A plea For UI Consolidation

[AlenK]

IMO Casio should spend some time figuring out how to harmonize their keyboard user interfaces so that going forward there is more consistency. As a result of Casio's otherwise great re-use of components the XW synths and the CTK/WK arrangers share the same core set of buttons and display (the part of the latter that the XW doesn't use is simply masked off). Yet their respective UI's are quite different; the same buttons on one often have a different function on the other and some similar functions end up on different buttons. That must be a little frustrating if you own both and have to alternate between them on a regular basis.

Even the organization of the basic PCM tones is different. On the XW-P1 (but not the XW-G1) PCM tones are accessed from five different categories using five buttons that are also used to select patterns. On the CTK/WK models and the XW-G1 these same buttons have nothing to do with selecting sounds. The tones are selected instead from the buttons that the XW synths (but not the CTK/WK) use for numeric entry when you select among the tones in a category (and for alphanumeric entry when naming things).

And instead of the five PCM tone categories in the XW-P1 there are eleven in the CTK/WK (I'm not counting drawbar organ tones). One of those categories is USER TONES where all 100 user memory locations for the PCM tones are accessed. In the XW-P1 those memory locations are instead distributed between the categories, which has the unfortunate side effect of drastically limiting how many user tones you can make for each category.

In the XW-G1 there are two PCM tone categories: melody and drum. (There are solo synthesizer tones, too, but I'm not counting those.) You select USER tones like you do on the XW-P1, using a PRESET/USER button along with numeric entry, but unlike the XW-P1 and like the CTK/WK the user PCM melody tones are all together, not split among categories. (There are also ten user drum "tones", by which Casio really means drum kits, within the drum tone category.)

So among only two product families (XW synths and CTK/WK arrangers) there are three different ways tones are organized and selected. I won't even get into the still greater differences in the UI and tone organization of the PX-5S, which would just further make my point.

I realize that the XW synths are (IIRC) two years newer than the the latest crop of CTK/WK arrangers and they ARE different product categories (and the PX-5S is newer still and yet another product category). So we can expect some differences and some improvements (e.g., it's easier on either XW synths than on the CTK/WK to select tones from within a category and also easier to name things). But the reality is that these keyboards co-exist today in the market and they all say CASIO on them. The disparate UI's can cause confusion. Casio products going forward should present a uniform interface and similar architectural organizations to the user, at least as far as the elements that are common between them go.

[stevecoscia]

Alen,

 

I would assume that the next round of WK/CTK keyboards will resemble the XW and PX-5S interface to some degree.  But, don't expect total congruence. The target customers for each market segment are different.

 

Casio has likely read your post and their R-&-D folks are doing what they can.  I've worked in the keyboard industry for more than 30 years and Casio stands out as a company with intimate customer relationships.  Very rare among big corporations.  Plus Casio REALLY LISTENS to customers.

 

In business and customer service, listening is a critical success skill.

 

-Steve Coscia