Hello,
I was discussing the Astrolab in another thread.
I'm wondering about the underpowered processor Arturia uses in their models.
Even the 88 version, with a more powerful processor, has a relatively long preset download time, and the polyphony management isn't really improved.
Yet, apparently, it's a stage keyboard, but the performance doesn't really live up to expectations, according to feedback.
There was a firmware version 1.70.
Are there any real changes in preset download speed and polyphony management?
I'm wondering if buying an Astrolab is really worthwhile.
Especially since the processor used is already underpowered from the start.
What's the future for this keyboard?
At some point, Arturia can optimize its VSTs all they want, but the processor will always be underpowered, and eventually, the keyboard risks becoming obsolete.
What do you think?
Is buying an Astrolab a good purchase?
Is buying the 88-note version for its more powerful processor a good idea?
Is there a real difference between the 37/61-note version and the 88-note version (with the more powerful processor)?
Thank you so much in advance for your answers and opinions.
Astrolab 37 / 61 and 88
-
- KVRian
- 890 posts since 9 May, 2005
I can't get beyond the UI. Can't stand it.
For me, I'd want Astrolab to be similar to a hardware "workstation" keyboard.
I'd want it to be multi-timbral across 8-16 different parts (similar to Kronos, Fantom, Montage, etc).
Even compared to a "Stage Piano" like the Nord Stage 4:
Stage 4 allows up to seven sounds simultaneously (two pianos, two organs, and three different synth engines).
Live, I'm not going to use a keyboard... if it can only play two simultaneous sounds.
That's not enough flexibility for most cover-band scenarios.
Not sure if Astrolab 88 is using the same keybed as their Keylab 88 mk3
I don't like the Keylab 88's velocity response.
Similar to the Korg Nautilus 61 and 73, I just can't get velocity-response to where it feels natural playing acoustic piano.
Individual keybeds feel different... but velocity-response isn't a struggle with Kronos, Stage 4, Montage, and Fantom.
For me, I'd want Astrolab to be similar to a hardware "workstation" keyboard.
I'd want it to be multi-timbral across 8-16 different parts (similar to Kronos, Fantom, Montage, etc).
Even compared to a "Stage Piano" like the Nord Stage 4:
Stage 4 allows up to seven sounds simultaneously (two pianos, two organs, and three different synth engines).
Live, I'm not going to use a keyboard... if it can only play two simultaneous sounds.
That's not enough flexibility for most cover-band scenarios.
Not sure if Astrolab 88 is using the same keybed as their Keylab 88 mk3
I don't like the Keylab 88's velocity response.
Similar to the Korg Nautilus 61 and 73, I just can't get velocity-response to where it feels natural playing acoustic piano.
Individual keybeds feel different... but velocity-response isn't a struggle with Kronos, Stage 4, Montage, and Fantom.
-
- KVRian
- Topic Starter
- 901 posts since 7 Aug, 2018
Thank you for your response and your opinion.
Completely agree with you, the Astrolab should have been something quite different from what it is.
For the scene, the reason at the base it is done, it is already far too undersized compared to its processor, download much too long, very poor management of polyphony ( even with version 88 notes which has a more powerful processor and the latest firmware 1.70, painful anyway ).
Now, one must be honest, there is an improvement in the loading of presets, but still insufficient with a good number of presets.
I love Arturia products, but for their 25th anniversary, a truly autonomous Astrolab should have been the real product and not the existing models.
In the absence of an Astrolab and a real use and management of the V Collection, it partly manages the library of the Analog Lab Pro.
Already there, not great.
Beyond that, the Astrolab is a nice machine, but far too limited.
Once again, Arturia should have released a truly accomplished machine with a processor worthy of the name.
Machines of more than 10 years load presets quickly and offer comfortable polyphony.
Once again, I love Arturia, but the more the impression that it was necessary to release at all costs the Astrolab in its current state for their 25th anniversary.
What really questions me is the lifespan of the Astrolab.
Already limited currently and Arturia will do their best to optimize, the hardware limitation (processor) will still remain as limited.
Arturia should release a version of the mega booster module and/or a Mega Astrolab X.
On the other hand, and rightly so, customers who bought version 61 and even worse version 88 notes (2300 euros anyway), it will complain and once again it will be justified.
I really don’t understand and certainly not the only one, why Arturia released a machine that was already very limited from the start.
I am not a pianist at all, I tried the 88 notes version and the keyboard is good quality, nothing more.
Beyond all that, it must be recognized that the concept is really great and for that BRAVO ARTURIA, really a shame about the rest.
The concern also, even if buying the 88 notes version (better but not great either) and that Arturia releases a booster module and / or a real Astrolab really made for the scene ( also boost), we end up with an instrument at 2300 euros and unsellable.
If so, I doubt that Arturia will make a gesture of recovery, which would be the least possible in this specific case.
Completely agree with you, the Astrolab should have been something quite different from what it is.
For the scene, the reason at the base it is done, it is already far too undersized compared to its processor, download much too long, very poor management of polyphony ( even with version 88 notes which has a more powerful processor and the latest firmware 1.70, painful anyway ).
Now, one must be honest, there is an improvement in the loading of presets, but still insufficient with a good number of presets.
I love Arturia products, but for their 25th anniversary, a truly autonomous Astrolab should have been the real product and not the existing models.
In the absence of an Astrolab and a real use and management of the V Collection, it partly manages the library of the Analog Lab Pro.
Already there, not great.
Beyond that, the Astrolab is a nice machine, but far too limited.
Once again, Arturia should have released a truly accomplished machine with a processor worthy of the name.
Machines of more than 10 years load presets quickly and offer comfortable polyphony.
Once again, I love Arturia, but the more the impression that it was necessary to release at all costs the Astrolab in its current state for their 25th anniversary.
What really questions me is the lifespan of the Astrolab.
Already limited currently and Arturia will do their best to optimize, the hardware limitation (processor) will still remain as limited.
Arturia should release a version of the mega booster module and/or a Mega Astrolab X.
On the other hand, and rightly so, customers who bought version 61 and even worse version 88 notes (2300 euros anyway), it will complain and once again it will be justified.
I really don’t understand and certainly not the only one, why Arturia released a machine that was already very limited from the start.
I am not a pianist at all, I tried the 88 notes version and the keyboard is good quality, nothing more.
Beyond all that, it must be recognized that the concept is really great and for that BRAVO ARTURIA, really a shame about the rest.
The concern also, even if buying the 88 notes version (better but not great either) and that Arturia releases a booster module and / or a real Astrolab really made for the scene ( also boost), we end up with an instrument at 2300 euros and unsellable.
If so, I doubt that Arturia will make a gesture of recovery, which would be the least possible in this specific case.