Login / Register 0 items | $0.00 New @ KVR
yul
KVRian
 
826 posts since 26 Sep, 2002, from Montreal, CANADA

Postby yul; Sat Apr 14, 2018 6:26 pm Korg Kross..Krome..?

Hi, for basic PCM mangling and sound design/layering which has the best sample set, engine, fx/arps/sequencer?

I believe the lower end Kross has a nice array of filters too?

I already have legacy vsti's and really don't need a VA nor a huge piano.

Also, aftertouch isn't important.

Cheers
tapper mike
KVRAF
 
4612 posts since 19 Jan, 2008

Postby tapper mike; Sat Apr 14, 2018 8:04 pm Re: Korg Kross..Krome..?

Krome is more programmable. It's not just about VA it's also about stacks and effects. Kross 2 supports aftertouch but... you need an external controller as the keys aren't capable of producing aftertouch.

For about the same price of a new Kross2 you can pick up a mildy used Krome.
yul
KVRian
 
826 posts since 26 Sep, 2002, from Montreal, CANADA

Postby yul; Sun Apr 15, 2018 6:31 am Re: Korg Kross..Krome..?

Hey thanks, is it more programmable beaucause of the screen or because it has more features? Can't I also stack with Kross? Would you say that Kross and Krome share similar PCM set?

thanks and much appreciated!
JCJR
KVRAF
 
2237 posts since 17 Apr, 2005, from S.E. TN

Postby JCJR; Sun Apr 15, 2018 7:50 am Re: Korg Kross..Krome..?

Apologies answering question not asked-- I'm not an expert and do not know much about kross or krome. Not trying to "push a trip".

So far as I can tell, the best bang for buck in sound and programmability seems to be Roland FA06 and Yamaha MOXF6. I have had an FA06 for a few years and will likely get a MOXF6 at some point. They both have lots of decent sounds and good programmability.

Both are about the same price. MOXF6 seems a little lower price in usa currently so far as I can tell. Maybe a little more expensive than krome or kross but OTOH I've been doing synthesizers since the 1970's and am confident I could "get by" quite nicely with either FA or MOX. I'd be at a loss to guess which of those synths is "better". No axe is perfect but both of them have different feature set and mucho bang for the buck.

I've looked at / played / read the manuals of "a couple hundred bucks cheaper" Rolands and Yamaha models, with similar sound tech, and they are probably good for the money. Products price competitive with krome and kross. They seemed too limited to me unless you just happen to like the patches included in the synths. Granted there are hundreds or thousands of patches in such thangs, but the "stripped down versions" of MOX or FA looked like basically if you can find a patch you like, then maybe tweak the FX, EQ, and filter/envelope in limited ways.

I mean, getting to specifics, was looking at yamaha's cheaper version of the mox, there were dozens of electric piano sounds, but none that I really liked. Maybe could find one patch not too bad and screw with the FX and EQ enough to make it pleasing, but it seemed too much like "making do" working around limited programming options in the axe.

It is a problem for the manufacturers because maybe some users want a zillion electric pianos, a zillion grand pianos, a zillion high-rez synths, etc. But I don't want a zillion electric pianos. I want about three electric pianos that not only don't suck, but sound great. A great dark rhodes, a wonderful dyno rhodes and a bang-on wurlie. Problem is, every musician who only wants his three favorite EP's, probably wants different ones. So the manufacturers try as best they can by supplying a zillion EP's, most of which suck in the opinion of any individual customer. Can say the same about synth sounds, pads, bass, etc. Can be a chore buying a new keyboard because every customer has to sit down and spend hours auditioning thousands of sounds, most of which suck, to find the handful he wants to use.

Maybe the kross and krome are not "limited editing" like the Yamaha and Roland products cheaper than MOX and FA. I would just kinda expect that to be the case but its just a wild guess (apparently being basically "stripped down affordable subset of kronos").
JCJR
KVRAF
 
2237 posts since 17 Apr, 2005, from S.E. TN

Postby JCJR; Sun Apr 15, 2018 7:57 am Re: Korg Kross..Krome..?

It can be useful to download the manuals of the instruments in question and study up on what is and is not programmable.
yul
KVRian
 
826 posts since 26 Sep, 2002, from Montreal, CANADA

Postby yul; Sun Apr 15, 2018 9:25 am Re: Korg Kross..Krome..?

Thanks a lot for your feedback I will certainly look at Yamaha as well as the manuals.

It is odd though that some of the more fundamental information on these boards is not available readily..

It's like most people are buying them for the name, looks, presets and price point...not that anyone cares about the sound capabilities. :dog:
JCJR
KVRAF
 
2237 posts since 17 Apr, 2005, from S.E. TN

Postby JCJR; Sun Apr 15, 2018 10:15 am Re: Korg Kross..Krome..?

yul wrote:Thanks a lot for your feedback I will certainly look at Yamaha as well as the manuals.

It is odd though that some of the more fundamental information on these boards is not available readily..

It's like most people are buying them for the name, looks, presets and price point...not that anyone cares about the sound capabilities. :dog:


It just depends on what a customer is looking for. Presumably the companies know their market purt well. I only know a tiny set of market demands warped by my own needs/prefs.

A historic example-- For decades the least expensive "not a pile of crap" Roland keyboards tended to be named juno x or juno y or whatever, and they are still selling juno models.

The newer junos seem "stripped down FA" type tech. I assume they are still built good for the money. In previous years many junos were basically "sound canvas general midi" type engines with keyboards, knobs and buttons. Some were not very programmable at all except realtime controls, and some of the later ones could store more/fancier edits. I'm guessing modern junos are more programmable than the old ones but haven't studied them.

That kind of sound engine (and the modern incarnations of "about the same tech continually refined") had at least two uses relevant to my world view--

1. The old ones (and presumably the new ones) were rugged enough to survive several years sitting on stage of 6 night local nightclub gigs, and so they lasted long enough that the amortized expense of the low price meant you couild use more of your paycheck to pay rent and light bills rather than expensive keyboards you bought just to wear down to a nub then buy something else when the old keyboard has got hopeless with too many thangs broken.

They sounded good enough for live, and you could find a live organ sound "good enough" and a live string or horn or synth part "good enough". Maybe the early ones not so programmable, maybe the organ needed a couple of knobs or sliders tweaked to sound right, but it was no problem if you knew it back and forwrds, inside and out. Somebody calls up a song needing certain organ sound, you click the buttons for the patch, flip a couple of knobs or sliders "where they belong" and play the song, on auto-pilot after awhile.

So in that kind of usage, you want a keyboard that is cheap enough that you can make a profit off gigging, weighs 10 or 15 pounds, sounds "good enough" for cheap gigs, and nowadays you can probably save all those "on the fly" EQ and FX tweaks, and even save your minor edits in a favorites bank so you can get to the 20 or 30 tweaked bread'n'butter sounds real fast between songs. Whats not to like?

2. Connected to a computer, even the early souind canvas-based junos were 16 part multitimbral, so if you were sequencing or using some kind of live computer mapping software, you could do heavier patch edits (many edits impossible from the synth front panel) and if you want to layer 8 voices, sure just send the same music part on 8 midi channels. For the price, and assisted by computer, again there's not much to complain about.

Carefully used, with computer-edited patches set up from a sequencer, you can do some purt good sounding full songs even with the first lowly Sound Canvas SC55. The issue with a lot of those early boxes was, you could set up some very nice patch tweaks via computer sysex, but many of that era couldn't save the tweaks. So you needed to use a computer and send your tweaks to the synth before every song. After you turned off the power or changed presets, otherwise all the edits were gone like a cool breeze.

________

So anyway when I start really getting the hots for some new gadget, I'll download the manual and read it purt carefully. Looking for things I'd like to do that maybe the box doesn't seem able to do, or maybe in some cases the programming interface turns out it looks like it would drive me crazy to fool with it. Such as pushing lots of buttons to do something simple that you need to do all the time, especially sometimes they hide essential functions behind combinations of buttons not marked on the front panel, so if you didn't read the manual then sometimes the synth woiuld have done a lot more than you thought it could. But I'd ideally like as few button presses possible and no hidden button combos, because those are so easy to forget if you don't use the synth daily.
User avatar
Jace-BeOS
KVRAF
 
4466 posts since 7 Jan, 2005, from Corporate States of America

Postby Jace-BeOS; Sun Apr 15, 2018 10:29 am Re: Korg Kross..Krome..?

I noticed that the sample sets included in the Korg M3 didn't allow lower pitches than their root note settings. I.e. no unnaturally slowed samples.

I don't know if it does this to imported user samples. I also don't know if Krome or Kross has this limitation.

Just thought I'd mention it just in case.
- dysamoria.com
my music @ SoundCloud
yul
KVRian
 
826 posts since 26 Sep, 2002, from Montreal, CANADA

Postby yul; Sun Apr 15, 2018 2:15 pm Re: Korg Kross..Krome..?

Wow interesting comments...so no live use here, just sound design and composition. It seems like most of these are built for the gigging musician which I a not..for the rest I guess the manual is the way to go.

Also, not beiing able to detune the root of a sample seems like a BIG show stopper!! Are we sure this is the case with Kross/Krome? Might actually get more mileage here with just my wavestation plugin even without the wavesequences

Thanks again!
JCJR
KVRAF
 
2237 posts since 17 Apr, 2005, from S.E. TN

Postby JCJR; Sun Apr 15, 2018 5:09 pm Re: Korg Kross..Krome..?

Apologies again fixated on non-kross/krome, but regarding samples-- I've not deeply researched this, and the option would raise the price of a moxf6 by about $400 as best I recall--

They sell a 1 GB static RAM add-on card you can install in a little hatch in the thang. 1 GB is a LOT of sample room if the samples are competently trimmed and tweaked. I think yamaha and various third parties give away and/or sell instruments which can be loaded into the card, and somebody could make their own given the proper nerdy masochistic tendencies. I used to do a lot of sampling decades ago and maybe sometime would get back into it, but haven't lately.

On the FA, the system uses a 32 GB SD card as its "operating system drive" kinda-sorta. I haven't studied to determine how much of the bootable system and user-loadable sounds reside in built-in static ram versus how much it loads on-the-fly from the SD card when you load a sequence or set of samples.

It has the eqivalent of 2 "virtual expander slots" that accept roland-baked files loaded from the SD card, containing new samples and starter programs, and you can mix/match the expander slot samples with onboard samples and apply the synthesis capabilities of the engine to the samples. Roland "gives away" downloadable files of all the old expander cards of the older JV and XV and Fantom, which costed about $200 apiece in hardware form in the good old days. Some of those old synths would hold 1 card, or 2 or 4 cards, and there were an older and a newer flavor of hardware card.

A "project based" person could load different expanders into the two slots on whim. I downloaded all the expander files and put them on the SD card, so I could load any of them thataway, just boot holding a key and tell it to load one or both expander slots. But a lazy person would probably pick the 2 most-useful-to-the-person expanders, load em up and leave em there, which I did.

There is also LOTS of FA sampling capability but it is somewhat limited, not like having a $4000 EMU sampler or whatever, but the fidelity seems good. The "user-configurable" sample engine is always on part 16, default channel 16. Under control of the 4 X 4 grid of drum-pad like buttons, you can have four banks of samples loaded, 64 samples total, and they can be quite long. I don't know if there is some (large) ram limitation to total sample size loadable, or if it streams the user samples direct off the SD card. Something I keep meaning to play with and didn't get around to it.

Anyway, the 64 samples are also mapped across the keyboard, and can be played from the keyboard as well as the drum pads. The drum pads are not velocity-sensitive, but the samples are volume-velocity-sensitive when controlled from the keyboard or from a midi track including velocity information.

The FA sampling engine, you can edit WAV files and load em from the SD card, or record into the FA from analog. You can trim and set loop points and (I think) tune them, or if not you could tune them in a computer before loading them. But there is no envelope or filter controls on the little user-sampling engine, just volume-velocity sensitivity if played from keyboard or MIDI track. But given the large potential sampling room, a resourceful person could probably get some nice stuff out of that simplified engine.

So far as I know, every sequence or "multi-part performance patch" can have its own set of up to 64 user-created samples, which supposedly get loaded in from SD card when you load a sequence or performance patch. And the thang has slots for HUNDREDS of user sequences and user patches and user performances.

That's why I'm not quite sure how much to believe without personally experimenting to stress the user-sampling engine. The SD card comes from factory mostly empty with just the required system files. If it actually does stream most of that stuff from SD rather than needing to load it to internal RAM, then the sample playback capability might be rather awesomely big. Or maybe if you stress it hard enough there would be (large) limits smaller than the size of the SD card. Dunno..
yul
KVRian
 
826 posts since 26 Sep, 2002, from Montreal, CANADA

Postby yul; Mon Apr 16, 2018 7:30 pm Re: Korg Kross..Krome..?

Hey thanks again for the precious information this is very helpful!! It looks like I will have to give Yamaha a try at some point!

Moderator: Moderators (Main)

Return to Hardware (Instruments and Effects)