What do you want in a keyboard synth in 2004?

[Max Ventura]

As I said in my earlier post about the K-2661, I was very disappointed by the keyboard action I found on that machine and on many others, too. But not only that: I am also sick of lenghty menus with obsolete midi commands and navigation interfaces unchanged since 1992.

 

For me, in the year 2004 a keyboard synth must be implemented with the following features:

-a semi-weighted keybed even on 61-keys models.

-multiple synth engines: a PCM for the basic, static sounds that don't need any special whizz to them, a VA engine, a note sampling/phrase sampling engine, and Virtual acoustic engine for sounds such as organ, piano, violin and the like.

-all the basic sounds covered, which means you need sounds for every kind of music, and at least 8 megs of sample rom (or whatever) for each sound, avoiding wasting precious ROM space on fantasy sounds such as "alien landing" or else; just cover our real-life instruments (all of them), give us the basic synth waveforms, and let us develop from there. Just give us QUALITY ones.

-dedicated realtime controls for each and all of the functions. Forget matrix interfaces or multiple-role switches. It's gonna cost more? Good. It's gonnna be crowded? Too bad. It's gonna be heavy? I'll rent a slave to carry it for me.

-polìyphony, multitimbrality, and multiple outs are a must.

-if it has a sequencer onboard, let it be a groovebox type of sequencer, good for grooving along and creating quick arrangements. We don't need ponderous, full-featured 32-track behemot sequencers when we can do all that on the computer; we are gonna do sketches of music on a synth, we're not gonna do a full production, for heaven's sake!

 

Fact is, we're all grown-ups, we have money to burn, but we ain't got the proper toys to burn it onto. We don't want compromises, we want it all.

[powerpop]

I'll disagree with you on your sequencer point. I do the majority of my production on the keyboard. I'd love a 32-track "big mama" sequencer and I'd use it daily. I don't get too bent out of shape when it comes to purchasing keyboards. Companies have to make compromises when building a keyboard. I simply decide what features are "must haves" and which features I can live without and buy the one that best fits my needs. Unfortunately for me, budget is a major factor so I may never be able to get the latest "uber workstation" but that's something I can live with.

[Mike Martin]

Max,

 

Could you be a little more specific? You mention dedicated knobs for every function....

 

What kind of polyphony do you think should be standard?

 

What about screen? Is touch screen really faster or better? I understand the need for a larger screen but how do you want to navigate that screen.

 

And honestly....what are you really willing to spend?

 

I love threads like this but please be specific if you can.

[Synthoid]

I'd like to see workstations let you keep playing a program, setup, combination or whatever while they are loading new sounds. A buffer wouldn't add much to the cost of the unit. And--all workstations should offer non-volitile storage for sequences and samples. Having to load these files from other media becomes tedious. Memory is cheap.

 

Finally, it's time workstations came up to the same standards of technology as their computer brothers.

[AmplifierExperts]

Well today's ideal synths would also support at LEAST a gigabyte of sample RAM, yes.

But I think it's impossible to please everyone's keyboard action tastes. I went with rack synths because I didn't want to be tied to any one sound source because I liked it's keys. A modular approach works for me and anyone who's particular about their keyboard.

So to that effect, I want to see a rack version of the perfect synthesizer of 2004.

Funny thing is, I much doubt we'll see it this year.

[ksounds]

I havent put together my wish list in a while, so here goes...

 

Polyphony is alright at the standard 128. 256 would be cool. Just be sure all voices will fire quickly in dense sequences and layers. Not all 128-voice units have 128 "usable" voices.

 

The user interface needs to be logical and refined, but PLEASE don't make us use touch screens. Or if you do, at least give us navigation buttons as well so we can work without touching the screen. Programming on a touch screen for hours at a time either numbs the fingertips or creates awkwardness through having to hold a blunt pointer.

 

File management system - Mike, you know how thorough and flexible the Kurzweil approach is. As far as I'm concerned, that's a great model for other manufacturers.

 

Non-volatile sample RAM. Plenty of it. Compatibility with soft sampler formats.

 

Plenty of user sound locations. The Triton Studio, Triton Extreme, and K2661 do this right.

 

Flexible voice architecture. Again, think K2600. Four layers in a program (even stereo layers) is limiting.

 

Controller features ala K2600. Zone mute buttons are a lifesaver. I don't understand why so few manufacturers include this feature. As an example, if we have a piano-EP-pad stack, merely using sliders to lower the volume of two of those layers wastes a ton of polyphony and makes the "active" layer sluggish.

 

Seamless voice transitions between Programs and multitimbral layers. Effects too, if possible, especially since some modes don't use all the available effects horsepower.

 

Killer action. Not sure of my favorite weighted action, but for semi-weighted, the keys on my Roland A-70 are incredible. I've never felt a more expressive all-around action (great for piano as well as organ / fast synth).

 

Great samples. That's obvious. Just be careful not to compress the life out of them.

 

Hi-powered effects system - Think quality and flexibility of K2600 coupled with the quantity of inserts in the ES.

 

Built-in B3 simulator with a killer leslie sim. Or at least the option to add them. It's a great idea on the K2600; I just wish it could be used without draining most of the polyphony.

 

Switchable damper pedal polarity or auto-sensing upon startup. Many synths already have this, but for those that don't, we're past the age of trying to trick the customer into buying your company's pedal by making others unusable.

 

Universal CC pedal compatibility. I have yet to get my generic CC pedal to work correctly on a Trinity / Triton. (Works fine on everything else.)

 

Keep the onboard sequencers. I'm fine with their current features, so no major R&D needed there. Just don't get rid of them.

 

As for an ideal price, I'm not sure about how much I'd be willing to pay. Just make me an offer I can't refuse.

[Carlito]

But I think it's impossible to please everyone's keyboard action tastes. I went with rack synths because I didn't want to be tied to any one sound source because I liked it's keys. A modular approach works for me and anyone who's particular about their keyboard

I took the same approach, Mark.To me too, keyboard action is as important as the sound.

[coyote]

For 2004, my JP8000 and QS7.1 will do just fine

[Phil B]

Lots of controllers (say, 4 faders, 4 endless rotaries, a bank of buttons, joystick, pitch/mod wheels, neoprene-feeling xyz pads with programmable zones), and semi-weighted 76 key keyboard, and a huge chunk of DSP that is open to host proprietary synths. Then the manufacurer can release new software for its customers to buy instead of these gigantic dongles many boards end up being when you want something new. Sort of like a keyboard version of VariOS (no VST or anything like that, it should be as stable as a hardware keyboard, not as stable as a PC), just a lot more geared towards synthesis. Or, you could say, a monster Clavia G2 Modular, but not necessarily "modular." I like that different synths have different personalities. I want the manufacturers to continue to do that. We already have Reaktor and the G2 if we just want to build stuff ourselves. Am I rambling now? Sorry, it's been a long day at work and I ain't going home anytime soon.

[Jeebus]

Choice of semiweighted OR unweighted for 61 and 76 key models. A quality weighted action for 88 note versions. The S90's action suits my tastes perfectly, but I know everyone has their own preference.

 

Touchscreen interface, key shortcuts, streamlined yet powerful OS. Give me real values for every parameter in Hz and dB, not unknown mystery units.

 

A huge wave ROM, with many high quality, realistic piano and rhodes sounds. I don't want to have to sample or "upgrade" with dated 16 meg expansion boards. Give me SEVERAL quality ROM multisamples, especially for those instruments. Sample EVERY KEY of the piano, at 4 velocity layers (fantom X style). Several acoustic and electronic drum sounds should also be available. Include a quality multitimbral VA engine as well, with at least 16 voices.

 

128 note poly, not including VA voices.

 

Plenty of controllers, including a ribbon, 4 sliders, and 4 dedicated "soft" knobs that are completely assignable per patch/multi/combi.

 

A decent selection of filter types, including realistic models of classic synth filters. (ala Ion, Virus moog emulations)

 

Adaptive controller smoothing on EVERYTHING. Parameter stepping is inexcusable in this age.

 

4 arpeggiators, with a huge library of patterns, and a DEDICATED ARP EDITOR, as well as the ability to take a section of sequence and turn it into an arp. There should be a piano-roll AND drum machine style arp editor/viewer, with the ability to edit the arps while running. While you're at it, include piano-roll editing in the sequencer as well. A score view would be cool too.

 

Plenty of sound locations that are ALL overwritable.

 

A good selection of effects, quality reverbs included. The current workstation crop has done rather well in this department, but I'd like to see more realistic emulations of vintage effects as well.

 

At least 20 SIMULTANEOUS insert effect processors, that are completely stackable and routable in any combination desired. Not 2 per part, or 4 availble in one mode but 2 in another, give me the maximum amount of processing available at all times. If I choose to chain 20 inserts on one part, I should have that option. In addition to at least 20 inserts, 3 Master effects, and EQ per part should also be available.

 

Sampling: Give us the ability to sample in any mode, and sample directly into sequences. Provide an easy file management system to keep track of samples. Include the ability to read the major sample formats. The individual time, pitch and formant control of the V-synth would be welcome. Resampling capability is a must.

 

Lots of connectivity should be included. Include the standard multiple analog I/O, and digital options as well, with DAW control emulation for the big sequencers. Include a hard drive and let me connect directly to my computer to drag samples and sequences back and forth. (Fantom style)

 

"Switchable damper pedal polarity or auto-sensing upon startup. Many synths already have this, but for those that don't, we're past the age of trying to trick the customer into buying your company's pedal by making others unusable."

 

YES. That means you, Yamaha...

[Dan South]

(1) HD sample streaming from an external Firewire drive (no noisy internal drives, please).

 

(2) Guitar samples that sound like a guitar, not a castrated zither.

 

(3) WORD CLOCK INPUT.

 

(4) No looping or stretching of internal samples. (I'll sacrifice polyphony for high quality sound.)

 

(5) WORD CLOCK INPUT.

 

(6) Easy integration with DAW's. It should be easy to record up to eight tracks at a time directly into your DAW.

 

(7) WORD CLOCK INPUT.

 

(8) Fast, easy backups. Export an image of every setting to a card, an external drive, or your DAW in seconds.

 

(9) Dedicated front panel buttons for effects on/off and local control on/off.

 

(10) Capable of mimicking most or all patches from previous models in the family, i.e. an upgraded Fantom or XV-5080 has to be able to play all Fantom or XV-5080 sounds in addition to new sounds.

 

(11) Minimum 1k available program slots without overwriting existing programs.

 

(12) Lightweight.

 

(13) Reliable.

 

(14) WORD CLOCK INPUT.

 

and finally...

 

(15) WORD CLOCK INPUT.

[Dan South]

One more thing. Sound quality is paramount. I'd like a high-resolution option that drops polyphony if necessary but delivers the highest quality voices and effects possible. Start out with 64 to 128 voices for composing or live playing, then drop down to 16 or 8 high res voices for tracking into the DAW or analog tape.

 

Oh, and a high quality output stage.

[The Magician]

How about this,

 

-64 notes minimum TRUE polyphony.

 

-Option of 49 key waterfall keyboard with 8 sliders; 61key synth un or semi weighted, and 76 key synth weighted or piano action

and 88key

 

-a good amount of control thingies (knobs, faders, xy pad, ribbon, joystick, wheels) (oh or make it modular and optional) oh and make them all fully MIDI assignable....(if i want to use my mod wheel as my leslie speed control, let me!)

 

-mouse or trackball navigation on a 320x240 lcd color without cheezy animations (ahem roland)

 

- Good solid adaptable synth engine something like the varios or vsynth in addition to sample playback and rom playback.

 

- In track sampling.

 

- Seperate "drum machine section" that can be assigned to the arpeggiators or to loops or whatever.

 

- USB MIDI and USB Drive Capability

 

- Oh and would it kill them to release a rack version, Keyboard version and workstation version (maybe sans sequencer or sampling on the rack/keyboard but not crippled with more/less ram or expansion (think triton LE)

the rack version appeals to the folks that like to studio and DAW, the Keyboard version is nice for performances and the workstation is for the workstation crowd.

 

- Some sense of sound library standard across a product line, I'd rather have features be the buying point, not oh this version does/does not have this or that sound (I'm thinking of korgs bad habit in the M/T series, O/N/X series and even in the trinity/triton) Also make the patches somewhat compatble within a family!

 

- Sensible MIDI implementation with additional bi-directional USB-MIDI Interface built in.

 

- several outputs including a nice digital i/o section.

 

IMO Yamaha has come the closest to this in the MOTIF/ S90/ Motif Rack but still have a way to go. Korg (I am a korg guy from way back) is guilty of not doing alot of these, and Roland plays Model number bingo on Wednesdays with some car companies so I can;t really attest to anything for them.....never touchd a Kurz except the Micro Piano..

 

Andy

 

The Magician

[Max Ventura]

Originally posted by Mike Martin:

Max,Could you be a little more specific?

Ok, Mike, here we go.

 

Take all the TOP features the other guys have been stating on the posts above, the most advanced ones, and discard the minor or the too-specific ones. Implement them on a project that can be released in 61 semiweighted and 88 weighted keys (76 is probably redundant but whatever...) plus in a large desktop module (with rack mounting ears).

 

Put two screens on it: two large 6" lcd's, one for sound programming the other for sequencer programming. Keep them separated.

Give us a mouse or a touch-pen control on both of them, plus standard cursor-dial navigation tools for good measure.

 

Give us a 16 midi+16 audio tracks sequencer with 16 dedicated minifaders (they can double as organ drawbars), 16 panpot knobs and 16 mute buttons, plus transport buttons and some dedicated arrangement buttons such as those you find on grooveboxes. We all can program our fills and breaks, but if we find them ready we can most definitely use them. Make it a 128 or 256 voices; give us 16 separate outs, 16 midi parts (32 is redundant).

 

Give us all the basic real world sounds (at least 8 megs each wave) without wasting ROM space on fantasy sounds. We don't need those. If we do, we make them up ourselves with the VA engine.

 

Give us a Virtual Analog and Virtual Acoustic/ Virtual Electric engines with some polyphony. Give us a sampler, too, that is capable of fine tuning notes as well as looping phrases with BPM matching. Or better, two different sample engines, one for each function.

 

Give us non-volatile, large, ram-based sample and sequences/patches storage within the machine. No external devices.

 

Give us firewire and/or USB connection with the external world with own FTP address. Let us midi control all makes of software and some hardware ones. Never mind ADAT outs: 48khz sampling rate is becoming long in the tooth, and with a firewire out plus FTP address is just muche easier to transfer files.

 

Tell engineers to thoroughly fix all bugs BEFORE shipping the product or stay in the lab until finished. Excuse me if I don't wanna be bothered. My car dealer didn't warn me to download the new, fixed mapping for the ignition chip when I got my new car.

 

ACCESSORIES:

a guitar-like midi controller; a sax/flute midi controller; full organ pedalboard as well as standard 3-buttons pedal; external control knob module for sound and sequences if we like more dedicated controls (do you remember Roland's PG programmers back in the '80s?). And finally, a nice case.

 

Money factor:

not important, if I can get ALL I need and don't need to download fixes, buy optionals, make do with what I have, get used to, surrender to, say bye bye to, and so on.

 

Very important , if I have to compromise.

If I have to get used to a product, make do with what it has, and the like, I want to spend as little as possible. Period. And probably I will sell it as soon as something new rises in the east.

 

Kurzweil keyboards: BIG and EXPENSIVE compromises.

Motif: inexpensive compromise, less painful, but still a compromise.

 

Thank you for your time.

[Jeebus]

Add onboard VST host capability, and we're all set.

[Max Ventura]

Yes Jeebus, I thought about that, long ago, but then there'd be major copyright/licensing issues... And anyway I think all makers can create a version of whatever soft synth engine is on the market, given or taken a few specs...

[DallasPA]

Hmmmmm,

 

First I'd stop making newer versions of 10 year old technology; kurweil, korg, Emu and roland are all big offenders of this. There really hasn't been any earth-shattering developments since the early 90's.

 

I'm with max upgrade the OS's on these beast, they should be so easy to operate they almost fly themselves.

 

Get rid of the 16bit compressed samples and go to 24bit samples. But, oh no, this would send these companies back to the drawing board and force them to build all new sample libraries which we know that don't want to do.

 

256 voice polyphony

 

512 Meg of ROM

 

1 Gig of RAM

 

MPC style sequencer

 

Hard disk Streaming

 

And plugin Technology

 

Big LCD with option for an external monitor like the old roland S-50.

 

Last but not least DVD-RAM or optical Drive loading/storage media.

 

Thats would be a winner for me

[ksounds]

I agree with the hard disk streaming. Forgot to mention that the first time around.

 

Also, I'd love to see voice architecture include the ability to keep formants the same while transposing samples. A few products seem to address this to an extent already, but I'm talking about doing this in a big-polyphony environment.

[resigned]

What the keyboard market is missing currently is state-of-the-art pro controllers. Keyboard manufacturers cannot compete with computers, whether they care to admit it or not, and we need to get past their limitations. Computer makers are ahead of the game and are now designing and optimizing computers to meet the specific needs of musicians. Musician's operating systems like Forte and Open Lab's Karsyn are progressively making computers more instrument-like. So assuming that computers are evolving into playable instruments, the real question is what do we need in a controller? And how can we package a controller/computer combo in a way that makes it as functional and portable as today's keyboards?

 

I'm really disappointed with the current crop of MIDI/USB controllers out there now. I can't even add up how many 25-note controllers exist, but where's the 76 and 88 note varieties? There were more softsynths than hard synths debuted at Winter NAMM 2004, so where's the pro controllers to go with them? Edirol, M-Audio, Novation, Evolution, wtf is going on? Novation is creeping ahead with it's 49/61 versions of the ReMOTE Audio, but modern 76/88 controllers are nowhere in sight. I don't know why because the need seems obvious, but I expect this to change.

 

I like the Open Labs "eKo" concept but the price is too high and I'm hesitant to buy a keyboard/computer combo when I have several workable computers now. What I want is an eKo-style customizable controller keyboard to go with my laptop or 1U computer. For that matter, wouldn't it be nice to see a controller with a 1U or 2U rack space under the keybed for a computer? Give me a small built-in touch display for stage and let me use my 19" flat monitors at home for serious work.

 

I'd also like to see a two controllers with swappable keyboard beds: one for 61/76 note and another for 76/88 note keyboards. A choice of interchangeable control surface modules would be nice (some specifically designed for certain softsynths).

 

This concept totally eliminates questions like how much polyphony, user-hostile navigation interfaces and tiny monochrome displays, unwanted sounds, upgradeability, sequencers, being stuck with a keyboard size/action you hate, and on and on. Most of all, it would allow keyboard manufacturers to do what they do best: design keyboards for home and novice use where their dated technology and repackaged sounds won't be noticed as much.

[DallasPA]

Pro,

 

Your idea is fine for those who are choosing the soft synth route, for me I prefer hardware synths and samplers so a controller that doesn't make a sound and only triggers softsynths wouldn't work for me. Just wished kurzweil had put a floppy on the PC2X or at least a usb port.

 

Dallas

[resigned]

DallasPA:

 

It's not much of a choice really when softsynth releases are outpacing hardsynth releases as widely as they are now. Just take the amount of time you currently have to wait for new sounds for your PC2x to be released and compare that to the number of independent softsynths that were released within the same time frame. Also with softsynths you're not limited to the good graces and fortunes of one manufacturer for updates/upgrades... and in the case of Kurzweil, their fortunes change quite often.

 

I currently use more hardware synths than softsynths too, but I'm ready to change that when the right tools come along to allow softsynths to be used more practically.

[lucasdopandeiro]

please, make lighter keyboards.

[aliengroover]

Originally posted by Dan South:

One more thing. Sound quality is paramount. I'd like a high-resolution option that drops polyphony if necessary but delivers the highest quality voices and effects possible. Start out with 64 to 128 voices for composing or live playing, then drop down to 16 or 8 high res voices for tracking into the DAW or analog tape.

 

Oh, and a high quality output stage.

Remember the Ensoniq EPS-series would let you increase the sample playback rate while sacrificing polyphony? I always thought that was a very cool feature, that let you get the maximum quality allowed by that engine.

Peace

[c4]

just get one of these

 

http://www.opnlabs.com/neko.php

[mildbill]

i don't feel like typing this again, so i'll quote myself from a similar thread about 9 pages back:

 

"more rom, ram, waveforms, polyphony and so on are all fine with me - i can take them or leave them.

 

i just wish the major companies would focus more on what's important.

i may be in the minority, but when i get a keyboard, i would like it to feel good to play and allow me to get some expression/control from it.

 

velocity, they've all got down - but how many boards can transmit release velocity and use it in a modulation matrix? RV is just as important as velocity.

when was the last time you saw a board with poly-pressure? also important.

one of my favorite control/play thingies was the touchpad on the korg Z1.

 

there are a ton of inexpensive keyboards out now that are starting to get with the program in the control area, but most of them have keys that feel very junky.

 

at least there are usually a few knobs that are assignable on boards from the big 3.

the europeans are much more advanced in this area.

 

another biggie for me is the lack of internal modulations from the japanese machines. for instance being able to control the speed of an lfo from an envelope. the yamaha stuff i have really ticks me off in this area.

most of us only have 2 hands and 2 feet, so while knobs, sliders and foot pedals are fine, sometimes you want to be able to automate some changes.

 

anyways, i guess i'm just saying that there's more to improve than just adding more ram or whatever."

[marino]

I'll keep it short...

 

I gave up long ago on having a synth which does all things, or even most things, for my music. So I'm not that interested in workstations. According to the gig, I could bring Romplers, samplers, analogs, VAs, etc... so expecting one instrument to do all those things at the highest level is a bit irrealistic to me. Or, put simply, I could like the VA sound from maker A, the synth engine from maker B, the samples available for sampler C...

 

The moral: Give me a beautiful master keyboard, and let me choose the rack synths and/or computer to use for any given job. Presently, I'm using a Fatar Studio 2001, which I find excellent except that it is heavy; also I like the weighted keys on recent Yamaha pianos a bit better.

So of course I'm going to repeat for the umpteenth time: Please make a master keyboard with 76, *fully* weighted keys, Yamaha P120-style. Wheels on top, so it's even smaller. Good aftertouch, good MIDI, with zones, response curves, MIDI in with merge, etc... Make it as light as possible, and I'll buy it right away.

 

If, on the other hand, should said keyboard have a good Rompler engine onboard, I won't complain... It could be useful to reduce the number of external instrument, and to layer the on board sounds with other stuff. But the master keyboard functions would be the most important to me.

 

Frankly, I find it bewildering that *nobody* is manufacturing such an instrument. To me, it seems embedded in the concept of MIDI itself, so to speak.

[Dan South]

I don't see the need for 24-bit samples. Maybe as an option. Sixteen bit samples would sound fine as long at they're (a) not overly compressed, (b) sampled chromatically, and © allowed to play for a few seconds before looping is invoked. 16/44.1 or 16/48 has a lot of audio potential, especially when you're talking about raw samples. The problem is that samples have been data compressed into oblivion in all of the production sample playback synths to date.

 

I say I want a revolution! I'd take fewer, better sounds over a gazillion overprocessed waveforms. I'd accept less polyphony for better sounding voices. Add a 256-voice General MIDI mode for people who evaluate synths by number and give me 16 to 32 gloriously rich voices. I'll record them separately or buy multiple units if possible. Quality over quantity. And give me an output section that doesn't add noise or grunge up the sound in any way. Or give me a quality digital out with WORD CLORK INPUT so I can transfer the sounds directly into a DAW without going through a cheap D/A stage.

 

The same goes for onboard effects. Give me four kick ass compressors and a couple of clean, syncable delay lines. Screw the other 167 effects that come with most synths. They suck anyway. If I want chorus or flanging or reverb, I'll patch in an outboard device that can do it correctly. Delays, compressors, an some flexible, clean EQ. That's all I'll ever ask for.

 

As for controllers, how about some keys. Let the ribbons and trackballs and D-Beams be options. I don't need 'em. I'll use my sequencer's automation to do all of the complex continuous controller stuff. Keep it simple, stupid. Gut the K-Mart features and give me a BMW sound engine, and I'll be happy. Quality over quantity. Reliability. Streamlined operation. Great sound. Who needs anything more?

[aliengroover]

Yeah, I don't care for having a sequencer or effectsin a keyboard. I'd rather that little extra be focused on the sound itself. That's cool for people that do everything with just one keyboard, but really how many people nowadays work like that. I very rarely use the effects or sequencer in a keyboard, preferring to use the MPC and outboard.

 

So...I agree with Dan. Just give me the sound, man. The sound.

Peace

[clusterchord]

As far as performance oriented keyboard first that comes to mind is------------------

 

1. 73 or 76 weighted keyboard, Yamaha style. I dont understand why nobody makes them, i am classically trained pianist, but really dont care to lug the "mandatory" 88 arround. Ensoniq did this 10 yrs ago. I think a 73 Yamaha that can go to the back of your car would sell.

 

2.Nice Piano/Rhodes/Wurlitzer sound. All memory for this. Scrap el-cheapo GM or similar "other"

on-board sounds.

 

3.Put the modeling B3 inside, separate outs for all, leslie out..

 

4.Configurable MultiFx section. Doesnt need that much horsepower,but it has to have FLEXIBLE routing (something Yamaha, and especially Roland yet have to realize). Chorus,phaser,leslie,tremolo,eq and reverb, times two instances. and basta. no gimmicks.

 

5.Full master kbd capabilities 8 zones, pedals etc etc

 

6.Programmable/Asignable knobs , not four, like they are made of gold, but sixteen, somewhere between Romplers and VAs in that dept.

 

Studio stuff--------------------------------------------

 

-Andromeda Rack (knobs emphasize VCF and ENV sections)

-New analog products with andy-type chips, and faster cpu.

-New analog products with anadigm chips or whatever.

 

all with lot of programmability, digital control, VCOs, finished rock solid OS (for crying out loud)

 

-Virus with few really good fx per channel, retainable in multi , above all delay with bbd simulation, phaser , reverb . Hope they dont make

the new version the same with even more voices.

Its a specialty instrument. Doesnt need more voices. Quality instead of quantity. A choice between current oscillators and some new better modelled osc's (with fat, drift, continous cycling). Spend new CPU wisely.

 

Nord 4: choice between NL2 and NL3 code, nice expanded VA effects section from Electro line.

 

Waldorf to survive, make a new wavetable instrument with higher fidelity wavetables (24bit?), SPDIF, option to put Analog Multiband filter, USB and Software for effortless loading and editing custom wavetables, more onboard memory and USB archiving of presets etc. Better FX section.

 

OK enough with the daydreaming...

[coyote]

"What do you want" has rapidly become "dream synth" ... and strangely enough, not one dream synth is like any other! Who would've guessed?

 

Given that all of us would be a bit reluctant to drop the $6K required for that dream synth IF it actually existed, is it any wonder the K2661 is exactly what it is?