KORG Legacy Collection updated for macOS High Sierra (first time since 2014)

[fmr]

Can I take this topic in a slightly different direction and ask if anyone is in much of a hurry to update to High Sierra? As far as I know it's going to break any synths using the Carbon framework as it has been made obsolete. I don't know which of my synths use this but I do know I have one foot in yesteryear with ReFX Vanguard and Hypersonic 2, which I believe are 'hanging by a thread' as they are, with 32Lives having them on 'life support' right now...

Vanguard I think I'll be okay without, though it will render some older projects useless - but I do like Hypersonic 2 still... To give it up is the same as giving up an old ROMpler I suppose. And they still fetch good $$$ for a reason.

Perhaps I need to convert the latter to sample libraries?

As a rule of thumb, you should always keep your computer one OS version behind (at least). So, don't hurry "upgrade" to High Sierra. There's nothing there that will improve your musical workflow, AFAIK.

Do that only if (and when) you have an application that you absolutely need and will absolutely refuse to run otherwise.

You can get more information in this thread: viewtopic.php?f=16&t=491751

[fallacy]

Can I take this topic in a slightly different direction and ask if anyone is in much of a hurry to update to High Sierra? As far as I know it's going to break any synths using the Carbon framework as it has been made obsolete. I don't know which of my synths use this but I do know I have one foot in yesteryear with ReFX Vanguard and Hypersonic 2, which I believe are 'hanging by a thread' as they are, with 32Lives having them on 'life support' right now...

Vanguard I think I'll be okay without, though it will render some older projects useless - but I do like Hypersonic 2 still... To give it up is the same as giving up an old ROMpler I suppose. And they still fetch good $$$ for a reason.

Perhaps I need to convert the latter to sample libraries?

As a rule of thumb, you should always keep your computer one OS version behind (at least). So, don't hurry "upgrade" to High Sierra. There's nothing there that will improve your musical workflow, AFAIK.

Do that only if (and when) you have an application that you absolutely need and will absolutely refuse to run otherwise.

You can get more information in this thread: viewtopic.php?f=16&t=491751

Thanks for that. I suppose security updates will still be provided for a period of time, so yeah it might be worth me staying a version behind. I just realised Reason will stop working if I upgrade since I'm still on v8.x .... the price you pay not to upgrade!

[Jace-BeOS]

But who would need a "ambient pad synth", a "futuristic pad synth", a spatial mono synth, a retro mono synth, a "bass machine synth", a "blah-blah synth", a PCM synth, a PCM spatial synth, a PCM retro synth, etc, etc.

Have to agree with you here. One way of looking at it is they've separated functionality that a 'do it all synth' can do in to discrete purpose built synths. But it doesn't take long before you realise some of them are one-trick-pony synths that do very little else than what is on the superficial surface.

Perhaps these limitations could inspire creativity as a result. When used as VSTi/AU you open them up to all the effects you have at your disposal which can potentially turn them in to something more unique.

Having said that - I ended up using Montreal (e.piano) on a recent track because it was immediately within reach. When it came to swapping it with something 'better' when I was tweaking/mixing, I ended up keeping it not because the quality is necessarily stellar, but because it just sounded 'right' in context. So they're nice to have around. Perhaps not $300 nice...

Sh101, Tb303 etc are also quick one-trick ponies. Minimoog is also quite simple when it comes to sound generation options (lfos, envs, modulators, 1 filter) - no sure what is wrong with that.

Exactly what I wanted to say in response to this line of criticism. While the synths native to Gadget are designed as limited sound generators (not the Legacy Collection-styled synths), that's exactly what makes Gadget fun and quick to work with. It's the point of Gadget.

If you want bass, use the bass gadgets. If you want FM bells and e pianos, use the FM Gadget. If you want game sounds, use the game sound gadgets. If you want a pad, use the Gadget made for pads. Each synth is set up to quickly offer a certain type of sound and provide moderate editing to customize the sound. They're shortcuts to production as much as picking up a TB303 or guitar would be for people who don't want to program synths before making music. I think most people work that way. The people who do heavy synth programming are the minority and there's already a ton of stuff out there to cater to them.

To restate the above; Offering one massive synth with all these abilities in one GUI is unnecessary complexity and isn't what Gadget is about. These synth engines direct you to specific gadgets for specific types of sounds, just like people do with small dedicated hardware devices. Complexity would be a longer path to execution of ideas.

I've started more melodically-driven, synth-driven music projects, more rapidly, in Gadget than I have elsewhere because I do less with sound design and more with melody and playing. I then export the tracks to Logic to do more complex production (if I like the song). This works for me and I think Korg has seen popularity of Gadget because it works well for others too.

[Jace-BeOS]

Can I take this topic in a slightly different direction and ask if anyone is in much of a hurry to update to High Sierra? As far as I know it's going to break any synths using the Carbon framework as it has been made obsolete. I don't know which of my synths use this but I do know I have one foot in yesteryear with ReFX Vanguard and Hypersonic 2, which I believe are 'hanging by a thread' as they are, with 32Lives having them on 'life support' right now...

Vanguard I think I'll be okay without, though it will render some older projects useless - but I do like Hypersonic 2 still... To give it up is the same as giving up an old ROMpler I suppose. And they still fetch good $$$ for a reason.

Perhaps I need to convert the latter to sample libraries?

As a rule of thumb, you should always keep your computer one OS version behind (at least). So, don't hurry "upgrade" to High Sierra. There's nothing there that will improve your musical workflow, AFAIK.

Do that only if (and when) you have an application that you absolutely need and will absolutely refuse to run otherwise.

You can get more information in this thread: viewtopic.php?f=16&t=491751

Thanks for that. I suppose security updates will still be provided for a period of time, so yeah it might be worth me staying a version behind. I just realised Reason will stop working if I upgrade since I'm still on v8.x .... the price you pay not to upgrade!

I'm still mostly using Snow Leopard. I dual boot to El Capitan, but hardly ever for music work. I will be on Snow Leopard until Apple releases a proper Mac Pro (if my nest egg can pay for it). Then it's software upgrades galore... and loss of software! I'll need to maintain a Snow Leopard machine on the side, ha ha...

[fmr]

To restate the above; Offering one massive synth with all these abilities in one GUI is unnecessary complexity and isn't what Gadget is about. These synth engines direct you to specific gadgets for specific types of sounds, just like people do with small dedicated hardware devices. Complexity would be a longer path to execution of ideas.

I've started more melodically-driven, synth-driven music projects, more rapidly, in Gadget than I have elsewhere because I do less with sound design and more with melody and playing. I then export the tracks to Logic to do more complex production (if I like the song). This works for me and I think Korg has seen popularity of Gadget because it works well for others too.

I never mentioned "one massive synth with all these abilities in one GUI". I mentioned that ONE synth is very well capable of basses, leads, pads, strings, and a lot more synth sounds, unless it is unnecessarily crippled. This is even true for the Minimoog (it can't do pads or strings, but can certainly do leads, basses, bell like tones, game sounds, FX, etc.). And the Memorymoog, which could be regarded as a polyphonic Mini, certainly can do pads and strings, besides all the rest. As can basically any polysynth since the Oberheim 4-voice - and they aren't "massive synths". Nor is the MonoPoly or the Polysix, or the MS-20 "massive synths", that would need to be simplified to be useable. Really?

But i have nothing against Gadget, and if it fits your workflow, good for you. I'm all in favour of alternatives. However, I would like to know how popular it really is in OS X, when compared with KLC (sorry if I don't trust you on this).

But there is another thing, and you said it yourself: "I then export the tracks to Logic to do more complex production". You pick the work you did in a software that costs 300 dollars to do a more serious work in one that costs way less than that.

Is it just me that finds this weird? 300 dollars for a "sketch pad"? Seems too much for me. Heck... that's almost the price of Reason. And there certainly isn't a Reason in Gadget

Anyway, let's not get back on this. I'm glad that Korg at least keeps maintaining KLC, and as long as they do it, I'll be quiet (not entirely happy, but quiet).

[dangayle]

I'm still mostly using Snow Leopard. I dual boot to El Capitan, but hardly ever for music work. I will be on Snow Leopard until Apple releases a proper Mac Pro (if my nest egg can pay for it). Then it's software upgrades galore... and loss of software! I'll need to maintain a Snow Leopard machine on the side, ha ha...

Why not build yourself a Hackintosh? You can build a baddass machine using commodity parts and pretty much everything works. I have an i7 macOS Sierra tower that’s been chugging along for over a year now, no issues.

[Jace-BeOS]

I'm still mostly using Snow Leopard. I dual boot to El Capitan, but hardly ever for music work. I will be on Snow Leopard until Apple releases a proper Mac Pro (if my nest egg can pay for it). Then it's software upgrades galore... and loss of software! I'll need to maintain a Snow Leopard machine on the side, ha ha...

Why not build yourself a Hackintosh? You can build a baddass machine using commodity parts and pretty much everything works. I have an i7 macOS Sierra tower that’s been chugging along for over a year now, no issues.

Absolutely not. I am done with PC hardware and voodoo. The last thing i want is to have to hack Mac OS (and updates) to get it to run on commodity PC hardware. I don't like commodity hardware, and the most expensive PC hardware was still not as eloquent as a Mac Pro (and the favored parts changed with the wind; one moment, I'm building a new PC with all recommended parts, and the next I'm troubleshooting and replacing those parts which are now "known to be problems"). Forget it. I have had enough trouble with Windows all my life (it's not me, unless you mean that i just refuse to put up with it any more; i hate being a tech). Mac OS isn't as great as it used to be, and Apple is on the decline (in quality, but business will eventually follow), but it's still far far FAR less irritating to me than Windows.

[Jace-BeOS]

To restate the above; Offering one massive synth with all these abilities in one GUI is unnecessary complexity and isn't what Gadget is about. These synth engines direct you to specific gadgets for specific types of sounds, just like people do with small dedicated hardware devices. Complexity would be a longer path to execution of ideas.

I've started more melodically-driven, synth-driven music projects, more rapidly, in Gadget than I have elsewhere because I do less with sound design and more with melody and playing. I then export the tracks to Logic to do more complex production (if I like the song). This works for me and I think Korg has seen popularity of Gadget because it works well for others too.

I never mentioned "one massive synth with all these abilities in one GUI". I mentioned that ONE synth is very well capable of basses, leads, pads, strings, and a lot more synth sounds, unless it is unnecessarily crippled. This is even true for the Minimoog (it can't do pads or strings, but can certainly do leads, basses, bell like tones, game sounds, FX, etc.). And the Memorymoog, which could be regarded as a polyphonic Mini, certainly can do pads and strings, besides all the rest. As can basically any polysynth since the Oberheim 4-voice - and they aren't "massive synths". Nor is the MonoPoly or the Polysix, or the MS-20 "massive synths", that would need to be simplified to be useable. Really?

But i have nothing against Gadget, and if it fits your workflow, good for you. I'm all in favour of alternatives. However, I would like to know how popular it really is in OS X, when compared with KLC (sorry if I don't trust you on this).

But there is another thing, and you said it yourself: "I then export the tracks to Logic to do more complex production". You pick the work you did in a software that costs 300 dollars to do a more serious work in one that costs way less than that.

Is it just me that finds this weird? 300 dollars for a "sketch pad"? Seems too much for me. Heck... that's almost the price of Reason. And there certainly isn't a Reason in Gadget

Anyway, let's not get back on this. I'm glad that Korg at least keeps maintaining KLC, and as long as they do it, I'll be quiet (not entirely happy, but quiet).

Logic used to cost $700. I bought my first version when it was $400. Now it's $200. Is Korg Gadget more costly at full price on a Mac? Hell yes. But like you compared to Reason, it's a different way of doing things and that's what i wanted. I have no need for Gadget on my Mac, but i do want all the gadgets in Logic to make porting my Gadget projects more dynamic. Gadget isn't a full DAW and i don't care for it to be, really.

[fallacy]

In defence to it being a "$300 sketch pad" well - thats only if you choose to use the standalone software. If you look at it like $300 for a decent bunch of plugins it doesn't seem so bad... though I personally paid the introductory price of $199, and would have had trouble justifying it for $300. No question that there are better things to spend the money on however. I mean if you already have a good flagship subtractive synth (capable of FM if you care) - a DAW with the organ/e.piano, then I'd argue the M1 and Wavestation KLC products would 'fill the gaps' for a much lower price.

IMHO the KLC Wavestation UI is nicer to use than Milptas (I can't speak for iWavestation.) Strangely I find the hardware itself pretty easy to program too. The design was not the worst in the world.

[fmr]

In defence to it being a "$300 sketch pad" well - thats only if you choose to use the standalone software. If you look at it like $300 for a decent bunch of plugins it doesn't seem so bad... though I personally paid the introductory price of $199, and would have had trouble justifying it for $300. No question that there are better things to spend the money on however. I mean if you already have a good flagship subtractive synth (capable of FM if you care) - a DAW with the organ/e.piano, then I'd argue the M1 and Wavestation KLC products would 'fill the gaps' for a much lower price.

Exactly. For people that already have a good collection of synths, there's nothing really useful in Gadget. The few things there that really justify paying something are the "versions" of KLC instruments. Those are the only ones that make it "decent bunch of plugins". But those I already have, and they have been sold by Korg way cheaper too.

IMHO the KLC Wavestation UI is nicer to use than Milpitas (I can't speak for iWavestation.) Strangely I find the hardware itself pretty easy to program too. The design was not the worst in the world.

I am not unhappy with the KLC GUIs either. The only thing they would need is to be bigger, and the possibilty to type values in the boxes. It's tiresome try to have an envelope segment match the exact values we want, when we akready know what we want (like when we are trying to match a sound from the 03R/W, as I was doing the other day - BTW, having in M1 VST all the PCM sounds that were in 0x series would be great too. There not so many new ones, after all. And the "waveshaper" would not be bad either, Besides that, the engine is very much the same). So, what's needed there is just small improvements. Overall, I find them pretty useful too.

[dangayle]

Absolutely not. I am done with PC hardware and voodoo. The last thing i want is to have to hack Mac OS (and updates) to get it to run on commodity PC hardware. I don't like commodity hardware, and the most expensive PC hardware was still not as eloquent as a Mac Pro (and the favored parts changed with the wind; one moment, I'm building a new PC with all recommended parts, and the next I'm troubleshooting and replacing those parts which are now "known to be problems"). Forget it. I have had enough trouble with Windows all my life (it's not me, unless you mean that i just refuse to put up with it any more; i hate being a tech). Mac OS isn't as great as it used to be, and Apple is on the decline (in quality, but business will eventually follow), but it's still far far FAR less irritating to me than Windows.

Oh, definitely don't go Hackintosh then, since you get all the headache of dealing with the parts and drivers and you can't update without a good day set aside to fix it when your graphics invariably quit. Those old Mac Pros were pieces of artwork, I remember opening one up circa 2007 and it reminded me of a hermetically sealed spacestation. Everything was just so.

I like my hackintosh primarily because I like being able to piece it out and upgrade parts as I get the cash and because I have several thousand dollars invested in the software ecosystem.

[fmr]

I like my hackintosh primarily because I like being able to piece it out and upgrade parts as I get the cash and because I have several thousand dollars invested in the software ecosystem.

I am thinking in follow the same path. I'm tired of all those underpowered and overpriced Macs. And now Intel is just launching a new set of CPUs, with very well priced six core i7. I bet we will not see nothing like that in Macs for a very, very long time.

[fallacy]

The only thing they would need is to be bigger, and the possibilty to type values in the boxes. It's tiresome try to have an envelope segment match the exact values we want, when we akready know what we want (like when we are trying to match a sound from the 03R/W, as I was doing the other day

It is absolutely possible to type in the values - you just double click on them. Sometimes when you do that you need to press the cursor to the right and then backspace to remove the existing values... Is that not working for you? It's how I prefer to do things sometimes as well...

As for the size, well I'm still 1080p. I'm also using a Hackintosh which is rock solid, but it's rather exotic hardware mimmicking the older 2010 24 core beasts of the time. It still copes with anything I throw at it so I won't be upgrading anytime soon.

[fmr]

The only thing they would need is to be bigger, and the possibilty to type values in the boxes. It's tiresome try to have an envelope segment match the exact values we want, when we akready know what we want (like when we are trying to match a sound from the 03R/W, as I was doing the other day

It is absolutely possible to type in the values - you just double click on them. Sometimes when you do that you need to press the cursor to the right and then backspace to remove the existing values... Is that not working for you? It's how I prefer to do things sometimes as well...

As for the size, well I'm still 1080p. I'm also using a Hackintosh which is rock solid, but it's rather exotic hardware mimmicking the older 2010 24 core beasts of the time. It still copes with anything I throw at it so I won't be upgrading anytime soon.

I checked, and you're right. It works IN WAVESTATION. M1 is built differently, and we have not value boxes for the envelopes in it. The values appear in floating boxes when we click over the nodes. So, in the M1, we can't do that. That's what I was saying

So, +1 for the Wavestation GUI, and -1 for the M1 GUI

BTW: No "undo" either. Every change you do is final.

[fallacy]

The only thing they would need is to be bigger, and the possibilty to type values in the boxes. It's tiresome try to have an envelope segment match the exact values we want, when we akready know what we want (like when we are trying to match a sound from the 03R/W, as I was doing the other day

It is absolutely possible to type in the values - you just double click on them. Sometimes when you do that you need to press the cursor to the right and then backspace to remove the existing values... Is that not working for you? It's how I prefer to do things sometimes as well...

As for the size, well I'm still 1080p. I'm also using a Hackintosh which is rock solid, but it's rather exotic hardware mimmicking the older 2010 24 core beasts of the time. It still copes with anything I throw at it so I won't be upgrading anytime soon.

I checked, and you're right. It works IN WAVESTATION. M1 is built differently, and we have not value boxes for the envelopes in it. The values appear in floating boxes when we click over the nodes. So, in the M1, we can't do that. That's what I was saying

So, +1 for the Wavestation GUI, and -1 for the M1 GUI

BTW: No "undo" either. Every change you do is final.

True but here's one for you that might make it a bit easier... Double click on the envelope points and then use the arrow keys to adjust... Just found that out myself and it definitely has its place (how old school is this, talking about KLC. One of the first soft synths I bought)