Yamaha MOXF or Kurzweil PC3K

[miden]

I currently have the MOXF, but some things about it I am not really liking...what do other forumistas think about the PC3K?

 

Apart from the semi-weighted keys and 76 note against 88 weighted.

[Sven Golly]

Rather than have people fire a bunch of random information at you, perhaps you could elaborate on "some things about it I am not really liking"?

 

For example, if you can't figure out programming the MOXF, you're going to have an aneurysm with the Kurzweil, as it's FATHOMS deeper and far more capable, but far more complex than the MOXF.

 

 

[miden]

Thx Sven - nah it's not the programming that's pretty easy and straightforward, it's more the loading of extra data not able to be stored on-board. Like only two perf banks, which run out REAL quick when using song based performances. And I know more can be loaded from a USB drive, but this takes time and does not lend itself to "dynamic" selection of tunes..this means I am forced to use far more backing tracks (MP3 on the iPad) and even though these are primarily only drums and bass, and all my own creations - it means stricter adherence to the song format.

 

I am finding the weighted keybed rather noisy, the USB audio driver is quite noisy too (even Behringer ASIO is quieter!!!)

 

Pitch and Mod wheels are too far to the top left..I must admit to not be a big user of these, but lately I am finding I am using them more and more. There are a few other things, but at the moment I cannot recall. They are more things that at the time I would think why is that not available, or done that way..

 

Some navigation (when playing live) while easy can be convoluted..and the plastic casing does worry me, even exercising care in transport. The thing that keeps me hesitating is that for bread and butter sounds, nothing imo, is quite as good as the Motif series...but having said that operational aspects need to be considered as well.

 

I have heard the PC3K series is quite good and I think I can get one at a bargain price, and if I am going to do it, it needs to be soonish as the MOXF is still current so I should get near to what I paid for it from a sale.

[Bif_]

miden,

 

I can give you some pertinent thoughts about the two instruments. I own the PC3 (not the PC3K) so I can't address the RAM aspect. In addition to owning the Motif ES, I regularly play a Motif XS and am well familiar with the Motif series.

 

Motif:

I much prefer the Motif sequencer over the Kurzweil. It has a learning curve but is much more capable than the Kurz. It also is more flexible with effects capacity (not capability, though) and is much easier to get a finished, 'radio ready' song than the Kurz.

 

Bass and guitar sounds are far superior on the Motif. The Motif drums don't sound as real as those on the Kurz, but I can make them fit the mix better. EP's are very good on the Motif but not necessarily better than on the Kurz, just different. AP's on the Motif are probably better, but not necessarily by a whole lot. Really depends on the sound you're looking for. In general, for emulating acoustic instruments, I've found the Motif to be about the best.

 

Live performance with the Motif is cumbersome. Switching programs 'on-the-fly' is difficult with the Motif.

 

Splitting and layering is not fun on the Motif either.

 

Kurzweil:

Playing the Kurzweil is a wonderful experience. The skillful, clever programming of many of the sounds make them sheer delight to play. In this area, the Kurz blows way past the Motif.

 

The Kurz AP's are respectable yet some don't like them very well. I find them to be pretty good and certainly serviceable. The organs are probably the best in a workstation. The strings and orchestral instruments and programs are second to none and vastly superior to any other workstation. Those are all a joy to play and sound dead real.

 

The Kore 64 expansion is a worthwhile investment for many more great drum kits and percussion, better guitars, and some crazy synth stuff.

 

Splitting and layering on the Kurz is pretty straightforward and DEEP, DEEP, DEEP. You can do so much in this area. Way beyond the Motif.

 

Sound programming and effects options are very deep. The Leslie effect is not far from sounding like my Ventilator.

 

For live use, the Kurz is a beast. Sounds don't cut off when you change programs (as long as you don't have heavily layered splits/combinations with lots of different effects). Changing sounds is normally seamless.

 

You can create 'quick access' banks with 10 programs or program combinations in each slot in the bank. You can also set the 'quick access' banks under the numeric buttons marked 0 through 9. This means you can access 100 different sounds with a maximum of two button pushes!!!! Impressive!

 

Obviously, the PC3K is a more robust instrument than the MOXF and will therefore be more durable.

 

I love my Motif, but for sheer joy of playing and for live use, the Kurz is a much better board.

 

My .02.

 

Greg

[miden]

Greg, thanks man! terrific info and just what I am after.

 

When it comes to studio work I have many really decent VSTi's to use for recording work, so the MOXF sounds, while I can use, are not really critical to my studio work. However your endorsement of the Kurz as a live tool is well noted it is in this area that the MOXf most disappoints ( JMO guys, not necessarily the same for all owners )

 

Cheers,

Dennis

[Bif_]

Dennis,

 

Just to put a bit more perspective on my opinion, I do a fair amount of sequencing (full arrangements for one-man-band stuff I do) as well as playing live as keyboard player (using both a Motif XS and and Kurzweil PC3) in a band.

 

I've also used my Kurz for my daughter's high school theater musical productions. I've done 'Grease' and 'High School Musical'. We also had a pianist but I did both of those shows covering most of the other keyboard parts, but I did it with just the Kurz. Splitting and layering was easy and helpful as was the ease of changing programs with the 'quick access' buttons. It was especially important for me to do these shows with one keyboard as we had limited space in our pit as well as limitations with open channels on the mixer.

 

I guess you can tell I love my Kurz.

 

Good luck.

 

Greg

[miden]

Cheers Greg - I am certainly leaning toward the K now - still got to confirm the deal yet, so it may all be moot

 

Can the kurz dynamically load new setups from USB...on the MOX you have to open the ALL file, then navigate to the Performance banks stored and then navigate to the actual performance you want to load, then navigate to the slot you want to load to, then exit back to performance mode to use it...so yeah, can one load a different preset performance on the Kurz in an easier and quicker way than that?

 

Dennis

 

PS: Some would say that 256 Perf slots on-board is enough, but I have to say once you start creating them (performance setups) to match specific songs, they run out REAL quick!!

 

The best tool I have come across for this sort of work is the Songbook on the Korg Arrangers, but the Korg Arranger sounds (particularly keys and bass) are pretty naff

[Bif_]

Dennis,

 

Better for you to post that as a separate question. I can't answer it.

 

Greg

[AnotherScott]

I much prefer the Motif sequencer over the Kurzweil. It has a learning curve but is much more capable than the Kurz. It also is more flexible with effects capacity (not capability, though)

I don't know the Kurz effects structure that well, but I thought it was the more flexible in capacity. It has 16 effects unit, which I think can basically be combined any way... i.e. 1 effect unit on each of 16 sounds, or 16 effects units on one sound, or anything in between. Motif doesn't have that kind of flexibility. The MOXF has 8 pairs of effects units, so in a sense, that's also 16 effects units, but the only way to structure them is 8 pairs of two. You can't put more than two effects on a sound, you can't put effects on more than 8 sounds at a time. So you can't use the 16 effects units any way you want as you can on the Kurz. (In both cases, there are also some global effects that are separate.) But I may be mistaken about something here...

 

Switching programs 'on-the-fly' is difficult with the Motif.

...

For live use, the Kurz is a beast. Sounds don't cut off when you change programs (as long as you don't have heavily layered splits/combinations with lots of different effects). Changing sounds is normally seamless.

 

You can create 'quick access' banks with 10 programs or program combinations in each slot in the bank. You can also set the 'quick access' banks under the numeric buttons marked 0 through 9. This means you can access 100 different sounds with a maximum of two button pushes!!!! Impressive!

I don't think on-the-fly sound switching is difficult on the Motif, but initially learning the different ways of setting things up and which way will be best for you is something that may take some effort.

 

Sounds don't necessarily cut off when you change programs on the Yamaha. The Kurz is better here, but the Yamaha still has some of this functionality. You can create and save sets of 16 sounds, and once you call up such a set, you can switch among those 16 sounds freely without anything cutting off. (This is in the Song/Pattern MIX mode.)

 

Yamaha also has an equivalent to Kurzweil's "Quick Access" mode, it's their Master mode. In that mode, you can access not 100 but 128 sounds (or combinations of sounds) with a maximum of two button pushes. So at least equally as impressive!

 

Personally, I give the Kurzweil the edge as an organ (its KB3 mode) and as a synth (its VA synth functionality, and having aftertouch), and based on my comparison of PC3 series to Motif XS/MOX series, I think Kurz generally does a better job at emulating vintage keys (the XF series may also allow you to address that, though). I think the Kurz is also stronger overall as a MIDI controller (though I like the Yamaha's ability to use 16 buttons as 16 MIDI channel selectors). I give the Yamaha the edge in a lot of its acoustic instrument emulations.

[johnchop]

Can the kurz dynamically load new setups from USB...on the MOX you have to open the ALL file, then navigate to the Performance banks stored and then navigate to the actual performance you want to load, then navigate to the slot you want to load to, then exit back to performance mode to use it...so yeah, can one load a different preset performance on the Kurz in an easier and quicker way than that?

 

Not exactly, although I'm not sure why you'd need to. Everything is stored on-board. Songs, setups, user samples... everything.

 

You've got a LOT of room for user setups (more than 256 slots), and as indicated you can switch between them with Quick Access mode (or just use up/down buttons in Setup mode).

 

If for some crazy reason you exceed the built-in storage, setups can be stored on USB as individual files, but you need to go to storage mode to interact with the drive. I would do that on a break in the set.

 

As far as moving around in a song, you can trigger different "riffs" using switches and/or keys.

 

FWIW the overall build quality and keyboard action will be an enormous improvement, with the expected additional weight.

[Cowzar]

Kurzweil have a detailed "Knowledge Base" for there products which might help you a bit more.

 

Kurzweil PC3K Knowledge Base

 

I would suggest researching the loading times of samples into the PC3K and the issues that exist with the software editor as well. So at least you will be aware when you purchase the product.

[AnotherScott]

I would suggest researching the loading times of samples into the PC3K

Long initial loading time is intrinsic to the technology, also used by Yamaha and Nord. (The flash cards in the MOXF being compared will have the same issue.) It's a trade-off... the idea being you don't need to perform that function often, you do it once to load up the samples you need, and then there are always there. But yeah, there are times it's a pain. By contrast, the Kronos method allows you to load new samples into the system much more quickly... but then hey, the machine takes 2+ minutes to boot every time you turn it on. Ultimately which consumes more time? Tough call...

[Dave Weiser]

User samples do take a long time to initially load into the PC3K... it can take up to an hour or so for 128 MB. It will depend on whether you have fewer large samples or many smaller samples.

 

On the bright side, after the samples are loaded that one time, you can power off, turn it back on and it boots in about 10-15 seconds.