Jump to content
CairnsFella

Any more input from Casio?

Recommended Posts

Hi all,

 

Of course, I can answer the question I posed myself, but I was stuck for a title.

 

I recently joined the forums and posted a few questions. This was the final stages of researching my next instrument purchase and I just wanted a few questions I had on the G1 clarified. I have now decided to go ahead with the purchase, so thank you to all that helped me out.

 

In a more general vein, although I realise that the XW synths are rather overshadowed by newer keyboards from Casio, they are, however, still listed as current on their various sites (both the primary Casio site, and the XW site).

 

It is good that there are still passionate owners and followers to keep driving the forum, but it strikes me (though I could be wrong) that the contributors from Casio itself have all but abandoned the products. It is a little disappointing to read that improvements to firmware seen in the XW's have filtered to newer products only. I dont mean entire new features as such things are more hoped for than expected, but 'improvements' such as sending control data via the arp etc. And I am sure a few of the many little issues unearthed by users and listed in the forums could have justified at least one more firmware update.

 

It is also clear that the manual was never up to scatch really given the depth of these synths, yet these have never been revisited. The workshops were great (and I do want to emphasise that), but they could go on to cover so much more.

 

In fact in at least one workshop it was stated that some of the new sounds etc being posted to the XW site was 'scratching the surface' of things to come, but I dont think a great deal more was forthcoming.

 

I am not saying Casio are 'in the wrong' here, or that they should be obligated to do any more than they have done. Indeed I have owned products from manufacturers (musical and otherwise) that are far less supportive of their products. I am merely saying that it is merely a shame that Casio have not continued it's push of the XW's (after all, they are the only products they actually market as 'synths' even if in practice the newer boards are synths in all but name) and that  we do not even see any significant input from product experts anymore. Some of the questions that 'user's are providing the answers for by way of trial and error in some cases, could be much more quickly addressed by the guys from Casio that once seemed so passionate about the product.

 

I mean I entirely see commercially why the primary focus would be elsewhere, but when I re-watch some of the youtubes I remember my original feeling was that '"these guys really love this product", but now (and this really isnt meant to be disrespectful, just an honest opinion) I feel "these guys really gave a good 'impression' of really loving this product".

 

Anyway, as I say, despite my feelings on the matter, I will soon be the owner of shiny new (or maybe 'slightly matt' new) G1. It is actually going to be a Christmas present from the wife, so it will be a while before I can actually 'use' it.. but at least I will have plenty of time to re-read the manual, the forums and re-watch the videos, so I can hopefully hit the ground running.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I understand where your comments are coming from, but you need to realize that Casio can only provide in-depth support to any given product for so long. Technically, it's not even Mike's job to provide support at all -- he's a marketing guy. (Of course, the support helps with the marketing effort).

 

Anyway, the whole idea of these Forums and Facebook Groups is so users can help each other out when Mike has to move on to the next big thing from Casio.  I hate to pull a "back in my day", but here goes:  :D   When I started in the whole synth thing back in 1985, there was no internet. We had to dig in and figure everything out ourselves. And we liked it! We loved it!  oldman.gif     We got it good today! 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Selling a product that has changed the sound of the music industry certainly makes a difference, For all that is word 

Casio is certainly listening. Updates and sound request as a user myself I can only hope many Casio owners will find

their way to this forum and contribute or make their sounds notifiable as a selling product. 

 

The product ranges in Fun , Study , Professional quality of use, One have to discover what kind or part of one own

musical prowess brings the best out of the music in making.

 

When I purchased the PX5S I didn't do it because it had the latest stuff inside I did it because it was a stage piano with

a synth in it and weighted key I've practically hit the hammer on nails with this cause it fitted my budget. I can experience 

the piano part and experiment with synthesis if I want the other stuff is a major bonus. With the G1 I went for the sampling

part and discovered I've also got more stuff then sampling alone in addition to the rest of my gear  and learning new things

is all alright. 

 

I've already listened differently to what sound of music is.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi CairnsFella,

 

I've been following your questions over the past weeks, but the others are much more on the ball than I am and got back to you pretty quickly. All I kept thinking was “Not a problem”.

 

Congrats on your G1. I can tell from your questions that you will be a deep user and the XWs really reward that.

Merry Christmas, YOU WILL LOVE IT!

 

Brett

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for your replies guys.

 

Scott. I feebly endeavored not to name Mike Martin specifically, although he had obviously been the main driver. You have rather echoed my thoughts (though I am not suggesting you feel the same way) in that the input previously provided was underpinned by the marketing effort. Nothing wrong with that, of course. But I suppose I felt a little ..... hmmm... need to be careful with my words here...... I need something less accusatory than 'suckered', but more explicit than disappointed..... in the manner that the G1 and P1 went from their wonder child, to their 'slightly' disappointing teenager, encouraged to leave home and fend for itself. In other words I previously felt the prior efforts were an equal mix of marketing and passion. Now I am inclined to feel they contained a greater marketing percentage.

 

I am entirely with you that we have it much better than days gone by. I indeed even acknowledged that there are companies that support their product less (I cant recall what specifically, but I am sure I have had products that espouse their ability to be improved with future upgrades only to never have any upgrades at all, and I have certainly had products whose drivers have fallen behind operating systems very early in their lifespan).

 

I am genuinely NOT bad mouthing Casio here, as I agree I have no grounds. Let's just say it would have been nice to be reflecting ongoing praise for them going above and beyond instead. I realize though, this sadly isn't the way the world very often works.

 

XW-Addict. Perhaps it is a bit early in the day for me here, but I am unsure what you are saying  :unsure:. Or at least unsure in relation to my original post. However, I am sure it is intended as a supportive comment as has been your positive assistance with regard my previous questions.

 

Brett. Thanks for looking at my previous questions. When I wrote the opening post in this thread I was conscious of the fact that I thanked only those that responded when I know that there are others that would if they had time, or would but may not have known the answers. I initially wrote my thanks to those too, but thought it looked a little odd, so deleted it. I wish I had left it in now.

 

I love music technology. I often think I should have been a studio engineer instead of 'trying' to be a musician. so yes, I will hopefully get quite stuck into the vast array of options the G1 offers, and will enjoy doing so. But I generally welcome all the help I can get too !

 

Anyway, thanks again everyone. As I research and research in advance of getting my hands on the G1 I am sure I will be calling on your collective knowledge a couple more times before Christmas (and probably after). So speak to you all then.

 

 

Cheers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I swear I really tried to resist adding to this topic. I was going to yesterday evening, but decided to sleep on it. (Its actually a slightly different point, but I still thought I should make it a continuation of the this one) This morning I decided against. But now after coming across the cause of my frustrations several more times, I just have to get this off my chest. Sorry in advance.

 

Despite how my original post in this thread may have read, it really wasn't intended as a 'rant' or other 'meaningfully negative' comment.

 

Since then, however, my ongoing search for information and research into my now 'purchased' G1 has led me further afield to other more generalised or 'other manufacturer' specific forums and articles. And what I have now more and more regularly read has started to feed my growing negativity towards the way in which Casio go about their marketing. I have also found a number of comments reflecting a similar view (though that does not mean either I, nor those others are therefore correct of course.)

 

Aside for the comments that mirrored my own with regard to the ongoing support given (Im not pushing that one further, just mentioning I was not alone), or failure to provide adequate explanation of functions that have been provided, or indeed that money spent on celeb's may for the XW's have been better spent on more pro active videos (I havent checked the figures, but one poster suggested that you tube videos of Casio workshops were as popular as those featuring celebrity presentations). No. Although I agree with all this, it isn't these that have been really bugging me. 

 

It is the fact that so often when an individual mentions one of the newer Casio keyboards in the same breath as an XW (usually, if not always the P1), a Casio rep jumps on the opportunity to mention how much better it is in this way or that way than the XW. Now this isnt only recent, so comments had been made when the XW was (as far as I could see) less than a couple of years old. And I am not talking about specific questions such as "Is X better on the PX than the XW", in which case I could understand the comparison either

 

One can only read so many of these comments before it feels like Casio are actively putting their own product down as a strategy for pumping the other up.

 

Since when does the active promotion of a feature mean it is necessary by direct implication to highlight the shortcomings of  other products? I am looking at a post now where the poster is asking about hex layers in a thread about the PX but refers to 'understanding them' in the XW. The response includes "many things that could not be done on the XW-series", and "The XW-series was limited to one". I have read and re-read this and cannot see for the life of me how the essentially unprompted and non necessary inclusion of comments that highlight the XW's shortcomings helped the response in any way.

 

Technology hasnt moved on that much in the the intervening period, so it's not as if they are merely saying we have achieved all this due to huge technological breakthroughs. I find it hard now to read these comments as anything less than "so why would you buy that piece of **** when we can offer you this" or ".. so obviously we weren't trying very hard before, but here is what we can do when we make an effort".

 

Im not making this up. If you cant find a Casio comment about boards such as the PX 5S in less than five minutes that reads similar to ".. such an astounding keyboard compared to anything I have worked on before" and "much improved compared to the XW" , then you are not trying very hard. Then the follow up exercise would be to see how much time there was between this, and the former comment  being levelled at the XW.

 

Of course, all the caveats mentioned in responses posted above still apply. Yes, Casio are trying to market their products. And what company doesnt push, nay even marginally exaggerate the features of a new product. I would even say that it isnt uncommon for companies to highlight how much better new products are than older ones 

 

BUT  unless I am truly going senile, this doesnt usually start with a couple of years of the introduction of the previous product AND does this really 'ever' happen whilst they are still selling the old product. Such self demeaning media is reserved for product replacements isnt it??

 

I realise that it may seem like an unnecessarily 'high' and perhaps 'odd' horse to be climbing upon when I have just ordered a G1, and - bearing in mind I havent got it yet - I still remain convinced it is the best fit for my personal needs. If anything, the fact that I have ordered a G1 rather than a P1 mitigates my exposure some of the 'degradation' being levelled at P1 features (though there are similar comments pertaining to common features e.g. midi, phrase sequencer, arps). But even though I am happy with my purchase does one really want to keep reading that the very people that make product actually consider it to be outdated, inferior, and outdone??

 

OK.. Whilst I hope that someone 'gets' what I am saying, I  promise that I am done with this subject.

 

My apologies once more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to chime in with my own 2 bits...

 

Casio has supported the XW line for over 3 years now.  Compare this to Korg products I've owned in the past with a shelf life of less than 18 months and virtually zero support during and after that lifespan.

 

Yamaha forums are so heavily moderated that any hint about a product's negative features are instantly moderated into oblivion.

 

My M-audio venom, though still technically a featured product, has seen zero developmental support and no upgrades in the past three years.

 

Be thankful that Casio is a company which still actively listens to its users and through vehicles like this forum actively supports them though the fact of the matter is, when it comes to the XW line, the users here today are almost as knowledgeable as the people who designed them 4 years ago and have occasionally come up with tricks which even the designers never considered.

 

When the XW's were released they were ground breaking from a price/performance standpoint.  Since then everyone of the big three released their own low priced, VA synths but imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.

 

Considering that you're coming three years late to the party buying an XW-G1 now I can understand perhaps a small sense of buyer's remorse in that you've done your research but the feature set doesn't seem all that mind boggling compared to some of the other big offerings from Korg and Yamaha and Roland.

 

As for any particular shortcomings of the G1, I can't really speak to those as the P1 probably outsold the G1 by a factor of at least 10 to 1.  When it comes to support, as always, squeaky wheel gets the grease.

 

While the XWs may not be end of life products just yet, I honestly can't see them staying in production past another Winter NAMM or two at most.

 

Rather than knocking Casio's support mechanism on a public forum, perhaps you should be asking yourself what are you really looking for in a board and whether or not you should have waited for the next Winter NAMM in 4 months and then the following 3 to 6 months while the latest and greatest actually begins to ship to the store shelves?

 

Personally I own loads of gear and my feeling is that when it comes to any future purchases I plan to avoid the latest and greatest and start buying pre-owned and vintage gear rather than buying the latest and greatest.

 

Synth technology is pretty much static these days.  Analog, VA, Wavetable, FM, Additive, Subtractive and PCM synths are pretty much all that anyone is messing with these days.

 

The only real advancements are in user interfaces, sequencers and soft synths for the most part.  Besides this, exactly how many Gigs of ROM/RAM can you throw at a sampler before it sounds ideal?

 

Like I said, I own a pretty impressive rack if I do say so myself, but I consider my XW-P1 to be a solid workhorse in my humble studio and it allows me to dial up some pretty amazing soundscapes with a few twists and twirls.

 

My advice is to stop staring at the grass on the other side of the fence and start concentrating on producing great music with the gear you own.

 

Gary ;)

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gary,

 

I know you didn't mean any malice with your response, but I feel that a number of your comments indicate that either I didnt articulate my point well, or that you didnt understand what I was saying. Whilst I hope it was the latter (as otherwise I guess most people will misinterpret my point), I fear it may well be the former, in which case I will sadly have to reap what people 'believe' I have sown. Whichever it was, I can be clear that as much as all your points may well be valid and well put, they have little to do with what I tried (and obviously failed) to say.

 

Specifically "My advice is to stop staring at the grass on the other side of the fence and start concentrating on producing great music with the gear you own." Suggests that I am personally questioning my own purchase. I can clearly state that I am not. In fact I can put it no simpler that the fact that Casio's own comments suggest that I "should be" questioning it.

 

You also stated "Rather than knocking Casio's support mechanism on a public forum" but my last post makes no such reference aside from a minor reference to agreeing with points I have read elsewhere, but even then I state these are not the issues bugging me. (And even my first post does not intend to 'knock' the support, unless you see that raising it as a question is in itself 'knocking it'. I accept that I could see it being interpreted that way, but only if if one chose to ignore my comments to the contrary.

 

I even highlighted that I am not revisiting the original points in the thread.

 

The whole point of my last post is not 'should Casio be supporting the product still' but 'should they be actively putting it down'. Pure and simple. In fact the logical extension of that is that I am suggesting they shouldn't be. Is that really a bad thing thing. I also commented that this appears to have been occurring for some time, so the 3 year reference is not in context with my comments (though again, your point seems to be focusing on the support provided over this period, rather than the use of the XW's limitations as a marketing 'leg up' for the later products as was the intended focus).

 

At the risk of repeating myself, could I perhaps make the following bullet point a key reference in terms of the nature of my 'complaint' (though 'rant' may be a better term).

  • I am ENTIRELY undeterred by ANY of the limitations, perceived or actual, presented by the XW series in terms of sound or performance. I see the G1 as a positive and exciting purchase. I am however frustrated by the frequent comments made by Casio in numerous threads that highlight the deficiencies (limitations) of this product, when such comments seem unnecessary, and that comments as to what new products 'can do' should be sufficient, rather than what the XW cant in the context of these 'threads'.

Further to this I guess I will just have to take it on the chin if people STILL think that I am personally berating the XW. I cant say anymore than I have that I am not.

 

I would also reiterate that your points are quite valid, and a reasonable rebuttal to my first post if I were stating those points as more than a point of consideration (I quote myself from that post "I am not saying Casio are 'in the wrong' here, or that they should be obligated to do any more than they have done.....")

 

Perhaps if you had been reading the discussions that I had you would understand me more? It is only in the context that those discussions exist that what I am saying makes any sense.

 

If however, people still feel I am merely being inflammatory, then I am happy to delete my views regardless of the fact that I have merely tried to reflect the impression that I believe they impart.
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And Gary, as an aside.

 

I actually have a thing for 'quirky' instruments (although I realize that comment could also be interpreted more negatively than intended).

 

To be honest it was interesting that you brought to my attention that the Venom was still current. The way I had read comments I had formed an - obviously now incorrect - opinion that it wasn't ( I should clarify that I wasn't certain it was obsolete as I hadn't researched it sufficiently, but I did 'feel' that way). But despite that I was still quite keen on buying one as it seems a bargain for what it can do, however it didnt really meet the needs that I was looking for at the time (and the XW does :D ).

 

I also have a Technics WSA1, which I love to bits, but was amongst the least popular (by sales) synth of its time, and is hardly without its detractors. And also a Yamaha A3000 sampler which wasnt exactly the 'go to' sampler of its day (or after its day).

 

Finally, I should point out that I am a bass player (and not even a very good one)...... so what do I know about keyboards !!!  :wacko:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Very good thread ...

 

I'm also a late buyer of XW synth (P1 in my case), I've bought one of the last exposition models available in France. In Europe, the XW keyboard line have been discontinued but you still find traces of the technology on the website (http://www.casio-music.com/euro/instruments/technical-insights/xw-technology/).

 

What I understand on casio catalogue is that they prefered to focus on digital pianos and they are very successfull on that way so I can't blame them ...

 

But I see that casio america supports the XW way longer than europe, and I'm quite sure that is because they truly love their instrument and have always cared to find it a special place (you should take a look at the XW page on facebook). Maybe due to a global strategical change, they just couldn't continue supporting it as much as the privias. It is true that it is quite frustrating to see part 1's and no part 2 in the tutorials or instrument sets but we still have a lot of youtube videos and a supportive community.

 

As for the positioning between the XW-P1 and the PX-5S. I clearly see the PX-5S as a mix between classical digital piano line and XW technology. It borrows the hex-layer and some automation (arpegios and phrase sequencer) and enhanced them (I'd really like to have resonant filters in the hex layer on the P1). But casio showed as well that P1 and PX-5S complement very well, the XW monosynth and step sequencer are unique in casio line and it seems the drawbar organ of the P1 is much appreciated.

 

Concerning the XW-G1, it is really a league on its own and I'm sure you'll love it. Its sampling and looping capability are very interesting and I'd love to have the same level of control over the monosynth without using ipad or windows applications. It is too sad that this keyboard haven't met its market.

 

It seems to me that PX5S holds the legacy of the P1 and that casio is trying to better fit the market of the G1 with the PD1 (which does not convince me)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

florent,

 

Thanks for your contribution. And I am happy to note (though I am assuming a little) that you do not necessarily see my comments as a flaming exercise.

 

The particular point that you made that I would like to seize upon is that the XW's are discontinued (Though I appreciate that you said In Europe). The whole focus of my latter points - which were not really about the support, but about the implied negativity shown by Casio toward their own XW line - assumed that the product was still current. I could 'make a case' that they are current, as I have never read anything that confirms discontinuation, and there are indicators to the contrary ). But if we assume they are no longer a current product, then the detrimental narrative from Casio makes much more sense. Indeed, as I previously noted, many companies will say how much better a newer product is than those past or superseded.

 

So in the interest of peace and harmony I think I will adjust my understanding and assume that the XW's are indeed discontinued in all but name, and as such will be much more tolerant of any further comments I read from Casio as to how the XW cant do this, or cant do that.

 

So with that concluded (I hope).....

 

I would agree with you re: the PD vs the G1. As much as I realize there are many features which are similar, and even acknowledging that my reasons for buying the G1 are more for the 'groovebox' functionality which I am sure some people will point out is better (in some areas) than the G1, I really really do not like the PD. If you gave me one I would sell it or give it away (No offense to those that like it, as if something fulfills a need, then it cannot be questioned I guess). I suppose I feel the G1 is quite unique and covers a number of bases well enough that there is limited competition anywhere near the price IF you happen to want/need a number of those features (I mentioned in another thread for example, that if I was purely after the synth sounds then I would have gone for a Roland JD-Xi, bu the synth element was quite low down in my priorities, and given that, the solo synth on the G1 is quite a bonus). The PD, however, seems like a poor mans MPC or Electribe. On top of that, whilst it shouldn't matter, it looks as though it is designed as a toy. If I wanted to be extra petty I would even say the built in speaker puts me off (though I can thankfully avoid anyone still trying to pitch it to me given that actual old fashioned MIDI ports are essential for me).

 

If (IF) it is indeed true that Casio does not intend to pursue the XW line into updated versions, that would indeed be a big shame. I wont list all the things that I think could easily be improved as many others have already done this. But I do believe that there is margin to make the keyboard more expensive and still represent great value in order to achieve some of the more costly features that would be so welcome.

 

Oh well, maybe in another 20 years eh  ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

don't know if the XW line of synth is discontinued. But in europe XW-P1 and XW-G1 are discontinued.

 

And that seems to be a strange relationship between casio and the XW because

 

 - the frontpage shows a P1  http://www.casio-music.com/euro/

 - on the inside casio page, there are developers interviews, each photo feature a P1 and/or a G1 : http://www.casio-music.com/euro/inside-casio/

 - the technical insight page focus only on AIR and XW technologies

 

Take a look at the interviews from the development team : http://world.casio.com/emi/xw/english/interview/ These guys seem to love their baby. XW development was a 10 years process. They've already put their technologies in new products but I hope they will make a follow-up to the keyboard line of xws.

 

Back in may (the 25th) one of the designers of the XW commented on facebook in some post about the use of an XW with an ewi, the message is self-explanatory of the developer point of view about the instrument : "Thomas-san, thank you so much for the post. We are very honored to hear that. Its 'solo synthesizer' was designed to recognize many MIDI messages so that the sound engine can be controlled by external devices completely."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

don't know if the XW line of synth is discontinued. But in europe XW-P1 and XW-G1 are discontinued.

 

 

Mike Martin from Casio addressed this here a while back. The XWs are still going strong, but for whatever the reason, the UK dist. decided not continue carrying them  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I would agree with you re: the PD vs the G1. As much as I realize there are many features which are similar, and even acknowledging that my reasons for buying the G1 are more for the 'groovebox' functionality which I am sure some people will point out is better (in some areas) than the G1, I really really do not like the PD. If you gave me one I would sell it or give it away (No offense to those that like it, as if something fulfills a need, then it cannot be questioned I guess). I suppose I feel the G1 is quite unique and covers a number of bases well enough that there is limited competition anywhere near the price IF you happen to want/need a number of those features (I mentioned in another thread for example, that if I was purely after the synth sounds then I would have gone for a Roland JD-Xi, bu the synth element was quite low down in my priorities, and given that, the solo synth on the G1 is quite a bonus). The PD, however, seems like a poor mans MPC or Electribe. On top of that, whilst it shouldn't matter, it looks as though it is designed as a toy. If I wanted to be extra petty I would even say the built in speaker puts me off (though I can thankfully avoid anyone still trying to pitch it to me given that actual old fashioned MIDI ports are essential for me).

 

Interesting perspective!

 

Here's mine. As some already know, I'm a big fan and collector of Casios. For their price point and when compared with equivalent models by other manufacturers, they are often hard to beat. Casio have produced some amazing machines over the years, and some very underrated and ignored keyboards purely down to brand snobbery. They have their faults and failings just as many other manufacturers do, but for bang for buck, they are often in a league of their own.

 

I have many, many Casios in my collection, pretty much all their high end gear right up to the XW's. My collection includes CZ, FZ, VZ, MZ, HT and a myriad of other Casios from "toy" VL-1's, to early flagships (Casiotone 1000P, CT6000, Casiotone 201) and unique oddballs including MT400V and CT410V.

 

Anyhow, the point I'm about to make is that I have all these synths/ keyboards, including a Korg DW8000 and a Roland JX-3P (with a KIWI Technics upgrade kit I've yet to fit), except that they are all over in the UK and I've since relocated to the USA since this past August. As we were staying in rented/ temporary accommodation whilst we looked for a house, I had nowhere to ship my extensive collection of music and "studio" gear, hence it all being left back home in the UK. For various other reasons I don't need to go into, I won't be able to go back to the UK until approx. the spring of next year to arrange to have my belongs shipped over here, and after being here just over 2.5 months and having nothing musical to grab when the mood takes me, I'm getting serious withdrawal symptoms not being able to jam on a guitar/ bass/ keyboard when I feel the need.

 

This takes me nicely to the PD1. Despite having a large collection of instruments, including an XW-P1 and G1, I don't have a drum machine. With soft synths/ DAW, and programmable synths, it could be argued that I don't really need one. But just as many enjoy retro analogue synths for their instantaneous "hands on" functionality, many also enjoy, and can be inspired, by a drum machine. Throw in numerous effects, filters, sampling AND a solo synth function, suddenly a PD1 looks to offer a great deal. For me personally, the speaker will be a godsend because all my amps are back in the UK, so I can still enjoy the PD1 without the need for any other amplification. As for looking like a toy, well, many thought that the CZ101 looked like a toy also, as did the HT700 (which came with built in speakers). The CZ101 was capable of monstrous sounds (just as powerful as the bigger/ "pro" CZ's, except with half the polyphony), and the HT700 could also produce some very interesting sounds thanks partly due to a genuine onboard analogue filter. Both prove that just because they look like toys, that doesn't mean that they will sound like one.

 

Agreed that the standard 5 pin MIDI omission was not a wise move, however, all I have here is my laptop. With USB connections. That means I can quite happily run MIDI to the PD1 via my laptop and a simple USB MIDI cable. In short, the PD1 will be a fun musical device for me to play around with until all my other gear gets shipped over next year. And though I've yet to receive it and put it to work (I only ordered it today), who knows, by next Spring maybe it will become an essential part of my rig and will continue to have uses even when my "big" keyboards and gear ships over. In short, I'm looking forward very much to getting my PD1 and finally being able to make some music again.

 

Oh, and here's the video that pretty much sold the PD1 to me  ;)

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Chas,

 

Whilst I haven't retained all of the information from reading the PD1 specs, I do recall there are many functions that exceed the XW's including the scope of the sequencer (more tracks being one thing I seem to recall). However, is what is being done on this video (which I agree is one of the better vids on the PD1 I have seen) really unachievable on a G1 (or perhaps I should say, couldn't you get close enough that there would be no discernible difference).

 

I do admit some of my prejudices are somewhat petty, and I do honestly congratulate you on your purchase and hope the PD1 meets and exceeds your expectations. I am certainly not a gear snob, even though my previous post may suggest otherwise. Ultimately, if you enjoy it and it makes music, then it wouldn't matter if the rest of the world didn't like that piece of gear as it obviously would be a good choice for you. In fact one could argue that there are plenty of people - though obviously not on this forum- that would look down their nose at my purchase of the G1.

 

As it happens, whilst I am not really into the seemingly narrow band of genres of music usually produced with these groovebox type instruments, I am interested in how they may be used in the creation of other dance music styles (I should clarify that I am not really 'up' on the differences between some of these genres, and I like the beats produced, but I feel they often lack a melodic element, so it's not a blanket dislike). To this end I have just purchased (though not yet received) an old Roland MV 8000. Although very old, and dated in some respects, they still seem to be very very powerful instruments. I'll be interested in your seeing progress with the PD1 whilst I tackle the MV. Although I ordered the G1 first, this is a Christmas present so I will have to wait until then to pair the two together (Because I can midi them directly :P  LOL ... just pulling your leg).

 

And Scott. Whilst I do not wish to be rude, I will conveniently ignore your comments that the XW's remain current in some locations :ph34r: . If I were to take your comments on board it would mean that my issues with Casio's comments would remain, so it's probably best that I blindly believe they have been discontinued but they havent told us!!).

 

Florent. Haven't had time to look through those links as yet, but I will later today. Thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

CairnsFella, replies in red!

 

 

Chas,

 

Whilst I haven't retained all of the information from reading the PD1 specs, I do recall there are many functions that exceed the XW's including the scope of the sequencer (more tracks being one thing I seem to recall). However, is what is being done on this video (which I agree is one of the better vids on the PD1 I have seen) really unachievable on a G1 (or perhaps I should say, couldn't you get close enough that there would be no discernible difference).

 

I believe it's more a case of "different horses for different courses". Though they share the same basic sound engine, the PD1 and G1 are very different beasts. There are many things you can do on a PD1 that you can't do, or certainly nowhere near as easily, on a G1. And vice versa. I've hardly had a chance to play with my PD1 yet, what with still moving into a new home and all that goes with it. However, I believe that in terms of sampling the PD1 wipes the floor with the G1 for immediate accessibility to samples. I *think* it's possible to have all 16 pads assigned to individual samples, thus without switching banks you can trigger 1 to 16 samples with a tap of the finger. The G1 meanwhile can have "splits", which will give you five samples over the keyboard range with each sample variable in pitch over an octave. The G1 obviously has a fully fledged keyboard, whereas the PD1 does not, but the G1 does not allow for more than 5 samples at any given time.

 

Thus I feel each should be approached in a different way. Though the G1 CAN be a beat box, it primarily focuses on keyboard playing, synthesis, sampling/ looping more for sounds rather than as a drum machine. The PD1 meanwhile clearly focuses on sampling first and foremost, and it's interface lends more to drums/ percussion/ rhythm than actual keyboard playing. Thus despite sharing similar hardware, the intended application of each is vastly different. As you are aware, I already have P1 and G1, and I got the PD1 to complement them, and not in any way replace them. For me, the PD1's focus is going to be largely as a drum machine/ sampler trigger. As I explore its capabilities I am sure I will find many more uses for it.

 

 

I do admit some of my prejudices are somewhat petty, and I do honestly congratulate you on your purchase and hope the PD1 meets and exceeds your expectations. I am certainly not a gear snob, even though my previous post may suggest otherwise. Ultimately, if you enjoy it and it makes music, then it wouldn't matter if the rest of the world didn't like that piece of gear as it obviously would be a good choice for you. In fact one could argue that there are plenty of people - though obviously not on this forum- that would look down their nose at my purchase of the G1.

 

No worries, and I certainly didn't mean to imply that you were in any way a "gear snob". And absolutely, if someone enjoys a piece of equipment and can make music with it, then that's all that matters. Personally I think it's crazy that people are paying £1000+ for Roland TB303's and TR808/ 909's, but that's what some people want and are prepared to pay. For me, I can make my G1/ P1 do a TB303 quite easily, and I can easily download genuine TR samples into the PD1 that gives me a digital version of these classic beat/ rhythm boxes for a fraction of the price. In fact, that's one of the reasons I wanted a PD1! Now I can load in Linn and Roland samples and have a very flexible and powerful device that gives me a similar interface and control that those classic machines have.

 

As it happens, whilst I am not really into the seemingly narrow band of genres of music usually produced with these groovebox type instruments, I am interested in how they may be used in the creation of other dance music styles (I should clarify that I am not really 'up' on the differences between some of these genres, and I like the beats produced, but I feel they often lack a melodic element, so it's not a blanket dislike). To this end I have just purchased (though not yet received) an old Roland MV 8000. Although very old, and dated in some respects, they still seem to be very very powerful instruments. I'll be interested in your seeing progress with the PD1 whilst I tackle the MV. Although I ordered the G1 first, this is a Christmas present so I will have to wait until then to pair the two together (Because I can midi them directly :P  LOL ... just pulling your leg).

 

All in the application! At a minimum, think of the PD1 as a glorified drum machine that you can load samples into. At most, think of it as a combined bass synth (TB303), drum machine (TR808, Linn 1 etc.), sampler and effects unit. There is a lot going on under its hood! I am not familiar with the Roland MV 8000, though a quick glance suggests there may be some similarities between it and the PD1.

 

And Scott. Whilst I do not wish to be rude, I will conveniently ignore your comments that the XW's remain current in some locations :ph34r: . If I were to take your comments on board it would mean that my issues with Casio's comments would remain, so it's probably best that I blindly believe they have been discontinued but they havent told us!!).

 

I know for certain that sales of new XW's in the UK have completely dried up (and have been for some time), and I think the same applies in Europe also. Yet since moving to the USA, I've been keeping an eye on the markets and XW's are still available new, with used prices holding up very well also. The USA seems to view Casios with less prejudice that the UK (that "gear snob" syndrome), hence still being offered. A shame, but Casio just can't seem to shake off that "toy" reputation despite producing some cracking equipment. Still, that reputation enabled me to pick up all manner of great Casios at bargain prices, so every cloud has a silver lining and all that.  ;)

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Oh wow, I had no idea! Brad, you've just proved again that the XW series never ceases to surprise, and after all this time it still reveals hidden gems and features.

 

Am I right in thinking that the PD1 has greater capacity for holding samples over the G1?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Chas. I didn't initially see Brad's post so was about to reply that I understood the G1 could map more than the per octave sample. Not being in possession of my G1 yet you had me worried. In fact it was with that in mind that I made the suggestion that the G1 could come close to the pd1 functionality. I'm sure there is more to it but in essence the much improved sequencer on the pd1 seems to be the biggest differentiator. If you need what the pd1 provides in that respect then obviously the G1 is no substitute. However if the G1's sequencer is adequate I stand by my feeling that the G1 would not only suffice for a similar purpose, but also provide greater flexibility elsewhere.

The MV 8000 is much like the older akai MPC's. Not the newer ones though as they are now much more PC dependant and less standalone. I have received it now, and whilst it shows its age with regard to things like disk access time and the like, it is a very very powerful and flexible machine. Although I won't be able to unwrap myn G1 until Christmas, I doubt I will have scratched the surface of the MV's abilities by then!

Anyway, hope you are enjoying your PD1 as much as I am enjoying my MV (which, if you are, you will be having a very very good time indeed)!!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LOL. I just noticed that Casio have put a post on their "Casio Music Gear" Facebook page only several hours ago regarding the XW synths. Nothing new. In fact I would tentatively guess it was an old post re-posted in error. (Or I could choose to believe it was a small token in response to my hope that they would still show the XW's some love  ;) )

 

Edit:

 

(Indeed upon further research the 'caption' used is one originally used in 2012)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×