cassdad
-
Posts
345 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Events
Articles
Downloads
Gallery
Store
Posts posted by cassdad
-
-
On 8/17/2024 at 1:04 PM, The Real MC said:
Standard procedure for Yamaha - planned obsolescence. They have always obsoleted portable storage with advancing new platforms. That way you can't load patches from new platforms into legacy products, forcing you to buy their latest keyboards.
Well, OK - but I see that “standard procedure” as a double-edged sword: Although for some it may “force you to buy their latest keyboards”. But for others, such as myself, it forces me to NOT buy the latest and keep using the old. I have way too many hours invested in programming those sounds, linking the associated MIDI messages to all my digital songs / notation, etc. I’m not willing to throw that all away, and re-spend all those hours to get the same results, just in a new keyboard. YMMV.
-
Yes, I guess that “tangible” is the key word here in this discussion. If we only had ears, perhaps software would suffice. But we also have sight and touch. For eons, craftsman have been creating their works, catering to touch and sight. Instruments are no different = touch and sight are important, not just the sound. Of course my keys have to sound great. But they also have to feel good and look good! IMO.
-
1
-
-
21 hours ago, cphollis said:
Since I've become a band leader, most of my purchases now are for band gear: sound, lights, etc.
I got started with Behringer gear: X32 rack, PM-16 mixing stations, powered hub, etc. Lotsa bang for the buck!
Just got my A&H SQ 5, six of the ME-500 personal mixers, a powered hub and a digital stage box. It's like night and day. Every part of the experience is much, much better: the UI, the workflow, the packaging, the pre amps etc. -- and the SOUND!
Once again, you don't know what you're missing until you hear it.
Interesting! So, sincerely, in a live situation, do you actually hear a significant difference in the quality of the sound via the SQ-5 compared to the Behringer X-32? I sincerely want to know. (I would be the 1st to acknowledge that “specs” never tell the whole story…. but the specs on some of the cheaper equipment seem very impressive.). I’m not in the position to buy / try different mixers to compare myself. If there is an audible difference in quality, I’d sure like to know!
-
1
-
-
21 hours ago, Ibarch said:
My band plays completely live, with no click tracks, backing tracks or samples. Keeps it simple…………. . If I want to hear pre recorded music I'll sit at home and watch YouTube.
…Or hire a DJ, which is, frankly, what I think people who want to hear the “original recording” (or musicians who want to regurgitate the original recording) should do. Just my personal opinion…..
-
3
-
-
Man, you folks are right…. looks like an incredible sale to me……. this is a screen print just now from the XR-18 from Sweetwater….. I think that’s an incredible (low) price. (I think I originally paid $600 or more for mine years ago.)
-
Yes, I do. (Midas MR-18 and Behringer XR-18).
-
I’m not sure I understand your question: Are you concerned that if you plug the unbalanced 1/4 inch jack into the “mono” unbalanced output, that it will then change the XLR outputs also to mono? I’d expect the balanced and unbalanced outs to be separate (in other words, nomatter what you plugged in the unbalanced outs, the XLR balanced outs would still be left and right). Is that your question?
-
I‘ve found almost all the “carpal tunnel” exercises to be of great value in this regard - there’s a ton of them on-line, pick any and all of them. They work great for me, YMMV.
-
Thank you, HammondDave, for the rig pics. To my eyes, the bottom tiered keyboard looks to be a Yamaha MOXF8.
-
1
-
-
10 hours ago, analogika said:
If you believe activating this feature means you’re running a backup, you need to reconsider, because it may be “effortless”, but it is not backing up your data.
Unless the answers to my questions have changed recently, it is vital for you to realise:You do not have a functioning backup solution.
It’s merely a function intended to ease the space constraints of expensive and too-small internal SSDs. If that’s all you’re using it for, good.
I know some people consider it a backup, which it most decidedly is NOT (again, unless things have changed fundamentally): it does not keep multiple copies of your data, it merely moves them back and forth to and from the cloud.If your computer dies and the copy in the cloud breaks: gone
If you delete the data on your Mac, it’s deleted off the cloud (though you may have access to a mistakenly deleted file for another thirty days in iCloud; I’m not sure). Then: gone.If you accidentally delete six chapters of the biography of Geddy Lee you’re working on, then that broken copy gets synced to iCloud and the six chapters are gone.
etc.
Righto, good points, thank you!
-
1
-
-
4 hours ago, analogika said:
Could you link to that info, please?
AFAIK, iCloud Backup is a function of iOS and iPadOS only, and not available on the Mac.
iCloud STORAGE (Documents in the Cloud and such) is available on the Mac, but that just moves Documents into the Cloud, deleting local copies when space is tight. It doesn't duplicate them AFAIK, let alone do a versioned backup.
I really don’t know, Analogika - You are asking questions way beyond my interest in this matter. All I know is that on my Macbook Pro, in the iCloud settings, I can do all the things I wrote of previously. No links, no investigation…. I just check what I want “synced” in the iCloud, and it’s always kept synced without me taking any action at all. It just works, and I don’t care how or why. If you don’t believe it, that’s fine, really. I’m only concerned that it works effortlessly for me, which it does. Peace.
-
7 hours ago, Docbop said:
here's the short to the point info from the linked article below.
The hard truth: Apple doesn't let you store Time Machine backups in iCloud, even if you have space.
https://www.howtogeek.com/738706/can-i-use-icloud-drive-for-time-machine-backups/
ICloud is just storage and you can put what you want up in the iCloud. I have multiple computers so I use iCloud for files that don't want to duplicate on each computer. I also keep a copy of stuff I've recorded as a backup, but I put down the stuff to the local computer to work on it. Time Machine is a backup solution that you have to give it a local drive or a network connected drive. You setup Time Machine and how often it makes a full backup and how often it make an incremental backup (just modified files).
OK, I think I understand that. I also use Time Machine (to a local hard drive) in addition to “iCloud”. Time Machine seems to pick a regular time (daily?) to do a “backup”. iCloud is a different thing, in that, in my experience, it just keeps all your files / folders synced / identical, almost real time, within the limits of your own internet connection speed (up and down). So, for me, iCloud immediately syncs any file changes I do, almost real time. Time Machine just does regular backups. But I could be completely wrong - but that’s how mine seems to be working. And it keeps all the files / folders synced between iCloud, my Macbook Pro, and my iPad Pro. Works great for me. YMMV.
-
12 hours ago, analogika said:
Storing something in iCloud is not “backing it up”.Apple says it is….. it’s automatic, and backs up all the files and folders I tell it to in addition to their standard set. It is set up to operate seamlessly and automatically in the background, and can be used at any time, for any MAC computer, for full restoration if needed. At least that’s my understanding.
-
Really? - Just backing up to iCloud is not secure enough?
-
I also “live” use the chorus (effect) mix / how much chorus to apply to whatever given voice. “Live” differing conditions require a different amount of effect.
-
2
-
-
Well, my take is that oftentimes the “chord” is “implied”, though not explicitly played. Doing so provides much open “space” in the recording, so parts are not overlapping or doubling in the same sonic space. Put another way: Something I’ve always disliked in many bands that have both a guitar and keys is that, if they are both playing “chords”, they are stepping on each other, both trying to occupy the same sonic space. Sometimes it enriches, but often, just drives the volume wars. In my opinion - YMMV.
-
2
-
-
If I’m correctly understanding the problem, what I do is simply raise or lower the tuning on my keyboard to match the recording.
-
19 hours ago, MathOfInsects said:
Sure thing, and even E1. Lower than E1 is beyond a bass's lowest string, and if I'm playing that, it's almost always for effect/because I can. Funny enough I have a song of my own that has an obligato bass part that reaches that low D, lower than my NS3C offers me, so I have to just change the part a bit when I play that song on that keyboard.
But that's one moment in one song in the course of a night. I personally wouldn't give up all those high notes for that single event, and am curious who requires those notes often enough to have a keyboard geared toward it. What is the playing context that makes notes lower than the bass would play, a crucial part of a rig? Honest curiosity.
Solo playing. and transposing down.
-
Just now, MathOfInsects said:
What if you set up a layer/split that you brought in as needed, where, starting with the Eb above that lowest E, you added the same piano patch an octave lower. Then you could play the one you have and still get the sonic benefit you're looking for from that lower octave.
Yup, that would work…. but seems like a lot of switching, etc…. that doesn’t compare in ease to just having the keys I want there to be there. I think the former suggest of at least having the keys go down to low “C” is a good compromise.
-
6 minutes ago, MathOfInsects said:
What percentage of the time would you say you are playing the lowest A on a piano/keyboard? I can't envision a playing scenario that would call for multiple forays down to that note. I'm curious how you use it.
Agreed, of course… but as others have stated…. at least they could give me down to “C”. Yes, low “B”, “Bb” and “A” are played just “for comfort”…. and even then, usually very lightly, as, like the top octave, they become more “thud” than tone.
-
21 hours ago, MartinLeo said:
Nord Stage 4 73 Hammer Action
I pulled it up, and the Nord Stage 4 73 still has exactly the problem at hand = the lowest key is “E” (not “A” as I’d prefer).
-
1
-
-
22 hours ago, AnotherScott said:
There are numerous 7x-key boards with hammer actions. Some have better sounds than others, but you can always use the boards to drive an external sound if necessary (i.e. from sound module, laptop, iPad...)
Yamaha: CP73, YC73, P121 (possibly discontinued)
Kurzweil: Forte 7 (possibly discontinued)
Nord Piano 5 in its 73 version, and Electro 6HP though few like that HP action (also some discontinued models you could find used)
Dexibell S4 (and discontinued models... P3, S3, S3 Pro)
Numa X PIano in its 73 version
Korg SV2-73 (and older SV1 and Grandstage)
These are all definitely smaller than 88s, but some are still on the heavy side (though lighter than those same boards are in their 88 configs, of course). What is the weight of your current 88 that you're trying to reduce?
I pulled up every board listed here = the bottom key on all of them is “E”….. which is exactly my point…. they eliminated the bottom keys that I normally use.
-
22 hours ago, AnotherScott said:
There are numerous 7x-key boards with hammer actions. Some have better sounds than others, but you can always use the boards to drive an external sound if necessary (i.e. from sound module, laptop, iPad...)
Yamaha: CP73, YC73, P121 (possibly discontinued)
Kurzweil: Forte 7 (possibly discontinued)
Nord Piano 5 in its 73 version, and Electro 6HP though few like that HP action (also some discontinued models you could find used)
Dexibell S4 (and discontinued models... P3, S3, S3 Pro)
Numa X PIano in its 73 version
Korg SV2-73 (and older SV1 and Grandstage)
These are all definitely smaller than 88s, but some are still on the heavy side (though lighter than those same boards are in their 88 configs, of course). What is the weight of your current 88 that you're trying to reduce?
MOXF8 = 31 Pounds. I also failed to mention that I want a hardware board / self-producing sounds. I know that I could always go with a MIDI controller and save weight and size… but then there’s the additional computer components, and I don’t have the time or the patience for all the hookups…. and I’ve tried playing using the Macbook Pro or iPad Pro… and neither provides the “at one with the instrument” kind of feel I get when playing a hardware board. YMMV.
-
6 minutes ago, MathOfInsects said:
Couldn't you just pitch shift your board down an octave and call it a day?
Good Point…. except I lose the weighted action, which, along with the sound quality, is most important to me. Also, I can’t see any point in shifting lower than the normal 88-key low “A”, so that is a waste IMO. Is there a 73 or 76 key board that has piano-like weighted action and killer piano sound?
KC pets
in The Keyboard Corner
Posted
This is “Louis XIV”, a ferocious beast who strikes fear in the hearts of the masses.
I know, a face only a mother could love…. but we love him just the same!