what percentage of your keyboard are you really using ?

[Dan O]

I would say I am only using maybe 60% of my keyboards potential !

 

triton owners ?

 

Fanthom owners ? Motif owners ?

[Krakit]

100% of my keyboards get used.

 

About 60% of my modules get used.

 

Carl

[Dan O]

How about the features of your keyboards ?

 

I guess that is what I was trying to say .......dano

[Rod S]

Tough to put percentages, since it really depends on what importance you give each feature.

 

The big problem IMHO is having a keyboard that has a feature than could be useful for you but you don't know about it; more often for me, there's features that are useless for me at the time, which I choose not to use. Since keyboards are designed for a wide audience, some may find a feature useless while others may find it indispensable.

 

Case in point: The 'phrase sampler' in the Yamaha CS6x. I've never used it, could care less about it, while there's a lot of users who bitch that yamaha didn't make the memory expandable (it's locked at 4MB).

 

But, I'll give it a shot:

PC88mx - 70% - I don't use a lot of the controller features; probably would use it if I used it live. It's becoming less and less useful for me except for the keybed.

CS6x - 90% - except for the phrase sampler and the play back sequencer, I would say I use all aspect of the board.

K2000 - 60% - way too deep

QSR - 80% - simple board, use it mostly as a sound module. There's not much depth to go into, IMHO.

WSR - 70% - haven't gotten as far into the programming as I would like.

[Krakit]

Originally posted by dano:

How about the features of your keyboards ?

 

I guess that is what I was trying to say .......dano

Well let me break it down a bit.

 

I have a vintage Korg CX-3. I use all the keys and the drawbars, rotary effects, click, distortion, bass and treb, and percusion. Basically all the knobs and drawbars get used.

 

I have a Korg (Univox Mini Korg) K-1. I make many different sounds with this synth, which requires that I change all the switches and sliders all the time.

 

I have a Rhodes. Volume and tone are the only controls and of course I use them.

 

I have a Hammond M3. I use all the switches and drawbars, and all the pedals.

 

I have many MIDI controllers, I use the mod and pitch wheels and all the assignable controls on all of them.

 

I have a Roland JX-8P. All of the user banks are filled with patches that I made myself. I use the pitch/mod joystick thingy and all the sliders (like portomento, aftertouch, vibrato et al). I use the sustain pedal and I've even been known to adjust the hi-mid-lo output level switch. Oh yeah, I have several cartridges for it that are also full of sounds that I made myself.

 

I have a Roland RD-100 which has only preset sounds in it, but I use the damper and sustain pedals, the metronome, the built in 2 track sequencer, the reverb, the chorus, the split functions and the layering abilities.

 

I have a Roland EP7 that has many of the same features as the RD above and I use them all.

 

Do I need to go on?

 

 

Carl

[DJDM]

The only keyboard that I have used in the last year at all is my old stand by Roland D-50 which I use about 50% of the features on.

But I use that to trigger my:

NN-19 90%

NN-XT 90%

Subtractor 100%

Malstrom 100%

ReDrum 100%

Dr. REX 100%

- DJDM

[Gus Lozada]

Before having a computer, I used about an 85% of my Ensoniq SQ1 Plus... sequencing, sound programming, automation, sys-ex storing, Midi control of other modules, etc...

 

Now, with a PC as the heart of my studio, I only use my SQ1 as a MIDI controller, sometimes I get its piano sound and ... some kick drums. It's maybe a 20% ?

 

For live gigs I use some analogish sounds, pianos, B3's and it's my MIDI controller, together with my EZBus and all of its faders. That's maybe another 25% of usage of its capabilities.

[BP3]

0.60%

 

But the best 0.60% I can find.

[Tusker]

80-90%

 

I have had each of my current keyboards and modules for over three years. I push them to their limits.

 

I am like one of those annoying tourists when it comes to features....."wait we can't move on till we have tasted of the rare LFO triple zing modulation feature."

 

Fact is, these days the synths come with so many presets, there is hardly any correlation between the synthesist's technical intricacy and the quality of output.

 

Cheers,

 

Jerry

[Llarion]

Oh, gads, next to nothing. I probably use 50% of what my RD-500 can do, and almost NOTHING of my Triton, maybe 3%... I haven't progressed much past the presets... I don't know how to sequence at all, and I only sampled once, for fun.

[Felix_dup1]

I bet most people use less than 50% of their keyboard (in fact, it's probably lower than that).

 

Manufacturers keep packing more and more into the gear - so what gives? My understanding is that a reduction of features doesn't necessarily make the gear more affordable.

 

... and on the other hand, for all the people who use only a small percentage of their keyboard, the same people and others love to nitpick about specs.

[Tusker]

Originally posted by felix:

I bet most people use less than 50% of their keyboard (in fact, it's probably lower than that).

That wouldn't surprise me.

 

I read a (Keyboard mag?) interview with Jam and Lewis where they said they try to get the boards before anyone else, so they can be the first to release songs with the presets.

 

It seems manufacturers are spending more and more of the synth development cost on sound-design. Deep synths like Andromeda often get judged unfairly by the presets.

 

It's a far cry from the age when people believed that there were new sounds out there for the player to find, they were worth finding, and new synthesis features would help you find them. The current environment makes the gear and the music produced by the gear disposable. It emphasizes ear candy over expressiveness. I am sorry to see it.

 

It's not an accident that the really good synthesis books were written in the 80's, after the rush of discovery in the 70's, but before the age of canned sounds we are in.

 

Jerry

[MusicWorkz]

I have a Triton Rack. I'd say I use about 70% of it. I don't use the sampling feature (expect to play with) and I've yet to use the RPPR stuff either. I have one expansion card (going to get another) and all my combi and prog banks are loaded with sounds, however, so my palette is great.

[Slowly]

I have an XK2 only. I set it up to my liking the first week I got it. Went to change some things just last night. Can`t figure a darn thing out and can`t find the manual. I`m stuck like Chuck. Kcbass

[Magpel]

Put me in the sub-50% club. I've explored my Z1 more deeply than any hardware synth I've owned, as that was sort of my purpose in buying it; seemed like a good unit to develop some programming chops with.

 

I've done some rudimentary programing on the QS 8, but mostly use it for a select few presets that I like.

 

I use Gigasampler almost exclusively as a sample playback module--tried to tinker around with its sample editor but find it terribly opaque.

[realtrance]

I'm a sucker for such opacities. My approach, with the synths I own and have spent time with, is to first, go through the factory sounds and look extensively at the architecture of the shipped patches, to understand how x, y and z are done on that synth. If I hear something I'm intrigued with in a factory sound, I quickly delve into the patch and make sure I understand exactly what it is that's contributing to that sound, take notes, etc.

 

Then I think about what the synth seems to "lack." Is it not "ballsy" enough? Does it not have any great organ patches as shipped? Is it too thin or crystalline sounding, or too thick or muddy in tendency?

 

I take that as my first "start from 0" patch challenge: define what I think the synth "lacks" and then overcompensate with my own creation.

 

If I'm lucky at that point, I have a good enough idea about how sound is being thrown around on the synth to know where to focus my energies for this challenge.

 

If I succeed in the challenge I set myself, well, I've just saved myself $600-$2,500, haven't I? I come away feeling like I have at least some mastery of the synth, that I have an instrument with wide range, that I'm not lacking in the tonalities I like to mix together.

 

This is an iterative process for me -- first round usually hits the basics of the synth, second and beyond is a question of going into the finer details. Often I find that some "specialty" features of a synth -- say, the structures on the JV- line from Roland, or the logic modules on the Nord Modular -- don't really get into my bones until a long time after I've spent my first phase of time with the instrument.

 

Along with that, I'm always reading and re-reading my manuals, my book collection, because I know even if I basically understand something I've read, it often "clicks into place" in ways I can't anticipate when I've reached a particular stage of knowledge in another area.

 

For instance, I've been reading through Benade's "Fundamentals of Musical Acoustics," which I first picked up out of interest in both the details behind acoustical spaces and what makes them tick (so I could use reverb better), and because it looked like it would have useful/interesting things to say about how various "natural" instruments make their sound. The book is a bit turgid for me, as dear Arthur has a fondness for the "let's tie a string over a bowl of water and attach the other end to a chicken and then bring a cat into the room" scientific experiments, which is a way of approaching knowledge -- like the "math problems" we did in elementary school (It's six o'clock and the train is at the station in Cheyenne, if 8 grandmothers finish dinner by 6:45pm and three of them start crocheting, how long will it take their sons-in-law to get to Cleveland?) -- I find a bit dry.... nevertheless, recently something which seemed a kind of side-point in Benade's discussion of piano tuning clicked _immediately_ into place re: detuning oscillators and playing with beat frequencies. Result -- I am making much more flavorsome, harmonically rich sounds in certain areas I never would have been able to make _reliably_ before (I'm not talking about the basic "detune osc 2 11 cents for fatter sound" thing, I've known that all along -- there's a finer granularity here that's worth learning about re: harmonics and their influence on the "liveliness" of a sound).

 

So, just case in point: I find all of the above much more rewarding -- and cheaper!! -- than getting quickly tired of the patches in my synth and going out to buy another for "fresh" sounds.

 

rt

[Synthguy]

Uhh... gee, what realtrance said. How syncrodental.

 

With my other instruments, which is quite a hodge podge, I'd say I run 75 - 85% depending on their complexity. My K2000R I'd say more like 50%. That thing has algorithms I plain don't know what to do with, so I stick with the saner things for now. However I'm working on some prog rock that's running into sci-fi territory, so I'm gonna go into that realm where there be dragons and see what conquests I may wreak.

 

Oh, unlike realtrance and tusker, I'm also a Roger Nichols grade gear junky, tho I've been messing with synths and gear for long enough that I know why I lust after all those instruments. Such as the Roland sound roms, impeccable. And the Nord Modular, incomparable. And the Alesis Ion... uhh... sweet!

[Umbra]

And the Alesis Ion... uhh... sweet!

??? It's not even necessarily going to be made and I have not heard any demo of it so how can it be sweet?

 

A large part of the problem is romplers and samplers. These encourage the preset notion.

[RABid]

I almost never use the sequencers or preset patterns. On most I go pretty deap with patch programming. The more satisfying it is to program the more I use it.

 

Roland Fantom - 80%

Korg Karma - 10%

Nord Modular Rack - 99%

Emu P2K - 50%

Emu XL-7 - 70%

Roland XP50 - 50%

Roland Handsonic - 50%

Roland SP11 - 100%

Yamaha RM1X - 20%

Korg Electribe R - 10% (For some reason I hate programming sounds on this thing.)

 

Robert

[marino]

Good thread. Put simply, I suck the life out of my synthesizers!! I've actually used the FUNs on my Kurzs, and the tracking generators on the Matrix-12. I loop the envelopes and modulate the modulations.

That said, there are a few functions that I KNOW I'm not going to use when I get a synth, simply because my music doesn't require them. For example, I use arpeggiators very little. And onboard sequencers - just to play back something live when it's necessary. I hate all Roland left-hand paddles, and I hope all Korg joysticks will disappear one day! And the worst of all known controllers - THE OBERHEIM LEVER. Bleaaarghh!!

Also: My XP80 has four pedal inputs and I only need one. For some reason I don't feel guilty... (sorry, I'm in a silly mood today)

 

Carlo

[RABid]

Originally posted by marino:

...I hate all Roland left-hand paddles, and I hope all Korg joysticks will disappear one day! And the worst of all known controllers - THE OBERHEIM LEVER. Bleaaarghh!!

Also: My XP80 has four pedal inputs and I only need one. For some reason I don't feel guilty... (sorry, I'm in a silly mood today)

 

Carlo

For the first time that I can remember, we totally disagree on something. I love the Oberheim levels, as well as those on the Rhodes Chroma. My second favorite is the Korg joystick followed by the newer Roland sticks. I hate wheels.

[DJDM]

Originally posted by Rabid:

I love the Oberheim levels, as well as those on the Rhodes Chroma. My second favorite is the Korg joystick followed by the newer Roland sticks. I hate wheels.[/QB]

Thats interesting... I am STILL not sure that I like the Roland stick on my D-50 which I use as a controller board! I've had it for, what, 14 years now? You'd think I could make my mind up about it by now. When I use wheels I get a little annoyed with how much work you have to to do to get the same effects that I can get out of a simple finger push with the stick. But then I use the Roland and I get a little annoyed that I cannot finesse subtle parts as easily... sheeze!

- DJDM

[mildbill]

when i had less gear, i used more of its features.

i had an oberheim matrix 6 for about 14 years and i used it 100%.

 

i spent a lot of time exploring all the mod's available and felt like i knew it inside/out.

also, after getting used to it, i found the levers to be way quicker than wheels.

 

now i have a lot more gear and each new piece gets explored less. it's just a matter of how time needs to be divided.

[marino]

Originally posted by Rabid:

For the first time that I can remember, we totally disagree on something

He he.. It was about time.

 

I guess I'm a little peculiar when it comes to controllers. Having adopted the XP80 as my main live controller, I've learned to live with its "improved" paddlle, but I hate it every time I use it (that is, quite often ). The only things that give me the precision I need are the Moog-style wheel and the RIBBON. I love ribbons, and that's one reason I'm bringing my AN1x with me as a second keyboard to gigs, more and more often. Wheels, and a ribbon! Frankly, the AN ribbon has nothing to do with a Kurzweil ribbon, but the board is VERY portable.

I also never learned to play the Nord Lead stick. It feels weird to me - but maybe if I spent a little time with it...

I DID spend years trying to "play" the levers on the Chroma and various Oberheims. No luck - it's just not for me. I'm sure you have excellent results with them; I guess all hands are different.

[Rick K.]

I spent a couple of hours in the studio last night recording for our upcoming release. And I got to thinking about this thread. I went through all my presets while waiting on the rhythm section to finish up and realized that there are alot of stock sounds in my boards that I didn't realize were there. I wish that I could have played with them right then and there, but I couldn't distract the others, so I just pushed buttons. I need to admit that I'm probably in the sub 50%-tile as well.

 

Also, I hate the Roland and Korg sticks, too! I much prefer the wheels on the Alesis or even the Kurz...

 

Rick

[Byrdman]

Originally posted by dano:

I would say I am only using maybe 60% of my keyboards potential !

 

triton owners ?

 

Fanthom owners ? Motif owners ?

Lets see. Whats 7/12 as a percentage. What are those black keys for anyway? I keep hitting them by mistake while trying to get the next key up. Fortunately I've got good at quickly sliding my finger off the black key onto the white one I really wanted in time to still be on the beat with the white key.

 

When I am having a really hard time with this while soloing, I get lots of applause from the audience (sarcastic bastards)

 

[Krakit]

I also hate Roland joyless sticks. I use the one I have because it's better than the alternative (not using it), but it sucks.

 

I prefer wheels myself. I'm not even a big fan of the Korg joysticks (which are a tremendous improvement over Roland's).

 

I just like the feel of the wheel. This is why they make all kinds.

 

Carl

[Dan O]

Nice comments from everyone .

 

I am trying to dig deeper into my keyboard .

I am going for 80% now ! dano

[realtrance]

Umbra,

 

I would politely disagree re: ROMplers and samplers -- there's an incredible variety of programming you can do with any good sample-based synthesizer.

 

Not only do you have independent LFOs and envelopes for each of many voices/elements/whatever the manufacturer calls them (consider each "voice" in a sample-based synthesizer the equivalent of an oscillator in an analogue synth, as that's what it is, with samples as the waveform source instead of sines, tri, pulse, saw), but the kind of subtle and significant variety you can create with the proper voice-crossfading techniques, the proper understanding of voice-stacking, the mixing of stacking with crossfading, etc. is, well, awesome.

 

Sample-based synthesis is if anything _more_ sophisticated than RA or VA synthesis, especially in effective technique.

 

It's all too easy, I agree with you, to rely upon the professional programming of a good sample-based synthesizer's presets, as doing good programming in this area is not easy (and in many ways, very different from RA/VA programming), and must be learned with practice.

 

But if you spend the time with it, you can even take "natural-sounding" instrument samples and do very interesting things with them, as long as you're not caught in the trap of insisting you're trying to sound like this or that real instrument.

 

Add to that a good multi-fx section and the ability to control in detail the efx and their relationships with each other (Yamaha, Roland, Korg all offer this), and the possibilities are immense.

 

That's the ultimate irony: the best sample-based synthesizers give you, if anything, an even greater ability to make interesting sounds if used masterfully, yet most people -- because of the instant attraction of the existing programs -- don't deign to dig in.

 

rt