| T.R | Title | User | Personal
Name | Date | Lines |
|---|
| 374.1 | I wish the first one were free! | CANYON::MOELLER | ASCII shall receive. | Thu May 29 1986 18:49 | 5 |
| VERY good review, Don. Wouldn't you like some orchestral voices
to accompany your piano? THEN you could get a sequencer, and...
and... and...
Thanks... km
|
| 374.2 | | CANYON::MOELLER | may you never hear Surf music again | Mon Jun 02 1986 20:47 | 17 |
| I reread this today, as for me all bets are off re:sampling for
now... after all, the Roland MKS-20 is what started me off on this
weird hunt.
There was a feature that I feel you glossed over. The unit has 64
memory positions or patches. The first 8 are as you said, 'read
only'. However, you can COPY any of these original patches into
another location, (patch#) and EDIT it (EQ/brightness/chorus/
tremelo) to your heart's content.
Don, would you say something about the adjustable keyboard response?
I seem to recall that the dynamic range or impact transient or
something was adjustable on the front panel.
Again, thanks for the review. it sounds like a real quality instrument.
KM2
|
| 374.3 | No Warts Whatsoever? | ERLANG::FEHSKENS | | Tue Jun 03 1986 11:16 | 6 |
| Karl (M. II) - I seem to recall you saying (someplace) that you
tried the MKS-20 and after some time found it wanting. Am I
hallucinating, or how did it disappoint you?
len.
|
| 374.4 | Back to my roots | CANYON::MOELLER | may you never hear Surf music again | Tue Jun 03 1986 13:42 | 15 |
| In the store, without time/attention to board EQ, internal EQ, reverb
settings and KX88 sustain pedal interface concerns, I felt it didn't
'sing out' in the midrange enough to suit me. If Don, as a trained
classical pianist, loves it, I'm admitting maybe I oughta take another
look. Plus, with the advent of reasonably priced high-resolution
sampler rackmounts, a modular setup regains its attractivity. And,
since I'm primarily a pianist, I'm kinda coming around back to this
setup as a start. Don't listen to me... I'm getting sort of schizzy.
BTW, KM I is happily at home playing with his brand new KX88/TX816
setup, trying to understand the PERFORMER sequencer and griping
about the quality of the Yamaha standard patches. Envy is a terrible
thing.
KMII
|
| 374.5 | Responses to .2 and .4 | DAIRY::SHARP | | Thu Jun 05 1986 15:24 | 23 |
| RE: .2
"Don, would you say something about the adjustable keyboard response?
I seem to recall that the dynamic range or impact transient or
something was adjustable on the front panel."
I don't have this on mine, unless I don't understand what you're talking
about. There's a volume slider on the front panel, besides the EQ section.
What this does is control the amplitude of the output signal. It also
responds through MIDI messages to velocity note-ons, and to a MIDI volume
message, but the keyboard sensetivity is always the same. I regard this as a
feature, in that when I play pianissimo on the keyboard the timbre is always
correct for pianissimo playing, likewise for fortissimo and all the way
through the dynamic range, regardless of how much the signal is boosted.
RE: .4
I wonder if what Karl hears as the MKS-20's failure to sing out in the
midrange is what I hear as the upper strings being overly sympathetic when
the dampers are off. I guess we'll have to sit down and listen to it
together sometime to figure that out.
Don.
|
| 374.6 | Our First Night Together... | CANYON::MOELLER | There's Still Life in Alphaville | Wed Jun 18 1986 14:56 | 57 |
| I spent last evening with my new toys: the KX88, MKS-20 and alesis MIDIverb.
To my great pleasure (as a Midiot) both the MKS-20 and KX booted up
in OMNI mode, the sustain and volume pedals worked, and the first 32 of
64 'patches' could be selected from the KX with no 'programming'
on my part.
Don Sharp the Multitudinous kindly sent me a one page primer of KX and
MKS-20 setup info. With his permission, I may edit it slightly and post
here as another reply. It's not his fault I didn't understand enough to
implement his instructions. Perhaps tonight.
WELL ! as a pianist, how do I like the setup? The KX88 is a very good synth
keyboard, but it's still so flaccid that I can play like lightning.
However, quickly repeated notes are a problem. They won't.
The dynamic range/tone color variations available on the MKS-20
are amazing, especially run thru the MIDIverb on patch 20. Perhaps
thinking of the impending Planetarium show, I had fun playing 'space
vibes' with the MIDIverb on patch 49/50, 20 second decay. Back to the
piano presets: while playing it, some of my '..sterile midrange' thoughts
returned. It's actually the two octaves around middle C. Sounds like one
string, rather than 3 oscillating. Kind of like a very good electric
piano. Of course, I've been playing an incredibly obsolete old Haddorf
spinet, which, with all the heat/dryness/recent humidity from our 'swamp
cooler', is a bit torqued in the tuning. It may be that I'm just not
accustomed to a very well-tuned instrument. Except for recording, of course.
So, how to get more complex info in the midrange? There is one piano
preset, #3 and its little brothers, that does have the harmonic
complexity my mistrained ears seek. However, it's got a LOT of hammer
slap. So I ran the signal into parametric EQ in the Ibanez Multieffects
Unit. Found the approx. hammerslap frequency and set it up as a 'notch'
filter. If this works, I thought, I can set up a new patch using the
MKS-20's internal parametric EQ. The outboard notch filter smoothed it
out but had a corresponding highend notes rolloff at the notch. So now
some of the top notes were quite dull.
Attempt 2: Maybe chorus only on the midrange. I split the audio output
(did I ever tell you about all the GREAT stuff you can do with Y-cords?)
into a stereo 10band graphic EQ, dropped off everything BUT midrange,
then ran THAT signal into a chorus unit, audio output into another channel
on the mixer. Better.
HOWEVER ! In the topic note, Don stated that once the MKS-20 hits tape,
you can't tell the Roland From Real. I had slapped a cassette in and taped
about 30 minutes of doodling/trying presets, before I started the 'enhance
the midrange' experiments. I brought this tape to work today and listened
on a Walkman. NONE of the percieved 'sterility' was there !!! Rang out
quite nice on some rapid ostinato passages.
I think I'm real pleased with it. There's a LOT to learn about the KX88,
and I will.
NAMM is over! BRING ON THE SAMPLERS !
K Moeller
|
| 374.7 | How wet is the noodle ? | EUREKA::REG_B | | Tue Jun 24 1986 15:03 | 28 |
|
Re .6
1) Did you ever rewrite the stuff that Don sent you ?, please post.
I spent last evening with my new toys: the KX88, MKS-20 and alesis MIDIverb.
To my great pleasure (as a Midiot) both the MKS-20 and KX booted up
in OMNI mode, the sustain and volume pedals worked, and the first 32 of
64 'patches' could be selected from the KX with no 'programming'
on my part.
Don Sharp the Multitudinous kindly sent me a one page primer of KX and
MKS-20 setup info. With his permission, I may edit it slightly and post
here as another reply. It's not his fault I didn't understand enough to
implement his instructions. Perhaps tonight.
WELL ! as a pianist, how do I like the setup? The KX88 is a very good synth
keyboard, but it's still so flaccid that I can play like lightning.
However, quickly repeated notes are a problem. They won't.
2) ^ ^ Does "so flaccid" mean too flaccid ? (for you; err
subjectively, of course)
Reg
|
| 374.8 | KX88/Roland MKS-20 MIDI Tech | CANYON::MOELLER | like, totally granular | Thu Jun 26 1986 19:55 | 145 |
| re -1: KX88 action...
As a pianist who's been playing most of my life, and who can sit
down at a grand with heavy action and play happily for a couple
of hours, ANY synthesizer keyboard feels 'flaccid'. The KX88 is
merely less flaccid than most. Might feel just fine, or perhaps
even heavy, to a non-pianist person.
::: Don Sharp's (or was that Don?) KX88 - MKS-20 MIDI Interface
notes are here reproduced in all their knowledgability ::::::
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: DAIRY::SHARP "Oh, no! Not another Don Sharp clone!" 17-JUN-1986 08:53
To: CANYON::MOELLER,SHARP
Subj: RE: KX88 LAND
Hi Karl,
Whew, congrats again. I've been having extreme difficulty getting through to
CANYON, thus the lag time with this answer. Anyway, to relieve your mind
without further ado, what I discovered upon booting up my system (probably
you've discovered this too by now) is that the MKS-20 reveives in OMNI mode
by default, and the KX-88 transmits in OMNI mode by default. Also, the KX-88
foot pedals basically do the expected thing by default, i.e. sustain and
volume. So almost everything works the way you'd want it to, right out of
the box.
One thing you will probably want to do that took me forever to figure out is
turn the chorus and tremolo off and on from the KX-88 console. Also, if you
plan to use the 8 memory banks of the MKS-20 for either different EQ setups
or chorus/tremolo settings you'll have to put the KX-88 into 8-bank mode.
For 8-bank mode (this is on page 17 of the manual):
Press the MODE switch to enter CA (controller assignment) mode
(you'll know this works by an LED lighting up next to the
label CONTROLLER)
Press the BANK 2/8 switch, which is 13 on the Bank A program select
switches.
(The upper readout should display a funny looking lowercase BN
and the lower readout will display the current number of selectable
banks, either 2 or 8)
Press the BANK 2/8 switch to toggle between 2 and 8 selectable banks
Press any other switch to leave CA mode at the setting you want.
When you're in 8-bank mode you can select 8 banks of 16 voices. The MKS-20
only recognizes 8 banks of 8 voices, so you get wrap-around above that
point. Also, the KX-88 displays the absolute voice number, i.e. numbers in
the range 1-64, where the MKS-20 divides them up as Bank1/Voice1 through
Bank8/Voice8.
To get the even-numbered banks of the MKS-20 you have to pick from voices
9-16 on the KX-88, e.g:
KX-88 MKS-20
1 => Bank1/Voice1 => Bank1/Voice1
8 => Bank1/Voice8 => Bank1/Voice8
9 => Bank1/Voice9 => Bank2/Voice1
16 => Bank1/Voice16 => Bank2/Voice8
17 => Bank2/Voice1 => Bank3/Voice1
24 => Bank2/Voice8 => Bank3/Voice8
25 => Bank2/Voice9 => Bank4/Voice1
32 => Bank2/Voice16 => Bank4/Voice8
33 => Bank3/Voice1 => Bank5/Voice1
64 => Bank4/Voice16 => Bank8/Voice8
65 => Bank5/Voice1 => Bank1/Voice1 wrapped all the way around.
To switch the KX-88 to higher banks: (this only works in 8-bank mode)
Press the Bank switch (A or B) the LED will flash. Enter the bank number 1-8
from the voice selector swiches for that bank. The LED will then display the
current voice plus (16 times (bank number minus 1)).
To assign toggle switches TS1 and TS2 to chorus and tremolo on/off:
Enter CONTROLLER ASSIGNMENT mode by pressing the MODE switch.
Press TS1 to select that switch for assignment. The upper readout will
display a funny T1 in LED-ese, alternating with the two controller codes
assigned to the switch. The switch uses one code for the turn-on function,
and a different code for the turn-off function. Use the program select
switches from Bank B to enter two two-digit codes for T1 to use. Select them
from above the preassigned range 00-3F, somewhere in the range 40-FF. I
use 40 and 41. Do the same thing for T2, assigning 42 and 43.
Now enter PARAMETER ASSIGNMENT mode by holding the mode switch down for 1
second while in CONTROLLER ASSIGNMENT mode. (What we're going to do here is
program the "logical controllers" 40-43 to send the MIDI messages that
control the chorus and tremolo.) Select CONTROL CHANGE by pushing Bank A
select switch 11. The upper readout shoult display CC. Enter the controller
number you want to define, starting with 40. The readout will show 00. Enter
5C, which is the the hex value for 92. 92 is what the MKS-20 accepts as the
control change number for chorus. Then enter the data type, which is 1 to
turn the function on. Repeat this sequence for controller codes 41, 42 and
43.
KX-88 CC # MIDI control # Data type
40 5C 1
41 5C 2
42 5D 1
43 5D 2
This is "explained" incorrectly on page 11 of the manual. The text says,
"The data type is significant only if this controller code is assigned to
Foot Switch 1 or 2. Regardless of the data type, TS1, TS2 and MS1-5 will not
send anything when turned off." That's true for MS1-5, but TS1 and TS2 each
have two logical controllers attached to them, one for the turn-on function
and one for the turn-off function.
Well, I think this is enough to get you started. I must say I admire your
courage, scheduling a performance for mere days after your new equipment is
supposed to arrive, and I hope things go smoothly. Feel free to call me if
this is confusing or if you have any questions, I'm at DTN 264-6068, or if
you don't have DTN I'm at (xxx) xxx-xxxx, or if you want to call me at home
tonight call (xxx) xxx-xxxx.
Good luck,
Don.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: DAIRY::SHARP "Oh, no! Not another Don Sharp clone!" 17-JUN-1986 11:23
To: CANYON::MOELLER,SHARP
Subj: RE: yes, MORE KX88 stuff..
>Uh, by this time I'm probably on thin ice, but.. it's unclear to me
>how, or if, after setting all this stuff up on the KX88 to do patch chgs,
>chorus/vibrato toggles, et al., HOW IS THE SETUP SAVED WHEN THE KX88 is
>turned off ???
It's saved by default. YOu have to do something unusual to restore the
factory settings, but it can be done in case you screw things up in a big
way.
>And, is it possible to DYNAMICALLY farkle the chorus unit using one of the
>4 sliders on the KX???
Well, unfortunately I think this is theoretically impossible, and I've never
found a way to do it either. According to the data sheet on the MKS-20 it
only responds to on/off commands. (I don't have it with me right here, so I
can't comfirm this.)
The way I get around this is I use my 8 memory banks to store a few good
settings (slow/shallow through fast/shallow and slow/deep through fast/deep)
and set the EQ basically flat on all banks, then I just select the
chorus/tremolo setting according to the bank number, and use the TS1 and TS2
toggle switches to turn them on and off.
I'll try another experiment when I get home and verify this.
Don.
|
| 374.9 | Is it Real or is it Roland ?? | CANYON::MOELLER | Dyslexics Untie ! | Mon Jun 30 1986 14:59 | 28 |
| ..the KX88 interface saga continues. Not content merely to implement
the 8bank addressing, I backed off a bit and considered how to alter
the patches on the MIDIverb as well. KX88 bank A gives me access
to the first 32 of the MKS-20's 64 patches. There aren't any of
the 'upper' 32 that I miss. KX88 bank B gives me access to the MIDIverb
patches, and, in 'single' mode, patch changes on A don't affect
B (MKS-20 changes don't alter the MIDIverb settings) and vice versa.
I've been experimenting, and I've found that the bright MKS-20
patch I used in live performance, Piano 1 bank 4, sounded 'tinky'
when recorded. I've found one VERY nice combination, Piano 2 bank
4, which is quite soft and 'round' until whacked, coupled with the
MIDIverb on patch 29, which is a 2.0 second MEDIUM WARM setting.
This nicely emulates (that word again!) the internal ambience of
a grand using a lot of sustain pedal.
It's a LOT of fun, kind of like having a dozen separate grand pianos
available, with different sound characteristics (and now, ladeez
an gennelmun! Elton JOHN!!! [Piano 3 bank 4]). Not to mention all
the variations of harpsichord/clavinet/vibes(least useful)/electric
piano. There are several electric piano sounds that sound just like
the DX7. BTW, that is NOT a compliment.
One question for Don Sharp. In the topic note, you mentioned a 'soft
pedal'. Have you got a second sustain-type pedal for the KX88 and
have implemented a controller function ?
karl moeller
|
| 374.10 | The Is it Real or Is It Roland Challenge | CANYON::MOELLER | Pins in my Software dolls | Mon Jul 21 1986 14:17 | 16 |
| The latest issue of KEYBOARD has a review of the Roland digital
piano.
I quote: "WOW!"
If any noters are curious about the sound of this unit, I issue
the "Is it Real or Is It Roland Challenge".
If you send me a blank cassette of decent quality, I will dub two
original piano pieces onto it. One will be a Toyo grand piano recorded
direct to half-track in a professional studio. The other piece will
be recorded direct to cassette in my stone-age studio. You will
have to determine which is Real and Which is Roland. Answers thru
personal MAIL only.
Karl Moeller 1450 E. Prospect Lane Tucson AZ 85719
|
| 374.11 | Is it live? | JAWS::COTE | Dun-dun, dun-dun | Mon Jul 21 1986 17:59 | 3 |
| Are you sure you don't work for Roland?
Edd
|
| 374.12 | | CANYON::MOELLER | the fool on Windham Hill | Mon Jul 21 1986 19:00 | 9 |
| You got me... we have a pirate entree into the Phoenix AZ Software
VAX. I work for ROLAND USA in Long Beach California. Exposed..
credibility shot.. what will I do... without my NOTES jones...
seriously, the MKS-20 is a great product, and I'd be happy to do
personal demos for y'all except you insist on living where it's
either green or cold, depending on the season
km2
|
| 374.13 | Another Roland Shill Confesses... | ERLANG::FEHSKENS | | Tue Jul 22 1986 11:08 | 7 |
| Roland does screw up occasionally, but mostly they get it right
(at least my notion of right). I give other brands a break, then
I trade their stuff in for Roland eventually.
len (who lives where it's either white or hot, depending on the
season)
|
| 374.14 | They've Come A Long Way, Baby | DECWET::MITCHELL | | Tue Jul 22 1986 13:19 | 8 |
| Roland really has cleaned up its act. Their early stuff was pure
junk of the first kind. Now it's great. (They could still take some
lessons in styling, though. Their machines still have that "English"
look {the Brits on this conference will nail me for sure for this
one.})
John M. (who lives where it's either wet or wet)
|
| 374.15 | Here come the nails | MINDER::KENT | | Thu Jul 24 1986 04:58 | 5 |
| Consider yourself nailed.
The Brit
(I wonder if the brass in Westminster Cathedral
was sequenced or plyed live)
|
| 374.16 | | EUREKA::REG_B | Ninety nine .9 percent TV free | Fri Jul 25 1986 11:43 | 5 |
|
DECWET, where is it that its either wet or wet ? Manchester ?
Westminster Cathedral ? Where's that ?
|
| 374.17 | And I Live in Wetsborough. | ERLANG::FEHSKENS | | Fri Jul 25 1986 12:11 | 5 |
| That's WETSminster Cathedral, Reg. It's near Wetschester, not
Manchester. That's where they crown the Raining Monarch.
len.
|
| 374.18 | When it Rains, it Poors.... | JAWS::COTE | Instant coffee's gonna get you... | Fri Jul 25 1986 12:25 | 4 |
| I don't think any of you have the Foggiest Notion of what you're
Pouring your hearts out over. Now Dry Up and get back to work!
Edd who_used_to_be_in_MRO_but_is_now_in_H2O
|
| 374.19 | Audience Precipitation Encouraged... | DECWET::MITCHELL | | Fri Jul 25 1986 13:58 | 11 |
| Re: .17,.18
Those puns were so bad, I'm sending you each a box of slugs (as
in terrestrial pulmonate gastropods).
DECWET is the cluster name for those of us stranded here at DECwest
in Bellevue, Washington (just outside of Seattle).
[Sorry, Karl--but you are *not* the westernmost noter!]
John M._who_chants_when_the_sun_comes_out
|
| 374.20 | I Wasn't Crazy! | CANYON::MOELLER | The hundredth monkey... | Wed Jul 30 1986 15:37 | 16 |
| The first Roland Challenge tape was mailed today to mr Dave Bottoms
of metropolitan Augusta, Maine. You got some bonuses, Dave. I included
a bunch of material. Please post here your response to the Challenge:
which of the first two piano solo pieces were done on the Roland.
Next: some notes back I asked Don Sharp about 'touch sensitivity'
on the MKS-20. He said HIS doesn't have it, and MINE doesn't have
it, but the RD-1000 DOES. that's the unit which includes the keyboard.
The RD-1000 allows 4 different touch sensitivity curves. There's
also an external Expression pedal which allows MIDI control changes,
which is not available on the MKS-20.
I have some questions about MIDI control changes, but I'll post
them into the Controllers note. wherever IT is.
kmII
|
| 374.21 | My vote is..... | RANGLY::BOTTOM_DAVID | | Mon Aug 04 1986 14:36 | 7 |
| I hereby declare that the first piece (name forgotten) is the Roland
and the second piece is the real piano.
I will disclose my reasons for this opinion after all of the results
are in (if I'm right) and via mail to Karl very soon......
dave
|
| 374.22 | Piece of cake? | STAR::MALIK | Karl Malik | Mon Aug 04 1986 15:02 | 5 |
| re;-1
So, was it easy to tell the difference (assuming you're right)?
- The_Other_Karl
|
| 374.23 | Not easy but do-able | MTBLUE::BOTTOM_DAVID | | Tue Aug 05 1986 10:07 | 5 |
| no, not easy, it took several listens, and some clues that were not
entirely related to the MKS. However, I am impressed with the sound,
it may be the best sythesized piano I've heard so far.
dave
|
| 374.24 | MKS-20 options | DREGS::BLICKSTEIN | Dave | Tue Mar 03 1987 10:24 | 69 |
| There are now several options for people interested in the MKS-20
and its derivatives:
1) MKS-20 - This is what has been discussed so far. It's a rack
unit and gives you a great deal a flexibility in terms of
altering the sound. I think it runs for about $1700 right?
2) RD-1000 - This is an 88 Key MIDI controller with a builtin
MKS-20. I believe you have access to all the same controls
that the rack mounted version has. It runs for about $2750.
3) RD-300 - This is an 88 key MIDI controller with a quasi
MKS-20 builtin. It only gives you the basic 8 MKS-20
sounds. You can only modify volume, chorus (on or off),
tremolo (rate and depth) and "brilliance" (I never sound quite
as brilliant as I'd like to ;-) It has a few less features
as a MIDI controller than the RD-1000 but it does have split
keyboard, and program change. BTW, both RD's are weighted
keyboards with velocity sensitivity (but no pressure/aftertouch/etc
or at least I think not). At $1700 this unit is a terrific
bargain/compromise. I mean for the same price as an MKS-20 you
can get something that has that same great sound (but less
customizing controls) PLUS a really nice keyboard that makes
a decent MIDI controller. (I prefer the feel of the Roland
weighted keybaords to the Yamaha which the action is a bit to
hard for my tastes).
Now I just have to mention that if you're looking for something
with an excellent piano sound that does a whole lot more than just
piano sounds, you should check out the Ensoniq ESQ-1. The ESQ-1
is a very complete Digital Wave Form synth with a builtin 8 track
MIDI sequencer that sells for about $1300.
Most synths give you a choice of only standard waveforms (sawtooth,
sin, triangle, square). The ESQ-1 waveforms are generated digitally
from tables. You are provided 32 wave forms. The way the ESQ-1
gets its realistic piano sound is that many of the waveforms are
actually multi-sampled waveforms (ala the Ensoniq Mirage). (There
are also sampled waveforms for strings, brass, etc.)
OK, here's where I stick my neck out. I bought my RD-300 and ESQ-1
at the same time. When I took them home and plugged them in, I
made the troubling discovery that I prefer the piano sound of the
ESQ-1 to that of the RD-300. (I'm not saying it's "better", I'm saying
I prefer it. It sounds more like the kind of piano I'm used to
playing.) What's more, is that since the ESQ-1 is a true synth
(and a top notch one at that), you can have some fun experimenting
with the sound. For example, I needed a sorta barroom piano sound
for ELP's "Benny the Bouncer". This was done rather easily by
just detuning one of the oscillators and modulating it slightly.
I was even able to make the detuning a factor of where the note
being played was (i.e. more detuning for lower notes, less for higher
notes). I've also got a "tack piano" sound.
Anyway, as I said it's a matter of preference, but if you're looking
for a good piano sound, and the ESQ-1 sound is to your liking, you
can get a tremendous synth/keyboard/sequencer for hundreds less
than the price of any of the MKS-20 derivatives.
I'm willing to demo the ESQ to anyone who is interested. I live
in the Nashua, NH area.
Currently, I'm using the RD-300 to drive the ESQ-1 for piano sounds,
but I often combine sounds from the RD and the ESQ, especially electric
piano sounds (I have a killer combination that I'm tempted to use
all the time.)
db - new to this file and to this area of music production
|
| 374.25 | yes, but... | JON::ROSS | wockin' juan | Wed Mar 18 1987 13:40 | 19 |
|
Ah, but see what you are doing? The Roland IS the keyboard
that feels right for a piano, the ESQ "isnt".
Piano 'sound' will always be subjective. I think I'd mix
both units and get a nice multiple string sound (MKS weak area).
Problem for me: ESQ only has 8 notes, right? Sorry. Some of us
like arpegios....or held chords with lead over them.
Hows your keyboard technique in terms of dynamics, BTW. MKS has
127 different timbres per key per velocity. Some of us use more
of those than others....
I think you have a great combination. And you can play piano
voices OTHER voices from the ESQ!
good choice.
|
| 374.26 | | DREGS::BLICKSTEIN | Dave | Wed Mar 18 1987 14:23 | 35 |
| You are of course right. In summary, there are compromises
one must accept for certain things (arpeggios, sustain pedal,
glissando, etc) if one uses an ESQ-1 instead of a MKS-20.
Regarding having the combination of an ESQ-1 and an MKS-20: the
ESQ-1 has an "overflow" mode that allows you to chain other synths
(including ESQ-1's of course) together to get around the 8 voice
limitation.
This is a nice feature that I think all synths with a limited number
of voices should have. The way it works is as follows:
In non-overflow mode. All notes played on the keyboard are sent
out over MIDI. When all 8 ESQ-1 voices are being used and a 9th
note is played, the 'oldest' voice (the one that has been playing
the longest) is "stolen" for the new note.
In overflow mode, Only notes that would normally cause a voice to
be stolen are sent out over MIDI (and no voice stealing occurs in
this mode).
Thus, you can get the equivalent of a 16 (n) voice synth by chaining
2 ( CEIL(n/8)) 8 voice synths together.
I have experimented using the RD-300 to handle the overflow from
the ESQ-1. For example, neither the RD-300 nor the ESQ-1 can do
a very realistic glissando on their own. However, by chaining them
together you get something far more realistic.
BTW, is the MKS-20 completely polyphonic (i.e. no practical limitation
on the number of notes playing at once)? I don't think the MKS-20-like
unit built into my RD-300 is completely polyphonic. I think it's
limited to something like 12-16 voices.
|
| 374.27 | 16 is dense! | JON::ROSS | wockin' juan | Thu Mar 19 1987 10:34 | 12 |
| mks is 16 notes. I have tried to play scenarios where
this limitation would show up (one could hear some
defficiency) but what ever re-assignment algorithm
they use (which itself isnt obvious to me yet) seems
to cover the stealing of notes for new attacks.
Maybe KMII has discovered a way...
Overflow seems to be getting popular. Matrix-6 had
it years ago.
rr
|
| 374.28 | dull mid-range? | STAR::MALIK | Karl Malik | Fri Mar 20 1987 16:39 | 12 |
|
I played on an MKS-20 yesterday. Listened to it very carefully
and came away with the impression that the middle-range wasn't so
impressive.
Sounded more like a synth imitation than a piano. I thought
the high and low ranges were quite good.
MKs-20 owners - Have you found this to be true? Should I get
my ears checked? Is this something that can be corrected with some
good equalization?
km_1
|
| 374.29 | | ZEN::WINSTON | Jeff Winston (Hudson, MA) | Fri Mar 20 1987 23:38 | 2 |
| RE: -.1 Though we're a minority, don't despair. You're not the only
one who came away from the MKS-20 less than impressed. ;-) /j
|
| 374.30 | wow. that makes two of you! | JON::ROSS | wockin' juan | Sun Mar 22 1987 15:54 | 12 |
| Gee. I guess that makes your opinion *more* valid. ;)
The mks20 has a versatile programmable eq built in that
makes VERY noticable modifications to the basic sounds.
You want midrange. You got it. You just didnt find it in
the sounds you tried apparently. Did you play with the EQ?
Also: What controller did you use?
ron
|
| 374.31 | RE _.1 | ZEN::WINSTON | Jeff Winston (Hudson, MA) | Sun Mar 22 1987 18:40 | 4 |
| Actually, to be fair, what I took home was the HP-3000 (preprogrammed
MKS-20 only). I have no doubt that I could 'tune' a full MKS to my
liking, I just wish they'd improve their keyboard (slow key return).
My detailed gripes are elsewhere in this file. /j 8-)
|
| 374.32 | nothing's perfect but a FREE Bosend�rfer | 16514::MOELLER | act like nothing's wrong.. | Mon Mar 23 1987 13:27 | 24 |
| Well, I don't disagree with anybody this time. I haven't ever noticed
any voices dropping out due to the 16 voice limitation. Nice
algorithms.
And I also agree that the MKS-20 is a bit weak in the midrange.
Yes, I've experimented with the mid-EQ a lot, and never got the
harmonic complexity that I expect from a piano. I'm currently running
it thru a stereo 10-band graphic as well. The top and bottom
are a stunning recreation. Perhaps someone with lots of parametrics
and stuff might fix it. So to get a bit of '3-string beating' going
I end up using the internal chorus a lot.
If there were one major complaint I have it's that all the sustain
pedal does is suppress MIDI note-offs. There is none of that soundboard
resonance I expect.. so I've been experimenting with my KX88 and
MIDIverb, attempting to get the sustain pedal [FS1] to do both the
sustain and switch the MIDIverb from a fairly 'dry' setting (pedal
off) to a fairly 'wet' setting (pedal down).. and back again. This
would help the realism considerably.
So, it isn't perfect, but the next best, the Kurzweil, still costs
$10K (racked) to $16K (with keys).
karl moeller
|
| 374.33 | midrange OK, sustain bogus. | EXCELL::SHARP | Don Sharp, Digital Telecommunications | Mon Mar 23 1987 15:08 | 13 |
| RE: .28 and .32
since the two km's agree, i'm forced to register my dissent. 'twouldnt't
seem quite democratic otherwise. i have no problem with the midrange in the
MKS-20. I generally listen through my cheap radio shack headphones or my
moderately cheap Boston Acoustics A-60 speakers.
However, I agree with KM II's evaluation of the sustain pedal. It doesn't
sound natural to me. It isn't much of a problem for my since I don't use a
lot of sostenuto, but when I do it rankles. As Karl points out some amount
of reverb/delay mitigates the problem.
don.
|
| 374.34 | a WURLIZTER ! What ABOUT it? | 16514::MOELLER | Drink & mow, lose a toe! | Mon Mar 23 1987 15:36 | 11 |
| re -1.. where can I get some Boston Acoustics A-60 speakers?
seriously, I do notice a sterility in the middle 3 octaves, and
have had people ask me what kind of electric piano that is ! ($hit!)
Uhh.. Don, what basic patches are your favorites ? I'm assuming
we're talking the 3 basic pianos, not the harps/clav/vibes/el1/el2
stuff.. I've taken bank 3 and 4, (bank 2 on the KX88) and customized
the sounds to suit.. one set of 8 chorused, the other set dry.
karl
|
| 374.35 | MKS-20 is still the standard under $10K | CLULES::SPEED | Derek Speed, Worksystems | Tue Mar 24 1987 12:57 | 31 |
| Another person who votes for the MKS-20 (and derivatives) sounding
not like a real piano in the mid-range. The low end and high end
are another story, however.
I did some experimenting with one of the sampled pianos (Ensoniq
SDP-1) and an ESQ-1 and taped some things on them, ranging from
single notes which I let ring out until they died, at various
velocities, etc. My opinion of the sampled pianos was that they
sounded good in the mid-range (better than the MKS-20) but sounded
god awful in the high end. Lots of aliasing noise, distortion.
Not realistic at all.
The MKS-20, on the other hand, had an excellent sound in the low and
high registers (the highs were very crisp), but did sound a little thin
in the mid-octaves. This was, as noted elsewhere, due to the fact that
the MKS-20 does not really simulate the sympathetic vibrations of
nearby keys.
Isn't it wonderful that we can sit here and nit-pick the sound of
these instruments? I remember a few years ago wanting a Yamaha
CP70 to get that "acoustic grand" sound on stage, but I had neither
the $$$, or the truck, or the road crew. My, how fast this technology
moves!
I for one am saving my pennies for an RD-300. MKS-20 users: how
valuable to you find the on-board parametric EQ and the ability to
store different piano sounds? Is it worth it for me to spend the extra
$$$ now for a separate controller (I don't have a velocity sensitive
MIDI keyboard now) and MKS-20 versus the RD-300?
Derek
|
| 374.36 | not bad at any price ! | 16514::MOELLER | Drink & mow, lose a toe! | Tue Mar 24 1987 15:56 | 14 |
| Well, Derek, I certainly set up a bank of 'customized' sounds on
the MKS-20, it helped a lot. But I haven't changed anything in months.
Regarding controllers, it was worth it to me to get a KX88, heavy
as it is, as it had the best piano touch I could find. Mileage may
vary. Roland's RD1000 would have made a poor MIDI controller.
Regarding the MKS-20's 'realism', I can nitpick, but, as Don Sharp
or myself stated many notes ago, once the sound hits tape it's VERY
difficult to tell... in fact I sent a recent tape to a well-known
European noter, and subsequently received VAXmail asking what kind
of piano I had been using.. not SYNTH, but PIANO.
karl moeller
|
| 374.37 | | DREGS::BLICKSTEIN | Dave | Tue Mar 24 1987 17:04 | 19 |
| Yeah, the Roland RD's are definitely inferior for the purposes of
controlling a MIDI system (splits, remote patch changes, modulation,
etc.).
However, I found that I much preferred the feel of the Roland keyboard
to that of the Yamaha which seemed too stiff.
My practice piano has always been...(I know you won't believe this but you
can come to my house and see).... a "Janzen" upright piano which
has a very light action. Never had much problem hopping between
my Janzen and the Steinways that I usually performed on, but always
had a tough time with unaltered Yamahas and Baldwins.
So instead of using a MIDI-controller to control my system, I'm
going to use the ESQ-1 sequencer (which can also function to a
reasonable extent as a system controller) and see how that works.
I felt that the feel of the keyboard was the most important thing.
db
|
| 374.38 | recant recant mea culpa | JON::ROSS | wockin' juan | Tue Mar 24 1987 18:42 | 35 |
| (alright dave, *I* agree [whoa! BFD!] Roland action good-to-me)
BUT BUT BUT!!!!!!!!
Gee, I hate to say this guys, after being a STAUNCH advocate of
MKS clones as the "ultimate" piana....
Heard the acoustic piano sample on a Roland S-50 today....erk.
Well, you *must* hear it. Now to top it off there was a RD-300
below it. Ok, so it didnt have reverb. But:
It was thin as could be. Hi, Low, Mid, whatever. And Im goin:
"wha?? The S-50 blows it away!" Then I notice that the 300
doesnt seem to sound good in it's own right.
Where is that mks-20 sound?
So I go "hey, Jack [his real name], why the **** doesnt this
sound like an MKS-20 or RD-1000? It's supposed to be, right?"
But it DOESNT! The only conclusions:
1. The 200 and 300 are not mks-20 derivatives (or shortcutted
to death)
2. It is an aural illusion (Im serious). Some sort of Psychological
strangeness is a function of the presets/price ratio....
3. The MKS-20 equalizer (that the 200/300 doesnt have) is VERY important
I DO know you can drastically change the sounds on the MKS with
the eq. AND that is a feature for me.
Hearing the mks at home with reverb renews my faith. But Im sure
awed by the experience today. More research is needed.
humble_ron
|
| 374.39 | MKS-20 vs. S-50?? | CLULES::SPEED | Derek Speed, Worksystems | Wed Mar 25 1987 10:31 | 8 |
| Ron,
Did you compare the S-50 to the MKS-20? Was this at Wurlitzer's in
Framingham? If so, my Juno is in for repairs there and I might have to
check this out in detail when I pick it up since they have an MKS-20 in
the rack there too...
Derek
|
| 374.40 | yes, no, no, yes | GNERIC::ROSS | we have good gnus and bad gnus | Thu Mar 26 1987 12:53 | 14 |
| not to mks, to rd-300 (which has the 'plain' bank 1 sounds only...blah)
framingham, yes.
Note that the s50 piano uses 2 'oscillators' per voice, so you only
gettum 8 notes vs 16 on mks.
AND (this is probably a big factor) the volume of the rd300 was
MUCH lower than the s50, so psychoacoustics may be messing in here.
(as well as me banging harder on the keys....)
So, go hear for yourself..
rr
|
| 374.41 | Not that it matters, but... | LOGIC::ARNOLD | Currently at Brown University | Fri Mar 27 1987 11:19 | 12 |
| Re: .32
>>> So, it isn't perfect, but the next best, the Kurzweil, still costs
>>> $10K (racked) to $16K (with keys).
For those of us still holding out hope for affordability, the latest
issue of Musician (with Robert Cray on the cover) claims that the
Kurzweil 250 has been reduced in price so that the basic model (woth
more standard features than before) has fallen below $10,000. The
racked version, I believe, is around $8,000.
- John -
|
| 374.42 | Reply to KMII RE: .34 | EXCELL::SHARP | Don Sharp, Digital Telecommunications | Fri Mar 27 1987 12:04 | 22 |
| RE: .34
Karl, I got my Boston Acoustics at Tweeter Etc. Don't know if the
chain/franchise whatever extends out your way. If you really want to know I
can look up the address/phone number for you and you can ask if there are
distributors available to you.
RE: my favorite patches, midrange problems, EQ solutions.
My favorite patches are Piano 1 & 2 and Electric Piano 1 (Rhodes.) But I do
make it a point to use all the patches. What I've done is to EQ all 8
patches in all 8 banks for the room I practice in & the speakers I use.
It's basically flat. I use the 8 banks to save varying rates/depths of
chorus/tremolo. Bank 1 has very mild chorus/tremolo on all 8 patches, and
they're off by default. Bank 2-8 have progressively deeper chorus/tremolo,
all basically pretty slow (2-8 cps typical). Bank 2, 3 & 4 have chorus=on,
tremolo=off by default, bank 5-8 have chorus=on, tremolo=on by default. I
use 8-bank mode on the KX88 so I can get to any level of chorus/tremolo in
my presets with 3 button-hits.
Don.
|
| 374.43 | MKS-20 vs. RD-300 | AKOV68::EATOND | Shut mah mouth wide open! | Wed Oct 21 1987 15:49 | 9 |
| RE < Note 374.38 by JON::ROSS "wockin' juan" >
About the RD-300 not sounding as good as the MKS-20...
Ron, did you ever do any more research into this? I'd be interested in
knowing what you found.
Dan
|
| 374.44 | I challenge you to a duet! | DREGS::BLICKSTEIN | Dave | Thu Oct 22 1987 10:17 | 9 |
| Well, why don't we make an experiment at Falljam?
Me and my RD-300 will be on one side of the stage, Ron and his
MKS-20 will be on the other. Come early and we can make a direct
comparison. Ron and I are gonna be using the same keyboard monitor
so it will make the comparison valid. We both have SRV-2000 reverbs
so we can even compare it with reverb.
db
|
| 374.45 | What's the question? | DREGS::BLICKSTEIN | Dave | Thu Oct 22 1987 10:27 | 19 |
| Actually Dan, I really don't see how answering this question should
affect any decision you might be facing.
If the quality of the sound is most important (and money isn't)
you should absolutely get the MKS-20 because at the very least it
is more flexible than the RD-300.
The RD-300 is a compromise. It gives you an 88 key MIDI keyboard
plus some VERY GOOD piano/e.-piano/etc sounds (do you not agree
Ron?) for about the same amount (less if anything) as an MKS-20.
If you already have a good keyboard, don't even consider the RD
as it gives you nothing you don't already have. If money is not
a consideration, don't bother with the RD.
The RD is mainly a lot of bang for the buck, but there's better
bang to be had for more bucks. (Please don't quote this).
db
|
| 374.46 | Yeah, that's why I'm selling the sampler... | AKOV75::EATOND | Shut mah mouth wide open! | Thu Oct 22 1987 11:01 | 7 |
| RE < Note 374.45 by DREGS::BLICKSTEIN "Dave" >
It's not really an issue with me, Dave, more of a curiosity than
anything. I now own an RD-200, and I love it. I have no plans of looking
at an MKS-20 as a potential purchase.
Dan
|
| 374.47 | Wrap It Up, I'll Take It | AQUA::ROST | Independent as a hog on ice | Thu Oct 22 1987 11:08 | 8 |
|
Re: .46
Dan, what is the current record in the Eaton household for how fast
you can put equipment up for sale after you buy it????
:-) :-) :-) :-) :-)
|
| 374.48 | Danny's Junky Music???? | JAWS::COTE | BIM me up, Scotty!!! | Thu Oct 22 1987 11:22 | 2 |
|
|
| 374.49 | Oh yeah, the record is one week | AKOV75::EATOND | Shut mah mouth wide open! | Thu Oct 22 1987 12:21 | 35 |
| RE Danny's Junky Music
Please don't associate me with *that* store!
Perhaps this is not the best place to give a quick reply, but, then
again, I can't think of any other placer that's better.
Everyone approaches the aquisition of their equipment a different way.
(Mine's just *really* different! 8^) I have used the Want Advertiser and
various "special's" as a way to obtain the equipment I have wanted. I have
watched the used and new market like a hawk and gotten a feel for what most
every piece of equipment is worth (at least those I was interested in, anyway).
Then, with a certain amount of cash available in reserve, I have bought units,
kept some, resold some and have obtained quite formiddable results. I am at the
point where I never would have thought I could be - owning one of the best
available piano units on the market, and a very good analog synth, a very good
drum machine, etc... One year ago, I never would have dreamed it possible. But
it was through my system of evaluation, buying and reselling that it was
possible. I'm sure on the outside it appears like a total confusion. But,
there was a method to the madness. I have gotten good (sometimes excellent)
deals, kept myself to a basic cash balance, and even given other people better
deals than they may have found otherwise (who may not have had the time or
inclination to do the research necessary). And, if ever the need should arise,
I could easily liquidate my assets and not lose money. Sound like a business?
Perhaps, but the only profit-making was put into bettering my studio.
So, I bought a sampler so that I could have a good piano finally. The
next few weeks pass and I see a 'tremendous' deal on an RD200. So, since the
sampler was principly to provide the piano sound, I can sell it, practically new
for less than I paid for it, *with* disks, and not lose a great deal, giving
someone else a break at the same time. Not bad, in my opinion.
Dan
|
| 374.50 | What do you do with cars???? | JAWS::COTE | BIM me up, Scotty!!! | Thu Oct 22 1987 12:36 | 6 |
| > Not bad, in my opinion.
Nor mine!
Edd (who_got_the_TX81Z)
|
| 374.51 | | AKOV75::EATOND | Shut mah mouth wide open! | Thu Oct 22 1987 14:03 | 7 |
| re < Note 374.50 by JAWS::COTE "BIM me up, Scotty!!!" >
> -< What do you do with cars???? >-
Cars, on the other hand, I drive into the ground.
Dan (who is now driving a '77 Nova)
|
| 374.52 | Get both! | JON::ROSS | Micro-11: The VAX RISC | Wed Nov 11 1987 09:09 | 12 |
|
the mks20 is just a bit more sonicly flexible than the rd300,
but then it doesnt have a keyboard.
I was really impressed with the RD300 at the jam. I think there's
ALSO some subliminal thing that happens when you play a keyboard
that FEEELS like a piano. It sounds MORE like a piano.
Therefor the best comparison would be an RD300 midi-ed to an mks20
and A/B with the mixing only.....
|
| 374.53 | That's what I've been trying to say | DREGS::BLICKSTEIN | Dave | Wed Nov 11 1987 11:19 | 25 |
| Darn, forgot to make that RD/MKS comparison at the jam.
> I was really impressed with the RD300 at the jam. I think there's
> ALSO some subliminal thing that happens when you play a keyboard
> that FEEELS like a piano. It sounds MORE like a piano.
As I've said, the foremost selection criteria for me
in choosing the RD-300 was the "feel" (the mechanical action)
and "response" (how it responds to velocity, etc.) of the keyboard.
The mini-MKS in it was sorta gravy. I was mainly looking for a
keyboard.
What may have been "unfair" in my evaluation of the RD was that
what I've called "response" is a function of BOTH the keyboard
and the synth. THe RD may have had an advantage of other units
I evaluated in that the the response of RD's synth may have been
"tuned" especially for the response of the RD's keyboard.
In fact, when I play the ESQ-1 piano patch thru the RD, it does feel
like the "response" is not as good as playing the RD's patch. But
that may just be because the RD's synth has more piano-like features
that respond to velocity, or have a more piano like response curve
since unlike the ESQ-1 it is dedicated to that purpose.
db
|