CHarrell
-
Posts
655 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Events
Articles
Downloads
Gallery
Store
Posts posted by CHarrell
-
-
1 hour ago, ElmerJFudd said:
In that respect you can get a lot of Korg’s stuff in software and run it on your own hardware. Which is a nice alternative. And they don’t seem to have gone subscription like Roland. Unless I missed that.
Nope, onesie and doneso! Korg's VST game is so on point.
-
1
-
-
Thanks for the response! I briefly had a YC summer 2021, but I don't remember all of the details. Can you assign a different speaker/amp for each part? (Rtr A for Organ, Lead for Keys A, etc)?
-
Hi @Outkaster! I've seen you sing the praises of the YC multiple times, and I will soon be a YC owner myself. I was curious, what have you found to be the best way to navigate the different sounds? I used to own the CP, where if you wanted a clav you'd just turn on the E Piano section and turn the knob to "Clav", but in the YC, it's in a menu. Is there a nice and easy way to quickly navigate to sounds that are "buried" in a certain voice category?
-
For my two keyboard rig like 4 years ago I did the sanded wood with holes drilled for the power and audio cords route....now I just use the Gravity shelf linked above, I like it a lot! Great for using as a composing desk, too.
-
7 minutes ago, ElmerJFudd said:
rumored ANX engine?
Didn't they patent that at least a couple of years ago? They've been really sitting on that golden egg.
-
After playing it more yesterday, and thinking about all the comments here and elsewhere, such as by Yamaha reps in the past, I think I might've gotten a heavily used unit. It's still in good condition, make no mistake, but the keybed is so light I can't help but wonder if this unit has seen a lot of battles over years.
Well, I've done it...I'm returning the CP4...and I got a YC88 instead. I feel bad because of how much praise the CP4 has gotten, including on this thread, but I think this will ultimately satisfy me the most. I miss a lot about the CP88, but there were features that the CP4 had that I missed on the CP88...and to varying extents the YC brought them back and/or reworked them.
So now I wait for the YC to arrive in a week, in which time Yamaha will announce a revolutionary, gamechanging 2.0 update for the CP series that will make me regret ever springing for the YC.
-
1
-
-
As a musician who started getting on the scene about ten years ago at the tender age of 19, I can say with assurance that the pay-to-play model is very much alive and well. I refuse to engage in it for principle reasons, but a number of my peers have gotten swept up in it: "C'mon, playing this venue is gonna be a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity!" That's how the venue would advertise it, too. Of course, you also have the Facebook etc. alternatives, where bands have to get the most likes or something, which is stupid on a number of levels.
From what I've seen, these kinds of schemes really bring out the worst, this gross, competitive frenzied rush in the desperate hope that THIS show will take us to the top, THIS is gonna be our breakthrough!
No thanks.
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, Sam Mullins said:
And isn't it nice how easy it is! As someone who was a long time user of Motif/S series keyboards (and the requisite archaic menu diving) and then defected to Kronos (when Montage crippled their MIDI capabilities compared to Motif)...I have to give Yamaha credit on the vast user interface improvements. I do understand that it is a simpler beast so easier to accommodate dedicated controls. But I'll also say that I like the interface better than the Nord Stage 2/3's that I used for years.
Agreed! And the CK has the best interface of the CP/YC line, too. Now it wasn't for that GHS bed....
-
9 minutes ago, AROIOS said:
😄 I feel your pain brother (sister). It took me 20 years to realize that the big snares in records I loved (Robert Mutt Lange, Walter Afanasseff etc) had little to do with "natural" or "realistic" drums. It was also eye opening (or, mind-opening) the first time I saw Chris Lord Alge crank his snare's treble up by a whopping 12db.
The amount of spicing/hyping in Pop production/mixing often looks (sounds) crazy when we compare the raw tracks to the finished products. The mix engineer and/or producer very often contribute to a huge part of the sound we hear.
I remember in high school I was in a media production class and we were first asked to do a "scavenger hunt" of different shots to capture with the camera. One of them ended up being a sunset, and that evening had an absolutely beautiful one. I recorded it, happy that all of the elements lined up and I couldn't wait to see the footage. ...And it looked awful.
It was then I started to have the idea that "natural", when it's recorded into a technological medium, doesn't look very "natural" at all, and you have to do a lot of unnatural work on it to have that effect! I think the same applies with music.
-
1
-
-
21 minutes ago, Floyd Tatum said:
It seems that some rich people, the richer they get, the bigger a$$holes they become. I mean, come on. Ok, you became a billionaire - we're all very impressed. Now, how's about spreading some of the cheese around a little. You'll feel better, try it!
Well, chances are they didn't exactly become billionaires through the most ethical means.
-
33 minutes ago, ProfD said:
However, I would question releasing a successor Kronos from a business perspective because the top-tier synth workstation market is almost dried up. 😎
The Fantom and the Montage (MODX) have done well though, yeah? Nautilus was a weird product, in my opinion, and I wouldn't be surprised if many consumers didn't know what to make of it.
-
8 minutes ago, dje31 said:
Not to thread derail, but this conversation has renewed my interest in picking up a like-new CP5...
Why is that?
-
1 minute ago, AnotherScott said:
...something added back to some extent or another in the YC88 and CK88 that followed the CP88. But as always, nothing has everything..
I know. 😂 Dammit this is hard, haha. I do prefer the CP88's interface, but with the way the wind's been blowing, and coming to value these features, I'm beginning to wonder if a used YC88 might be my best bet after all....
-
2 hours ago, Dave Ferris said:
But I felt I could dig in more, like on an acoustic, on the CP4. In that sense the CP4 felt more comfortable and natural to play.
I'm going to check tonight with this in mind, and see how I feel!
2 hours ago, Dave Ferris said:But the CP4 CFX sound, no matter how well it sounds, or works with a band, still sounds dated to me.
I feel this as well. I've heard many people say they prefer the other two pianos, which I agree with, but...I do also feel it with them as well.
-
This can mean only one thing:
invasionKorg Kronos successor bay-beeeeeee!!!!! -
11 minutes ago, Stokely said:
Ah the old 'playing for exposure' or in this case 'paying for exposure'
One thing so many musicians must know is the difference between general and targeted exposure!
-
1 hour ago, ProfD said:
However, if the bands goal(s) is to have a bowling night or get out of the house or play for free beer and food and hook-ups, etc., these types of gigs might pay off.
Whoa whoa whoa, wait, playing music can actually get you laid???
-
1
-
-
4 minutes ago, ProfD said:
Bingo.
IMO, the better technology allows folks to jump on and start riding immediately while reserving the nerd-level stuff for those who choose to deeper dive.
FM synthesis went straight from ear candy (presets) to for most users, there's no way I'll ever create my own sounds.
The Opsix definitely makes FM programming more accessible and instantly gratifying than its predecessors who were not so kind enough to offer one data slider and membrane switches.
I'm slightly curious to hear cool sounds and music being created by a new generation of synth programmers using FM and other forms of synthesis.😎
It's been my belief and conviction that the last several years, from the mid-ish 10s on, is the first time FM synthesis has truly been popular.
-
I know whachu mean. I've only played it in well lit environments, but in a stage setting I can totally imagine some of the text being very difficult to read.
-
1
-
-
Alright, y'all, played with it for a couple hours last night! Some first-night observations just spitballed in a random list:
-Even before I plugged it in, I could tell the keybed was noticeably lighter than the CP88. This surprised me, as even peeps like Blake Angelos would say things like "the CP88 is just a touch heavier". Maybe it's because I'd been playing the 88 for a couple years now, but it's a pretty big touch heavier! I think I might actually prefer the 88's keybed and connection to the pianos for now, but this was just my first night. I feel like the 88 is more responsive.
-Even though it's lighter than the CP88, I had a much harder time carrying it than the 88, probably due to its dimensions (I'm pretty short). Like it felt heavier than the 88.
-You can get pretty damn weird with it in not a lot of time. One of the benefits of having more tweakability than the 88.
-Can definitely see why people such as Bobadohshe said the 88's Rhodes and Wurlys were better! The default e-piano sounds are just...weird. Thankfully the 4 has presets like the 75RdsMW where it sounds good out the gate, but I was surprised. The SCM parameters are cool, and I like being able to make some strange tones with them, but it's not a standout feature for me by any means.
-As many have said, the menu diving is very intuitive. I do find some parameters strangely buried in like page 3 of an edit menu though.
-The base pianos sound nice, but the 15 variations honestly feel very miniscule to my first playing. I can see why they streamlined this in the 88, opting more for variety in piano models themselves rather than different tweakings of the sample sets.
-I don't know what it is, it shouldn't be special, but the default way the mod wheel affects the sounds is just so musically satisfying to me.
-The effects categories confuse me. They have one for "Mod", for example, that includes a phaser, but then they have a separate category for phasers, that have different phasers. Can I get a Tim Allen in here?
-The pads here kick the 88's ass.
Feelings after one night? Well, all things considered, I do find myself still missing the 88, appreciating more some of the decisions they made to simplify things--though the 4's ability to tweak filter, ADSR, mono/poly, etc. are actually really nice to have. However, there were some moments last night, especially when I was with a patch for a few minutes, where I just played, and I could feel what some members on here were talking about. That's more than I can say for a lot of the keyboards I've been trying out for the last few months! Really the only other keyboards I can say this about is the ES920 and to a lesser extent the MP7SE.
So I want to give it a couple more days, it's definitely earnt that much.
-
10 hours ago, CyberGene said:
How does that work? Not nagging, genuinely interested. Since I have a masters degree in Physics and I understand how FM-synthesis works both from math and physics standpoint, I'm also very well versed with analog synths and recreating patches that I imagine, yet I struggle making any meaningful FM-patches. It just doesn't follow any logic... 😕
Honestly when I first got into FM synthesis almost 10 years ago (my first type of synthesis!), I would go to my university library all the time and read all about Bessel, harmonic sidebands, overtone series, etc., hoping it'd give me the ability to create cool FM tones...and it didn't do a damn thing. 😂 While it can be cool to understand the physical/mathematical backbone behind this, ultimately it wouldn't be a very cool way to create timbres if you had to have this deep theoretical knowledge just to make some patch. When I was a kid learning how to ride a bicycle, I didn't need to know how all the parts interlocked and interacted with gravity, centrifugal force, etc. etc....I just got on and rode!
Similarly, I actually got way more proficient at FM synthesis, when after knowing some of the basics (ie stuff like "high number for ratio makes higher pitch"), I actually, you know, made patches. I would think of a sound I wanted to create, and would deconstruct it in my mind. Think of a typical Rhodes. You have the "body" of the sound and the tines, to make it very very simple and basic. From there, I'd just focus on each "component" of the sound and designate them to different operator stacks: tines would be harsher, higher pitched, short ADSR, yada yada, and I'd tweak an operator stack to create that aspect of the sound. Repeat for the other(s). Now do you always get the result you originally aimed for? Of course not, the same can happen with subtractive. But you can find some hella cool sounds in the process!
What's great about the opsix, with its very tactile interface, is that it makes that whole process much more intuitive and quick: in a lot of interfaces, you have to be very precise with your goals. "I want a higher pitch kind of sound, so let me try an 8:1 operator ratio in this stack here". With the opsix, it's more like: "I want a higher-pitch kind of sound, let me twist this knob to the right until I get the sound I want." This is obviously just one example, but I hope you understand the ultimate point I'm making here. The approach the interface provides is much more open to trial-and-error, experimentation, and relying almost purely on your tastes, rather than trying to conform your imagination into some assembly line workflow.
-
1
-
-
On 6/26/2023 at 10:16 AM, AROIOS said:
One caveat: "most natural, realistic" might not mean "best sounding". The great sounding acoustic kits we hear in records are often, if not always, heavily mixed/processed. Learning a bit of mixing techniques (compression, eq, reverb, layering) will go a long way on improving our drum sounds.Or you could do what I did when I started creating music digitally 8 years ago: spend hundreds of dollars on drum samples and VSTs, hoping they'd give me certain kinds of sounds that were the ones I wanted, with no clue about processing or anything else (for example, if I wanted an intense distorted drum kit sound, I'd buy a VST hoping it'd have those sounds instead of, you know, applying a distortion effect to some drum samples I've already had).
Much more musically satisfying this way and not a cause for regret at all!
-
1
-
-
6 minutes ago, Baldwin Funster said:
In n Out screwing people. Appropo.
-
2
-
-
2 hours ago, CyberGene said:
nd FM-synthesis is not about real-time physical controls.
That's what I like about the opsix interface though, is that it asks the question: why not? Why can't FM have real-time physical controls?
-
2
-
The favorite IOS AUV3 synths and effects thread.
in The Keyboard Corner
Posted
Synthmaster's got a lotta junk in the trunk, but I don't think its interface was very well optimized for tablet. Some of Korg's apps unfortunately fall under that too, like their Odyssey.