The Yamaha AN1x Synthesizer mailing list

Peter Korsten wrote:

> Roland, for instance, doesn't really innovate: they just improve on what
> others do, and sell it for an appropiate price.

Actually they're tying to capitalize (though not in the best way) on their
earlier successes, hence this "Groove Approved" mumbo jumbo. They like to tout,
"Yeah, we made the 808 and the 909 and the 303. Are we ever gonna re-release em
or make updated versions of them? No. Just buy this lame Groovebox instead.
After all, it's 'Groove Approved.'"

>Korg is pretty innovative (the spin-offs of their OASYS keyboard, like the

Prophecy, Trinity and Z1)

Not innovative in the true sense; the Z1 is just another VA synth, the Trinity
is just a late '90s version of the M1 and the Triton is just another sampling
workstation. Oh but wait! They're all in silver casings!

But they ARE making products that the public wants and likes, for example the
Electribes and the MS2000 (which currently is sold out in most stores, and won't
get new shipments until October!)

>Yamaha is even more innovative.

True, though not with the best results, popularitywise. For example the FS1r,
really is a good piece of equipment, but has lame presets and it never caught on.
Hey but something has to be said for a company that takes risks. Though they're
huge anyway and have been around for 113 years, so it's not like they're gonna
go bankrupt anyway.

Same with the EX series synths, which are some of the best sample-based synths
you can find. Though apparently the CS1/2/6x models are apparently popular. I
also like the
QY-70, which is an amazing product that got very little publicity. Everyone I
know who bought one, including me, learned of it word-of-mouth.

> Kurzweil, which is American despite the German sounding name, does little to
> innovate. Their VAST engine is quite old by now, even though their stuff is
> top-end, and even more expensive than Roland.

The WERE innovative; after all they came out with the first sample-based synth
back in 1984 (The grand old Kurzweil 250) but for the past 8-9 years they've
essentially came out with the same product (various versions of the K2000 <yawn>).

> But really new and exciting stuff seems to come mainly from the UK
> (Novation), Germany (Access, the late Quasimidi, Creamware), and Sweden
> (Clavia, Elektron). Most of it seems to focus on analogue modelling, though.

Well Clavia's NordLead started the whole virtual analog craze in the first place!

They're sort of like cutting-edge independent record labels up against the majors...

- 30 -

:. elson trinidad, los angeles, california, usa
:. elson@...
:. www.westworld.com/~elson

"music is a form of rapid tranportation" - john cage

[ the futurethnic beats of e:trinity - www.e-trinity.org ]

From: "Elson Trinidad" <elson@...>

> Peter Korsten wrote:
>
> > Roland, for instance, doesn't really innovate: they just improve on what
> > others do, and sell it for an appropiate price.
>
> Actually they're tying to capitalize (though not in the best way) on their
> earlier successes, hence this "Groove Approved" mumbo jumbo. They like to

tout,

> "Yeah, we made the 808 and the 909 and the 303. Are we ever gonna

re-release em

> or make updated versions of them? No. Just buy this lame Groovebox

instead.

> After all, it's 'Groove Approved.'"

There's a market for these boxes, otherwise Roland wouldn't make them. And
the CS1x isn't any different from these boxes.

I was thinking more about there JV/XV/XP synths and modules. The technology
may be kinda old, but it still sounds good. And the pros love it. Ever
noticed that you always see Roland on stage and in the studio? And, while
we're at it, hardly any Yamaha?

> >Korg is pretty innovative (the spin-offs of their OASYS keyboard, like

the

> Prophecy, Trinity and Z1)
>
> Not innovative in the true sense; the Z1 is just another VA synth, the

Trinity

> is just a late '90s version of the M1 and the Triton is just another

sampling

> workstation. Oh but wait! They're all in silver casings!

The Z1 is way much more than a VA synth. As a matter of fact, it's the first
available polyphonic physical modelling synth (the Yamaha VP1 was not
available). You can take a modelled violin in oscillator 1 and a modelled
analogue in oscillator 2. Try that with any other synth.

And the workstation concept comes from Korg: after all, the M1 is theirs as
well. The Trinity and Triton are further improvements on that concept,
meanwhile bringing new features. (The Trinity can be expanded to a whole
studio-in-a-box.)

Calling Korg "not innovative" is, in my opinion, unfair and biased.

> But they ARE making products that the public wants and likes, for example

the

> Electribes and the MS2000 (which currently is sold out in most stores, and

won't

> get new shipments until October!)

Well, the public wants those, and Roland's groove boxes, and Yamaha's CS
series. I don't really get this point.

> >Yamaha is even more innovative.
>
> True, though not with the best results, popularitywise. For example the

FS1r,

> really is a good piece of equipment, but has lame presets and it never

caught on.

> Hey but something has to be said for a company that takes risks. Though

they're

> huge anyway and have been around for 113 years, so it's not like they're

gonna

> go bankrupt anyway.

Not likely. But the ironic thing is that their most down-to-earth products
sell like crazy. The CS series, the 01V, and all the other stuff that they
make - take, for instance, all their accoustic pianos.

> Same with the EX series synths, which are some of the best sample-based

synths

> you can find. Though apparently the CS1/2/6x models are apparently

popular. I

> also like the
> QY-70, which is an amazing product that got very little publicity.

Everyone I

> know who bought one, including me, learned of it word-of-mouth.

The EX5 got bad word-of-mouth from its users, and for a good reason. (BTW, I
have a silver one and love it.) It is significantly handicapped in several
areas, and Yamaha will only give you a working OS if you pay an amount of
money which is a significant part of the list price of this rather expensive
synth.

The EX5 was new, though not revolutionary, but it wasn't finished. And
that's exactly what they did with the A3000. I would hope that newer Yamahas
actually work when you buy them.

With the FS1r, it's the same story. You have these FSEQ's, but there is no
way you can edit them on the machine, and there is no software available to
make use of it. So it's a useless feature. (I know that there is some
software, but with "use" I mean actually producing usable stuff.)

That's Yamaha's problem. They been building quite a few unfinished products
lately, and now they're back at the trusted AWM2 engine, which is even older
than Roland's JV engine. Duh!

Now why does this remind me of Microsoft... world's biggest company in their
class... "freedom to innovate"... unfinished products... :)

Praise be that we have one of the few *finished* products from that period.
:) (Although mine is acting quite funny lately.)

- Peter

Peter wrote:

>>

That's Yamaha's problem. They been building quite a few unfinished products
lately, and now they're back at the trusted AWM2 engine, which is even older
than Roland's JV engine. Duh!
Now why does this remind me of Microsoft... world's biggest company in their
class... "freedom to innovate"... unfinished products... :)
<<

Its the nature of the beast. The punter wants lots of new fancy gadgets with
zillions of new features (because the marketing guys and media tell then
that's what they need.....even tho' most punters don't have a clue how to
use the gear they already have ;-)

Companies respond by imposing unrealistic demands on their design
departments. The result being that innovation is rushed and products are
released too soon.....just to fill the marketing vapour ware hype gap. By
the time the discerning punter realises he's been sold a 'pup', its too
late....all the engineers have been reallocated to some other impossible
project!

Its unfair to single out Microsoft or Yamaha in this respect (they just
happen to be the biggest)...look at almost any other high tech company in
the consumer market and the story is the same :-(

In the end the user gets what the user wants (or should that be what they
think they want.....or possibly deserve :-)

You can't blame Yamaha for still making the AWM2 stuff......if the user
still wants to buy it!

>>

Praise be that we have one of the few *finished* products from that period.
<<

The sad thing is that the AN1x was a great product....it sounds great and
only ever had minor bugs. Unfortunately, at the time of release the market
didn't seem to want it....sales were poor. Until of course Yamaha stopped
making them....now everyone wants one! Go figure?

Regards

Gary
Email:
gary@...
http://www.yme.co.uk/yme

> I was thinking more about there JV/XV/XP synths and modules. The

technology

> may be kinda old, but it still sounds good. And the pros love it. Ever
> noticed that you always see Roland on stage and in the studio? And, while
> we're at it, hardly any Yamaha?

That's probably coz Yamaha only real controler is the old KX88 (as far as I
remember), but take a look at some Funker Vogt's tour pictures (
http://www.funker-vogt.com/ ) you'll see an AN1x as one of the master
keyboards it's also used by Cesium:137 , Crome-Red , DevilSpeed , Dolls of
Dasein , Gridlock , Igor Khoroshev (of Yes) , NIN , Velvet Acid Christ
....and the CS1x is used by 5 Factor Model , 99 Devils , Bushflange , Dark
Illumination , David Bowie , Hans Zimmer , Jamiroquai , Moloko (seen it on
stage) , PULSE , R.I.P. , Sneaky Bat Machine , Solemn Assembly , T.V. ,
Vertigo Blue...(source: industrial.org)

> The Z1 is way much more than a VA synth. As a matter of fact, it's the

first

> available polyphonic physical modelling synth (the Yamaha VP1 was not
> available). You can take a modelled violin in oscillator 1 and a modelled
> analogue in oscillator 2. Try that with any other synth.

But it's not an user-friendly synth when you're going to program it (I
almost bought one).

> And the workstation concept comes from Korg: after all, the M1 is theirs

as

> well. The Trinity and Triton are further improvements on that concept,
> meanwhile bringing new features. (The Trinity can be expanded to a whole
> studio-in-a-box.)

I must agree w/ you.

> Calling Korg "not innovative" is, in my opinion, unfair and biased.

Like Roland and Yamaha they've made a reliable "engine" and keep doing some
"tune-ups" on it. It's not inovative, but their gear are well accepted on
the market.

(about Yamaha:)

> > Hey but something has to be said for a company that takes risks. Though
> they're
> > huge anyway and have been around for 113 years, so it's not like they're
> gonna
> > go bankrupt anyway.
>
> Not likely. But the ironic thing is that their most down-to-earth products
> sell like crazy. The CS series, the 01V, and all the other stuff that they
> make - take, for instance, all their accoustic pianos.

If I start to wish to have the complete Yamaha's line up they will face the
bankrupcy...remember, the AN1x and the Polymorph as already gone...probably
Porsche should be the next...(lol)

PinheadX.

From: "Gary Gregson" <gary@...>

> You can't blame Yamaha for still making the AWM2 stuff......if the user
> still wants to buy it!

AWM2 is great. I suppose that the other manufacturers' engines are on par,
but it's mindbogling - I mean, I find the AN1x confusing enough as it is. :)

> The sad thing is that the AN1x was a great product....it sounds great and
> only ever had minor bugs. Unfortunately, at the time of release the market
> didn't seem to want it....sales were poor. Until of course Yamaha stopped
> making them....now everyone wants one! Go figure?

I don't know... maybe they were too early? Yamaha products hardly ever live
longer than two years, or perhaps even less. So perhaps the AN1x was already
'doomed' before the market really cought on. I don't know.

- Peter

I think this is a typical Yamaha marketing decision. They release so much
gear, but if you look at the gear itselve: no expansion possibilities, not
even flash updates.. Take a look at Clavia for instance, they constantly
update the Nord series (ok. they don't have a choice 'cause they don't have
the r&d funds like yamaha :)..
As for the AN1x being doomed, i recall the an1x being rated higher than
(for instance) the jp8000 when it was released.. I don't mind though, i
picked up my an1x 2 years ago for $500 :))

grtz
Bas

>>>>

I don't know... maybe they were too early? Yamaha products hardly ever live
longer than two years, or perhaps even less. So perhaps the AN1x was already
'doomed' before the market really cought on. I don't know.

- Peter


----------------
<http://click.egroups.com/1/7750/9/_/663009/_/965172068/> border="0"
alt=""
src="http://adimg.egroups.com/img/7750/9/_/663009/_/965172068/benefitsblue_n
ew5.gif">


----------------
Community email addresses:
Post message: AN1x-list@onelist.com
Subscribe: AN1x-list-subscribe@onelist.com
Unsubscribe: AN1x-list-unsubscribe@onelist.com
List owner: AN1x-list-owner@onelist.com

Shortcut URL to this page:

<http://www.onelist.com/community/AN1x-list>http://www.onelist.com/community
/AN1x-list




clix @ cyberpunk studios | clix@... | http://clixx.cjb.net

> > The sad thing is that the AN1x was a great product....it sounds great

and

> > only ever had minor bugs. Unfortunately, at the time of release the

market

> > didn't seem to want it....sales were poor. Until of course Yamaha

stopped

> > making them....now everyone wants one! Go figure?
>
> I don't know... maybe they were too early? Yamaha products hardly ever

live

> longer than two years, or perhaps even less. So perhaps the AN1x was

already

> 'doomed' before the market really cought on. I don't know.

The most weird is that they never made a "new or big brother" for this synth
like happened to the CS1x that was succeded by the 2x and 6x...just a card
that don't fits in all Yamaha's synths, only in the new and expensive (or
should I say "expansive"?)....
I just can't understand the japs they did lost a great opportunity...or
didn't? Let's face that now we have to BUY an S series or a CS6x in order to
BUY the PLG-AN card...

PinheadX.

PinheadX wrote:

>>

The most weird is that they never made a "new or big brother" for this synth
like happened to the CS1x that was succeded by the 2x and 6x...just a card
that don't fits in all Yamaha's synths, only in the new and expensive (or
should I say "expansive"?)....
I just can't understand the japs they did lost a great opportunity...or
didn't? Let's face that now we have to BUY an S series or a CS6x in order to
BUY the PLG-AN card...
<<

Its not surprising the 2x and 6x were made after the huge success of the 1x.
In contrast sales of AN1x were pretty poor.

I suppose the big brother of AN1x was EX5 (or at least it contains some of
the same technology). Also you aren't restricted to just the S series and
CS6x for the PLG150AN card. It works quite nicely in
MU100/MU100R/MU128/MU1000/MU2000 and SW1000XG.

I can also assure you that PLG150AN isn't the last we will see of this
technology from Yamaha!!


Regards

Gary
Email:
gary@...
http://www.yme.co.uk/yme

> > my taste
> > Germans, make some great pieces of gear. My next goal is to buy a
> > Polymorph...but it's to far from now..:-(
> Hmmm...i wouldn´t call Polymorph a great piece of gear...
>
> Tom
>

Explain....?

--- In AN1x-list@egroups.com, mango <j.kolling@c...> wrote:

> > > my taste
> > > Germans, make some great pieces of gear. My next goal is to buy

a

> > > Polymorph...but it's to far from now..:-(
> > Hmmm...i wouldn´t call Polymorph a great piece of gear...
> >
> > Tom
> >
>
> Explain....?

As far as i´ve heard about it, the OS has some awfull bugs. Also
Quasimidi is not well known in Germany for their good service...

Read the test on www.sounds-on-sounds.co.uk.

Tom

From: <tomfinegan@...>

> > ...And I surely would do that, but there's no more ANs to buy. To
> Yes there are...the 150AN-PLG-IN card...ok only a kinda AN1/2x but,
> who cares...

I know, but to use it I have to buy a new synth like CS6x or S80 wich are
expensive, the CS6x costs about $2500 here (and I'm not sure if the S30 is
"upgradeble") or a new sound card for my PC, but it's not distributed here
by Yamaha do Brasil and I don't trust in my winblows'98 to make music. I
know I may use another OS, but I already spent money in software for it and
don't intend to spend more..I'm a MS slave...:-)

> > > > my taste
> > > > Germans, make some great pieces of gear. My next goal is to buy
> a
> > > > Polymorph...but it's to far from now..:-(
> > > Hmmm...i wouldn´t call Polymorph a great piece of gear...
> > >
> > > Tom
> > >
> >
> > Explain....?
> As far as i´ve heard about it, the OS has some awfull bugs. Also
> Quasimidi is not well known in Germany for their good service...
>
> Read the test on www.sounds-on-sounds.co.uk.

I've tried to search the SOS web site to get some info about the KorgZ1 some
days ago and it seams to keep having some technical problems...:-(...would
you mind to send the direct link to this page? I'm not so sure, but I think
I already read this review...
But as far as I know it, I mean, how this gear sounds, it would be a perfect
companion for my AN1x and my Sampler...but I also know that it's not much
easy to program.

Pinheadx

From: <tomfinegan@...>

> Read the test on www.sounds-on-sounds.co.uk.

Isn't that http://www.sospubs.co.uk/ ?

- Peter

--- In AN1x-list@egroups.com, "PinheadX" <pinheadx@t...> wrote:

> I know, but to use it I have to buy a new synth like CS6x or S80

wich are

> expensive, the CS6x costs about $2500 here (and I'm not sure if the

S30 is

Nah, you also can use the AN-PLG in a Yamaha MU100r or MU128.
This tone-modules should go for a much lower price than CS6x.

From: <tomfinegan@...>

> > I know, but to use it I have to buy a new synth like CS6x or S80
> wich are
> > expensive, the CS6x costs about $2500 here (and I'm not sure if the
> S30 is
>
> Nah, you also can use the AN-PLG in a Yamaha MU100r or MU128.
> This tone-modules should go for a much lower price than CS6x.

You're almost right...I forgot about that, but it costs a little less (in
USA) then the Polymorph or about $300 more then the MS2000R and as far as I
know it supports only the PLG100 series cards rather then the PLG150 as the
AN card.
I'm sure that nobody of this list would pay a 1000 bucks for a XG module.

PinheadX.

> You're almost right...I forgot about that, but it costs a little less (in
> USA) then the Polymorph or about $300 more then the MS2000R and
> as far as I know it supports only the PLG100 series cards rather then the
> PLG150 as the AN card.
> I'm sure that nobody of this list would pay a 1000 bucks for a XG module.

I have a PLG150AN in an MU100 (the desktop module version of the MU100R,
that provides a single card slot...with no cards fitted as default). You can
actually pick these modules up quite cheaply in the UK (especially second
hand). Plus, as with all synths, there is nothing wrong with the sounds
these modules can produce, so long as you are prepared to do a bit of voice
editing.


Regards

Gary
Email:
gary@...
http://www.yme.co.uk/yme

From: "Gary Gregson" <gary@...>

> > You're almost right...I forgot about that, but it costs a little less

(in

> > USA) then the Polymorph or about $300 more then the MS2000R and
> > as far as I know it supports only the PLG100 series cards rather then

the

> > PLG150 as the AN card.
> > I'm sure that nobody of this list would pay a 1000 bucks for a XG

module.

>
> I have a PLG150AN in an MU100 (the desktop module version of the MU100R,
> that provides a single card slot...with no cards fitted as default). You

can

> actually pick these modules up quite cheaply in the UK (especially second
> hand). Plus, as with all synths, there is nothing wrong with the sounds
> these modules can produce, so long as you are prepared to do a bit of

voice

> editing.

It should explain why the MU100 costs more then the MU128...The info I
posted above regarding to its compability w/ the PLG150 cards I got at the
MU128's page in the Yamaha UK website, so I supposed that the MU100 should
have (at least) the same spects.

Thanx for opening my eyes..:-)
PinheadX.

> It should explain why the MU100 costs more then the MU128...The info I
> posted above regarding to its compability w/ the PLG150 cards I got at the
> MU128's page in the Yamaha UK website, so I supposed that the MU100 should
> have (at least) the same spects.

The MU100R is (was) more expensive than the MU128, since the MU100R came
fitted with both the VL and VH cards!. The MU100 desktop module is
significantly cheaper since it doesn't have any PLG cards fitted as
standard. Also as far as I am aware the PLG150 cards work fine in all
current PLG capable XG units (including MU128)

Regards

Gary
Email:
gary@...
http://www.yme.co.uk/yme

From: "Gary Gregson" <gary@...>

> > It should explain why the MU100 costs more then the MU128...The info I
> > posted above regarding to its compability w/ the PLG150 cards I got at

the

> > MU128's page in the Yamaha UK website, so I supposed that the MU100

should

> > have (at least) the same spects.
>
> The MU100R is (was) more expensive than the MU128, since the MU100R came
> fitted with both the VL and VH cards!. The MU100 desktop module is
> significantly cheaper since it doesn't have any PLG cards fitted as
> standard. Also as far as I am aware the PLG150 cards work fine in all
> current PLG capable XG units (including MU128)

What can I say?...I just read about it while you made it work...:-)

PinheadX