Do you still lust for hardware keyboard workstations?

[Lunatique]

I understand that hardware synth/sampler workstations have been all the rage all these years(Fantom X, Motif, Triton..etc)--almost like they are trying so hard to compete with computer DAW and softsynths/samplers. But other than portability/stability/compatibility issues, are there other reasons why these hardware keyboard workstations continue to fascinate us and make us drool?

In today's computer music-making enviroment, any prolific host sequencer can kick the S#$t out of hardware sequencer in terms of power and features. The soft synths/samplers are kicking the hardware counterpart's a$$ all over the place too in terms of innovation, power, cost..etc. Realistically speaking, a powerful laptop hooked up to a midi controller keyboard can easily replace these hardware keyboard workstations--even overtaking it easily.

With all this in mind--are there still reasons to get a hardware keyboard workstation?

[kara]

Well yes,....
except when you play live

I wouldn't dare to play with a midi keyboard hooked up to a laptop with wind*z on it.
Three main reasons for that :
1. Latency
2. Imagine it crashes in the midle of an act
3. Most public think you are cheating when they see a PC on stage Which often is the case

Just my 2 cents here

Rony

[handy]

I've been looking for a while to get away from soft synths, for the simple reason that hardware knobs just work! Musical inspiration is slowed down even by assigning midi-learn controls and memorising the layout. Korg's microcontrol is the most interesting controller to me simply because it has LED displays that can say what they are assigned to. What we need are more soft synths with physically similar control devices. My 2penneth.

[griels]

Well yes,....
except when you play live

I wouldn't dare to play with a midi keyboard hooked up to a laptop with wind*z on it.
Three main reasons for that :
1. Latency

5ms doesn't seem too bad. My Echo Layla can manage that at 90% CPU load.

2. Imagine it crashes in the midle of an act

Hardware crashes too. Although, perhaps you should treat the laptop as another 'member of the band' rather than the sole focus of attention (it's bloody boring visually anyway in that case ).

3. Most public think you are cheating when they see a PC on stage Which often is the case

On the contrary, I think it's cheating to use these workstations. They provide you with a restricted set of sounds which all sound good, but you can't get anything really 'cutting edge' sounding, so its easy to take the lazy way out and use the familiar and pleasant sounding presets. I'd rather see someone try and fail to do something new on stage than trot out the same old VA and S&S sounds once again. As far as I know, the 'performance sequencing' capabilities of these workstations is also way behind those of Ableton Live, Max/MSP or Plogue Bidule.

[bluedad]

those hardware workstations don't interest me one bit.
I may be doing a live gig sometime myself, and plan on
using my laptop and vst's.

[Kingston]

can't think of any reason of getting a hardware workstation anymore. Or maybe just for a physical models?

But what I do lust after (for live) is this:

1. well setup mobile rackmount PC with a good soundcard. Laptop soundcards aren't nearly as good yet; a lot less flexibility.

2 Good keyboard controller with lots of knobs, or keyboard and external knob box.

3. Logic (or whatever good host), bunch of VSTi's and well planned and properly setup controller (environment) templates for them.

Live Bliss.

Quick glance at current market and it seems you can get all those for about £2000-3000.

We live in good times methinks?

[DuX]

No way . Been there, done that. Having a bunch of synths-workstations is a nightmare. Cables, lack of flexibility, hard to move around, hard to... many things, and for stage, a good "racked" PC with a LSD [ ] screen is perfect. My only wish is to buy a hunk of a midi controller keyboard with heaps of pots and buttons and I'll be dancing the rain-dance . Workstation? Maybe some of them would make a nice MIDI keyboard though... I like Korg Triton - quite flexible for a workstation, or Kurtzweil K2000 or K2500... nice keyboards.

btw. I'm not afraid of doing live gigs with a PC and Pukedose... if you do it the right way . no laptop for example, but a nice rack-PC powered by some nice UPS and cleeeean - installed just with music programmes.

Cheers.

Have a beer for me.

[ericj23]

i kinda want one (just 1)- just for the no cpu load, the cliched sounds (things are cliches because there is some truth in them) but mainly for a good quality keyboard rather than this springy plastic evolution thing ive got

[whyterabbyt]

I only ever lusted after modular synths. That includes the new Nord G2X, tho.

[DevonB]

Another good reason is sound quality. I've been playing quite a bit with the Roland Fantom X series, and wow! Whatever they're doing under the hood, it's amazing still. And I don't consider you sitting down at the store for 10 minutes playing with it a fair way to judge these units either. I've spent quite a few hours with this unit, and I'm very impressed still. 128 meg ROM with 1024 presets, can hold 6 expansion cards, and up to 532 megs of RAM internally, plus whatever you throw at it in the PC Card slot for Smart Media or Compact Flash. Really, the new hardware synths are true workstations with the ability to store seqences, arpeggios, chords, rhythm sequences, and I wouldn't be afraid to take it on the road either.

No, they don't have Nuendo or Sonar or Logic built in. It's about the sound that comes out of these boxes and the performance features that make these boxes very drool-worthy for the performing musician. For live, I'd feel MUCH more comfortable relying on this box to be there and WORK when I asked it too.

Devon

[Rick1114]

Recenty I played around with some Hardware at Sam Ash to see how they 'felt' and sounded compared to my software set-up. The newer Fantom and V-station are pretty cool - nothing else left me lusting. You do get more cutting edge sounds with soft synths (they don't require as much mass appeal to sell), but Hardware keyboards play beautifully in terms of instrument response. It made me realize what a piece of crap my PCR-50 midi controller is. It has a "velocity offset" but that's the extent of it. Really hard to play very subtle parts in realtime that require sensitive velocity changes like drums. Looks like there are finally some quality midi controllers coming out but they cost $$$.

[Joxer the Mighty]

Not for a hardware workstation, but I do lust for a Cwejman S1 and a synthesizers.com modular.

Whyterabbyt, get the G2! Mine just arrived this week. If you're into modulars, you'll have a blast with one!

[dougsyo]

I've had a couple of Yamaha keyboards, most recently the PSR-2000. The Yamahas all out-lasted the Korg CX-3 (six months) and the Nord Lead 2 (one month).

As much as I loved the sound, they have "DX7-think" - very few knobs, lots of buttons and menus to deal with. I hated it. You have to hook an external knob or slider box to it in order to have controls at-hand when you want them. I don't miss this aspect of the 2000 at all. Give me a sample-based workstation without tons of menus! I just eyeballed the Motif ES, Fantom X, and Triton Extreme, they're all buttons and menus. Bleah.

Doug

[HanafiH]

I don't lust after any hardware because I have quite a bit of it, and certainly everything I want. I deliberately cross-graded back into hardware after over five years of trying to get what I want out software. Software does the control and can do the recording thing just fine. I use the computer as atape recorder mostly though I do use the odd soft synth I acquired that was good or convenient.

I guess it depends on what you want. Some softsynths like FM7 are really very much better than the technology they imitate, yet the Yamaha FS1R remains the flagship FM synth of all time.

I think part of it stems from the fact that nobody can pirate a physical synth. Korg for example, can expend a huge amount of time and money building rom blocks that just don't have an equivalent in the soft domain in the sure and certain knowledge that they'll get the money back and then some. Three decades of experience building digital audio systems will always out perform three years in the sharkpool of VSTi.

For me, the primary motivation for ditching softs was the experiential element of knowing your instrument. All the great synths have a virtuoso: Vangelis and the CS80, Eno and the DX&, Wakeman and the Moog D. That virtuosity arises from, amongst other things the intimacy with the machine. You can't ever build that relationship up on a computer platform with its ever shifting problems - version shunt, driver changes, maintainace releases. You never actually arrive at the point where you have what you want, only the promise that some future scenario will deliver it. Music becomes a constant quest for the next big thing in an endless tunnel called 'innovation'. I don't buy that anymore.

I much prefer to have a contained system that does what it says when you buy it, and develop myself as a musician. I've had enough of the endless myriad of technicalities that explains why computer will deliver one day, but not yet, if only I keep on spending more. I know vendors who are peddling snake oil when I see them.

[griels]

Well, I personally love what computers do for me NOW. Show me a hardware synth that can do what Reaktor or Kontakt can do. I have a PC, a Roland A-37 semiweighted keyboard and a Peavey Studiomix. The only hardware synths I own are a dust-gathering Roland MT-32, a worthless Yamaha toy keyboard and an ancient Casio MT-100 analogue synth. I feel no need for external digital synths.

If I were to get external hardware, it would have to be something unique to hardware like a genuine analogue synth, a real Rhodes or, dare I say it, a genuine guitar. In terms of digital processing, the only items I would consider would be things unique to the non-native world such as the VL-70m or, at a push, a Lexicon or Eventide reverb (although I'm very happy with SIR, Ambience and Classic Reverb, and in a live situation lots of reverb doesn't make much sense). But those are really icing on the cake.

Maybe in terms of the genre of sounds they produce some of the workstations sound lusher or smoother or nicer, but I'm not interested in those sounds. I love the new sounds that softsynths such as Tassman or DiscoDSP Vertigo offer. I can't see a workstation like the Triton offering anything similar. Just using these cliched (yes, cliched) sounds seems 'cheap' somehow to me. They've been heard a thousand times and whatever value they had the first few times is now gone. You might as well use my Yamaha PSR-790 What really matters is the thought you put into your sound, not how many gazillion DSPs your sound source has or how many man years were spent in designing the filters.

As I said, in terms of performance features, packages like Live or Max/MSP offer a great deal to the performing musician. I fear people are too tied to conventional, linear concepts of live performance. Just triggering riffs/arpeggios from a keyboard is primitive... The new tools allow you to treat the computer as a sort of virtual musician, another member of your band, with complex algorithmic processing. That's how I forsee the future of live electronica, anyway. We need to move away from the extremes of 'click play on a sequencer' or 'improvise on an instrument' and let our computers become another instrument in the band. How we do this is another question, but finding solutions is part of the fun.