Keyboard workstations - mature, obsolete, or just on a plateau

[ProfD]

Excellent points made by all.

 

It really comes down to how the musician wants to work.

 

I am committed to carrying an 88-note board (synth or DP), so the weight is a non-issue.

 

Anything less than 88 keys just feels nasty.

 

Seriously, using a laptop as a DAW would be the win-win in my situation.

 

The lazy bastid side says put those features in one box and let me roll.

 

BTW, great work on that tune Busch. I dig it.

[keynote]

Originally posted by soundscape:

BTW... the Roland E-550 arranger has 1 Gb of Wave ROM. That's a big jump, and no doubt we'll see these sizes on the next generation of production workstations.

Having said that, I would like to see more 'synthesis' than just focus on huge Wave ROMs. (Which may or may not result in better sounds.)

FYI we already do see these sizes on 'this' generation of Workstations. 1 Gb (Gigabit) is not the same as 1 GB (Gigabyte). It takes 8 Gigabits to make 1 Gigabyte so 1 Gigabit (Gb) is 1/8 the size of a Gigabyte (GB). 1 Gigabit divided by 8 equals 128 Mega'bytes'. The Yamaha Motif ES has 175MB (Megabytes) of WAV ROM. There are other workstations on the market currently that have at least 128 Megabytes of WAV ROM. > Just wanted to clarify that 'bit' of information.

 

Great topic btw. I think Workstations are the bees knees myself. An all in one solution is not only practical it is also very convenient in a variety of situations. Gigging for one. Say you need a particular sound besides the paltry amount on some other type of Boards, you would have it/them conveniently at your disposal with a Workstation. Or to have the ability to Sample a particular custom sound on the spot is also very handy. With a Workstation there is usually no need to haul around several different Boards to a gig which saves a whole bunch of setting up and breaking down time. Two and three tier setups are great if you have a roadie to do it. But for me simpler is better. In fact most of the time when you see Bands on TV etc., the keyboardist is more often than not using just one board and that one board is more often than not a Workstation. At least that's been my observation anyway.

 

I am not knocking other types of boards like Digital Pianos or whatnot, as they each have their own use and purpose. I'm just more apt to go with an all in one solution because of the convenience of having everything at my fingertips in one unit and also because of the portability factor. And since I like to delve into more types of voices than just Piano/EP or Organ, a Workstation fits that bill to a tee and then some.

 

As to what we will see in the future in the way of technology advancement I am very excited at what lies in store. I agree that we have been in kind of a lull the last few years and there has been somewhat of a stagnation in new product releases and some of the products recently released have been underwhelming. But Yamaha seems to have an upper hand with its new SAV (Super Articulated Voice) technology; and it will, in my opinion, be a big boost in sound realism advancement for their keyboards as already demonstrated by the Tyros2. Yamaha is no doubt hoping their new Flagship will be the next "gotta have" piece of gear. Something akin to the new Playstation3 coming out next month from Sony.

 

Then there is Korg with its new synthesis engine incorporated into the OASYS and hopefully soon to be implemented into a more affordable Workstation package. Gotta happen right?

 

Roland is in the wings conjuring up something but I honestly have been somewhat disappointed by Rolands efforts the last several years. Their Grand X Piano is good and some of their EPs are really good but the Fantom X as a whole has been a let down for me. The RD-700SX has been a bright spot for their Digital Piano line though. And they may surprise us with their newest workstation offering you never know. I will try to remain positive in the meantime. But overall I am very upbeat at what lies ahead in the world of keyboard technology.

[soundscape]

Originally posted by keynote:

Originally posted by soundscape:

BTW... the Roland E-550 arranger has 1 Gb of Wave ROM. That's a big jump, and no doubt we'll see these sizes on the next generation of production workstations.

Having said that, I would like to see more 'synthesis' than just focus on huge Wave ROMs. (Which may or may not result in better sounds.)

FYI we already do see these sizes on 'this' generation of Workstations. 1 Gb (Gigabit) is not the same as 1 GB (Gigabyte). It takes 8 Gigabits to make 1 Gigabyte so 1 Gigabit (Gb) is 1/8 the size of a Gigabyte (GB). 1 Gigabit divided by 8 equals 128 Mega'bytes'. The Yamaha Motif ES has 175MB (Megabytes) of WAV ROM. There are other workstations on the market currently that have at least 128 Megabytes of WAV ROM. > Just wanted to clarify that 'bit' of information.

http://www.rolandus.com/corporate/press_releases/press_release.aspx?PressId=271

 

"With a gigabyte of WAV ROM memory, high-definition tones, and a powerful 4-speaker bi-amped sound system, the E-80 is a master in its class."

 

I guess I meant the E-80 and not the E-550. (Does the E-550 even exist?!)

 

However, I just found some posts on other forums and a magazine review which say that it's actually Giga*bits* and not bytes. Hmm.

 

BTW, the Yamaha Tyros 2 has 300+Mb Wave ROM. (Not that a large Wave ROM is any guarantee of quality.)

[steadyb]

Originally posted by Floyd Tatum:

I think they're far from reaching their logical conclusion. There's huge room for improvement, in my opinion, on many fronts

I totally agree. Lack of fonts has always been the thing that has kept me away from workstations.

 

If they made one with many fonts, as Floyd suggests, then count me in.

 

Maybe I want my presets to be Helvetica, but when I'm editing patches, I prefer to look at Arial Black, whereas when I'm sequencing - Palatino is the only way to go.

 

 

Excellent suggestion, Mr. Tatum.

[soundscape]

Actually proper font (not front?!) design and display is an extremely important aspect of user interfaces.

[HomeAmateur]

My biggest complaint with workstations is that they always seem to deliberatly NOT put there current best piano sample in them. IE: Fantom NOT having the "Supior Grand",.. or the MotifES NOT having (at the time would of been the P-series sample) I believe it did come with the orginal S90 S700 but only after loading it with a disc.

 

Im sure this is a marketing stragety. However it just seems like blatent greed to me. If it had to be one way or the other (which it dont-for the price we pay) it would make more sense that the S-series Yamaha's were missing the best piano and you had to buy the workstation to get the "best" piano..... afterall isn't the point of the "workstation" to be an all-in-one studio --- it just makes no LOGICAL sense to me.

 

Ill bet nickles to quarters that when Yamaha comes out with a "new" piano, better then the S90ES, that they WON'T make a plug-in-card with that new sample....

 

also....Ill bet if they made a plug in card with the S90ES piano on it, that it would possibly save alot of people from selling there ES8's for the S90ES and/or increase the sales of the ES8, along with the sale of that "S90ES piano plug in card" thus giving the customer the "best of all worlds"........

 

It would seem though that with the software options becoming more popular, there going to have to step it up a notch or two with what is offerd on the hardware synths and workstations.

[RABid]

I'm just glad I have a choice. When I want to sit in a recliner and make music with the TV on I use a laptop. When I want to sit up proper and look out a window while composing I use a hardware workstation.

 

Either way, when I move to the step of finalizing sounds I move to the bedroom studio and use a proper loaded PC or two.

 

Robert

[soundscape]

Originally posted by homeAmateur:

My biggest complaint with workstations is that they always seem to deliberatly NOT put there current best piano sample in them. IE: Fantom NOT having the "Supior Grand",.. or the MotifES NOT having (at the time would of been the P-series sample) I believe it did come with the orginal S90 S700 but only after loading it with a disc.

 

Im sure this is a marketing stragety.

Well, I can see what you're saying but on the other hand, I doubt workstations have that great margins on them, and there is no reason why a manufacturer should "give away" all their intellectual property. Also sometimes there is simply no "conspiracy," products are made to a price and therefore something has to give.

 

afterall isn't the point of the "workstation" to be an all-in-one studio --- it just makes no LOGICAL sense to me.

A "workstation" is supposed to be able to do most "bread and butter" (for want of a better term) things at least to a reasonable standard. Particularly in the context of a "pop" track with many other instruments, the Yamaha Motif ES Full Grand should be just fine.

 

BTW, aside from whether Yamaha's workstations represent good value for money today, I get the sense these days "consumerism" somehow means unlimited expectations from companies to give you all the stuff you want at a price you like. Never mind that you'd not want to be underpaid for you work.

 

 

Ill bet nickles to quarters that when Yamaha comes out with a "new" piano, better then the S90ES, that they WON'T make a plug-in-card with that new sample....

[Triton76]

I like the workstation because, as a cover band player, it gives me a good range of sounds that are useable with little or no tweaking. It can do splits and layers so I just need one kb at the gig or rehearsal. Then when I'm at home I can use the sequencer to jam. It's plug and play; very easy to learn.

I've tried using a pc lately but have run into all kinds of headaches not present with a workstation. I won't be switching any time soon, but I hope to slowly understand how to make it all work.

[soundscape]

I think again I should say there are pros and cons to this "open" and "closed" stuff. Among the pros are that the company gets a really tight control over all parameters, and it's much harder to rip off or pirate their stuff. A good example is games consoles. They are a dedicated single platform, plug n' play and the games can be totally optimized for it. Also historically the likes of Sega would have high quality control and wouldn't let any old 3rd party company release stuff and some of their in house work was really amazing quality. (In fact, Electronic Arts used to have odd shaped cartridges for the Sega MegaDrive/Genesis, because they didn't have a license from Sega!)

 

Conversely the "closed" platforms can end up with the manufacturer's control stifling competitors or overcharging for certain options or accessories, and sometimes apparently slow progress. (However, it might be better to have refined technology from "last week" than the bleeding edge stuff thrown out onto the market as quickly as possible.)

 

The trouble is, the pros of "closed" systems are seldom considered any more, it seems. (Also the term "open" is horridly abused.)

[HomeAmateur]

Soundscape,

 

I understand the whole price-point/something has to give argument, however Im not sure its the greatest argument for the ES8 or the Fantom for that matter.

 

I know I (and probably many others) would of voted that the piano sample not be sacraficed but rather instead (if its a memory issue - which today certainly isn't) leave off a couple handfulls of "other sounds - the not so usefull ones" in trade for a better piano.....seens piano is usualy most peoples primary sound.

 

You know Im right, its ok to admit it.

[soundscape]

Well, you'll notice I'm not exactly saying that you're totally wrong. Just that there's more to it. A Yamaha employee was asked in some other forum why they were still using SmartMedia when it was obsolete. His answer was simply that they have to plan keyboards over long lifecycles and do deals that make sense at the time. The keyboard industry is a cottage industry compared with the PC market.

 

I do think that, as we've seen with OASYS, hopefully the next generation will be a lot more flexible and upgradable.

 

In many idioms of music, the piano simply doesn't feature at all. Last time I watched the Motif ES promo video on the Yamaha site some German dude (Bert Smorenburg) was demonstrating its use in the creation of electronica.

[MikeT156]

Home:

 

The thing you have to keep in mind, the Motif ES8 was designed long before the piano sample for the S90ES keyboard was even though of. For example, the Motif ES8 has a 100Mhz system board in it, as well as smart media cards, which are just about DOA. Old technolgy already.

 

I believe Yamaha will come out with yet another piano card for their "modular" line, which include the Motif ES8, provided the last piano card they came out with wasn't a complete failure. I spoke to Yamaha last week and they told me they are getting tons of requests for the piano sample from the S90ES, but they didn't know if/when it would be available for the ES8.

 

As far as being "upgradable", the upgrade path for the Motif ES8 is one of the reasons I bought it. It comes with a 16 track sequencer, can add memory for the sampler, plus there are a number of plug in boards available for it.

 

I've recently added memory to the sampler, and am looking into buying boards for it. I don't feel that anything that came standard on the Motif ES8 is lame, so I didn't had a burning desire to run out an buy something right away.

 

Mike T.

[soundscape]

Originally posted by MikeT156:

For example, the Motif ES8 has a 100Mhz system board in it, as well as smart media cards, which are just about DOA. Old technolgy already.

100MHz measuring what, bus speed?

[MikeT156]

Soundscape:

 

It's a 100Mhz system board, which means it has a 100 Mhz micro processor in it. You have to buy memory for the sampler that is either 100Mhz or 133 Mhz, or it won't work. Edit note: more recent system boards allow mfg to crank up the processor speed, while retaining the actual clock speed of the system board for other things attached to it other than the microprocessor. Example, 486DX266 used a a 66MHz microprocessor on a 33Mhz system board. The microprocessor did two clock units for every one clock unit of the system board.

 

Current PC system boards are running at gigahz speeds these days. However, musical instrument workstations are not processor hogs. You really don't need a lot of processing power to run a music workstation like the Motif ES8. The USB 1.1 port is kinda slow though. but that's what was available at the time it was designed.

 

Mike T.

[soundscape]

Is it using a Hitachi SH-series CPU like the Tyros?

 

(Tyros motherboard: http://www.svpworld.com/images/DSC00027.JPG)

[keynote]

Originally posted by soundscape:

 

BTW, the Yamaha Tyros 2 has 300+Mb Wave ROM. (Not that a large Wave ROM is any guarantee of quality.)

The Tyros2 actually has 300 Mega"bytes" of WAV ROM not bits. I know it's kinda confusing. But the 300 Megabytes on the Tyros2 is actually the linear amount i.e. the uncompressed amount. Yamaha has officially stated that the Tyros2' WAV ROM has been compressed so the 300MB is not the true (actual) figure. It is more like 165MB or so after being compressed. In fact Yamaha decided not to post the WAV ROM spec of the Tyros2 on its web site because they said they didn't want to 'confuse' the consumer. >> More like they didn't want to lose sales so they chose not to post anything hoping the average consumer would not know the difference and thus not be aware of the actual compressed amount which as I said is probably around half that of the 300MB linear amount.

 

Having said that, the Tyros2 is still one of the best sounding keyboards out there regardless of price or category e.g. workstation, arranger, etc. I just wish Yamaha would be a little more forthcoming in its dealings with the public in regard to specific listings of specifications regarding their products and not to try and pull the wool over our eyes; if in fact that was what they were trying to do when they chose not to list the Tyros2' WAV ROM on their web site. 300MB (the amount Yamaha 'announced' to the public) looks and sounds a lot more appealing to a person than listing the actual compressed 165 or so Megabytes in the specifications on their web site. Shrewd, very shrewd Yamaha..

[soundscape]

Originally posted by keynote:

Originally posted by soundscape:

 

BTW, the Yamaha Tyros 2 has 300+Mb Wave ROM. (Not that a large Wave ROM is any guarantee of quality.)

The Tyros2 actually has 300 Mega"bytes" of WAV ROM not bits. I know it's kinda confusing.

I usually use Mb to mean Megabytes, and Mbits to mean Megabits. I don't find it confusing at all, except Roland actually used the term "Megabytes" in their press release when they meant "Megabits." Though I can certainly see that some would find it confusing.

 

Originally posted by keynote:

But the 300 Megabytes on the Tyros2 is actually the linear amount i.e. the uncompressed amount. Yamaha has officially stated that the Tyros2' WAV ROM has been compressed so the 300MB is not the true (actual) figure. It is more like 165MB or so after being compressed.

That's all true, but in general PCM data compresses losslessly a fair bit. I don't know what compression scheme they're using, but I imagine it's pretty transparent. A majority of the time manufacturers' figures are for the Wave ROM figures 'in 16-bit linear' form; without further qualification, that's what I always assume.

 

Originally posted by keynote:

In fact Yamaha decided not to post the WAV ROM spec of the Tyros2 on its web site because they said they didn't want to 'confuse' the consumer. >> More like they didn't want to lose sales so they chose not to post anything hoping the average consumer would not know the difference and thus not be aware of the actual compressed amount which as I said is probably around half that of the 300MB linear amount.

So, by not telling the average consumer the Wave ROM figures, the average consumer is not going to be aware of the actual compressed amount as compared to the uncompressed amount? Huh?

 

Originally posted by keynote:

Having said that, the Tyros2 is still one of the best sounding keyboards out there regardless of price or category e.g. workstation, arranger, etc.

I assume it excels more with the sounds of "real" instruments (with the Super Articulation and Mega Voices) rather than more "synthetic" sounds?

[Dan South]

I don't recall Roland using "megabytes" when they mean "megabits," but they do have a cheesy practice of labeling sample RAM as XXX megabytes (16-bit linear equivalent). That means that it was XXX megabytes before they compressed the living daylights out of the samples.

 

How big is that sample for real? XXX/2? XXX/10? XXX/20? It sure as shootin' isn't XXX metabytes.

[soundscape]

Originally posted by Dan South:

I don't recall Roland using "megabytes" when they mean "megabits,"

Well, if you'd like to find out the actual Wave ROM size of the Roland E-80. Roland claims one gigabyte in this press release:

 

http://www.rolandus.com/corporate/press_releases/press_release.aspx?PressId=271

 

While at least one magazine review and various forum postings say one gigabit.

 

 

Originally posted by Dan South:

but they do have a cheesy practice of labeling sample RAM as XXX megabytes (16-bit linear equivalent). That means that it was XXX megabytes before they compressed the living daylights out of the samples.

 

How big is that sample for real? XXX/2? XXX/10? XXX/20? It sure as shootin' isn't XXX metabytes.

The figures I've heard for the compressed size are typically something like 60% of the "in 16-bit linear form" uncompressed figure. I don't know what compression schemes are being used today, but AFAIK ADPCM-type compression has been used in the past. When has the compression been 10:1 or 20:1?

[RABid]

I thought most all of them compressed to some extent and labeled the uncompressed amount of RAM.

[resigned]

Originally posted by MikeT156:

Home:

 

The thing you have to keep in mind, the Motif ES8 was designed long before the piano sample for the S90ES keyboard was even though of. For example, the Motif ES8 has a 100Mhz system board in it, as well as smart media cards, which are just about DOA. Old technolgy already.

 

I believe Yamaha will come out with yet another piano card for their "modular" line, which include the Motif ES8, provided the last piano card they came out with wasn't a complete failure. I spoke to Yamaha last week and they told me they are getting tons of requests for the piano sample from the S90ES, but they didn't know if/when it would be available for the ES8.

 

As far as being "upgradable", the upgrade path for the Motif ES8 is one of the reasons I bought it. It comes with a 16 track sequencer, can add memory for the sampler, plus there are a number of plug in boards available for it.

 

I've recently added memory to the sampler, and am looking into buying boards for it. I don't feel that anything that came standard on the Motif ES8 is lame, so I didn't had a burning desire to run out an buy something right away.

 

Mike T.

There are several great posts here like this one which are apparently in support of the workstation concept but actually make the argument against them.

 

By the time it takes to design/develop and bring workstations to market they are old when they hit the shelf, the Motif ES being the case in point. Even today the street price on a bare Motif ES 8 is about $2800 and the memory and obsolete smart media cards and plug-in sound boards can easily raise the investment by hundreds more, which could buy a LOT of quality up-to-date computing power and software if spent elsewhere. You can buy a nice piano softsynth today that will blow away anything made for the Motif past present or future, but some people still hang on the words of Yamaha reps hoping for a hint of better things to come for their rapidly aging workstation.

 

Workstations are a religion - I mean, what else do you call it when you spend thousands on obsolete technology and continue to believe that the manufacturer will support it when historically we all know better? It's not really faith in the manufacturer we're talking about - it's the idealistic hope that you haven't spent money on something that is already scheduled to be abandoned.

[steadyb]

Originally posted by Dan South:

I don't recall Roland using "megabytes" when they mean "megabits," but they do have a cheesy practice of labeling sample RAM as XXX megabytes (16-bit linear equivalent). That means that it was XXX megabytes before they compressed the living daylights out of the samples.

 

How big is that sample for real? XXX/2? XXX/10? XXX/20? It sure as shootin' isn't XXX metabytes.

Maybe they just used the wrong fonts.

[dp2]

I'm pretty sure that workstations are here to stay. They're versatile, portable, flexible, and simply playable. On the other hand, computer-based setups are here to stay, and I'm pretty sure they will gain a lot more ground in the marketplace.

 

Yet, the truth is--no matter which camp you're in--the 2 will become one. The Oasys is both an instrument and a computer--not one or the other. Hardware and software are inseparable: most hardware needs software to do something; most software needs hardware to run on.

 

I believe the next-generation workstations will feature more ports for interfacing with other devices (including computers), and I believe that workstations will be shipped with the ability to hot-swap sound modules like some computer systems can hot-swap HDs, various cards, etc. Imagine being able to upgrade your workstation--when you're ready to do it like you can already do with your computer.

 

I believe soundscape is correct to suggest that open interfaces (and thus open standards) will win out over time. The primary reason, why many vendors haven't already adopted various open standards for designing/implementing new hardware and software, is that most musicians don't demand it. Demand it, support it, and they'll build it! There's a reason why Ensoniq went out of business. Similarly, there's a reason why Korg felt comfortable enough with its relatively new Karma technology to release it--on steroids--in the Oasys.

 

For me, it wouldn't matter when the next Oasys-buster keyboard gets released. I'm happy with my Oasys and K2600, and that's all that matters. There's always going to be something bigger, better, faster, and stronger on the horizon. Bob James and Jeff Lorber still have their Rhodes, and they sound just as good on it today as they did years ago.

[dp2]

Oh yeah . . . with that said, I tend to prefer to use both a workstation and computer setup--both in live and studio settings. This way I get the best of both worlds. This way I can have my cake, eat it too, and share it with some friends.

[ProfD]

Originally posted by The Pro:

Workstations are a religion - I mean, what else do you call it when you spend thousands on obsolete technology and continue to believe that the manufacturer will support it when historically we all know better? It's not really faith in the manufacturer we're talking about - it's the idealistic hope that you haven't spent money on something that is already scheduled to be abandoned.

They used to say the same thing about computer software.

 

Isn't planned obsolescence the culture of capitalism fueling consumerism?

 

Workstations like any other technology are great for those folks who commit to their investment and get paid for it.

 

It would be hard to get an Ensoniq ASR fixed today let alone supported by the manufacturer who went belly up. Yet, many hip-hop producers still use it to this day.

 

Same thing with the older Akai MPCs. Personally, I have yet to find another workstation or computer that can lock up a groove similarly.

 

Workstations offer an ease of use in one box for folks who do not want to wrestle with a computer, software, dongles, dingles, keys, cards, upgrades, interfaces, USB, Firewire, PCI, etc.

 

Workstation or computer, the fundamental remains the same, ability to make music and ease of use.

[MikeT156]

Quote by The Pro:

----------------------------------

There are several great posts here like this one which are apparently in support of the workstation concept but actually make the argument against them.

 

By the time it takes to design/develop and bring workstations to market they are old when they hit the shelf, the Motif ES being the case in point. Even today the street price on a bare Motif ES 8 is about $2800 and the memory and obsolete smart media cards and plug-in sound boards can easily raise the investment by hundreds more, which could buy a LOT of quality up-to-date computing power and software if spent elsewhere. You can buy a nice piano softsynth today that will blow away anything made for the Motif past present or future, but some people still hang on the words of Yamaha reps hoping for a hint of better things to come for their rapidly aging workstation.

 

Workstations are a religion - I mean, what else do you call it when you spend thousands on obsolete technology and continue to believe that the manufacturer will support it when historically we all know better? It's not really faith in the manufacturer we're talking about - it's the idealistic hope that you haven't spent money on something that is already scheduled to be abandoned.

----------------------------------

Let's be honest Jim, you had a problem integrating your Motif ES8 into your music making system. You're use to using a KB arranger like the Tyros, something that doesn't suit my musical needs, it fits yours.

 

My main beef with the Motif ES8 is the UI. As in most things yamaha, it's more difficult than it has to be. However, I don't have the money to replace it, so I've continued to work with it, and it's working out for me.

 

I'm a OMB, I use full sequenced songs, and play along with the sequences I use live with different sounds. Piano, organ, Rhodes, strings, etc, Sing lead, run a harmonizer and mix as I go. I NEED a workstation in order to do my act, plain and simple.

 

I haven't heard anything else out there that blows away the Motif ES sound set that is less expensive and has the same capability.

 

Sure, you can wrap up some money in ANY workstation, but it's better than being locked into a system that you outgrow in a year and have no choice but to replace it.

 

Yamaha has heard what some players were saying, e.g. Motif ES8 is too expensive, has features not everyone will ever use, and it's HEAVY to move around. So they came out with the MO "lite". No expansion slots and no sampler. 88 weighted keys, much lighter, AND a MAP price of $1599.00. Not to expensive for most players. From what I've seen, the Tyros 2 is even more expensive than the Motif ES8.

 

I don't regret investing in my Motif ES8. I only wish Yamaha could write a better owner's manual so it wouldn't take so long to learn how to use it.

 

Mike T.

[keynote]

Originally posted by soundscape:

Well, if you'd like to find out the actual Wave ROM size of the Roland E-80. Roland claims one gigabyte in this press release:

 

http://www.rolandus.com/corporate/press_releases/press_release.aspx?PressId=271

 

While at least one magazine review and various forum postings say one gigabit.

 

 

The Roland E-80 manual clearly states that the WAV ROM is 1 Giga'bit' not byte. So Roland flubbed up by posting the 1 gigabyte on their web site apparently. I would tend to believe the manual instead of a typo by some careless or un-informed web master.

 

soundscape, about what I said as to someone not knowing the difference between the linear amount vs. a compressed amount, if a person looked at it on the surface and they are unaware of the technicalities or the differences (Yamaha 'says' 300 Megabytes so it must be 300 Megabytes) And if Yamaha doesn't post any amount on their web site a person may not know or realize the 'actual' WAV ROM amount of the Tyros2. 300MB linear = 165MB compressed - say what??? I would guess a lot of musicians are not into the technical side of keyboard technology and possibly wouldn't understand a lot of the mumbo-jumbo such as linear vs. compressed or other complex aspects of different keyboard processes.

 

Now if the WAV ROM of the Tyros2 was "uncompressed" i.e. 300MB uncompressed, you better believe Yamaha would have undoubtedly made every effort to proudly display that fact on their web site. As it stands now they seem to have apparent reservations about posting anything.

 

Btw, I'm not saying ALL musicians are uninformed about the technical side and the various in's and out's of Keyboard technology or of Audio recording processes. It's quite the opposite here at KC. We're the elite though right? Oops... I better be careful.

[resigned]

Originally posted by MikeT156:

Let's be honest Jim, you had a problem integrating your Motif ES8 into your music making system. You're use to using a KB arranger like the Tyros, something that doesn't suit my musical needs, it fits yours.

 

My main beef with the Motif ES8 is the UI. As in most things yamaha, it's more difficult than it has to be. However, I don't have the money to replace it, so I've continued to work with it, and it's working out for me.

 

I'm a OMB, I use full sequenced songs, and play along with the sequences I use live with different sounds. Piano, organ, Rhodes, strings, etc, Sing lead, run a harmonizer and mix as I go. I NEED a workstation in order to do my act, plain and simple.

 

I haven't heard anything else out there that blows away the Motif ES sound set that is less expensive and has the same capability.

 

Sure, you can wrap up some money in ANY workstation, but it's better than being locked into a system that you outgrow in a year and have no choice but to replace it.

 

Mike T.

Mike:

 

We agree a lot on many issues, and perhaps on this one but on different levels. A minor point: I don't own or use a Tyros but I do use an older arranger: the Yamaha 9000 Pro which has more polyphony than the Tyros and uses the PLG cards. It's a handy studio tool for music creation and sequencing among many that I use including Reason, Sonar and Colossus.

 

You're quite right that I found the Motif ES 8 UI and OS to be a hinderance to my music making but isn't that the point?

 

I too am a OMB with sequenced backing and have been very frustrated by convoluted workstations as well as polyphony limitations and sound options. The Motif wasn't my first workstation - I've used Roland and Kurzweil workstations in the past. I gave up on all of them... my stage system of choice right now is a digital piano (standard compliment of sounds including piano, Rhodes, organ, strings, etc.) and MP3 backing. It's light, less expensive than a workstation and sounds better IMHO, plays great, and I'm not locked into polyphony limits or hardware lifetimes. The piano can be freely changed out as better models come along (in fact I use an acoustic piano at some gigs) and with MP3 I'm able to use a limitless variety of hardware player options.

 

These choices were forced on me by simple questions, such as what would I do to fulfill a gig tonight if my workstation died this morning? How can I incorporate new and better sounds from multiple sources? How can I get past polyphony limits without dragging even more equipment to my gigs?

 

I went through the process of incorporating a workstation into my stage act, and now that I've unincorporated it I feel like my options for the future have increased greatly.

[soundscape]

Originally posted by dp2:

For me, it wouldn't matter when the next Oasys-buster keyboard gets released. I'm happy with my Oasys and K2600, and that's all that matters.

How do you find the OASYS' sound compares with the Kurzweil?