward to 2021 and yep, I'm a Nord guy, and yep, those keyboards have a sea of knobs. I still like all these knobs, though the vast majority are useful during offline sound design vs. live on gigs. I use wheel and pedal morphs on gigs to adjust things like filter frequency, volume, sometimes a few other things. During a gig, the only knobs on my NS3 I may touch for certain songs are related to EQ, delay, and LFO, possibly overdrive. Otherwise, I've previously "set and forget" those things and the sea of knobs is not needed for gigs.

 

This has led me to yearn for some kind of a hybrid, almost like a Nord Stage "Lite" that has all the same compute power, but with a significantly simplified UI with a set of assignable knobs and sliders. Almost like the Moog Little Phatty, which had a few simple knobs that could be connected to your choice of parameter. I wonder if there's a way for companies to consider this and it could save money on hardware needed plus construction costs. With a company like Nord that has historically been all about the knobs, this is probably unlikely.

[cp-the-nerd]

Lemme fondle them knobs all day everyday.

[ABECK]

Nord did make the Micro-Modular, which is somewhat what you are describing. (in a very limited fashion)

[bfields]

I love physical controls. On the other hand, menu-diving is a bit different now than it was on a DX7 LCD. A big screen can give access to a *lot* of parameters. You lose some tactile feedback and the ability to find controls without looking, but you gain flexibility. Long-run, screens are only going to get cheaper and bigger, whether on the keyboards themselves or (increasingly) on external monitors.

[Dr Mike Metlay]

Menus are why the Korg wavestate videos aren't done yet.

[vonnor]

I'm with Moon. Ever since the DMC MX-8 and the Lake Butler RFC-1 in the late 80's I have always preferred to only touch the keys, wheels, levers and pedals during a live performance. That being said, I do a lot of programming and tweaking off-stage and hate the menu-diving to the point of being a deal-breaker. More modern instruments are coming out with software editors which are fine for me in lieu of a bunch of hardware knobs.

 

~ vonnor

[timwat]

TL;DR: Knobby synth above Kronos set list. It doesn't need to be a Korg, but anything similar to Kronos set list mode would do it for me.

 

Why - because for KB players like me, on an electronic gig a great deal of the role is driven by songs in the traditional sense. So sounds (programs, combis, patches, whatever you call them) are dictated by the song. I need quick access to the sounds I already know I want for that song. UI that organizes like that is useful. And then knobby synth allows in the moment adjustments for those times that require it.

 

Strictly piano gigs don't require much of any thing other than a decent piano sound and an expressive action. No menus or knobs required.

 

I don't really play any synth-heavy gigs (Kraftwerk, Tangerine Dream) and never have, but I presume I'd think entirely differently if that was part of my wheel house.

[wineandkeyz]

Knobs

[Konnector]

Lotsa knobs/sliders for a pure synth kybd.

 

"Enough" knobs/sliders for a workstation style kybd that also has a good UI for programming. (And several pedal inputs.)

 

Easy access to patch changes. I like the pad control of Studio Sets for one button glitch free changes of patch combinations like the Roland FA series has.

[ABECK]

Easy access to patch changes. I like the pad control of Studio Sets for one button glitch free changes of patch combinations like the Roland FA series has.

 

When I had my FA, I did a show where we covered Steely Dan's Aja. I used the pad controller for Part Select and Part Mute extensively to easily cover all the EP, string, marimba, synth and clav parts that come in and out throughout that album. I even taped little pictures to the pads for reference. That was worth more to me than knobbage!!

[drawback]

I'm a deep menu diver when I'm setting up my basic sounds (at home); knobs & switches take it from there.

[Iconoclast]

I've played on both teams and I am a firm believer in knobs.

 

I had played VSTs for years in mainstage, and thought I understood synths.

 

Then on a whim I bought an OB-6. It's incredibly limited compared to almost any VST synth. But within a few weeks of playing with it I realized that knobs move at the speed of your brain and you just flow with it.

 

Menu diving and even mouse-tweaking seems to use up more of your brain that you should be using listening/playing.

 

Menus are where inspiration goes to die.

[AnotherScott]

As with Konnector and Abeck, in performance, the most important aspect to me is good patch change facilities. That's actually a weakness of some of the otherwise "knobby" boards, like the Roland VR09/VR730, Vox Continental, and Nord Electro6/Stage3. I like to see 10 or 16 one-button recall locations available to me at once (whether physical buttons or touchscreen). And if they're hard buttons, then either enough panel space around them to attach 2 banks worth of labels, or a screen that shows you what's assigned to each of the buttons at a glance.

 

Though I was really impressed with the CP73/CP88 design for a piano... it had 8 one-button recall locations (not too bad), but it had also let you grab from a set of sounds "on the fly" without using those buttons at all, in what seemed to me a "less compromised" way of doing that compare to other boards that offer somthing like that.

[eric]

Nord did make the Micro-Modular, which is somewhat what you are describing. (in a very limited fashion)

 

I had one of those for a hot moment! It was kind of fun, though I recall not loving what was involved with getting it set up to work on gigs...so it's kind of a Catch 22.

[Tom Williams]

Deep dive at home, and a few controllers at the gig (i.e., wheels, ribbon, and one or two continuous pedals), and I am happy. Even for clonewheel songs I usually preset the drawbars for that tune.

 

Hypocrisy Disclaimer: I just pulled the trigger on a relatively-knobby PC4, so I may end up wildly pro-knob in a month. Or two. Whenever they ship....

[David Emm]

I'm a deep menu diver when I'm setting up my basic sounds (at home); knobs & switches take it from there.

 

I was forced to menu dive more as synths went for one data-entry slider and a few buttons. While I played live, it was totally pre-configured at home. I was too busy remembering the song to wrestle with much knob action.

 

95% of my current knobs are made of software. I still lean in and sniff the Wavestate and Prologue a little, but my "menu diving" is now a welcome All At Once affair within Logic. Its grab & go.

[brenner13]

More is always better for knobs and sliders.

[The Real MC]

Give me a panel full of knobs any day.

[TommyS]

Hello,, my name is Tom, and I"m a knobaholic,,,

[jazzpiano88]

I like knobs. But for the knob-less synths, I could see a market for a hardware version of an editor/librarian that could be configured for any synth.

You buy the hardware and each synth configuration is sold as a low cost add-on. Or do it yourself if you have the time.

[CEB]

Depends. Both are good. What I need is patch command control that brings up what I need when I need it. If I need to do real time live resonance or cutoff manipulation I want knobs or Roland sliders. But that is just me.

[The Real MC]

The main problem with menu combined with single data control is that control will wear out much faster than a panel full of controls.

 

A menu system with only +/- buttons is the worst.

[Docbop]

I was thinking about how would something like audio boards do with multiple layers. The board at the church I worked at had a sea of knobs and faders that were generic channel strips because the board had more channels than the number of physical knobs and faders. Then a set of buttons to quickly change layers. But it did have tiny electronic labels so we could tell which channel on what layer we were on. For the effects area again generic sets of effects knobs and buttons that we could pull up any effect as necessary to make changes. Then there were some dedicated knobs, buttons, and faders for output section of the board. So once used to the layers and ability to call up or assign effect or plug-in to generic control you could do a lot fast. Seems like workstation keyboard are like this a bit but I think it could be taken further. You think something like this would be workable or too confusing. Keyboardist have to make changes faster than mixing FOH.