CairnsFella

Some interesting points raised here. Personally I wonder how many individuals really delve into some of the technicalities prior to purchasing (or not). Things like the names for synth engines, how hex tones work, how much of previous MZ series are carried over etc. Many of us do of course - and it certainly makes interesting discussion - but do many of the 1000's (10's of thousand's?) of people that actually buy the gear. I would have thought image, value, appearance, sound, and perhaps most importantly, 'hype' are the biggest factors. To this end - and I am making an assumption that Casio is still a big deal in 'home keyboards' I don't see why this would flop, as has been suggested (Yes, I know its and arranger keyboard, but I still see it finding homes with more of the advanced Casio home keyboard owners than with the existing arranger market). Granted, the price may 'hamper' it, and it may not be a runaway success, but I think it's too early to call a flop because there are plenty of people that will quite happily upgrade to the latest and greatest Casio Home Keyboard. Even a potential one. It was interesting to note Gary to suggest the "success" of the XW's as a comparative point. Again, I am not in a position to 'know' the situation, but I certainly wouldn't be surprised to establish either that :- - the XW's were nowhere near as successful as Casio would have hoped (and I state this as an - on the whole - very happy G1) owner. or - the MZ will likely prove more popular than the XW line. I do not believe there was as 'ready' a market for an XW synth as there is for the more traditional Casio keyboards, or even their pianos and stage boards (as they clearly now have a good reputation in that area as well). There seems to be a very wide overlap with regard to what people to consider professional / non professional. As much as I love my G1 I really do not consider it a professional board. Professionals may use one, but by the same token many many item's of 'non professional' gear has been used by professionals, both in the studio and on stage. Casio's marketing in my opinion over hyped the professional aspect (as I equally feel they over hype and slightly mislead with the various technologies employed in their gear - though of course I am not saying that everyone else is innocent of this). Yes, the XW is a great unit and for me it exceeds what " I " purchased it for, but if I had been in the market for a board for it's 'synth' primarily, I would definitely have looked elsewhere. This isn't necessarily a bad thing, as the upside is that it is quite a unique offering. Getting back to the MZ and the point I am alluding to, I am with several here that at this price I wouldn't get this board over some of the other major players, but equally I note many of the contributors are those that have been big fans of the synth capabilities of THE XW's and PX's and I feel that this group (even those that have earlier 'classic' Casio's) really want to see significant progress in those areas, I'm just not sure if that is the direction that this is meant to represent. I believe AlenK mentioned some fair competition for the MZ above. Price wise I would have to agree that that Casio have it tough as there are likely some good sounding boards in that group. If I 'were' in the market for such a board and were purchasing without having heard the board (not that I'd do such a thing), the Casio would likely be toward the bottom of the list. I guess if you are a PX owner you may not be so hesitant, but the rompler element in the G1 is - in my own opinion - pretty damn weak for a modern board regardless of the price, or the fact that it isn't the 'party piece' of that board (I refer again to my 'non professional' assertion). Even if I 'heard' the board, the Casio would really have to sound "better" than some of those mentioned before I'd buy it. I know that it has a lot of other features beyond the various 'engines' but for that price it really needs to 'sound' good. But. As also mention, some people like Casio for their fun element, and for them perhaps the MZ does exceed the competition.

Good info. Not primarily - or perhaps even secondarily or tertiarily - a keyboard player, my skills do not encompass pitch bending solo's, so an alternate mapping for the pitch bend wheel is a good fit for me. Seems like a bit of a faux pas in the original configuration. Still, I guess with the gazillion combinations of parameters some things were going to be missed.

Thanks Brad. Well I am happy to admit where I have glaring holes in my keyboard knowledge, and this is obviously one of those areas. I have never transposed in anything other than octaves, but obviously just because I havent done it I shouldn't have presumed it isn't done. Thanks for that, and sorry for being such a thicky. I also see I could have found this in the manual.... I apologise once again.. I was being very lazy at the time.

Okay, I admit I am being lazy. I haven't rechecked the manual.. it's late, and whilst reading some other posts I was reminded of something I wanted to check out and thought I would fire the question here.... but please ignore if this is easily found out elsewhere. I was basically wondering what the transpose button was for. I can transpose using the + and - keys alongside the transpose button, but I have prodded the transpose a few times and it doesn't actually seem to do anything. Im thinking I have a broken button and guessing it has some effect on the transpose beyond the octave shifts of the + - .... but in case I am not going nut's.. is it really possible it does nothing?

I only just discovered I could start up in different modes which I was quite pleased about. But your right, it does rather limit the point when you are only saving one button press, and may well still have a lot of scrolling to do to get where you want to be.

If the original speakers were already incredible lets hope that they have also improved areas that have previously been less so incredible.

Arpeggiator - Preset Patterns and Sounds This section has made me realise that assessing sections separately based upon presets and user modifications is perhaps a little unfair. I will stick with this approach given this is how I have started, but I do admit the potential for unfair negativity. This is because as good as I think the arpeggiator is, with the preset arpeggiations and tones there is definitely room for improvement. I am coming from a limited background of arps in general. I have a fair bit of gear. but nothing that gives me much in the way of live arpeggiations. Many years ago, a friend in a band I was in had a CS1X (at least I 'think' that was the board - could be wrong) and it had some quite fantastical arps in it. However, this could probably be attributed in part (and possibly a large part) to the sounds employed on the board. In addition, I am pretty sure the arpeggiator was not programmable. So whilst I like the one on the G1 out of the box, it didnt quite impress me as much as I recall being impressed by the Yamaha...... but without having programmed any of my own patches on the Casio, and taking into account the fact that the arps are also programmable here as well, it is quite possible that the G1 may exceed my own recollection of the Yamaha board overall. Having said that, even with the presets I again had a lot of fun. some are a little cheesy and make me feel like the 1980's home keyboard department have a standing requirement to sprinkle some 'classic Casio auto accompaniment fairy dust' on every element of the XW's that they can. But regardless, anyone experiencing a keyboard arpeggiator for the first time will still find plenty to like here. Perhaps I shouldn't get too excited about the additional potential of this section, but I am looking forward to playing with and reporting upon this section once I get into some serious programming.

Sample Looper I think the following will become a bit of a theme in relation to the Sample based elements of the G1. And that is that I feel there is not enough memory. The sample looper is a cool little feature but it is so handicapped by the recording time available. Of course I realise Casio could have provided 10 times the memory and some people would still be unhappy, but I feel this misses the point. There is a 'real' limitation here, and given that sampling is the G1's raison d'etre I feel it is almost inexcusable to have such limited sampling time. I also realise the cost would increase with increased memory, but I am quite sure I would have remained interested if the cost of double the memory were factored in (especially if the the extra memory were provided 'at cost' - which I realise if a difficult argument, but I think in the grand scheme of things it would make sense). However, I am nonetheless left to assess the sample looper based upon the memory provided. Despite my opening shots (and acknowledging that a similar point of view is likely to be repeated with regard to the other sampling functions) I still find the sample looper to be a fun, if rather limited, bonus feature. For jamming and quick sketchpad ideas it can be a useful tool - provided your progression is brief - and I have found myself spending quite a bit of time with it, although it must be said that a lot of this time was taken up by repeated attempts to record something that fit within the loopers meagre allowances. I am going to try and be as positive about the function as I can here and say that if you consider it a sort of hidden extra, then it is much much better to have than not have. Of course it isnt hidden, as there are additional buttons provided for this feature, and for any meaningful sampling time one must use a low mono sample rate. But IF you manage to convince yourself that it is a hidden extra, then it's a fun little thing that our P1 brethren may - if only at a low level, and for a brief time - may acknowledge to be a usable differentiator between the two boards (though of course not a primary one).

XW Did you ever find a solution to this issue?

I'm too new to the Casio world to state anything with true conviction, but I sadly believe there is often too much compromise. I agree with you, but in my minds eye I see these and other ideas on a whiteboard gradually being crossed out by a committee, rather than a blank board with ideas being added.

Interface - First Impressions I think it's reasonable to state how I initially find the interface Vs after some time and maybe after long term use. I am no expert, but am reasonably conversant with instrument interfaces. One thing I can say for certain is that I know what a truly bad one is like (e.g. Yamaha A3000 sampler). I probably havent met an interface that I could truly call perfect, and of course what would be perfect for me would likely not be perfect for most others. I have previously read the manual and watched tutorials and workshops, but unless doing those things with the board in front of you they did little more than give me an ever so slight advantage in 'guessing' what I am looking for. With the complexity and quirkiness that this keyboard provides, the little LCD was always going to be challenged when it comes to providing adequate clues to what is going on inside. Equally, whilst the controls do, in their own way, what you would expect them to do, one really has little idea of the state of play by just looking at the board at any given time. In combination though, the controls and LCD - that appears to update with every pertinent control movement - make me feel that it will not take 'too long' to be come reasonably familiar with the interface.

Preset Sounds I first of all want to paraphrase myself ".......but regardless of whether I love or hate every other aspect, I have little doubt that I will be happy with my purchase..." Essentially I do not want to be seen as a negative Nellie about the board in general given that the first area I cover is just that unfortunately. I had a little play with all of the on-board sounds and I must say that I was a little bit disappointed, and that was despite not having hugely high hopes in the first place. Yes, I had listened to many demos, tutorials, and reviews, but mainly on my tablet or through our lounge PC and Home Theatre setup. Even though I have listened to some in my music room, I realized there was a dependency on the recording quality. But in person the sounds really didnt jump out at me any more. I may be talking out of my rear technically here, but it is almost as if the compression inherent in the video clips may have flattered the tones. Any gains in the dynamics from playing the keyboard directly through my system are offset by how much more 'clearly' I can tell that the sounds are lacking. Let me break this down further in the interests of fairness. PCM sounds I do not believe that many people would disagree that this isn't the forte of this board anyway. In fact I am sure there are plenty that believe it isn't the forte of the P1 either, and given that we know, for example, the piano is lesser than the P1, it was never likely to be a standout area. I have limited experience with other current budget boards, but I can say that in my opinion my other keyboards - originating the best part of two decades ago - have better bread and butter sounds. Maybe not 100% across the board, but in the vast majority of cases. I had a distant hope that the G1 'might' have a chance of showing up my fellow jammer's old Korg T3 (Which only had 8MB of ROM) but this clearly isnt going to be the case. Other than the vague possibility that my JBL's are still not 'run in' properly (which is a long shot, and still doesn't explain the discrepancies with my other boards) I have little to add that isnt rubbing salt in the wounds. ** I am not saying that anyone who disagrees with me is 'wrong' but this is my honest personal opinion. I would also add that this is only about the preset sounds as they are. I will try playing with them in a later 'modified sounds' section** Solo Synth sounds I can be brief here as essentially I feel the same about these as I do the PCM sounds. The only reason that it was worth separating this from the PCM is that I had slightly higher hopes for this element. Still, I am going to remain optimistic that once I start to modify the sounds and learn where the Solo Synth strengths lie, I could still be surprised. Although there would need to be a corresponding improvement in preset modulation controls which in the presets seem at best, to have a limited usable range. Sample presets Ok. So there are a couple of cheesy presets in the sample section (I actually need to double check this i.e. that they are not just PCM sounds that I have assumed are in the sample section). I was a little apprehensive regarding the sampler given some of the specs banded around. Having said that I was actually rather pleased with the clarity the vocal samples seemed to demonstrate. there is of course little I can comment upon in this area really though as the sample section (whether the sounds I heard were samples or not) is all about your own samples, so I need to wait until I review the 'modified sounds'. Edit Drum Kits I thought it fair to include drum kits separately (although they are technically just part of the PCM sample set). The reason being, when compared to the other sounds I thought they were eminently more usable. Maybe not great, and some hits are better than others, but in the context of things - and given my understanding they they are not multi-sampled - they otherwise appear to be a highlight of the unmodified sound set. Having said that I feel they are more suited to electronic styles regardless of the 'kit' selected. Essentially I feel I could happily jam along to the drums without the 'distraction' that I feel when using the other presets.

Hi All, Finally started working my way through the various facets of the G1. Although I have had the smallest of small peeks at many of the functions, I plan on working my way through each aspect of the board more thoroughly and will note my findings in each area as I go. This may take some time. I suppose there will not be that many people interested in a 'review' based post at this time in the G1's lifespan. However the thread is relevant to this board, and I am also interested in reflecting upon my own findings over time. I should also note that I had specific reasons for buying the G1 which I wave no doubt that the unit will fulfill. Specifically I wanted a simple but flexible step sequencer. For the price, I felt that what the G1 lacked in this area compared to a number of dedicated units were only limited compromises for me. (I am sure experienced electribe and novation circuit users may feel there is no comparison, however I currently do not have 'power user' aspirations and was convinced with what I had read and seen that my requirements were more than covered). I guess that this next statement is a bit of a spoiler regarding my first 'element', but regardless of whether I love or hate every other aspect, I have little doubt that I will be happy with my purchase because of this section alone. That said, I will still give an objective opinion on that area once I have delved in a little. A little more background may also give some context. I am an amateur (and a mature) bass player. In fact I am that amateur that I prefer to say Bass owner. I primarily play at regular organised jams in my area, and occasionally a few of us will get together in generally short lived side projects. Historically I played in a couple of bands, but very low key and having done limited performances. In what was a long 'middle period' I got into computer based music, though eventually realized that I had wasted years in the pursuit of 'sound creation' (and I literally mean sounds i.e. synth/vst programming and sample mangling) and had all but ceased any song creation or hands on instrument playing. I also built up a fair bit of kit in that time (though a drop in the ocean compared to what many guys here have). Most of it is old now and I dont add things often due to finances, need, desire to play more than fiddle, space etc. In short I have half a dozen guitars and basses, several guitar pedals and multi fx, a few bass and guitar amps, mics, vocal fx some rack gear including effects and sampler, and old Technics Electric Piano & Technics WSA1 Synth (The brand loyalty is a coincidence as the piano was my late mothers), a Roland MV8000, a few drum pads and a couple of drum machines, a couple of recorders/mixers, and a selection of PC software and interfaces. And for monitoring I use (dependent upon what I am doing) either a pair of passive Celestion PA speakers, or my - reasonably new addition of - JBL LSR308's and a a fairly cheap Cerwin Vega Sub. I guess few of you are still here after that dull intro, but I just want to put myself into context when I comment upon the various aspects of the G1.

I for one appreciate that clarification. Having read your post I must confess that the video does not state explicitly that it will do anything beyond what you described BUT I do feel it implies there is more synchronization than there is. You have saved me from a potential (though not particularly imminent) ipad purchase, which I am grateful for as I am not normally an Apple consumer (fruit or hardware ) so I think I will be better off learning the unit's interface directly. Maybe not as pretty but I am hoping - after increased familiarity - more intuitive overall.

Well I hope for your guys sake that you are right. But this was my point as I feel the "highlights" they have chosen to reveal are underwhelming. Obviously enough for those of you with Casio expectations, but I feel it's a missed opportunity to kindle the interest of those not sold on the brand. EDIT: That said, if they do what they have done for other boards and recycle the case. Get rid of the speakers and put 2 rubberized areas and it could be a good basis for a new XW... especially with those pads.

Well I am going to get my 2c worth out of the way, though I must admit I am not really a target audience member for this type of keyboard (But I am having a quiet day at work, so need the interaction ) It does strike me though, that Casio is a little vague about it's own target audience. Who are those bullet points meant to appeal to? Over 1000 new sounds. Personally, I'd be happy with 100 sounds if they were longer / higher quality / multi-samples etc. I feel they emphasize quantity over quality. Colour Touch Interface M'eh.To be fair, I know people have asked for this type of interface, so fair enough. I can give or take as long as whatever interface is intuitive. Hundreds of Rhythms Double M'eh (Is it just me, but whenever Casio talk about in built rhythm's I instantly recall the old bossa nova's and latin beats of the early boards) Obviously I realise such things are much moved on, but but even assuming it is something the customer wants, I still find it a rather underwhelming bullet point for a new keyboards features. Wouldn't this be taken for granted in this type of board? Flash Sample Memory Hmm.. Interesting.... Unless it's a paltry couple of MB. Tonewheel Organs. Given the feedback I have read regarding existing organ sims in the Casio boards, I would hope they have improved them.. and if so the bullet point should read "Improved Virtual Tonewheel..." Why.... because some people have long memories and without any indication of improvement will just think... "Casio Organs are not great" 40W Speaker System Casios commonly have speakers. 40W may well be a great number (is it?). Those that may have been on the edge of showing interest at that point... are they going to say ..... ahhhhh.. but 40W speakers... ok in THAT case I will look into this a bit more. Ok Ok I have come down a bit hard on this (especially as I honestly wouldnt be buying this even if it were the undisputed king of it's sector, as it just isn't my sector. And of course I assume it is meant to appeal to the people that know the old MZ 2000 (Though I am led to believe that it was hardly Casios biggest selling board, so the Reinvented, Reimagined, Reborn tag, once again, has a limited target). Anyway, I apologise if I sound a little negative... for all I know it's a great unit, and it certainly appears as though it may appeal to more traditional Casio owners (unlike myself, as I only have a G1, and would really liked to have seen Casio make the really rather few improvements to that line required to make it truly great )

Okay, was an easy find. Watch after 4:50

Hmmm. Interesting. Just last night I (re re re re) watched the G1 workshop video on youtube, which then 'autoplayed' to another CAISO MM video about Midi-Designer for XW, and it specifically showed the opposite (i.e. all the slider and knob changes performed on the XW were reflected on the IPAD.). I will see if I can track it down and share the link.

Sorry if I am poking my nose in here as I may have missed something. But isnt this post in the wrong section, or are you also using a PD1 in this process, as your post doesn't seem to suggest so,

Well I just had my first 2 days off since Christmas ......................AND.............................. I STILL haven't played my G1. D'oh!! This is partially due to the fact that I haven't had time of since Christmas so I had so much to catch up with before I I felt I could 'indulge' myself. Secondly, I am primarily a bass player - which I don't spend enough time practising either - so as I was invited to a jam for one of the days I felt I should go to that. But there was one other little reason too. After clearing space in my 'Studio' (loose definition), I had another feel of the knobs and sliders on the G1, and noticed one slider was very loose. It soon became apparent that it was barely hanging on. I decided to write to Casio and thought I would include a video to demonstrate - as much as a video can - how loose the slider was. Whilst doing the video, the slider - or more specifically the plastic cover for the slider - split completely in half in my hand. Anyway, I have written to Casio to hopefully have this resolved, though, at a push, I could glue the old one back together. I am reluctant to do this though as I would likely have to glue the slider to the slider post too. A little disappointed it must be said, but I guess these things happen, and it could be worse I suppose. But after all that .. still no playing. My room is now organised though, so if I am not too tired tonight I am going to throw the (metaphorical) power switch and take it for a ride. ... finally...... hopefully !!

I think this would be hard to approximate. The variable is how busy the song is (how many notes per minute (or even second). Having said that, I haven't done any solid maths but using some round figures of 10 notes per second, this would seem to give you a 50 minute song (if my unchecked calculations are correct)

Interesting keyboard. I note that it is "Oriental" focussed. I assume (as I didn't read a great deal) that it still caters for bread and butter tones, but with better than usual Oriental sounds ? Be interested to hear your feedback on that one.

Uhh?? I have visions of some dancers, a director, and a camera crew emerging from the device, then the Casio transporting you to a number of exotic locations!!!!

I'm going to play devil's advocate for a moment here as I had a look at the keyboard in question and the 150. Whilst I do not deny they look very similar indeed (and for all I know it may well be an intentional rip-off) but having said that, there really isnt a great deal of design manoeuvrability if you are looking to produce a sleekish black keyboard with minimal controls and stereo speakers. In fact, aside from the keys - which I think I can justifiably disregard in this context - to me it is only the relative placement of the volume knob, and two of the logo's that are real like for likes. I honestly believe they could have got a lot closer in design without any 'infringement'. Edit:- Well, I am happy to admit to being wrong should the situation require. In this instance though I feel I need to say I am both wrong and right, I am wrong in that, having looked around for a few minutes, I see that other manufacturers do seem to be able to come up with quite a variation in design for this type of keyboard. However, the vast majority (of those that I saw in my few minutes of searching) offered a lot more controls and / or display, which is what primarily made them look different. In addition, I stumbled across the Williams Legato 88. To my mind this is much closer to the 150 than the previously mentioned keyboard. It doesnt have the 'knob' but the button layout closely mirrors the casio, as do the speaker shapes/positioning, and the overall case.

And it arrives. Hooraaaaaaaah Most pleased indeed. Sadly, given my Christmas day schedule, I didnt even have time to plug it in (Well, I could have when I got back late evening, but I was shattered and I want to be pert and alert for my first experience with the G1.) What was strange though, is despite all the research I had done, the pictures I had seen and the videos I had watched, the G1 still 'somehow' looked a little different in the flesh. I cant explain as obviously it isnt different to the pictures.... I suppose it just shows that pictures are not a substitute for the real thing. Anyway, the difference was neither in a bad nor good way... just different. But I like the way it presents in the flesh. I also quite liked the action for a budget synth... suits my unskilled playing ability (though obviously having not plugged it in yet I should reserve judgement until I try the velocity sensitivity). One thing I found in my few moments with the board that I was pleased with is that most of the buttons (though not the knobs) are a firm rubber type substance. I had assumed that all the controls were hard plastic, so that was a pleasing find. At work today, and still pretty jaded, but I hope I perk up by the time I get home ready for some sonic experimentation.