The search for a Kurzweil K2000 piano soundalike VST

[ghettosynth]

Here you go, these are from the 2500. I'm sure that they've secured the necessary rights to distribute this legally, it wouldn't be on the web otherwise, amiright?

Also available as soundfont and reason refill.

https://www.amazound.com/store/krz-pian ... kt-samples

[waltercruz]

so... they transformed a piano that was less than 20MB (all the ROM on k2500 is 8MB and in K2600 is 12MB) in a 1.4 Giga of samples?

[AnX]

Honey, I Blew Up The ROM

[ghettosynth]

so... they transformed a piano that was less than 20MB (all the ROM on k2500 is 8MB and in K2600 is 12MB) in a 1.4 Giga of samples?

They sampled at 24 bit for each patch. Some of the patches will have some VAST processing. As I mentioned, often a filter or exciter is applied. So, if you're just sampling a preset you will want some velocity switching if that processing is mapped to velocity. If you're creating bread and butter samples like this then it's probably easier to autosample than to spend time trying to replicate the processing in Kontakt. Hence, big sample libraries.

[briefcasemanx]

I haven't messed with kontakt sampling ever, can vast do things that can't be done in kontakt?

[ghettosynth]

I haven't messed with contact sampling ever, can vast do things that can't be done in contact?

yes, no? Probably, but who cares is the right answer. VAST is such a great marketing phrase. It's really not vast, maybe walmart broad, if I may coin a phrase. Each of the components is very weak in terms of quality as compared to modern DSP.

VAST is not flexible like we think of with modular synths. There's a lot there, but it's very definitely a sample based synth engine. I enjoyed it for a while in the 90s, but, I remember it getting kicked to the back seat quickly when I got the Nord Modular.

That said, you could certainly do the things that people do with Piano samples. The filters in Kontakt are nothing to write home about, but they're better than the filters in the VAST.

[bmanic]

I haven't messed with contact sampling ever, can vast do things that can't be done in contact?

yes, no? Probably, but who cares is the right answer. VAST is such a great marketing phrase. It's really not vast, maybe walmart broad, if I may coin a phrase. Each of the components is very weak in terms of quality as compared to modern DSP.

VAST is not flexible like we think of with modular synths. There's a lot there, but it's very definitely a sample based synth engine. I enjoyed it for a while in the 90s, but, I remember it getting kicked to the back seat quickly when I got the Nord Modular.

That said, you could certainly do the things that people do with Piano samples. The filters in Kontakt are nothing to write home about, but they're better than the filters in the VAST.

Hmm.. depends on what era of Kxxx synthesizer you talk about. Yes of course, none will be as flexible as a modular synth (but try having 128 voice polyphony on a modular system!!) but that is true for ALL of these kinds of synthesizers, not just Kurzweil's synths.

In terms of capability and flexibility in sheer amount of things you can do, Kurzweil's VAST system is most definitely more capable than similar era Roland/Yamaha/Korg stuff. Having said that, flexibility isn't always the most desirable thing. Sound is. And this is where the Kurzweil both shines and falters. There are some real weaknesses to many of the VAST processing blocks but there are also some brilliant capabilities somewhat hidden within the system (like that strange FM type of shaping and warping blocks that remind you of today's wavetable synth's oscillator shapers).

It's also supremely flexible when you leverage the functions to precisely tailor a modulation path the way you want it to work. Want an LFO to only work on a specific range of keys at certain velocities? Yes.. that's possible. Try to do that on a Roland/Korg/Yamaha workstation. Basically you have the tools to do most things in terms of modulation that you can think of (except audio rate modulation). On the other major brands you are usually limited to specific options preset for the user (like keyboard tracking for the filter which is usually set in stone, not possible to really alter the curve/distribution).

[waltercruz]

so... they transformed a piano that was less than 20MB (all the ROM on k2500 is 8MB and in K2600 is 12MB) in a 1.4 Giga of samples?

They sampled at 24 bit for each patch. Some of the patches will have some VAST processing. As I mentioned, often a filter or exciter is applied. So, if you're just sampling a preset you will want some velocity switching if that processing is mapped to velocity. If you're creating bread and butter samples like this then it's probably easier to autosample than to spend time trying to replicate the processing in Kontakt. Hence, big sample libraries.

ah, that makes more sense!

[ghettosynth]

I haven't messed with contact sampling ever, can vast do things that can't be done in contact?

yes, no? Probably, but who cares is the right answer.
<snip the rest>

Hmm.. depends on what era of Kxxx synthesizer you talk about. Yes of course, none will be as flexible as a modular synth (but try having 128 voice polyphony on a modular system!!) but that is true for ALL of these kinds of synthesizers, not just Kurzweil's synths.

I was really trying to avoid having a long conversation where nerds exchanged a bunch of detail that nobody else cared about, but ok.

So my comparison here was between Kontakt and the Kurzweil 2000. I answered yes/no? probably on purpose. Yes, there are probably some things that you can do with the Kurzweil that you can't really do with Kontkat, but nothing compelling enough for me to find 3U to keep it in. I haven't used it honestly in almost two decades.

In terms of capability and flexibility in sheer amount of things you can do, Kurzweil's VAST system is most definitely more capable than similar era Roland/Yamaha/Korg stuff.

No doubt, but, and I spent too much money for mine in the 90s, the issue is with how useful it is/was. IMNSHO, it's more useful on paper than in practice. If I could go back in time I wouldn't buy the K2K. After I got the Nord, the K2K pretty much got relegated to drum/sampled keys duty.

Having said that, flexibility isn't always the most desirable thing. Sound is. And this is where the Kurzweil both shines and falters. There are some real weaknesses to many of the VAST processing blocks but there are also some brilliant capabilities somewhat hidden within the system (like that strange FM type of shaping and warping blocks that remind you of today's wavetable synth's oscillator shapers).

Yes, but, it's very limited and not worth owing one for today. I think that, like FM, it's easy to create harsh and ugly sounds with the K2K, perhaps why Trent Resnor like it so much, but as I much as I thought it was the bees knees when I got it, my hindsight thinks that it was a waste of money.

It's also supremely flexible when you leverage the functions to precisely tailor a modulation path the way you want it to work. Want an LFO to only work on a specific range of keys at certain velocities? Yes.. that's possible. Try to do that on a Roland/Korg/Yamaha workstation. Basically you have the tools to do most things in terms of modulation that you can think of (except audio rate modulation).

Yes, but you're coming at this from the POV of one wants some 90s rompler. I still don't really get Rompler nostalgia. I was talking about today. Don't get me wrong, I spent hours twiddline funs to get just a certain sound, and yes, at the time it seemed so powerful. Today though, Reaktor replaces all of that for me. Kontakt can also do much of that. For what I was doing at the time, the DSP quality of the Nord Modular trumped all of that. Not to mention the much more natural U/I.

On the other major brands you are usually limited to specific options preset for the user (like keyboard tracking for the filter which is usually set in stone, not possible to really alter the curve/distribution).

No doubt, which is why I purchased mine when I did. I wouldn't buy one for Rompler nostalgia today though.

In retrospect, I didn't get much out of 90s rompler tech and wish that I would have had the foresight to just skip it all. I don't know what that would have looked like for me though. However, it was a very short window between spending too much money on shit romplers and computers becoming usable enough as a rompler to replace them.

With what I ended up doing with the K2K, I didn't really need it. Probably the only rompler that earned its keep for me in the 90s was the JD800. That said, it also had some annoying limitations. I think that the large sum I spent on those two synths would have been better spent on something else entirely.

[Uncle E]

I was really trying to avoid having a long conversation where nerds exchanged a bunch of detail that nobody else cared about, but ok.

Isn't this the exact reason we're all here?

No doubt, but, and I spent too much money for mine in the 90s, the issue is with how useful it is/was. IMNSHO, it's more useful on paper than in practice. If I could go back in time I wouldn't buy the K2K. After I got the Nord, the K2K pretty much got relegated to drum/sampled keys duty.

I always loved the interface. Any parameter you're on, click the Edit button and you're instantly taken to its modulators or other related parameters. Of course, your Nord Modular is in a different league entirely. I only had the Micro Modular and even that was a fantastic idea machine. In hindsight, that was one of the most inspirational synths I've ever had. I had a 2600 Blue Meanie around the same time and didn't get nearly as much done with it.

like FM, it's easy to create harsh and ugly sounds with the K2K, perhaps why Trent Resnor like it so much

The waveshapers and funs.

In retrospect, I didn't get much out of 90s rompler tech and wish that I would have had the foresight to just skip it all. I don't know what that would have looked like for me though. However, it was a very short window between spending too much money on shit romplers and computers becoming usable enough as a rompler to replace them.

I'm still making the same mistakes as I made then. As much as I love my old analogs and romplers, the smart thing would be to sell it all and get a Jupiter-Xm with the rompler add-ons. I'm sure I'd get more done with it. But I won't because "muh sound qualities"...

[DJErmac]

I was really trying to avoid having a long conversation where nerds exchanged a bunch of detail that nobody else cared about, but ok.

Isn't this the exact reason we're all here?

I wish this thread would never end.

[gaggle of hermits]

I was really trying to avoid having a long conversation where nerds exchanged a bunch of detail that nobody else cared about, but ok.

yeah, those guys, eh? who needs 'em going on about VAST and sampling depth and exciters.

who are these dweebs?

"The DSP256 that is always on, even on the digital outs, is nothing compared to the KDFX."

"They sampled at 24 bit for each patch. Some of the patches will have some VAST processing. As I mentioned, often a filter or exciter is applied. So, if you're just sampling a preset you will want some velocity switching if that processing is mapped to velocity."

fancy writing that kinda thing in a thread about k2xx-series synths.

[bmanic]

I haven't messed with contact sampling ever, can vast do things that can't be done in contact?

yes, no? Probably, but who cares is the right answer.
<snip the rest>

Hmm.. depends on what era of Kxxx synthesizer you talk about. Yes of course, none will be as flexible as a modular synth (but try having 128 voice polyphony on a modular system!!) but that is true for ALL of these kinds of synthesizers, not just Kurzweil's synths.

I was really trying to avoid having a long conversation where nerds exchanged a bunch of detail that nobody else cared about, but ok.

So my comparison here was between Kontakt and the Kurzweil 2000. I answered yes/no? probably on purpose. Yes, there are probably some things that you can do with the Kurzweil that you can't really do with Kontkat, but nothing compelling enough for me to find 3U to keep it in. I haven't used it honestly in almost two decades.

In terms of capability and flexibility in sheer amount of things you can do, Kurzweil's VAST system is most definitely more capable than similar era Roland/Yamaha/Korg stuff.

No doubt, but, and I spent too much money for mine in the 90s, the issue is with how useful it is/was. IMNSHO, it's more useful on paper than in practice. If I could go back in time I wouldn't buy the K2K. After I got the Nord, the K2K pretty much got relegated to drum/sampled keys duty.

Having said that, flexibility isn't always the most desirable thing. Sound is. And this is where the Kurzweil both shines and falters. There are some real weaknesses to many of the VAST processing blocks but there are also some brilliant capabilities somewhat hidden within the system (like that strange FM type of shaping and warping blocks that remind you of today's wavetable synth's oscillator shapers).

Yes, but, it's very limited and not worth owing one for today. I think that, like FM, it's easy to create harsh and ugly sounds with the K2K, perhaps why Trent Resnor like it so much, but as I much as I thought it was the bees knees when I got it, my hindsight thinks that it was a waste of money.

It's also supremely flexible when you leverage the functions to precisely tailor a modulation path the way you want it to work. Want an LFO to only work on a specific range of keys at certain velocities? Yes.. that's possible. Try to do that on a Roland/Korg/Yamaha workstation. Basically you have the tools to do most things in terms of modulation that you can think of (except audio rate modulation).

Yes, but you're coming at this from the POV of one wants some 90s rompler. I still don't really get Rompler nostalgia. I was talking about today. Don't get me wrong, I spent hours twiddline funs to get just a certain sound, and yes, at the time it seemed so powerful. Today though, Reaktor replaces all of that for me. Kontakt can also do much of that. For what I was doing at the time, the DSP quality of the Nord Modular trumped all of that. Not to mention the much more natural U/I.

On the other major brands you are usually limited to specific options preset for the user (like keyboard tracking for the filter which is usually set in stone, not possible to really alter the curve/distribution).

No doubt, which is why I purchased mine when I did. I wouldn't buy one for Rompler nostalgia today though.

In retrospect, I didn't get much out of 90s rompler tech and wish that I would have had the foresight to just skip it all. I don't know what that would have looked like for me though. However, it was a very short window between spending too much money on shit romplers and computers becoming usable enough as a rompler to replace them.

With what I ended up doing with the K2K, I didn't really need it. Probably the only rompler that earned its keep for me in the 90s was the JD800. That said, it also had some annoying limitations. I think that the large sum I spent on those two synths would have been better spent on something else entirely.

Actually I totally agree with you on most points. I'm coming at this from the exact opposite life-reference/experience point to yours. I could never afford a Kurzweil synthesizer when they were in their prime as they were stupid expensive here in Finland but the K2000 was still the very first synth I extensively tweaked and played with due to a summer job next door to a music shop where I spent more time than at the job! For two months straight!. My only other experience had been with some analogue synths, mainly a Minimoog and a Jupiter 8 so jumping from these into completely new digital domain with a synthesizer that had huge manuals stacked next to it in the store, got me into synthesis in general.

The first synth I did eventually get was a brand new, just released, Roland XP-50 as I could afford that one. But I was still always fantasizing of owning a Kurzweil top of the line product.

Thus I've always had a soft spot for the Kurzweils and now later in life I of course own several of them (just a while ago I got a fully loaded K2500X with the KDFX board installed.. for an amazing 400 euros. Paid about 200 euros about 10 years ago for my K2000RS with several included SCSI HDs and a SCSI CD-Rom).

Naturally I wouldn't recommend a vintage Kxxx synthesizer for anybody that is already happy with plugin solutions for synthesis. Reaktor and Kontakt far surpass the abilities of pretty much any hardware things in my opinion and if I'm being completely honest, soft synths are on far more productions that I've been part of than any hardware ever has.

So yeah, basically I do agree with your sentiment. But as I'm suffering from the nostalgia bug due to my history, I am indeed eyeing the latest K2700 synthesizer even though I most definitely do not need one. I just happen to have much more disposable income at this stage in my life than I ever did in the early 90's.

[Uncle E]

So yeah, basically I do agree with your sentiment. But as I'm suffering from the nostalgia bug due to my history, I am indeed eyeing the latest K2700 synthesizer even though I most definitely do not need one. I just happen to have much more disposable income at this stage in my life than I ever did in the early 90's.

I'm kind of glad they made it look so toy-like. That calms the GAS.

[bmanic]

Haha yeah it does look a little "wannabe" somehow. And it's still just the same VAST it's always been. But it'd be my first "next gen" Kurzweil as I've only had K2000 and K2500 before. Would like to get my hands on proper horizontal algorithm combos and such.

But yeah, we'll see how it turns out. I have no problems waiting a year or two before committing.