Hi Guys, this is a really interesting discussion, if slightly academic
I don't suppose Yamaha are goingto base their product
development on our advice.
However some great points have been made about what makes a good
hardware synth. Yes, a lot of people do just want a `look'and a
bunch of great presets. For those who like to get into editing, I think
a direction has been indicated by Roland, with their GAIA SH01 keyboard
very direct access, pretty much one control per function. However
it took a retro step too far for me - no display or patch names, only
bank and patch numbers. I haven't heard one but the reviews are
enthusiastic
http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/aug10/articles/roland-gaia-sh01.htm<
http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/aug10/articles/roland-gaia-sh01.htm>
For this reason, I recently bought a Korg MS2000BR (rack) on ebay
very knobular, including a sixteen-step"analogue-style" step
sequencer. Not perfect, but nice if you like hands-on access.
http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/may00/articles/korg.htm<
http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/may00/articles/korg.htm>
Arturia have also just set the cat amongst the pigeons with their mono
analog Minibrute maybe there will be a poly Maxibrute but it
has to have patch memory.
Even though the AN1x sounds great and the facilities of the keyboard as
a whole are excellent (wheels, X-strip), I have never been able to
comprehend the knob matrix. I tried making an alternative background
legend for it, but it never got anywhere close to intuitive. I
considered getting a Yamaha AN200, as a more accessible (knobby) version
of the AN1x. Then I realised that if I got a Behringer BCR2000 midi
controller, I would have 32-knob / 16-switch access to the AN1x
parameters, for about half the price of an AN200. Got the BCR2000, just
need to set it up, which is probably a few day's labour of love. I
will certainly share the syx template if I get the job done, but
don't hold your breath.
So yes, I would like to seean AN2x. You would think that Yamaha would
appreciate - all that development work they did 15 years ago is still
worth something. I would settle for the same basic VA architecture,
maybe a little more modulation (eg: res and lfo speed as destinations)
plus another envelope plus direct USB connection to PC. The front panel
should be simply divided into clearly labelled areas (like GAIA).
Ideally, the knobs would be rotary encoders with LED rings (like
Behringer BCR) and Osc/LFO waveform selection would be shown by LEDs
(like GAIA / MS2000), so that when you call up a preset, you can see how
it is made, just as you can with a soft-synth on a computer screen.
That kind of understanding of patch design is a real incentive to get
stuck in and make your own sounds. Also the light show would be amazing
[;;)]
Best regards to all
Bill
--- In AN1x-list@yahoogroups.com, Jeff <jf.serviere@...> wrote:
>
> Hi Peter and you all happy AN1x players !
> What deserved our beloved keyboard ? It does not look "analog" (read =
> full of knobs) and the package looked like any entry level keyboard to
> keep a (relatively) low price tag. Most of the people don't go inside
> the programs, just listen at some factory presets. Tweaking a lot in
the
> parameters can be time consuming (right, Ritchie ?)... So an old
> fashionned look and some Moog or Prophet like presets and that's all
the
> average customer needs. Maybe a remain of the DX7 and other FM engines
> where programming was awfully complex and quite impossible without
> computer.
> OK, the AN1x is not perfect, mostly because of the multi function
knobs
> and the cryptic programmation matrix, you have to take care of the
> plastic case, but the keyboard is nice to play and it can sound
awesome.
> Cheers.
> J.F.
>
> Peter Korsten a écrit :
> >
> > Op 25-2-2012 9:37, derek192603 schreef:
> >
> > > I personally think that Yamaha have lost their innovative edge
over
> > the years, probably because innovation doesn't sell synths to the
> > unwashed masses who don't edit and want instant sounds (i.e. the
> > majority of people couldn't give a hoot about architecture and the
> > depth of them).
> >
> > Presumably, Yamaha have to pay the bills as well. And I think the
bigger
> > problem is software synths. The niches, which probably didn't any
profit
> > at al for Yamaha to begin with, are now filled by software synths.
> >
> > The workstation concept is something that has worked well for the
last
> > 10, 15 years, so that's what they're selling.
> >
> > > I have the EX5, AN1x, SY77 and FS1R and I believe that they
> > represent the pinnacle of Yamaha's innovation. Of course there is
the
> > DX7 (but the SY kicks its ass) and the CS/GX/GS series as well, but
> > these four (EX5, AN1x, SY77 and FS1R ) are my personal picks. I am
> > still dreaming of the day that Yamaha take all of the features of
> > those four to make a dream uber synth, and I'm hoping that the
Kronos
> > is the competition that makes Yamaha wake up from the nice sounding
> > but uninspiring Motif series.
> >
> > Don't forget the VL-1/VL-7/VL-1m and the VP-1, which is about as
common
> > as Bigfoot is. Some of that ended up in your EX5 as well.
> >
> > As for an über-synth... wasn't that what the EX5 was supposed to
be?
> > Although the EX5 never really knew what it wanted to be, or what the
> > different departments within Yamaha wanted it to be. If you take a
look
> > at the schematics, you realise how utterly unsuited the thing is for
the
> > workstation role (one that involves samples and loading those from
sort
> > of media).
> >
> > I'd rather that Yamaha would come out with a relatively simple basic
> > design, with a 4 or 5 octave keyboard of AN1x quality (yes, the
EX5/EX7
> > keyboard is much nicer, but also more expensive) and space for knobs
> > and/or sliders. They could reuse the same case for the different
synths,
> > muck about a bit with the layout of the knobs, and have a distinct
> > colour for each synth.
> >
> > And then, each synth would excel at one particular kind of
synthesis:
> > analogue modelling, physical modelling, FM, whatever. And it would
be
> > affordable, so definitely less than â¬1000.
> >
> > Would it sell? It's hard to say, and given that we haven't seen
anything
> > like it, that probably means that they did their research and
concluded
> > that they wouldn't make any money from it.
> >
> > But it would mean a fresh new wind through the hardware synth
business.
> > After all, how many reincarnations of the same Virus, Clavia,
Elektron
> > or miniature Korg can we stomach?
> >
> > - Peter
> >
> >
>
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]