ragestormz
New member
hi . can anyone recommend a synthesizer good for gigging thats below 1k or slightly above 1k?
synthesizer
- Thread starter ragestormz
- Start date
Indigo_blues
New member
the roland xp30 is fabulous also but donno if its discontinued liao.
SilverBeast
New member
Hey stormz,
U new to the world of E-music or an "old bird" in this scene?
When u said u looking for a synth, did u mean a kybd with sounds and nothing else like sequencer?
Bongman had made some good recommendations but take note of those models doesn't have a sequencer, but comes bundled with a software sequencer (and usually an editor).
It may be a bit "amateurish", but can I add the Korg PA50 to the list? And if you are really very tight in budget, how about a Yamaha PSR 550 (S$800 with built-in sequencer) to start your musical journey with?
You are in the era of E-music that sampled sound technology among the "Big Wigs" of synth makers are more or less comparable to each other (with different strength and weakness, of course). Importantly, like what you play and hear.
Good Luck!
U new to the world of E-music or an "old bird" in this scene?
When u said u looking for a synth, did u mean a kybd with sounds and nothing else like sequencer?
Bongman had made some good recommendations but take note of those models doesn't have a sequencer, but comes bundled with a software sequencer (and usually an editor).
It may be a bit "amateurish", but can I add the Korg PA50 to the list? And if you are really very tight in budget, how about a Yamaha PSR 550 (S$800 with built-in sequencer) to start your musical journey with?
You are in the era of E-music that sampled sound technology among the "Big Wigs" of synth makers are more or less comparable to each other (with different strength and weakness, of course). Importantly, like what you play and hear.
Good Luck!
Indigo_blues
New member
if you can find an old D70 its also a super gigging synth.
ragestormz
New member
thank you for all the replies.
wouldn't consider myself an old bird. been playing for about a year.
started as a pianist, never really touched the sequencer. might be fun to try.
thing is i have been using the keyboards at the studio and really thinking of getting my own but not too sure what i really want. i think sound is very important and usability.
preferably something i can store my effects with.
with split function and multi-effect. those are basically the stuff i currently use.
but ya. the main thing i'm looking for is a good sound, good strings sound especially.
wouldn't consider myself an old bird. been playing for about a year.
started as a pianist, never really touched the sequencer. might be fun to try.
thing is i have been using the keyboards at the studio and really thinking of getting my own but not too sure what i really want. i think sound is very important and usability.
preferably something i can store my effects with.
with split function and multi-effect. those are basically the stuff i currently use.
but ya. the main thing i'm looking for is a good sound, good strings sound especially.
ragestormz
New member
btw, musician friend's pricing is by us dollars or sing? there are no currency sign before the prices.
ragestormz
New member
yep! hai........
SilverBeast
New member
Wooo...that seems to be an overstatement and you may probably scare some would-be keyboaders away
Well, unless anyone's into the pro-music scene that demands perfection to the last bit, most hardware sequencers in workstations can be made a good workhorse. It just takes a bit more skill...and perhaps patience...to handle one :wink:
Cheez
Moderator
SilverBeast said:Wooo...that seems to be an overstatement and you may probably scare some would-be keyboaders away
Well, unless anyone's into the pro-music scene that demands perfection to the last bit, most hardware sequencers in workstations can be made a good workhorse. It just takes a bit more skill...and perhaps patience...to handle one :wink:
Don't think it will scare keyboardists away.
Keyboard skills and sequencing skills are different. People learning to play the keyboard usually just focus on keyboard playing skills. If people want to start off with sequencing, I still think software is easier to start off. My opinion - workstations are stable as Bongman stated. But the price of workstations is usually the problem. It is cheaper to get a synth without build-in sequencers and sequence with a PC at home. Most people don't sequence live anyway. And now, since most synths without build-in sequencers have midi playback function via memory cards etc, songs can always be progammed back home, stored on a SD card and brought for live playing. To me, it is a cheaper option, and also easier in terms of sequencing. Using software sequencers are not about being pro - it's about being easier and faster to work + lower cost. Of course, no need high end softwares- Sonar Home Studio isn't very expensive but more than enough for sequencing. Beginners at sequencing will find life easier and sequencing much more fun with software!
aireydon
Member
sequencer
hm..i would say..generally i prefer korg string patches to roland string patches.
about sequencers i agree that sequencing skills and keyboard playing skill is totally two different things. theres so many things to consider, especially the volume mixing and the threat of cancelling frequecies when u combine incompatable voices..etc etc
...adn when u play live wif yr band u gota edit on the spot again becso it gonna sound different from what u program at home!! :evil:
i also agree that software sequencer are easier to use. but then again maybe its becos generally keyboards with decent sequencers ( i by decent i mean at least 8 or 16 tracks and at least can mix) are generally more expensive, less people own them? and even if you are using yr fav board at yr fav studio u prob wun have much time to figure them out. the lack of its availability decrease the number of people proficent in them. ??
maybe thats jsut one of the many reasons more people are making compositions at home, using softare synths,sequencing and composing etc. if u are a avid composer/song writer music hobbist u prob prefer a cheaper,sequencerless synth and yr PC.
but from a performing perspective, this trend is making the sequencing keyboardist almost exinct form the stage.IMO i think its a pity. so many boards coming up with sequencers and so little people using them live!!
end up most pros have a few boards when they can use just one, or bands use back up tracks.
i mean sequencing aint playing cheap or something , if u select tactfully which tracks/voices to save and which to play live, one can still kick ass on stage, yet giving yr band a fuller sound. if u are a cover band u can realli cover better too. Keyboardist shld learn hardware on-board sequencing too,
i mean,ultimately music is meant to be enjoyed, appreciated and PErformed. too much reliance on software sequencer may prob end wif the song being not so stage performing friendly.have to bring the labtop or use backing cds and make yr drummer wear metronome. end up less keyboardsist knowing how to hardbarod sequence too.
so far i only saw a few who did this on stage,yet the audience go wild. toumas of nightwish(sequenced on korg triton and n364.) and chen jian ning of F.I.R( Korg Triton le. just one board!) jon lord also used an on board sequenced track(or issit an arppegio?) while doing one of his solos in come hell or high water.
the backing tracks can be subtle and make the band sound more whole. it all depends on all u arrange the song.
just to cover my ass
, i totally respect people who software sequence, just tat its a pity not to see many using hardware sequencing live. :roll:
when i got the triton le, its totally with this concept in mind so i can realli cover my songs better, now i cant imagine turning back to software sequencing, that would mean sloggin in a labtop to the studio... 8O
took me months to figure out the on board sequencer, i 'm a slow learner.but prob would have spent musch lesser time figuring out a software, but i still think its worth it. maybe when i'm old and cant jam anymore i would reaali appreciate the covenience and easier use of software at home! :lol:
hm..i would say..generally i prefer korg string patches to roland string patches.
about sequencers i agree that sequencing skills and keyboard playing skill is totally two different things. theres so many things to consider, especially the volume mixing and the threat of cancelling frequecies when u combine incompatable voices..etc etc
...adn when u play live wif yr band u gota edit on the spot again becso it gonna sound different from what u program at home!! :evil: i also agree that software sequencer are easier to use. but then again maybe its becos generally keyboards with decent sequencers ( i by decent i mean at least 8 or 16 tracks and at least can mix) are generally more expensive, less people own them? and even if you are using yr fav board at yr fav studio u prob wun have much time to figure them out. the lack of its availability decrease the number of people proficent in them. ??
maybe thats jsut one of the many reasons more people are making compositions at home, using softare synths,sequencing and composing etc. if u are a avid composer/song writer music hobbist u prob prefer a cheaper,sequencerless synth and yr PC.
but from a performing perspective, this trend is making the sequencing keyboardist almost exinct form the stage.IMO i think its a pity. so many boards coming up with sequencers and so little people using them live!!
end up most pros have a few boards when they can use just one, or bands use back up tracks.
i mean sequencing aint playing cheap or something , if u select tactfully which tracks/voices to save and which to play live, one can still kick ass on stage, yet giving yr band a fuller sound. if u are a cover band u can realli cover better too. Keyboardist shld learn hardware on-board sequencing too,
i mean,ultimately music is meant to be enjoyed, appreciated and PErformed. too much reliance on software sequencer may prob end wif the song being not so stage performing friendly.have to bring the labtop or use backing cds and make yr drummer wear metronome. end up less keyboardsist knowing how to hardbarod sequence too.
so far i only saw a few who did this on stage,yet the audience go wild. toumas of nightwish(sequenced on korg triton and n364.) and chen jian ning of F.I.R( Korg Triton le. just one board!) jon lord also used an on board sequenced track(or issit an arppegio?) while doing one of his solos in come hell or high water.
the backing tracks can be subtle and make the band sound more whole. it all depends on all u arrange the song.
just to cover my ass
, i totally respect people who software sequence, just tat its a pity not to see many using hardware sequencing live. :roll: when i got the triton le, its totally with this concept in mind so i can realli cover my songs better, now i cant imagine turning back to software sequencing, that would mean sloggin in a labtop to the studio... 8O
took me months to figure out the on board sequencer, i 'm a slow learner.but prob would have spent musch lesser time figuring out a software, but i still think its worth it. maybe when i'm old and cant jam anymore i would reaali appreciate the covenience and easier use of software at home! :lol:
Cheez
Moderator
Aireydon, great post there! I always enjoy a good and well-thought argument! It's posts like these that help others to balance and think through what they want. Excellent!
So, here's my counter-argument...
I had been using on-board sequencer for almost 10 years. Initially, it was on my Yamaha SY77, then SY99 - all 16 tracks workstations. Also used lousy Roland 4 track external seqeuncers before. So I'm very used to build-in hardware sequencers. Those were the days when PC weren't that stable (Windows 95 and before...). I used to perfrom live with the on-board sequencers all the time. When playing in a quiet corner of a ballroom, I usually get people turning heads like "where is that music coming from?" People don't hear one keyboard playing full sounds often - and live.
As my sequencing got more complicated over time, I'm began to get frustrated with a few things. 1. The on-board sounds are not sufficient and to my liking - which made me get an external module eventually, 2. I run out of polyphony very quickly - partucularly since I sequence with nothing less than 10 tracks in those days. With playing piano/e piano live with the sequence, I get into trouble with robbed notes. So that eventually led me to get an external piano module just to increase polyphony and let the workstation function as a sequencer and nothing else. Even layering of piano sound with strings get into polyphony problems (in those days when max polyphony is 64 notes). So when I go for a gig, I bring my workstation, my external sound module, external piano module, and an external effects/reverb module (so that my external modules mix together with the workstation as a whole and don't sound separate). That's really heavy!
Then I discovered Cakewalk - in those days when Cakewalk was still Cakewalk not Sonar. I found out certain things that thrilled me:
1. I can use the mouse to edit - much faster than using buttons and I don't have to scroll through menus after menus just to change the volume of a track;
2. I can actually see my sequences easier;
3. I have a monitor instead of a small LCD
4. I can have more than 16 tracks of midi
5. Because editing is easier and faster, it allows of changing parameters/settings in a live situation much faster and without problems (in those days, Cakewalk has a "panic button" in case something happens)
6. Moving tracks is just drag and drop. Selecting sounds is just a click and the entire menu of sounds on my workstation and sound module appears etc
I gather since I have to bring sound modules etc with me anyway, another laptop isn't going to be too much heavier.
I hardly play with pre-recorded tracks - only once and it was not a good experience since I have totally no control (and the soundman is the one playing the CD). Since the, I always play live with seqeunces. Then I migrated to softsamplers and I got rid of all my external modules. Now I program with 20 -30 tracks - impossible with build-in sequencers. And in a live situation, I still find editing and changing parameters much faster with a screen and mouse. After switching to Logic, I've never dreamd of going back to onboard sequencers anymore.
So while I agree with you it is a pity that few use sequencers live, I still think we don't need to edit sequences in a live situation as much - maybe as you said, tweaking sounds here and there. But even then, it is much easier, faster and safer to do that with a notebook (ie software sequencer) particulalarly live since we want changes FAST! What I meant in my previous post by "sequencing live" is not using sequences in a live situation (which I think we should all do that as much as we can), but editing and actually programming live. Also, if I perform in a performance, I usually check out the place first. Sometimes if there's a rehearsal, it helps more since I edit the settings to suit the acoustics before the actual performance. That will make editing and changing in a live situation less often - we don't like changing things live anyway. It's stressful and a distraction...
What do you think?
So, here's my counter-argument...
I had been using on-board sequencer for almost 10 years. Initially, it was on my Yamaha SY77, then SY99 - all 16 tracks workstations. Also used lousy Roland 4 track external seqeuncers before. So I'm very used to build-in hardware sequencers. Those were the days when PC weren't that stable (Windows 95 and before...). I used to perfrom live with the on-board sequencers all the time. When playing in a quiet corner of a ballroom, I usually get people turning heads like "where is that music coming from?" People don't hear one keyboard playing full sounds often - and live.
As my sequencing got more complicated over time, I'm began to get frustrated with a few things. 1. The on-board sounds are not sufficient and to my liking - which made me get an external module eventually, 2. I run out of polyphony very quickly - partucularly since I sequence with nothing less than 10 tracks in those days. With playing piano/e piano live with the sequence, I get into trouble with robbed notes. So that eventually led me to get an external piano module just to increase polyphony and let the workstation function as a sequencer and nothing else. Even layering of piano sound with strings get into polyphony problems (in those days when max polyphony is 64 notes). So when I go for a gig, I bring my workstation, my external sound module, external piano module, and an external effects/reverb module (so that my external modules mix together with the workstation as a whole and don't sound separate). That's really heavy!
Then I discovered Cakewalk - in those days when Cakewalk was still Cakewalk not Sonar. I found out certain things that thrilled me:
1. I can use the mouse to edit - much faster than using buttons and I don't have to scroll through menus after menus just to change the volume of a track;
2. I can actually see my sequences easier;
3. I have a monitor instead of a small LCD
4. I can have more than 16 tracks of midi
5. Because editing is easier and faster, it allows of changing parameters/settings in a live situation much faster and without problems (in those days, Cakewalk has a "panic button" in case something happens)
6. Moving tracks is just drag and drop. Selecting sounds is just a click and the entire menu of sounds on my workstation and sound module appears etc
I gather since I have to bring sound modules etc with me anyway, another laptop isn't going to be too much heavier.
I hardly play with pre-recorded tracks - only once and it was not a good experience since I have totally no control (and the soundman is the one playing the CD). Since the, I always play live with seqeunces. Then I migrated to softsamplers and I got rid of all my external modules. Now I program with 20 -30 tracks - impossible with build-in sequencers. And in a live situation, I still find editing and changing parameters much faster with a screen and mouse. After switching to Logic, I've never dreamd of going back to onboard sequencers anymore.
So while I agree with you it is a pity that few use sequencers live, I still think we don't need to edit sequences in a live situation as much - maybe as you said, tweaking sounds here and there. But even then, it is much easier, faster and safer to do that with a notebook (ie software sequencer) particulalarly live since we want changes FAST! What I meant in my previous post by "sequencing live" is not using sequences in a live situation (which I think we should all do that as much as we can), but editing and actually programming live. Also, if I perform in a performance, I usually check out the place first. Sometimes if there's a rehearsal, it helps more since I edit the settings to suit the acoustics before the actual performance. That will make editing and changing in a live situation less often - we don't like changing things live anyway. It's stressful and a distraction...
What do you think?
aireydon
Member
Cheez said:Aireydon, great post there! I always enjoy a good and well-thought argument! It's posts like these that help others to balance and think through what they want. Excellent!
So, here's my counter-argument...
I had been using on-board sequencer for almost 10 years. Initially, it was on my Yamaha SY77, then SY99 - all 16 tracks workstations. Also used lousy Roland 4 track external seqeuncers before. So I'm very used to build-in hardware sequencers. Those were the days when PC weren't that stable (Windows 95 and before...). I used to perfrom live with the on-board sequencers all the time. When playing in a quiet corner of a ballroom, I usually get people turning heads like "where is that music coming from?" People don't hear one keyboard playing full sounds often - and live.
As my sequencing got more complicated over time, I'm began to get frustrated with a few things. 1. The on-board sounds are not sufficient and to my liking - which made me get an external module eventually, 2. I run out of polyphony very quickly - partucularly since I sequence with nothing less than 10 tracks in those days. With playing piano/e piano live with the sequence, I get into trouble with robbed notes. So that eventually led me to get an external piano module just to increase polyphony and let the workstation function as a sequencer and nothing else. Even layering of piano sound with strings get into polyphony problems (in those days when max polyphony is 64 notes). So when I go for a gig, I bring my workstation, my external sound module, external piano module, and an external effects/reverb module (so that my external modules mix together with the workstation as a whole and don't sound separate). That's really heavy!
Then I discovered Cakewalk - in those days when Cakewalk was still Cakewalk not Sonar. I found out certain things that thrilled me:
1. I can use the mouse to edit - much faster than using buttons and I don't have to scroll through menus after menus just to change the volume of a track;
2. I can actually see my sequences easier;
3. I have a monitor instead of a small LCD
4. I can have more than 16 tracks of midi
5. Because editing is easier and faster, it allows of changing parameters/settings in a live situation much faster and without problems (in those days, Cakewalk has a "panic button" in case something happens)
6. Moving tracks is just drag and drop. Selecting sounds is just a click and the entire menu of sounds on my workstation and sound module appears etc
I gather since I have to bring sound modules etc with me anyway, another laptop isn't going to be too much heavier.
I hardly play with pre-recorded tracks - only once and it was not a good experience since I have totally no control (and the soundman is the one playing the CD). Since the, I always play live with seqeunces. Then I migrated to softsamplers and I got rid of all my external modules. Now I program with 20 -30 tracks - impossible with build-in sequencers. And in a live situation, I still find editing and changing parameters much faster with a screen and mouse. After switching to Logic, I've never dreamd of going back to onboard sequencers anymore.
So while I agree with you it is a pity that few use sequencers live, I still think we don't need to edit sequences in a live situation as much - maybe as you said, tweaking sounds here and there. But even then, it is much easier, faster and safer to do that with a notebook (ie software sequencer) particulalarly live since we want changes FAST! What I meant in my previous post by "sequencing live" is not using sequences in a live situation (which I think we should all do that as much as we can), but editing and actually programming live. Also, if I perform in a performance, I usually check out the place first. Sometimes if there's a rehearsal, it helps more since I edit the settings to suit the acoustics before the actual performance. That will make editing and changing in a live situation less often - we don't like changing things live anyway. It's stressful and a distraction...
What do you think?
Hey cheez, so u are a on board sequencers lao jiao
....wow..the sy 99...i always thought to my self,,"how much stuff can they squeeze into that floofy drive in those days!??"..sometimes i find even the triton tedious to sequence, i cant imagine how u managed to pull through sequencing with all those vintage synths...! in those days u prob ran out of memory faster than u run out of polyphony.?i prob did not foresee the probs u mentioned beocs i'm just starting out onboard sequencing jaming, and i have no professsional playing exp too, only for fun jaming, and i only need to sqeuence my part. meaning i dun sequence the bass ,drums etc. prob thats why i did not foresee, nor encounter the very good points u mention.
Now then i realise, actually if we reaali want to sequence well ,and replicate the whole song, and if u are a one man band keyboardist( were u,? cheez,in yr days? curious), as u improve in yr sequencing skills and explore more, u will discover the lack of sounds in only one board,etc ,prob end up with racks and modules etc. then, having a labtop certainly beats having all those! morover, editing on a labtop certainly beats editing on one symth, not to mention more than 1-3 synths and modules...etc...
when i tink back, i once saw a phillipino band with no drummer and bassist, only vocals ,keys and a great lead guitarist, at concord hotel. and the guy is using yamaha and roland syths. compared to what he did ,covering top 40s, i guess waht i am doing now is reaali peanuts and kids' play... :lol: i remember seeing 3 synths and a rack i think.
right now, becos i use layers and combinations , even 16 tracks is only just enough for me. and i haven even began the journey of bass and drums sequencing yet.maybe if i progress down the road that u took(if i reali had this wonderful chance...)..i will prob do the same as u did..get modules, find them cumbersome,resort to soft synths and labtop .
its prob the kind of bands and environment that u play in, that determines if one workstation is enuff , or u need one workstation plus yr labtop
thankx for highlighting this to a newbie!