Similarity with CASIO XW series.

[Gnomo Alegre]

Hello:

I start this post out of curiosity. I don't want to discuss what synth is better or more expensive, please.

What synth is more like CASIO XW series?

 

Thank you very much.

[Null]

I think the King Korg and the Yamaha AN1X are the closest competition to the XW series from the major manufacturers.

[AlenK]

Fortunately (for those not wanting to duplicate capability they may already have in another keyboard) the XW isn't really close to any other synth in that its collection of features isn't like any other (which is what Mike Martin was saying when it was introduced). Yes, like the King Korg and AN1X it has virtual-analog emulation (if you don't quibble about how it generates its waveforms - I don't). But unlike them its VA engine isn't polyphonic. I don't know of any other monophonic VA synth other than the Korg Prophecy from 1995 (plenty of real analog ones, though).

 

Unlike the AN1X (and more like the CS1X/CS2X) the XW can function as a ROMpler (heck, it's really built around a ROMpler) but of course you can say that about most keyboards nowadays. The XW-P1 model also drawbar organ emulation, complete with physical emulation of drawbars using sliders. That's something that only a few synthesizers (as opposed to all-out clone-wheel organs) can do, including the Korg Kronos and Kurzweil PC3 series models (other Kurzweil models don't have the sliders). 

 

Now include the step sequencer, with its interactive control using buttons and sliders. Yup, you're standing all alone in the field.

[XW-Addict]

Hahaha I would say less then more the King Korg is way above the XW series league it could have also for the AN1X depending on how much effect can be adjusted using these percussive GM sounds to sound like and if the solo synth would have bell timbres and did not be monophonic alone then it could have......just by a bit. 

 

It is a nice synth but its just above older vintage synth like DX7 series Moog and drum computers like 808 and such it can slightly match any "Performance" like function on other brands depending how you do combine and program the sounds for it. 

 

Actually I don't have a clue what to compare it with but it looks nice and let me find out things sorta you won't know unless you start to program it and I found it the hard way doing the sound designing I'm busy programming four different patches which really sound nice (to me, I'll post them in the coming weeks if time grants me this). With that a synthesizer is a thing to program and create sound with how you do it depends on the music to be shared.

 

(edit) I forgot to mention the XW synth might be the only synth on the market now with substractive synthesis from the external oscillator.

[Peter]

My description of the XW-P1 is Jack of all trades, master of none. 

[AlenK]

Hahaha I would say less then more the King Korg is way above the XW series league it could have also for the AN1X depending on how much effect can be adjusted using these percussive GM sounds to sound like and if the solo synth would have bell timbres and did not be monophonic alone then it could have......just by a bit.

I wasn't going to comment on how the XW's VA emulation compares to the VA emulations of other synths but now that you've brought it up (I think - hard to understand what you said there, XW-Addict!)...

The perception or assumption of people (not us here) that view the XW as just a cheap synthesizer wannabe is that the XW's analog emulation just can't be any good and certainly nowhere near the VA's from Roland, Yamaha or Korg. All they have to do (and have done) to convince themselves is twist the cutoff knob, hear some stepping and declare "The filter is garbage!" Never mind that the stepping is caused by the read-back of the knob (128 steps) and that you don't hear that stepping when you sweep the filter with an envelope or LFO.

But I don't know of anyone who's actually done a rigorous A/B compare between the XW and another synth to compare the VA emulation quality. Yes, there is aliasing in the XW's oscillators. But there is aliasing in the oscillators of some other VA synths, too. No, AFAIK the XW's resonant filter isn't modeling the filter of any particular analog synth of old (or if it is Casio isn't talking), unlike a lot of VA synth engines that try to model specific Moog filters, Korg filters, etc. But IMO it still sounds good if you don't crank the resonance full-bore on harmonically-rich sounds (which brings with it some bad distortion, as opposed to the good kind).

Unfortunately, except for some of those Moog-inspired sounds from Mike (and his Blade Runner CS-80 patch) there are no tones we can point to to say "See! It can sound just like an analog synth!" It's too bad Casio didn't reserve at least a few presets for "warm and smooth" instead of giving us so many that "scream".

(edit) I forgot to mention the XW synth might be the only synth on the market now with substractive synthesis from the external oscillator.

Analog synths like the MiniBrute and MicroBrute can also pass external audio through the filter. But you are right in that no other synth I've ever heard of can pitch shift the external audio the way the XW does it, treating it just like an internal oscillator. (You might be able to achieve something similar on a Kurzweil given the "VAST" architecture, but I haven't heard of anyone doing that.)

[Display Name]

The XW's are synths that BEG to be experimented with. There's just so much you can do with the step sequencer, arpeggiator, phrases and real-time controls. I have been real busy side projects and family stuff, but I am going to dedicate some quality time to my XW-G1. I am going to make a little sub-studio with JUST the XW-G1 and my multitrack box do some experiments. 

[Jokeyman123]

Another shot across the bow. Generalmusic Equinox. Had drawbar organ mode, with switches for key click, Leslie emulation with fast/slow adjustment (before anyone else as far as I know). Standard synth engine and PCM ROM, but huge collection of programmable sounds and waves.  Programmable arpeggiator with again huge variety of arpeggios, plus a phrase sequencer and hundreds of preset phrases that can be combined and played as multi-layered loops live, while changing resonance, attack, sustain, transpose and tempo live using the sliders which also output control change through MIDI. No step sequencer. No hex mode but up to eight sounds could be split, layered etc.and fairly quickly accessed for live playing.  If the interaction between these modes had been more well-implemented, (it wasn't) and the OS not so buggy (it was) this instrument was remarkably similar in concept to the XW IMO. Also had an optional plug-in board for external audio input that would be connected to synth engine for filters, modulation and effects. I'd swear Casio got some of these engineers aboard and said, OK let's really get this to interact and there is the XW. Unlike the Casio, these performance elements (phrase sequencer, organ mode, layering, live loops and playing keyboard in single or solo mode) were not connected interactively in an easily usable way, part of it's failure I think. Again, Casio seems to have examined these elements and provided such an amazing way of getting these to work together, it really feels like one is creating a type of live orchestra or ensemble performance, with the performer being the conductor. Now if only I could restore my pooched firmware, sigh.

[BobbyS]

Another shot across the bow. Generalmusic Equinox. Had drawbar organ mode, with switches for key click, Leslie emulation with fast/slow adjustment (before anyone else as far as I know). Standard synth engine and PCM ROM, but huge collection of programmable sounds and waves.  Programmable arpeggiator with again huge variety of arpeggios, plus a phrase sequencer and hundreds of preset phrases that can be combined and played as multi-layered loops live, while changing resonance, attack, sustain, transpose and tempo live using the sliders which also output control change through MIDI. No step sequencer. No hex mode but up to eight sounds could be split, layered etc.and fairly quickly accessed for live playing.  If the interaction between these modes had been more well-implemented, (it wasn't) and the OS not so buggy (it was) this instrument was remarkably similar in concept to the XW IMO. Also had an optional plug-in board for external audio input that would be connected to synth engine for filters, modulation and effects. I'd swear Casio got some of these engineers aboard and said, OK let's really get this to interact and there is the XW. Unlike the Casio, these performance elements (phrase sequencer, organ mode, layering, live loops and playing keyboard in single or solo mode) were not connected interactively in an easily usable way, part of it's failure I think. Again, Casio seems to have examined these elements and provided such an amazing way of getting these to work together, it really feels like one is creating a type of live orchestra or ensemble performance, with the performer being the conductor. Now if only I could restore my pooched firmware, sigh.

 

 

It is unfortunate you cannot get another programmed chip and install it.

[Jokeyman123]

See my post under "pooched XW" elsewhere for more details about this.

[XW-Addict]

I wasn't going to comment on how the XW's VA emulation compares to the VA emulations of other synths but now that you've brought it up (I think - hard to understand what you said there, XW-Addict!)...

The perception or assumption of people (not us here) that view the XW as just a cheap synthesizer wannabe is that the XW's analog emulation just can't be any good and certainly nowhere near the VA's from Roland, Yamaha or Korg. All they have to do (and have done) to convince themselves is twist the cutoff knob, hear some stepping and declare "The filter is garbage!" Never mind that the stepping is caused by the read-back of the knob (128 steps) and that you don't hear that stepping when you sweep the filter with an envelope or LFO.

 

unfortunately, except for some of those Moog-inspired sounds from Mike (and his Blade Runner CS-80 patch) there are no tones we can point to to say "See! It can sound just like an analog synth!" It's too bad Casio didn't reserve at least a few presets for "warm and smooth" instead of giving us so many that "scream".

Analog synths like the MiniBrute and MicroBrute can also pass external audio through the filter. But you are right in that no other synth I've ever heard of can pitch shift the external audio the way the XW does it, treating it just like an internal oscillator. (You might be able to achieve something similar on a Kurzweil given the "VAST" architecture, but I haven't heard of anyone doing that.)

I partially have to stand correct about what I've commented because you're right about the "Engine" even I get confused about emulation and a total new engine concept in the growth (maybe the XW defines itself as mystery engine X  haha).

 

The PX5s was defined as the better synthesis engine or rather the next evolution of the P1 and G1. As you said it we could be in the mist about the architecture as a hint made towards Kurzweil VAST as with Korg they have invested in engine after engine for Korg it leaded from Oasys , Karma to EDS as the last been a part of engine derivative made way to other synthesis efforts which became different synthesis modelling algorithm into the Kronos concept. Same for kurzweil maybe.  

 

I actually was astonished how you've put it I realized it afterword like my gosh he's right . The XW has also multiple engines in a package which makes it even versatile like the rest of these synth but at an affordable price and PX5s above those two whatever comes after might be better expanded engine and soundscape for the need of live performance or such.

 

I don't know this and have to ask is the part of VA-emulation from the solo synth or just a PCM sample part or actually the performance side of the XW ?.

 

(Honestly I had to refresh myself reading a few pages of Peter manning - Electronic and Computer Music).  

[AlenK]

The solo synth is the virtual-analog emulation part. However, some would argue that you don't have virtual analog without, first, modeled oscillators and second, lots of knobs and sliders (potentiometers).  The Casio uses sampled waveforms (PCM) instead of mathematically modeling the oscillators, even for the so-called "synth" oscillators (the first two out of six).  It does this even for the pulse-width modulation (PWM) waveform, which is partly why that doesn't work quite right (see here).  But some other so-called VA synths also use waveform samples. It's a viable approach.  (This is something I have actually studied in depth.)

 

The other qualification I mentioned is having lots of potentiometers (pots).  This, of course, because analog synthesizers have always had lots of those, often one for every continuously-adjustable parameter.  So the argument goes if you want to claim virtual analog you have to provide all those pots too, even if they aren't directly wired to the circuitry.

 

The problem with this is, how many pots do you need to qualify?  Many real analog synthesizers have over forty pots.  Do you need that many?  If not, what is the minimum you can get away with?  The XW has four knobs and nine sliders and they ALL adjust solo-synth parameters when you are playing a solo-synth tone (in a different manner on the P1 than the G1).  Is that enough?  I say "yes" but then I think "virtual analog" doesn't require a knob/slider user interface at all.  In my view the old Roland D-series synths (except for the D-70) implemented virtual analog (alongside PCM samples), despite having almost no continuous controls on the front panel.  In my opinion, in fact, the D-50 was the very first commercially available virtual-analog synthesizer, beating the Nord Lead by eight years.

[XW-Addict]

So to answer the question right what to compare the XW with depends how many samples and  algorithms manipulating and producing the synth tone does.

Romplers by definition well the XW does a decent synth tone all in a keyboard for live performance without a computer or else it would have easily been done

as an Casio synth App ) in a rack. Guess I chose well going for the G1.

 

Ah well the way I see it I have a bit of everything out there, the XW is made to hook things in it as such you can hook it into a DAW. I've hooked it to my four track Boss Br and made just as easy a song.

 

Just as Mike Martin proved it can do anything depending what kind of music you create even without a computer. Now I'm even more excited releasing my four performance mode in creation patches so I can say i'm a beginner it's not much but it made me proud. 

[Gnomo Alegre]

I knew that the CASIO XW series is unique in its kind. That makes me feel more cheerful.