new Kurzweil Pc3 question

[12fingers]

For those of you whom have acquired the new Kurzweil, are you able to transfer older setups from k2500,k2600,k2661 to the new instrument?

[Chuckers]

The answer is no. However, if you have some favorites, the architecture is VERY similar, and it would be easy (though a bit time-consuming) to re-program your setups on the new keyboard. Also, there is a computer-based editor coming in a month or two that should make programming a lot easier/faster.

 

[MoodyBluesKeys]

The PC3X uses a different storage method, and does not accept samples. I have a K2661, PC2x, and PC3x. The PC3x is a LOT more like the K2661 in its method of operation than the PC2x (and sounds a LOT better, especially acoustic pianos, electric pianos, orchestral, bass, brass, strings, pads -- oops, that's getting to be about everything).

 

I do not plan to get rid of my 2661, and have a dual stand in my studio. The 2661 goes on most gigs, becuase of its size and weight, but I do have a case - BTW the PC2X and PC3X are the same size (but the PC3X has internal power, no separate power supply to be an annoyance).

 

I'm studying classical piano, and the PC3X gives me an extra incentive to practice (the PC2X is now used as a family piano, we have three students in the family).

 

Once the Kurz engineers get the software all completed and write the manuals in depth - the PC3X can store user sounds made from the existing sounds - and the VAST controls are similar to those on the 2661 - there is a LOT more versatility in changing sounds than the PC2 series.

 

Jim

 

[12fingers]

Thanks! I might get one since I already own three Kurzweils and really like having an 88 key controller as my base keyboard. I need to sell off some of my less used gear anyhow. I am surprised that they didn't try and make it backward compatible with the K2600 series since you can invest quite a bit of time programming. I too like the K2661 as a second tier gigging keyboard. It is nice and light and still sounds great. From all the reviews I read, I hear the PC3 sounds really good.

[ErikH]

You can't make it backwards compatible and change the sounds, at least without a fair bit of difficulty.

 

The underlying sample set of the pc3, while similar to the 2600 series, is not the same. Not only does that make backward compatibility quite difficult... but half of the custom 2600 sounds use mods, effects, etc, which are ALSO not the same.

 

It's not really feasible to be backwards compatible here. It works best either for very simple boards (which can be modeled in their entirety in a new and more complex board) or for complex boards where the new version ADDS to, but does not completely CHANGE, the underlying programming and sound structure. Neither of those fit the pc3.

[Moonglow]

.....BTW the PC2X and PC3X are the same size.....

From the picture, the depth (width?) of the PC3X looks a little deeper to me.

[MoodyBluesKeys]

.....BTW the PC2X and PC3X are the same size.....

From the picture, the depth (width?) of the PC3X looks a little deeper to me.

 

According to Dave Weiser with Kurzweil, one of their design constraints was to use the same case (although the front panel is punched differently for controls. Apparantly, this reduced the development cost. I have an ATA case that was originally purchased to fit a SP88X, and also both my PC2X and PC3X fit.

 

The three instruments sure do SOUND different, though.

 

Jim

 

[Stefan Lindmark]

From the picture, the depth (width?) of the PC3X looks a little deeper to me.

If you ever get a chance to compare it next to other workstations, you'll notice that the PC3x is quite slender.