Nord User Forum

Do you know what's inside a YaMotif ?

No idea. As I understand it the Motif XS (on presumably the XF) runs Linux for the user interface and controlling the DSPs/custom Yamaha chips which run the sound and effects stuff.

Appearently the OASYS may be more similar to the Kronos (or probably the other way around) than I thought. Two articles:
- http://digitalmedia.oreilly.com/2005/11 ... oasys.html
- http://www.synth.me/music-gear/intervie ... org-kronos

There are lots of pictures of the inside of the Kronos to be found, since people got tired of the noisy fan and replaced it. To be honest, it looks mostly like a PC.

In the end, what counts is the sound, how controlable it is and if it runs stable enough. The distinction between software and hardware synths will probably keep getting smaller. I mean: is the Kronos a hardware synth, or a dedicated controller for 9 softsynths? What about the dedicated Touch Digital controller for GForce impOSCar2, a VST soft synth? (http://touchdigitalcontrollers.co.uk/)

Hello,

Inside a Korg T3 :

http://chane.free.fr/newmusic/tuto1.html

frantzkb wrote: Inside a Korg T3 :

I was looking at that picture and I was a bit confused. Why the strange mixture of surface-mount and through-hole technology. Of wait, T3 not M3.

mjbrands wrote:I was curious to see what my NS2 actually contained so I could compare it a bit to my Nord Wave.

This image shows the major components on the NS2 main board.

I wonder if such approach is rather archaic. Korg Kronos dual-core Intel dual-core Atom CPU is rather capable then 150MHZ Freescale DSP56362. In the mean time some people complain about Intel dual-core Atom CPU used in Kronos as it's certainly not the fastest one you could pick nowadays.

whitenoise wrote: I wonder if such approach is rather archaic. Korg Kronos dual-core Intel dual-core Atom CPU is rather capable then 150MHZ Freescale DSP56362.

Oh, I definitely agree with you there. But note that there are 6 of those DSPs in the Stage 2 and much faster ones are available. Since the Nord Lead that started it all (in a way) Nord has produced DSP-based products, which has pro's and con's.

I wouldn't be surprised if more of the major players in the digital piano/workstation market go in the direction of what Korg did with the Kronos. Roland, Clavia (Nord) and Access (Virus) have invested heavily in DSP-based setups, or even use custom designed chips. Yamaha seems a bit less stuck in that corner; maybe they'll be the first of those.

I'm sure products will gets lots more new features, etc. I would also expect the quality (not sound quality, but stuff like stability, usability, quality and solidity of the hardware) to suffer somewhat, as they can get new features to market quicker (and cheaper).

Either way, I'm sure we'll still get some exciting products before we're all running soft synths (possibly on custom platforms, such as Korg's Kronos). I love the way U-he's Diva virtual-analog soft synth sounds.

mjbrands wrote:Since the Nord Lead that started it all (in a way) Nord has produced DSP-based products, which has pro's and con's.

I wouldn't be surprised if more of the major players in the digital piano/workstation market go in the direction of what Korg did with the Kronos. Roland, Clavia (Nord) and Access (Virus) have invested heavily in DSP-based setups, or even use custom designed chips. Yamaha seems a bit less stuck in that corner; maybe they'll be the first of those.

This reminds me of what was happening in computers in the early 80s. With the weak processors of the time exhibiting huge limitations for game development, Atari and Commodore had developed their own proprietary graphics and sound chips for their computers (and custom disk controllers that did not grind the rest of the system to a halt during disk access, which was far more of an issue for a game than for "real" applications). But the same technology that gave them these big advantages later became obstacles, as Apples and PCs, with no custom coprocessors, could easily increase their systems' capabilities by upgrading to new core processors as they appeared, whereas Atari and Commodore could not comparably increase their systems' performance without redesigning their own custom chips, which in some cases, I believe, even meant they couldn't even upgrade their systems to new core processors, because their custom processors were tied to the clock speed of the core processor for which they were designed.

mjbrands wrote:I was curious to see what my NS2 actually contained so I could compare it a bit to my Nord Wave...

Did you happen to snap any shots of the guts from an angle wide enough to see the whole thing? Would be interested to see it all at once!

buffler wrote:

mjbrands wrote:I was curious to see what my NS2 actually contained so I could compare it a bit to my Nord Wave...

Did you happen to snap any shots of the guts from an angle wide enough to see the whole thing? Would be interested to see it all at once!

Doesn't look like it, but I'll have a better look.

I did find this one though and I can say the Stage 2 contained quite a bit more than this one. The Wave even contained quite a bit more.

What is that one?