This Just In......PX-5S

[AnotherScott]

Mike, I have a couple of questions about its MIDI controller functionality.

 

In a Stage Setting, is it possibly to configure a zone so that it sends out a specific MIDI Program Change over a specified channel, while NOT having that sound assigned as playable from the PX-5S itself? For example, I might want to call up a Stage Setting that, in addition to splitting/layering whatever sounds I want on the PX-5S itself, also changes the patch in a second keyboard. So I'd want to send a Program Change over some MIDI channel that the PX's own keys will not be triggering.

 

I'm also curious about the reverse scenario... I might want to call up an internal PX-5S sound in a Stage Setting, but have its sound triggered by an external keyboard. It's similar... in this case I'm looking for the PX-5S preset to assign a given sound to say, MIDI channel 3, while no part of its own keyboard is assigned to play on that channel, but it will respond to it over MIDI.

 

On a different topic, all the previous Privias I've played have had what Roland calls patch remain, the ability to sustain sound X after switching to sound Y until the keys (or pedal) are released. It might glitch because of a change of fx, but on some models, you could get around that by saving versions of the sounds that didn't have the fx enabled. Will that work on the PX-5S?

 

Lastly, for those bothered by the black cover on the battery panel... I mentioned elsewhere that I'm intrigued by the QuNexus, and I think it would probably fit very nicely there! So, just cover it with something cool. ;-) (Or I supposed you could dip it in a bucket of white paint...)

[Mike Martin]

Mike, I have a couple of questions about its MIDI controller functionality.

 

In a Stage Setting, is it possibly to configure a zone so that it sends out a specific MIDI Program Change over a specified channel, while NOT having that sound assigned as playable from the PX-5S itself? For example, I might want to call up a Stage Setting that, in addition to splitting/layering whatever sounds I want on the PX-5S itself, also changes the patch in a second keyboard. So I'd want to send a Program Change over some MIDI channel that the PX's own keys will not be triggering.

 

Yes that is possible. Basically you'd have to assign the key range to something that is beyond the physical range of the keyboard so the keys wouldn't trigger it.

 

I'm also curious about the reverse scenario... I might want to call up an internal PX-5S sound in a Stage Setting, but have its sound triggered by an external keyboard. It's similar... in this case I'm looking for the PX-5S preset to assign a given sound to say, MIDI channel 3, while no part of its own keyboard is assigned to play on that channel, but it will response to it over MIDI.

 

Yes this is possible, I'd have to figure out if the insert effect would be available on that incoming MIDI channel. Basically even if you're using channels 1-4 as zones, parts 5-16 are still live for incoming MIDI.

 

On a different topic, all the previous Privias I've played have had what Roland calls patch remain, the ability to sustain sound X after switching to sound Y until the keys (or pedal) are released. It might glitch because of a change of fx, but on some models, you could get around that by saving versions of the sounds that didn't have the fx enabled. Will that work on the PX-5S?

 

yes

 

[Mike Martin]

So it wasn't recorded direct? I was thinking it might have sounded too clean because of the of the way it was recorded.

 

YES it was recorded direct.

Can we expect a variation in color scheme? Thanks a lot for the Q & A Mike.. you're a dedicated man.

 

Thank you very much!

 

I would not hold your breath for a color variation.

[Bill H.]

On a different topic, all the previous Privias I've played have had what Roland calls patch remain, the ability to sustain sound X after switching to sound Y until the keys (or pedal) are released. It might glitch because of a change of fx, but on some models, you could get around that by saving versions of the sounds that didn't have the fx enabled. Will that work on the PX-5S?

 

yes

This is a another feature praise and worship players really like. It's nice to be able to change sounds during quieter portions of the service, and it pretty much has to be seamless if you're in an exposed situation (which happens a lot).

 

You're going to sell a lot of these to praise and worship teams. This new board is sounding better and better all the time

[Mike Martin]

A couple people have asked me this question in PMs so I thought I'd mention it here.

 

The question was about selecting Stage Settings remotely from another MIDI device.

 

There are 100 Stage Settings- 10 banks of 10. To select them remotely all you need to do is send Bank 112 and program change 0-99 to and you're set. This is what we did with the Set List Maker app at NAMM.

[EscapeRocks]

Excellent!

[Malpaugh]

A couple people have asked me this question in PMs so I thought I'd mention it here.

 

The question was about selecting Stage Settings remotely from another MIDI device.

 

There are 100 Stage Settings- 10 banks of 10. To select them remotely all you need to do is send Bank 112 and program change 0-99 to and you're set. This is what we did with the Set List Maker app at NAMM.

 

Is this the same procedure to use Set List Maker to call up registrations in my PX-3?

[JeffLearman]

On a different topic, all the previous Privias I've played have had what Roland calls patch remain, the ability to sustain sound X after switching to sound Y until the keys (or pedal) are released. It might glitch because of a change of fx, but on some models, you could get around that by saving versions of the sounds that didn't have the fx enabled. Will that work on the PX-5S?

 

yes

Excellent, and THANKS for remembering to ask that! This might be a deal-clincher. My other main contender (MOX8) can do that, but only if you program it as a ... somethingorother. That's sufficient, but I like it better when it just WORKS.

 

Can't wait to get my hands on one. I'll have to bug the local shops to get them in.

[Mike Martin]

Is this the same procedure to use Set List Maker to call up registrations in my PX-3?

 

I don't think the PX-3 works the same way. The Set List Maker App does have a "MIDI Learn" feature you could try selecting registrations on the PX-3 and see if the Set List Maker app records the proper change.

[AnotherScott]

My other main contender (MOX8) can do that, but only if you program it as a ... somethingorother.

Right, a Mix. The limitation there is that the patch remain only works as long as you're switching among the 16 sounds (maximum) that you've put in that Mix. But in practice, that's not necessarily such a bad limitation, as many gigs call for using the same handful of sounds over and over again throughout the night. You can also store up to 32 different Mixes (i.e. 32 sets of 16 sounds you can switch among). Though if you're the kind of player who likes to call up a different preset for each song in your repertoire, that won't work very well.

 

I like the MOX a lot, but the PX-5S does have some very nice advantages, including what I find to be a better keybed, and a shallow depth that makes it easier to keep its keybed close to that of a second tier board above it. Sounds aside (since we haven't heard the PX-5S yet), some remaining MOX advantages (from a performance perspective) would be a larger (i.e. more informative) display, the expression pedal, and more (and more nicely shaped) buttons that may make it easier to do things with a single button press.

[AnotherScott]

I don't think the PX-3 works the same way.

Right. As I recall, the PX3 requires sysex to call up registrations externally. This is a welcome improvement!

[JeffLearman]

Thanks, Scott. One Mix would probably cover everything I do these days! But I like the price point & portability of the PX5. I might buy them both, take them home, and keep the better of the two -- assuming the shop allows that, which I expect they would.

[AnotherScott]

One more point about a MOX mix... as I understand it (I haven't played with this myself yet), each part of a split sound requires its own location in that bank of 16 sounds. So if you wanted splits with left hand bass for all your sounds, instead of having 16 sounds to choose from at a time, you'd have 8, as the other 8 locations would be taken up with 8 iterations of the bass sound, one to mate with each of the 8 right hand sounds. (Essentially, you're defining the assignments of 8 MIDI channels... each one with a split sound of bass plus some other sound.)

[AnotherScott]

Another question, Mike...

 

For the main tone buttons (Piano, EP, Organ, etc.), can you define which sound is called up by default when each of those buttons are pressed? Two limitations on the PX3 were that, one, any change you made (say, switching the EP so that the button called up the "Pure EP" preset which was not the default) could not be saved (you'd have to specify it again every time you turned the unit on), and two, each button could only call up a sound it its pre-designated category (so you couldn't use, say, the Guitars button to call up a Brass sound, if that were a more useful sound for you to have so instantly available). Any chance these limitations of the PX-3 have been addressed on the PX-5S?

 

(One conceivable way to address this would be if a Stage Setting could include definitions for those 8 buttons.)

[Mike Martin]

No it's not really designed to work that way. If you want instant recall of something specific that is what Stage Settings are for. The tone categories on the left side of the instrument are essentially for selecting your ingredients when you're building or changing a Stage Setting.

 

When your playing a Stage Setting, there are zone +/- buttons that you switch between the active zones. So if you want to change a sound on one of the zones you can choose a zone then grab an alternate sound from the categories on the left.

[Bif_]

Right, a Mix. The limitation there is that the patch remain only works as long as you're switching among the 16 sounds (maximum) that you've put in that Mix. You can also store up to 32 different Mixes (i.e. 32 sets of 16 sounds you can switch among). Though if you're the kind of player who likes to call up a different preset for each song in your repertoire, that won't work very well.

 

You can store 32 'Mixing' templates but the workaround to this is that you can store a different 'Mixing' in each 'Song' location, therefore you can store 64 different 'Mixings'.

[Bif_]

I might buy them both, take them home, and keep the better of the two -- assuming the shop allows that, which I expect they would.

 

A couple things for you to think about.

 

These two keyboards are quite different instruments. The MOX is a workstation with a sequencer. It will allow you to make complete arrangements all from that one instrument. It has more storage for programs than the PX 5S and probably has a broader sound palette (great guitars, basses, drums).

 

The PX-5S has a wonderful key bed (I've spent a fair amount of time playing the PX-350). It's very pleasant to play. You also get 256 notes of polyphony, versus 64 on the MOX. If you layer many sounds at all on the MOX you will likely run into notes cutting off.

 

The Casio is more of a performance instrument but the Yamaha would be a better choice if you are wanting to create complete arrangements solely on one keyboard. I also prefer the piano sound (and playability) of the Casio over the Yamaha.

 

Greg

[AnotherScott]

You can store 32 'Mixing' templates but the workaround to this is that you can store a different 'Mixing' in each 'Song' location, therefore you can store 64 different 'Mixings'.

Ah! Thanks.

 

These two keyboards are quite different instruments. The MOX is a workstation with a sequencer.

That's true, but many people buy the MOX strictly as a live performance instrument, caring nothing about the sequencer, too. So for that application, people will compare it to the PX-5S, and each will have its pros and cons from that perspective alone.

[Ekewaka]

PX-5S not having a sequencer, no big deal for me. 24lbs full-weighted keyboard, under $1k and good sound, big deal.

[Franz Schiller]

Ok, I'm a bit late to the party, but...

 

I just happened across a PX-350, and the textured action was just SOOO COOOOOL. It totally blew me away.

 

If that's the same as on the PX-5S, it will make for a very sensual synthesizer experience.

[Mike Martin]

Ok, I'm a bit late to the party, but...

 

I just happened across a PX-350, and the textured action was just SOOO COOOOOL. It totally blew me away.

 

If that's the same as on the PX-5S, it will make for a very sensual synthesizer experience.

 

Yes, the same action.

[tucktronix]

The Casio is more of a performance instrument but the Yamaha would be a better choice if you are wanting to create complete arrangements solely on one keyboard. I also prefer the piano sound (and playability) of the Casio over the Yamaha.

 

Greg

 

Owned a MOX8 for over a year, used strictly as a gigging keyboard.. works very well for me. I don't clearly understand your comparison here. You can't assume every workstation is geared towards "creating arrangements". If you really believe so, you may want to try to sell that ridiculous idiom to the many pro-players with Motif's.

[Nomadness]

I have a question for you, Mike...

 

This is the board that's going into my sailboat (already sold the RD-700SX and related land-based studio gear in anticipation), and I'm designing the seating to accommodate it (5" vertical lift range from normal lab desk height, as well as a front-back slider). The machine will simply sit on the desk when in use, then be stowed in a deep slot underneath, pushed back far enough to clear knees (that was a key dimension).

 

The question is this: how "robust" is the packaging in terms of overall cabinet flexibility? Would you feel comfortable seeing me support the PX-5S by its ends only (in padded slots), given that it is sometimes a rather dynamic environment with shock loads in all axes? Or would you feel better having a full-length shelf? Since I can't put my hands on one yet, I don't really have an intuition about this, but ends-only support would be MUCH more convenient as it would not block access to a compartment back against the hull. A compromise would be to have the end slots augmented by a little "receiver" that captures the middle and keeps it from flexing... that's still a bit of a nuisance, but less so than a full shelf.

 

Cheers, and I'm looking forward to getting one on order!

Steve

 

[Mike Martin]

Steve,

The PX-5S shares the chassis of the PX-350. The optional stand for the PX-350 supports the unit from the ends. As you can see from this picture the PX-350's ends are shaped to drop into the stand:

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8466/8077767104_97bfff182a.jpg

 

The stand for the PX-350 however comes with a support beam that goes underneath the keyboard. Technically with the only support coming from the far ends, it would be possible for the chassis to flex if you were a heavy handed player...and I can only imagine this happening over the course of years of playing but that is what the beam is supposed to prevent. Looking at the bottom of the PX-5S this same support beam could be fastened to a PX-5S to provide some rigidity. I can check with our parts department to see if that could be ordered separately, but worst case you just buy the stand and get the beam with it.

[Nomadness]

Thanks, Mike. While playing, it will be fully supported on the desktop... my larger concern is about what happens when it is stowed under the desk and the boat is pounding in the waves (which can result in some zero-G moments followed by slams, though she's 18 tons and that tends to filter the high-frequency spikes pretty well). I just re-read my question and realize that I wasn't clear about this: when in use, it's solidly supported.

 

Anyway, it's a somewhat similar problem mechanically, so the fact that a beam is offered for the stand suggests that a little mid-chassis support in the stowage nest is probably not a bad idea. I'll proceed on that assumption. I appreciate the info (and the photo!).

 

Cheers,

Steve

 

[Bif_]

The Casio is more of a performance instrument but the Yamaha would be a better choice if you are wanting to create complete arrangements solely on one keyboard. I also prefer the piano sound (and playability) of the Casio over the Yamaha.

 

Greg

 

Owned a MOX8 for over a year, used strictly as a gigging keyboard.. works very well for me. I don't clearly understand your comparison here. You can't assume every workstation is geared towards "create arrangements". If you really believe so, you may want to try to sell that ridiculous idiom to the many pro-players with Motif's.

 

I was trying to point out that the Yamaha does something the Casio can't do since the Casio doesn't have a sequencer. A workstation can be used a a performance instrument, but not vice versa.

 

I own a Motif ES and regularly play live with a Motif XS. Yes, they work fine for performance.

[JeffLearman]

These two keyboards are quite different instruments. The MOX is a workstation with a sequencer. It will allow you to make complete arrangements all from that one instrument. It has more storage for programs than the PX 5S and probably has a broader sound palette (great guitars, basses, drums).

Thanks. It's a valid point, but I have no need for the workstation part of the MOX8; I'd be using it as a performance keyboard. I use my computer for production.

 

I do use bass and drum sounds on my MR76, for multitracking. I'd probably use those on the Yamaha. If I go for the Casio, I may need to keep the Ensoniq. I may want to keep it anyway, since it has minimal resale value give the keys are breaking. Too bad it's not rack-sized. I'm not quite up to the task of chopping it!

 

But it's the performance characteristics, and mostly the piano, that will be the deciding factors.

[Franz Schiller]

Mike,

Just a quick question for you.

 

I'm taking a space voyage soon, and I was wondering if the PX-5S chassis could likely withstand a cryo storage chamber, at near-light-speed for nine months?

 

Also, once I arrive, how will the PX stand up in alternative gravity situations? My destination planet is three-quarters Earth size and therefore has only partial standard gravity.

 

Finally, have you done any high radiation tests? My destination has a sun that's much closer, and so levels of ions are much more intense than our typical terrestrial amounts.

 

Thanks!

[Ekewaka]

Mike,

Just a quick question for you.

 

I'm taking a space voyage soon, and I was wondering if the PX-5S chassis could likely withstand a cryo storage chamber, at near-light-speed for nine months?

 

Also, once I arrive, how will the PX stand up in alternative gravity situations? My destination planet is three-quarters Earth size and therefore has only partial standard gravity.

 

Finally, have you done any high radiation tests? My destination has a sun that's much closer, and so levels of ions are much more intense than our typical terrestrial amounts.

 

Thanks!

 

I'm afraid you need to wait for PX-10S for those features to be in place.

[Ken Beaumont]

Isn't that the one with the brain to midi interface?