About hardware keyboards

Stories from the Trenches
21

Well stating specifications is not was I was asking.

I was more talking about this.

““hardware workstations” live because there is no other choice. All the manufacturers do care about is profit and squeezing literally every single penny from the same things they already sold years ago, over and over again. That is the fact, not an opinion.”

First, I have 2 x MODX, a Fantom 06. I play live with the MODX M7 controling GP on a MacBook Pro. I dont have to, I have a choice. I have done a few gigs with just the MODX M7.

Taking the second part about manufactures trying to squeeze every penny. Explain why Yamaha gave us a total free upgrade to the MODX M that gave us extra features, and ESP, which was only available to Montage users before this. Hardly seem like they are screwing anyone over to me.

22

To everything there is a season, and a time to every purpose.

I like some of my hardware, have a love hate relationships with some, and use virtual instruments where it suits me.

Having choices is better than not having choices, and when I make my choices I make my own decisions about whether I want to support the companies that produce them. For everything one person buys there is somebody somewhere that righteously objects to that choice.

23

One point I would add is the hardware companies tend to do a very good job finessing their samples considering the ram limitations they work under.

Since I tend to be ram conscious, I always thought (but did not spend much time actually researching it) there is value in having access to their exact libraries (with the same ram footprint) available to use within GP.

But, so far I have heard too many issues with their collections compared to (let’s say) Kontakt (and I am not even sure they retain the same modest ram footprint as their hardware versions).

24

Specifications itself just confirm why something sounds toy-ish compared to something else. And I mentioned only acoustic pianos specs. It is the same story for every acoustic category - trumpets, guitars, brass-es, strings etc etc etc. It simply can not be compared.

Players buy what hardware manufacturers make. And they make instruments which are strictly locked inside their systems, the same principles for decades. Does it work and gets the job done? Of course it does. Is it anything revolutionary? No. There is no open arhitecture workstation in existence. OpenLabs, Lionstracs, long time gone. MusicComputing - I dont remember anything from them for a long time. The only real upgrade is either a hybrid system (like yours), or go full time vst (like me).

About squeezing pennies. Yamaha’s latest flagship is still based on the same synthesis from 1989 - AWM2. FM exists even longer. AN-x from Montage M (AN imitation) is not the same as AN which existed in Yamaha EX-5 (together with AWM2 and FDSP) and that same Yamaha had also VL, which Yamaha completely abandoned since Motif ES. VL was derivated from VL1 - one of the best physical modelling synthesis ever. Just for reminder - EX-5 is a synth from 1998.

That same (essentially) AWM2 synthesis is in all Motifs - ES/XS/XF and their smaller derivates, and original Montage (which btw has all waveforms from XF). Did AWM2 improve over years? Of course. Did FM improve? Also yes. Is it innovation? No. Is it in essence the same thing as before, or better say recycling? It is. How does it compare to VST world, sonically and techologicaly? It is a joke even to compare them. Even ESP is coded for single core - huge issue for people with lower clock’s on their cpu’s. Maybe that will hurt someone’s feelings - It is how things are.

While VST companies make wonders with deep sampling and modelling - hardware manufacturers are stuck in past, big way. Basically, all of them. The only one who dared to go “open” (and still exists) was Korg, with Oasys, and managed to squize multiple engines to run on a single (pentium) core cpu and 4 gigs of ram, with 10 inch touch screen and glowing faders and what else not, 20 years ago. That is brave. And they still embrace it, with Kronos, but being limited with the same arhitecture from the past, there is no real, massive push forward.

The other “problem” for all of them is giving too much or “everything” to end user (exactly what my Avenger gives to me) - then there is nothing left to sell later. Its basic principle of business. Very similar to a car facelift - minimal change inside and outside, with the same price as original model. Since I made Avenger for my own needs - I can go crazy as much as I want, as long as I can take the investments financially.

To be clear. I personally own both Montage and Modx. Did hundreds and hundreds gigs and concerts with them. Did also hybrid setups with them and GigPerformer. And they all serve purpose. To be fair, all keybords have their own charm and nice sides. But, Fiat 500 is not same as Koenigsegg Jesko. Despite how much the Fiat owner would love it to be. It simply cant be.

25

I am from Balkan area David. You wouldnt believe how different mindset people have here compared to West. Most of them (lets say 95%, and I mean musicians) will rather complain than sit and learn something new. Golden rule - Korg is to play no matter how buggy it is, and Volkswagen is to drive, no matter how stiff it is. :grinning_face:

Joke aside, lately are people more interested into software, but old habits are not easy to change.

26

I’ll leave you to it. You obviously feel strongly about this.

27

I did not recognize you by your userid, which is why I asked those questions. Now, given what you have accomplished with Avenger, I understand your position.

I had an Oasys a long time ago and it was an absolutely inspirational instrument, no question. But the Kronos, which of course is a cheaper version of the Oasys, and which I would still use if I was going to go hybrid, has really not changed much, other than minor tweaks.

You’re absolutely right when you note that the changes over the years in most keyboards has been incremental. There are still some innovations - the newer Waldorf Quantum is a very inspirational keyboard, even the ASM Hydrosynth pushed things forward a bit.

28

Interesting discussion. I haven’t followed synths for over 20 years. My first synth was the Korg M1. After that, I only played using master keyboards (Roland A80, A90) with rack versions of the X3 and the Roland P55 piano module.

In the early 2000s, I ventured onto the stage for the first time with Logic. It was a tough road, and I was often ridiculed in those early days. In 2025, I switched to GP because Logic’s interface, with its updates, no longer suited my needs, and I played my first gigs with GP a month ago. That, too, was a tough road (at 53, such transitions aren’t exactly easy…).

Since playing live with computers and virtual instruments, I no longer have any desire for real synths. But it was a good time back then. People used to spend a lot of time in music stores, trying out different synthesizers and marveling at the sounds and their possibilities. That atmosphere has been lost. But that’s just how things are now.

29

All good David, I figured out you didnt recognize me. I am trying my best with English, not being my native language.

Very true, and unfortunately, it is system limitation only. And despite that, it is quite potent and versatile machine. On the other hand, I still remember how Korg completely forgot to solve heat dissasipation management in first Kronos. A few additional holes and a fan would drop the internal temp almost 20C. While just looking at Oasys internals, it screams - this is designed to last.

I dont know how many people know this, but it is interesting to mention what originally Oasys was - it was in existence long before the keyboard itself in 2005. Parts of arhitecture were in Trinity, Prophecy, Triton (Triton original name was Excalibre), and bit later Oasys PCI Dsp based card (limited functionality, and it was a big flop). Also interesting to mention is that first Oasys prototype shell had design language of Trinity.

Indeed there are. I would add Dexibell to that list - Vivo S10 T2L piano engine is combination of samples and physical modeling, has motorised faders, seamless sound switching and unlimited polyphony. They also made those pianos as VST, purchased it two days after they got available in store.

30

Eh, M1. Had one, sent it to repair shop to solve buzzing outputs and never went to take it back (Roland D50 too).

A80 and A90 - never had either of those two, but had A50 - what a keybed. Keybeds made in a past time, when the player keys feel was the big deal. Only reason why I skipped to purchase 9000 Pro and canibalize it to take the 76 keybed from it (same as the one in Oasys 76) is the age.

Best decision you could do. Gig Performer is made by musicians for musicians - as much as it is simple and fast to use, it can go 100 times deeper for most demanding stuff. And all of that without compromising stability.

31

Your English is fine. If you had made your userid be something like “transavenger” I would have known who you were from the beginning :winking_face_with_tongue: