Chas

A very good friend of mine, Roi, is the main man behind the wonderfully eccentric musical outfit known as Mechanical Cabaret. Last week he did a gig at an electronic music night event known as 'Dirty Contacts' (in north London) and he borrowed my Casio VL1! You can see some pictures of him playing it in the Facebook album I created :-) https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.10152904588079762&type=1&l=181dd82a8e

Dark Fox, Don't give up just yet. As has been suggested, try your XW and the data editor on another computer as this ought to highlight whether the issue is your XW or your computer (I'm guessing the computer). Furthermore, Windows gets a lot of flack, and for sure it isn't perfect, though many 3rd party programs are poorly written, and some hardware is not designed quite right and can cause such issues. Windows is being expected to cope with so many things it's no surprise that occasionally things don't go to plan. A systematic and logical approach I feel will isolate where exactly the problem lies. Try another computer first, and if that all works fine then the problem is your computer/ configuration. Then you can try and isolate the various bits of hardware using the USB ports on your computer and eventually you may find the culprit. Good luck, and please keep the forum posted with your findings. Chas

I'm recovering from night shifts so didn't quite understand this in my frazzled brain state. But it made me laugh anyway so that's good!

I don't have a PX-5S, though I would like one. However, owning 28 Casios already, which include an XW-G1 and and XW-P1, I can't justify such a purchase at present. Not least because in my collection I also have a CZ-1, a VZ-1, an HT6000 and an FZ-20M, so I already have most of the previous Casio flagship synths (most bought at rock bottom bargain prices). Then again, who knows what the future will bring?!!!

Wow, I knew Casio had made digital drums before, but have never seen the LD-80 model. Looks quite similar to the Yamaha DD-55: I knew about the Casio LD-50 model: And of course, some of the Casio MT series of keyboards could have optional extra drum pads added: Or just use the built in drum pads on some Casio models, such as those on the MT520: I'd be very curious to know what the Casio LD-80 drums sounds like as I already have a Yamaha DD-65. If the Casio rivals the DD-65, I could well be tempted to sell the Yamaha and get the LD-80 and have all Casio gear!

Copy to a compatible SD card, insert into XW, then follow the instructions for loading them in. Or use the XW data editor and transfer them over from your PC directly to your XW.

I certainly agree with Patrick's sentiments regarding some of the sounds from the P1's Hex Layers. A few demos I've recorded have amazed me at the overall sound on playing back. One sounds of the P1's Hex Layer, 'Sleep State' has a very ethereal, evolving quality, and simply recording the stereo track to Cubase, with no post recording effects, and then playing it back (dry) it sounds almost three dimensional and all enveloping the listener. And that's just one of the preset Hex Layer sounds - there are plenty more to find of similar depth and substance

You mean like the Casio HT700, HT3000, HT6000 and HZ600?

Just checked the back up CD copy I still have, and it has 'Cubasis VST 5' written on it. It was given to me by a friend who bought a soundcard and it came bundled with it, but he already had a full version of Cubase so never needed/ wanted Cubasis. This is the one I had installed on my PC a few years back. Now I'm running Cubase SX (it's old but works absolutely fine for what I need). Any idea what the Cubasis VST 5 was all about?

I thought that Cubasis was a stripped down version of Cubase, often packaged with audio hardware/ sound cards? I had a copy of Cubasis running quite happily on my PC until I upgraded to a full Cubase package.

I believe the same happened with ARP. The guitar synthesize they spent way too much time on, and the super-polysynth that never did quite work properly (I forget the model now) spelt the end for such a great company.

Not sure what the point would be, when Moog currently make the Voyager and Korg re-released the MS20 last year. Why copy synths that already exist new? I would rather see Casio develop the XW range further, maybe incorporating a CZ emulator with real time CZ editing controls (imagine what THAT would sound like when tweaking!) That way Casio have their own sonic identity rather than mimicking another manufacturer's product. Plus, as October Rust has pointed out, the XW's can already 'do' Moog'ish like sounds, and can even cover most of the MS20 type sounds (though not its wild filter). However, the XW's can do WAY more than a MiniMoog or MS20 could ever do, so why not concentrate on making the most of the XW's powerful features rather than wanting Casio to clone an old design of synth?

I love it! We should get a whole load of stickers saying this made up!

Definitely a 'synthesist' here. I took piano lessons for all of about 8 weeks back in 1981, because I thought that was what I would have to do to become Gary Numan. The fact that I couldn't make weird sweeping noises and blips and blops made me realise that being a keyboardist wasn't what I wanted to do, more that I wanted to be a 'soundscaper' like a mad scientist aka Thomas Dolby, or be like Brian Eno in Roxy Music. Then again, with a bit of practice I could come up with simple melodies and bass lines ala Vince Clarke, The Human League, OMD and other such synthpop artists. A virtuoso Rick Wakeman I will never be, nor will I be a Billy Currie or Howard Jones (both whose playing I love). I can realistically reach the playing abilities of Vince Clarke, Phil Oakey and even Gary Numan though, all who are not keyboardists in the traditional sense. Whether I will ever be as successful as them, well, that's doubtful!

Thanks for the advice everyone, it gives me some ideas to ponder. As mentioned, I've manually made some demos simply by recording the XW's drums into my DAW (looping the step sequencer), then recorded multi-tracked manually played melodies and bass lines. This is mainly to get my song 'sketches' down before I forget them! Now I have a few ideas I'd like to start recording properly, or maybe in a more 'professional' way. As the style of music I am going for is very much in the vein of 'synth pop', machine accurate timing is important to get that robotic feel and sound. Thus I want to start using the DAW and its MIDI more heavily, especially as it allows me to go back and edit far more easily. For instance, as my playing isn't exactly brilliant (I am first and foremost a bassist, and secondly a rhythm guitar player, NOT a keyboardist!) so what I had done in the past is to manually play/ record the parts in MIDI, then when I'm happy with the MIDI (through editing or through playing it right first time!), I feed the MIDI back into the keyboard and record the audio that the keyboard now produces. This has many advantages, as if I want/ need to I can used the MIDI track to play/ record a different patch or even a totally different keyboard. The 'playing' will always remain the same, and I get huge flexibility with the sounds. The drums get more complex, as if I am to use the XW's drums I have a number of options. I can simply record the step sequencer 'live' (clocked to the DAW's internal tempo) and leave it at that. However, that means all drum pattern editing has to be done on the XW, and it gets much harder to edit once the recordings have been made. Or I can set up numerous patterns on the XW and link them together to make up the entire song, but again that limits me in terms of editing flexibility once the audio has been recorded. Whereas if I use the DAW and have the drum tracks initially recorded as MIDI tracks, I can then edit and re-record drums to my hearts content. I would use the same process as per the main keyboard tracks whereby I use the recorded MIDI drum tracks to trigger the XW's drums and then record the audio output. By muting the appropriate drum sounds in the XW, I can then record each individual drum part onto separate audio tracks, which would then give ultimate mixing control when it comes to the final mixing. I'm not sure if this sounds long winded, or if others would agree this is a good process to get individual XW drum tracks recorded onto my DAW, with a good degree of editing flexibility. I guess as well a lot of this has to do with the fact that the XW only has a stereo out and my sound card (Creative Audigy 2) can only record 2 x line-ins at any one time. If I had individual outs for each of the XW's drums and multiple recording inputs then this wouldn't be an issue! Oh, and just to complicate the recording process further, some of my songs are using the XW's arpeggio. So again, do I clock the XW to the DAW's internal tempo and record the arpeggio (played manually) straight to an audio track, or do I be brave and try and record the arpeggio as MIDI information...?!!!! That would give me further editing flexibility of the data, and like with the drums and melody parts, I could play the arpeggio MIDI back into the XW and have the MIDI play any patch if required. Then I could record the triggered audio whenever needed. I don't know if I am making all this more complicated than necessary, though what I am hoping to do is to make some songs using ONLY my XW's (P1 and G1), hence wanting the most control over them that I can get. Maybe this might make my proposed recording process a little more feasible? Then again, on the demos I've done so far the XW's sound really good even when using very basic real time recording processes. Decisions decisions..!

A fairly quick query here to anyone who records the drums from an XW (P1 and G1) onto a multi-track recorder/ DAW. I'm am slowly working on and getting ready to record some of my compositions. As I am playing every part (or programming every part), multi-tracking is a godsend. I've done some rough demos by recording the XW step sequencer drums (looping the 16 steps) directly to my DAW (using the stereo 1/4" out leads), and then manually playing additional melodies/ parts as part of the multi-track process. However, one thing I would like to do, as I did when I recorded with bands in the past, is to record the drums to individual tracks (i.e. bass drum - track 1, snare - track 2, high hat - track 3 etc.) Plus, I'm not sure whether to program my DAW (Cubase) to trigger the drums via MIDI, or program the XW's internal step sequencers and have them clocked by the DAW. Having each drum sound on an individual track will give greater control when mixing, though as the XW only has a stereo audio out it isn't possible to have individual outs per drum as per some of the more powerful drum machines. Plus my DAW only as 2 x inputs anyway! Therefore I am assuming I should record the drums one at a time when recording a programmed pattern? A couple of the demos that I've done, the XW drums sound surprisingly good when just recorded onto a stereo track. However, I'm concerned that if I start building the tracks up more I will need more flexibility with panning individual drums sounds, changing individual volume levels and adding compression/ effects etc. later on. Then again, bands like the John Foxx era Ultravox used the Roland TR77 on their track "Hiroshima Mon Amour" to great effect, and that only had a single line out for the whole drum machine. How do other XW users program and record their XW drum tracks? Do you use the step sequencers on the XW's, or do you use your DAW to trigger the drum sounds of the XW's? And do you just record all the drums in one go as a stereo track, or do you record each drum to its own track on the recorder/ DAW? Any advice would be gratefully received.

LOL!

As most people on this forum already know, I own both a P1 and a G1. I got my P1 first (in November 2012) as the powerful Hex layers were the big draw for me. Initially I couldn't see the point of the G1, I thought it was just a dumbed down P1 with the extra feature of the sampling. Well, having now had the G1 for a few months the extra drums and the greater real time control over the solo synth has knocked me for six. I have barely even touched on the sampler side of things yet! They really do compliment each other well, and I have to say that the G1 hasn't been marketed as well as it could because quite simply, a lot of people don't really know what it can do over the P1. Ideally, Casio should have merged the two together to give the XW-PG1, though for now I recommend anyone with a P1 to get a G1 (and vice versa). Together, you will have covered virtually every base and will have a formidable rig. So much so that out of the 28 Casios I own (yes really!) I've hardly touched the other 26 of late...

And as someone also mentioned above, Nissan has 'Infiniti'. However, most people into cars see them as just badge engineered vehicles using parts shared with 'lesser' models. Lexus = it's still a Toyota. Acura = it's still a Honda. Infiniti = it's still a Nissan. Granted that when the original Lexus LS400 was released it sent shockwaves amongst the upper market car manufacturers (BMW, Mercedes, Jaguar etc.) for the sheer quality, fully loaded standard specification and value for money. However, Toyota were doing a known practice that the Japanese do when establishing a new brand name - releasing a product at a price point well below what it was really worth and undercutting the opposition. I heard rumours that they lost money on every LS400 they sold, though that was part of the plan. The car was released, journalists and consumers raved about it's build quality and value for money and the brand name was firmly established as a quality brand in the mind of the public. The next models to come out from Lexus were still good but no way near the same high build quality as Toyota were building them down to a price to get profits. However, the name 'Lexus' on its own was now enough to shift the cars off the lots and generate profit for the company. The above practice was also common amongst the early Japanese guitar manufacturers in the late 70'/ early 80's. The Japanese 'Squier' models can now command almost as much as the same era Fender equivalents as the build quality was so high, and other Japanese brands released models that seriously worried the likes of Fender and Gibson. The infamous Japanese 'Matsumoko' factory produced the brands 'Aria', 'Vantage' and 'Westone' etc. ( http://www.matsumoku.org/models/models.html ), and then the likes of Ibanez and also Yamaha produced some very high quality professional instruments at prices less than the American and British big names. It was so successful that most of these Japanese brands still exist, and their impact on the big American manufacturers caused them to raise standards and/ or bring out their own budget brands to compete. Casio meanwhile are in a class of their own having produced everything from musical calculators and 'toy' keyboards, right up to professional level equipment. They have a rich and successful history, and though some snobs still look down on the name, over time many have come to respect the 'pro' offerings from Casio thanks to the likes of the CZ, VZ and FZ series in the late 80's, and now the XW's, Privia and PX series. With such a long and successful history of being a manufacturer of musical instruments, I see no reason to change the brand name 'Casio'. In fact, what IS starting to happen is that though some still see Casio as a manufacturer of toy keyboards, many now recognise, and respect, the model names 'XW', 'PX', and 'Privia' almost as brands in their own right. That to me shows that Casio's marketing is working very well and there is absolutely no need to bring in another brand name for their pro models.

I haven't done it myself, though watching Mike Martin's excellent Youtube demo of the 'Bladerunner' set up, I understand that Mike set the XW keyboard into 'zones', using different patches in each zone (and maybe a 'phrase' running too?) I think he explained the set up in the comments section.

If Casio wanted to come up with an upmarket brand name, how about... ..."CLASSIO"?!!!!! (groan!) Seriously, one of the things that attracts me to the Casio brand is the fact that they make instruments for the people. There is nothing snobby or pretentious about Casio, something that can't be said for some of the users of other brands. And even better, when you show some of these keyboards snobs just what some of the higher end Casios are capable of they can't (won't?) believe it. The CZ and VZ's can easily stand up to a DX7 (including DX7II), the FZ samplers were very advanced for their time, and the XW's we all know can easily punch above their weight and price. As such, if the day comes that I will gig with keyboards I will be more than happy, and proud, to display them with the name 'Casio' on display. The snobs can sneer all they want, but when they hear what the Casios can do, it will be me who has the last laugh along with generating new found respect for Casio. Long live Casio!

Also make sure that the keyboard 'zones' haven't been changed, along with the key range. If they have, then the setting for the zone 'key range' might not include the keys in question hence them not sounding when pressed.

Piano_71, look out for an XW-G1 also, as you can use all the knobs to twiddle away on the solo synth section without the need for a tablet. There are some bargains to be had as many just don't know what to make of the G1 and prices can be low as a result. You could probably pick up a used G1 for the price of an ipad!

Joined!

I've voted 'other'. I know there is a 'pop' option, though I feel that 'synthpop' is a genre all of its own - think Human League, Gary Numan, early Depeche Mode, Thomas Dolby, Howard Jones, Blancmange, OMD, Soft Cell, Ultravox (both John Foxx and Midge Ure versions), John Foxx (solo), Flock of Seagulls etc.) This was/ is my major influence on the style of music I play. Additionally, I also like a lot of soundscape type synth music i.e. Vangelis, Jean Michel-Jarre, Adrian Wagner, Kraftwerk (who could also come under 'synthpop'). Then I also like more traditional bands that had heavy use of synths such as Rush and Duran Duran. Quite an eclectic selection!