BIG Question?

[Chris Laarman]

If you're willing to be more or less tethered to a computer, you could severe your wishes. You could "invest" in the keyboard with the keybed that suits you most (number of keys, key mechanism, aftertouch), accept the type of synthesizer (workstation, arranger, mere synthesizer, mere MIDI controller), and use devices in software for the rest.

For comparison, this is the part-story behind my four keyboards mentioned above:

I did not at all plan to buy keyboards after a Korg MicroKey 2 Air and later also a Worlde P88 keyboard controller, both in 2021.
The release of the Fantom-0 series made me think that I could "easily" transfer the patterns of my 1990 songs (recorded in a file format that pre-dates General MIDI) to that Fantom, tweak them, and find the fitting sounds for them. (In 1990 I had a Roland U-20 synthesizer with a far from all-round sound set, plus a few expansion cards. I resorted to Pizzicato Violin for a banjo sound, among others.) - I still consider the Fantom-08 a crucial factor to realizing my plans, even though I haven't touched it in nearly six months now. I plan to use it mainly for emulating "traditional" instruments (including electric guitars).

By the way, I seem to remember that JunoX was included in the "Zenology Pro Analog Icons" expansion bundle that I bought at RolandCloud for my Fantom. (I did spend some time looking that up, but I failed.)

The Hydrasynth Deluxe was the result of a thread (here or over on gearspace.com). I have never been into synthesizing beyond physical modeling (Yamaha speak) or virtual acoustics (Roland speak) but I imagined that this would be a great device for playing with waveforms. (Please don't insert a debate here about "the best synths for playing with waveforms".)

I had finally purchased the most expensive edition of NI Komplete, and I considered the Komplete Kontrol controller a proper way to manage its components, as well as compatible software from other developers (notably EastWest).

Finally, the Thomann AK-X1100 started as a quest for a Korg Pa4x Oriental. (I don't feel like checking if it was this very thread that caused it.) I had to give up on "Oriental", but I thought that it might be worthwhile to have an arranger keyboard with integrated loudspeakers after all. Just after ordering, I discovered the Oriental sibling of my device: the "Dante Zen" by Medeli. (Oriental editions of arranger keyboard feature an extra group of buttons associated with scales, and sounds and styles associated with music from Türkiye, Iran and surroundings.)

My recording project doesn't involve oriental songs, but I do have a song in Greek 7/8 measure. (I suspect the American oldie "Misirlou" to have been stretched from such a 7/8 to a rumba.)

So, I've ended up with four new keyboards. In my view (not yet opinion) they represent different approaches to what keyboards could be. - And now that I have differing MIDI-keyboards, I can turn my attention (once more) to the sounds I want. I'm very pleased with my Ferrofish B4000+, a drawbar-organ module. It represents my love of certain songs by Procol Harum, but those drawbars with numbers should also amount to another way to playing with waveforms.

 

[RedEyeC]

Simply put - buy an arranger if you are that one-man band live performer - a workstation is the step above with better recording / studio capabilities. I just watched the Juno X video - if you are into the Roland sound engines, but must be within a budget - consider the older Fantom X series - a lightly used Fantom X6, or even the Xa - great workstations I have recorded with.

 

[JimDavis]

You're still talking about two entirely different environments, though. Sonic differences aside, but just in terms of basic functionality...

... The Fantom-06+JunoX combined still won't do what the PA5X will do (e.g. as an arranger, or in having a workstation-style 16-track linear editable sequencer... though from what I saw in the manual, unless I missed something, it doesn't seem to have the punch-in punch-out facilities of most such sequencers, which is surprising especially since the PA1000 has it, as did the PA4x)

... the PA5X does not do all those other boards do (e.g. the Fantom's loop-assembly sequencing approach, or the direct knobby synth control of the JunoX)

So it's not just a matter of total budget, or one board vs. two, but also I think what's most important to you in terms of the workflow.

I am aware they are two entirely different environment. I am struggling because I am not 100% determined what type of music I'd like create and therefore which instrument/s will give me more color and flexibility on those platforms.

 

[Chris Laarman]

I am aware they are two entirely different environment. I am struggling because I am not 100% determined what type of music I'd like create and therefore which instrument/s will give me more color and flexibility on those platforms.

I think that the sound should come after the structure and the arrangement.

I mean, you spoke of jingles. That would be short pieces, too short to be considered "repetitive", and definitely not long enough for a format like Intro - Verse - Chorus (itself AABA) - End. That would eliminate the need for Arranger features or even pattern-based sequencing (but you might still want these).
You would still want a linear sequencer, even if your Female Voices should be a capella.
Finally, you want your sounds. But if you plan to make short clips, you don't have time to use the kaleidoscopic sort of synthesizer sounds. (Those that I could likely use my Hydrasynth for.) Instead, you'd use clear-cut sounds (that could well be "synthetic" after all).

Within my (limited) scope, you might want a Fantom-0 after all, maybe with expansions. (The subject of adding expansions to the very limited storage of a Fantom-0 is high on my viewing list. I think I have explanations by "Ed" from Roland on my "watch later" list on YouTube.)

Others may well have better suggestions.

 

[anotherscott]

I mean, you spoke of jingles. That would be short pieces, too short to be considered "repetitive", and definitely not long enough for a format like Intro - Verse - Chorus (itself AABA) - End. That would eliminate the need for Arranger features or even pattern-based sequencing (but you might still want these).

But jingle-length stuff is only a small portion of what he talked about... he said, " I'll try to create jingles like we hear in the beginning of 5 o'clock news hour on TV in old days or TV series style themes, Enya style songs, Enigma's (sadness) style music and few dance, techno style rhythmic songs like Depecehe Mode or Pet Shop Boys styles"

 

[Chris Laarman]

But jingle-length stuff is only a small portion of what he talked about... he said, " I'll try to create jingles like we hear in the beginning of 5 o'clock news hour on TV in old days or TV series style themes, Enya style songs, Enigma's (sadness) style music and few dance, techno style rhythmic songs like Depecehe Mode or Pet Shop Boys styles"

Thank you for retrieving that quote. So Jim has some 4 more musical directions to consider.

 

[JimDavis]

But jingle-length stuff is only a small portion of what he talked about... he said, " I'll try to create jingles like we hear in the beginning of 5 o'clock news hour on TV in old days or TV series style themes, Enya style songs, Enigma's (sadness) style music and few dance, techno style rhythmic songs like Depecehe Mode or Pet Shop Boys styles"

When I said jingles, I didn't mean to be pedantic but "jingles" is one of the type of music I'll be interested in making.

Try listening the tune from minute 5:55 of this video

Above is one of the sample tunes I'd like to be able to create and record...

Thank you for retrieving that quote. So Jim has some 4 more musical directions to consider.

Trust me sometimes I even confuse myself...

 

[Chris Laarman]

When I said jingles, I didn't mean to be pedantic but "jingles" is one of the type of music I'll be interested in making.

Try listening the tune from minute 5:55 of this video

Above is one of the sample tunes I'd like to be able to create and record...


Trust me sometimes I even confuse myself...

1) Anotherscott wasn't calling you pedantic, but reminding me of the other styles you mentioned.

2) The video you linked to is about Glenn Main recreating the song "Sounds like a melody" in sequencer Cubase. - One could make a contest about the number of keyboards in that room!

3) I was under the impression that you can confuse yourself already... ;-) - It seems to me that you'd better take your time before making a big purchase.

4) During that time, use the sequencing software you already have to make the music you want. Write down for yourself the nature of the trouble you run into. Not as "horrible" or similar, but as "can't find the lead sound I think of", "I have to correct that riff hundredfold - should I have created a pattern?", or whatever.
Once you have, say, twenty of those notes, you may be able to spot a general message. That message shows your key wish (pun accepted). Then ask yourself how that wish could be fulfilled. A $5000 keyboard might be the answer, but so might taking a walk in a park.

You could also take the YouTube route of "How did they do it?" Like studying what gear Glenn Main seems to need, or how others do whatever catches your ear.

5) That "pinpointing" is the heart of the matter. It's probably familiar to all of us with ambitions other than "being the perfect performer of works by Franz Liszt".
Suddenly, an old joke comes to my mind. A man comes to the railway station and asks for a ticket. The clerk replies: "What ticket?" The man says: "I don't know. What have you got?"
And yes, if it turns out that your creativity spans a wide range, then your answer must be a versatile keyboard, or several different ones. "If you want to paint a rainbow, you need many colors." (I claim copyright to that expression, but allow others to use it freely.) ;-)

 

[JimDavis]

1) Anotherscott wasn't calling you pedantic, but reminding me of the other styles you mentioned.

2) The video you linked to is about Glenn Main recreating the song "Sounds like a melody" in sequencer Cubase. - One could make a contest about the number of keyboards in that room!

3) I was under the impression that you can confuse yourself already... ;-) - It seems to me that you'd better take your time before making a big purchase.

4) During that time, use the sequencing software you already have to make the music you want. Write down for yourself the nature of the trouble you run into. Not as "horrible" or similar, but as "can't find the lead sound I think of", "I have to correct that riff hundredfold - should I have created a pattern?", or whatever.
Once you have, say, twenty of those notes, you may be able to spot a general message. That message shows your key wish (pun accepted). Then ask yourself how that wish could be fulfilled. A $5000 keyboard might be the answer, but so might taking a walk in a park.

You could also take the YouTube route of "How did they do it?" Like studying what gear Glenn Main seems to need, or how others do whatever catches your ear.

5) That "pinpointing" is the heart of the matter. It's probably familiar to all of us with ambitions other than "being the perfect performer of works by Franz Liszt".
Suddenly, an old joke comes to my mind. A man comes to the railway station and asks for a ticket. The clerk replies: "What ticket?" The man says: "I don't know. What have you got?"
And yes, if it turns out that your creativity spans a wide range, then your answer must be a versatile keyboard, or several different ones. "If you want to paint a rainbow, you need many colors." (I claim copyright to that expression, but allow others to use it freely.) ;-)

Oh I know another scott wasn't calling me "Being pedantic"... I meant I wasn't trying to be pedantic when I mentioned "jingles" since I am not precisely stuck on that idea for a style of music creation.

Yep Glenn Main makes all of us jealous. The number of his keyboards are more than the number of Jelly beans I've had in a year.

LOL, you are right regarding versatility. If it is possible I'd like to stick with a versatile single instrument to do everything I'd like to do due to that instrument having vocoder, 16 channel sequencer, variety of special sounds and effects with user friendly interface and enough online support in explaining the usage with a good reputation of quality products....

I always go with versatility whenever possible.My bike is a BMW GSA which is great on freeways for long distance touring and also great on back country roads with bad or dirt surfaces. My RV is tiny small almost like B class. I can drive like a car while also comfortably camp in it too with every comfort of my own home.

That's what I am looking for. Whether a single instrument like a PA5X or a PA1000 or a Fantom 07 or even a Fantom 7 or a combination of 2 instruments at the lower end of pricing to make it equal to a one top of the line model... Like a single PA5X or a Fantom 07 + Juno X as I mentioned before, or some other combination of 2 instruments or even 3... As long as price range stays under and around $5k...

In all honesty, I feel frustrated when I see these kind of keyboard (synth) makers fill their instruments with hundred types of piano, clarinet, oboe etc sounds... IMHO if I am paying $5000 and buying a synth with almost 2000 sounds on it, that means, 99.9% chance I'll not be using it in front of London Symphony Orchestra and perform the Piano Concerto #2 by Rachmaninoff...

For the love of God, fill your instruments with original never before heard kind of sounds to impress me and not try to make the exact copy of a Steinway Concert Grand...

I need sounds that makes you feel like floating freely in outer space, sounds that make your soul shake, sounds that makes you feel like you're in a dream or in front of a majestic scenery of the nature, and arpeggiator that makes you feel like get up and dance with the beat... Now that will impress me more than that 38 different types of piano and 16 types of harpsichord plus many many more useless ordinary sounds...

It feels like my DirecTV channel scam. They say my plan have 250 channels but 15 of them selling knives, 10 of them telling me I should be praying... There goes the 10% of my channels and as for movie channels like HBO??? God knows I watched the Shawshank Redemption possibly over 116 times by now.

Oh well, enough ranting... Search continues so let me go back to it...

Ok, C'mon Jimbo, back to Clicking on YouTube...

 

[Chris Laarman]

Oh I know another scott wasn't calling me "Being pedantic"... I meant I wasn't trying to be pedantic when I mentioned "jingles" since I am not precisely stuck on that idea for a style of music creation.

Yep Glenn Main makes all of us jealous. The number of his keyboards are more than the number of Jelly beans I've had in a year.

LOL, you are right regarding versatility. If it is possible I'd like to stick with a versatile single instrument to do everything I'd like to do due to that instrument having vocoder, 16 channel sequencer, variety of special sounds and effects...

In all honesty, I feel frustrated when I see

0) You seem to have posted your message before finishing.

1) Well, Glenn doesn't make me jealous yet. I'd say "stop, look and listen". (Yes, I'm still in railroad mode.) He seems under a pressure that might also have caused him to buy keyboards that he wouldn't have bought in hindsight. That's a downside of a creative urge...

2) Yes, having just one "versatile single instrument" does sound appealing. But do you prefer a swiss army knife to your cutlery? (Yes, sometimes.)
PS: Do you know Tolkien's story about "one ring to rule tem all"?

3) I told you about the keyboards I've bought this year. I won't tell you (on keyboardforums.com) about the guitars I've bought this year. <nudge nudge, wink wink>

4) In the past few years, I had a cause for buying quite some tools. I was surprized to discover why I "should" purchase, well, arrays of power tools. That's another rainbow I wanted to paint...

 

[Biggles]

Do you still have the Genos that you recently bought?

If so then that is a top end arranger and it may well have many of the features you require.

Are you having issues learning how to use the features of the Genos?

If you are unsure of the Genos operating system then that will surely cause frustration, time and effort are required which unless this happens creativity will suffer.

If you transition to a Korg, Roland or both or whatever then you will still have a very steep learning curve to go alone. It took me six months to get to grips with the Pa operating system and a few months to learn the ins and outs of the Korg Kross that I also had at the time.

All the talk in the thread is kind of irrelevant if you are in a confused state yourself about which direction to turn.

Good luck making your decisions

 

[JimDavis]

Do you still have the Genos that you recently bought?

If so then that is a top end arranger and it may well have many of the features you require.

Are you having issues learning how to use the features of the Genos?

If you are unsure of the Genos operating system then that will surely cause frustration, time and effort are required which unless this happens creativity will suffer.

If you transition to a Korg, Roland or both or whatever then you will still have a very steep learning curve to go alone. It took me six months to get to grips with the Pa operating system and a few months to learn the ins and outs of the Korg Kross that I also had at the time.

All the talk in the thread is kind of irrelevant if you are in a confused state yourself about which direction to turn.

Good luck making your decisions

No, I sold my Genos last year for other reasons...

But for the short time I've hold on to Genos I've felt like I was playing with a very sophisticated, expensive and hard to learn keyboard. It was great to load a sophisticated backup stuff and play on it but if I wanted to do it on my own it felt like I need an MIT degree first and then spend 3-4 days to create a tune that will play 4 minute and be over with....
It may not be the reality but at least I've felt that way.

I only bought that because it was na very good buy. I ended up getting that sealed in its box brand new Genos for $3800 just to try ton see how I will feel towards so called top of the line arranger Yamaha have in the market.
After a month of playing everyday with it I said "nope, this is not it" and sold it for $4750...
That was my Genos experience and that's why I feel like a little hesitant in my approach towards the arrangers.

In the past I've had a very good buy from Sweetwater for $2650. It was a Fantom 7... I've felt that creativity was m much more easier with that instrument. After only having it for 3 days and watching some YouTube tutorials I was able to create simpler 1-2 minute long jingles. That is not as much important to me but I've felt like the workflow on Roland made much more sense to me...

Thanks, I need a lot of luck to make an informative decision.

The problem with these type of keyboards is not having the chance to try them hands on before buying them like guitars I've bought in the past. My local Guitar Center is dried on keyboard section.All they have is few cheap $400-$600 Yamaha and Casio keyboards with few electric pianos and 10-15 midi controllers. None of the sophisticated upper echelon equipment in the stores nowadays to experience them before purchasing.

Oh well, as I said thanks to generous return policy they are keep coming and going via UPS after a shorty trial period and my Sweetwater engineer says. No problem at all, pick one and return it within 60 days (due to Christmas season) and I am golden...
Search goes on...

So that

 

[anotherscott]

In all honesty, I feel frustrated when I see these kind of keyboard (synth) makers fill their instruments with hundred types of piano, clarinet, oboe etc sounds... IMHO if I am paying $5000 and buying a synth with almost 2000 sounds on it, that means, 99.9% chance I'll not be using it in front of London Symphony Orchestra and perform the Piano Concerto #2 by Rachmaninoff...

If you were playing with the LSO, you wouldn't need orchestral sounds like clarinet or oboe, they've got those covered already. And that's kind of the point. Many people want to compose things that use real piano, real orchestral instruments, but they don't have access to a recording studio and $100k grand piano, and they don't know how to play clarinet, oboe, etc., and don't have the resources to hire professional string, horn, and wind players for their compositions. Even modern pop songs still often use acoustic instruments... pianos, strings, brass, etc. ... not to mention drums. There are tons of boards that have nothing but "synth" capabilities... no pianos, no authentic sounding orchestral instruments, limited if any drum sounds. But they are not typically designed to be the sole sound source in a composition, arrangement, or live performance. Other boards oriented more to those purposes typically try to cover all the bases, for whatever styles/genres of music someone might be interested in.

For the love of God, fill your instruments with original never before heard kind of sounds to impress me and not try to make the exact copy of a Steinway Concert Grand...

The best source for "original never before heard kind of sounds" are what you can create yourself, in a board with lots of user editing/programming functionality. (Though that's another set of skills to acquire.)

or the short time I've hold on to Genos I've felt like I was playing with a very sophisticated, expensive and hard to learn keyboard. It was great to load a sophisticated backup stuff and play on it but if I wanted to do it on my own it felt like I need an MIT degree first...
That was my Genos experience and that's why I feel like a little hesitant in my approach towards the arrangers.

Getting back to your first post where you listed PSR-SX700/900 as possibilities, to me, the things you're talking about doing wouldn't be very different than they were on the Genos. Though someone else here recently did feel it was a sufficiently simpler board for his own uses, see https://www.keyboardforums.com/threads/yamaha-psr-sx-900-alternatives.33981/

I also don't think Korg arrangers are easier than Yamahas. They have other advantages that relate to some of the things we've been discussing... having the workstation-style linear sequencer, and getting back to my previous comment here, the sounds are highly editable. But I don't think they have an ease advantage.

Though also, the Yamaha and Korg arrangers are both sample-based, which does not give you the "synthiest" sounds and editing capabilities, which seems like it could be a good part of what you're after. The Fantoms are synthier boards (while also doing the sample-based stuff).

In the past I've had a very good buy from Sweetwater for $2650. It was a Fantom 7... I've felt that creativity was m much more easier with that instrument.

That would seem to also tip the balance more toward the Fantom-07 you also mentioned in your first post along with those Yamaha arrangers. So I guess that brings me to the question of, in what ways did you feel that the Fantom did not meet your needs? And related, why didn't you just keep the Fantom7?

 

[Biggles]

If you found the Genos complicated then any Korg Arranger or for that matter and Workstation will be just as Complicated.

There is no real way around it other than spending time watching Video Tutorials on the keyboard and working through the manual

I was interested in a Roland pre Covid so spent hours, watching the Tutorials on the Roland Product Support channel then going to my local store and trying the Roland, I had about six trips and must have spent about five hours playing the keyboard which in the end I discounted as the sequencer was only just adequate but the layered sounds could only be adjusted via menu diving

 

[anotherscott]

I was interested in a Roland...which in the end I discounted as the sequencer was only just adequate but the layered sounds could only be adjusted via menu diving

Which Roland? In the Fantom/Fantom-0, you can adjust the layered sounds with the sliders. There's also a screen, usually just a single button-press away, which will list all the sounds you're playing, and you can adjust their volumes from that screen as well.

 

[JimDavis]

If you were playing with the LSO, you wouldn't need orchestral sounds like clarinet or oboe, they've got those covered already. And that's kind of the point. Many people want to compose things that use real piano, real orchestral instruments, but they don't have access to a recording studio and $100k grand piano, and they don't know how to play clarinet, oboe, etc., and don't have the resources to hire professional string, horn, and wind players for their compositions. Even modern pop songs still often use acoustic instruments... pianos, strings, brass, etc. ... not to mention drums. There are tons of boards that have nothing but "synth" capabilities... no pianos, no authentic sounding orchestral instruments, limited if any drum sounds. But they are not typically designed to be the sole sound source in a composition, arrangement, or live performance. Other boards oriented more to those purposes typically try to cover all the bases, for whatever styles/genres of music someone might be interested in.



The best source for "original never before heard kind of sounds" are what you can create yourself, in a board with lots of user editing/programming functionality. (Though that's another set of skills to acquire.)



Getting back to your first post where you listed PSR-SX700/900 as possibilities, to me, the things you're talking about doing wouldn't be very different than they were on the Genos. Though someone else here recently did feel it was a sufficiently simpler board for his own uses, see https://www.keyboardforums.com/threads/yamaha-psr-sx-900-alternatives.33981/

I also don't think Korg arrangers are easier than Yamahas. They have other advantages that relate to some of the things we've been discussing... having the workstation-style linear sequencer, and getting back to my previous comment here, the sounds are highly editable. But I don't think they have an ease advantage.

Though also, the Yamaha and Korg arrangers are both sample-based, which does not give you the "synthiest" sounds and editing capabilities, which seems like it could be a good part of what you're after. The Fantoms are synthier boards (while also doing the sample-based stuff).



That would seem to also tip the balance more toward the Fantom-07 you also mentioned in your first post along with those Yamaha arrangers. So I guess that brings me to the question of, in what ways did you feel that the Fantom did not meet your needs? And related, why didn't you just keep the Fantom7?

I understand why they add the $100k Concert Grand and I have no problem with that or with Oboe or Harpsichord... I don't understand the 38 samples of each. If the player can make any sound with these instruments why not to put one or two samples of each and let the piano player adjust the knobs and sliders to make his own "special sounding piano" or oboe or harpsichord???

Of course I can create never before heard sounds but if that was the norm than all we need one of each sound samples and that will be enough for us to have a starting point to create all the other ones. Right?

 

[Chris Laarman]

I understand why they add the $100k Concert Grand and I have no problem with that or with Oboe or Harpsichord... I don't understand the 38 samples of each. If the player can make any sound with these instruments why not to put one or two samples of each and let the piano player adjust the knobs and sliders to make his own "special sounding piano" or oboe or harpsichord???

Of course I can create never before heard sounds but if that was the norm than all we need one of each sound samples and that will be enough for us to have a starting point to create all the other ones. Right?

An instrument doesn't sound the same across its pitch range and the attack a tone gets played with. Therefore, several samples are taken across the pitch range and at several attack forces ("velocities" in MIDI speak). And the longer these samples, the "better". - If I'm correct (from memory), the matter gets clear from using a sound-font editor (or its documentation), like Viena. (Viena was created as an alternative to Vienna, the sound-font editor associated with the SoundBlaster hardware. Remember adding such card to your PC?)

As often (in sound or graphics), a result can be achieved via a bitmap way or a vector way. Or a hybrid of those. I'd consider anything sample-based hybrid already. - The pure vector approach is taken by Applied Acoustic Systems, which makes their soft synths so compact.
I don't know the exact nature of Roland's V-Piano engine, one of the grounds to prefer an original "full" Fantom over a Fantom-0. You can even specify the tilt of the piano lid! However, this accounts for the double circuitry.

 

[Biggles]

Which Roland? In the Fantom/Fantom-0, you can adjust the layered sounds with the sliders. There's also a screen, usually just a single button-press away, which will list all the sounds you're playing, and you can adjust their volumes from that screen as well.

It was the FA07, great board for the price, great sounds, a keyboard feel that I liked but it was just the age of the board, its limited sequencer and the lack of on the fly volume control that put me off.

I would be tempted by a Roland 07 though.

 

[anotherscott]

The Fantom-07 is a really nice board... but depending on what you're trying to do, you could easily find its sequencer functionality MORE limiting than what was on the FA! ;-)

 

[W.H.Auden0]

Which Roland? In the Fantom/Fantom-0, you can adjust the layered sounds with the sliders. There's also a screen, usually just a single button-press away, which will list all the sounds you're playing, and you can adjust their volumes from that screen as well.

The creative process begins with the Fantom's 64-voice, 16-part multitimbral sound source—the same engine used in the acclaimed XV-5080.