New Casio-well not exactly 2012

[Jokeyman123]

So soon we forget.....

 

https://www.harmonycentral.com/forums/topic/1883577-casio-xw-p1-performance-synthesizer/

 

Just browsing around, trying to get the creative flowing, came across the original posts (25 pages worth!) about the then new XW-P1, with copious amounts of valuable info from Mike Martin and another heavy-hitter, Craig Anderton-built my first effects boxes including a remarkable home-brew phase shifter from one of his electronic kit books years back.

 

If you wish to speculate which features we might see in a new Casio keyboard/module (its killing me!!)-look at some of these posts-most of those features are already there in the XW.  I can imagine refining some of the XW's features-more polyphony, better resolution with the filters, maybe add the 17-track midi/song recorder ALA PX-560/MZ/X500 and the new AIX sound engine, ability to utilize a few more DSPs and routings plus the touchscreen menu system-and release in a 61-76 and 88 key version at the right price, could be a world-beater. For all this-I am sure it will need some new type of CPU-another Casio-developed CPU, pone that is powerful enough to run ALL the functions of the best of the Casio keyboards COMBINED (capitals on purpose.) And in one keyboard. Not easy or cheap to tool a new one up, maybe Casio can combine a few from different Casios.

 

Every time I take the XW out again, and look over all the 2020/2021 new keys, virtual instruments and modules-I am again reminded-what a monster this Casio was, and still is. I'm so glad they discontinued it! Only makes it more valuable...

 

I have pretty powerful not Casio noise-makers here, which is why I keep overlooking/underestimating the XW. How could this "cheap" Casio compete with with my multi-thousand dollar monsters? In some respects it can't, but not missing by much. The ones I've kept-are unique, which is why I've kept them. Like the XW.

 

I keep underestimating this board because it didn't cost 5000 US dollars, my mindset after all these years of much more expensive instruments I purchased, many of which can't compete with what is available now.
 

All master painters used the same basic colors/easels/etc. but what Rembrandt did was entirely different from Van Gogh, Monet, Klee, Picasso or me in kindergarten with fingerpaint shmush. Got to try to remember that. Got to stop creating fingerpaint smush with the XW.....there is still so much to it

[Executor]

5 hours ago, Jokeyman123 said:

So soon we forget.....

 

https://www.harmonycentral.com/forums/topic/1883577-casio-xw-p1-performance-synthesizer/

 

Just browsing around, trying to get the creative flowing, came across the original posts (25 pages worth!) about the then new XW-P1, with copious amounts of valuable info from Mike Martin and another heavy-hitter, Craig Anderton-built my first effects boxes including a remarkable home-brew phase shifter from one of his electronic kit books years back.

 

If you wish to speculate which features we might see in a new Casio keyboard/module (its killing me!!)-look at some of these posts-most of those features are already there in the XW.  I can imagine refining some of the XW's features-more polyphony, better resolution with the filters, maybe add the 17-track midi/song recorder ALA PX-560/MZ/X500 and the new AIX sound engine, ability to utilize a few more DSPs and routings plus the touchscreen menu system-and release in a 61-76 and 88 key version at the right price, could be a world-beater. For all this-I am sure it will need some new type of CPU-another Casio-developed CPU, pone that is powerful enough to run ALL the functions of the best of the Casio keyboards COMBINED (capitals on purpose.) And in one keyboard. Not easy or cheap to tool a new one up, maybe Casio can combine a few from different Casios.

 

Every time I take the XW out again, and look over all the 2020/2021 new keys, virtual instruments and modules-I am again reminded-what a monster this Casio was, and still is. I'm so glad they discontinued it! Only makes it more valuable...

 

I have pretty powerful not Casio noise-makers here, which is why I keep overlooking/underestimating the XW. How could this "cheap" Casio compete with with my multi-thousand dollar monsters? In some respects it can't, but not missing by much. The ones I've kept-are unique, which is why I've kept them. Like the XW.

 

I keep underestimating this board because it didn't cost 5000 US dollars, my mindset after all these years of much more expensive instruments I purchased, many of which can't compete with what is available now.
 

All master painters used the same basic colors/easels/etc. but what Rembrandt did was entirely different from Van Gogh, Monet, Klee, Picasso or me in kindergarten with fingerpaint shmush. Got to try to remember that. Got to stop creating fingerpaint smush with the XW.....there is still so much to it

The XW is not a bad synthesizer, but the lack of polyphonic analog sounds (in the case of the xw-g1), very bad effects (especially the reverb) and the lack of a linear sequencer, make it an incomplete synthesizer. In the case of the xw-G1, it's great that it can sample, but only in 10 banks. If you want to change another set of sounds, you have to load sound by sound in all 10 banks and it takes a long time to load, which makes it unfeasible for live performances.However I have the impression that this time, Casio is not going to meet our wishes, I hope I am wrong but we all know the path he has taken in recent years.

[Brad Saucier]

6 hours ago, Jokeyman123 said:

Every time I take the XW out again, and look over all the 2020/2021 new keys, virtual instruments and modules-I am again reminded-what a monster this Casio was, and still is.

 

The XW's were/are great!  The P1 seemed to be most popular.  They have a sound all their own, especially when you start digging in and making it your own.  I love when people find the positive aspects of something, put them to work and share their experiences and help others, and the XW community has always been very supportive of one another.  I rarely found a chance to help anyone with technical questions in the XW forums and group because they always figured it out on their own, or they quickly helped one another.  They did and still do amazing things with them, an amazing community of people.  

[Jokeyman123]

Many musicians passed over the CZ's back then-as imitations of the DX FM synths-many people never even noticed how different the PD synthesis could sound-I wasn't one of them! Now these have become ( 40 years later) coveted synths, and by the way in case some of you newer to the game didn't know-scan through all the CZ waveforms in the XW-you can do it just by installing the XW-P1 software-even without connecting the XW-it has a complete list of all the factory waveforms in the XW-and there is a huge collection of CZ waveforms.

 

And Executor-look at the newest or newer "analog" synths that have come out-almost all except for pieces like the Behringer DeepMind and similar-are monophonic too. I remember when, for 5000 bucks you could buy a Prophet 5-5 voices of polyphony-or for twice that-10,000 US you could get the Prophet 10-yes 10 voices of polyphony!  Yes it would be nice to have polyphonic analog tones, but then with 3 oscillators per monophonic tone-most of the new Korgs, Rolands etc. or clones of the classic analog machines-have 1-2 oscillators and are monophonic. so the XW-the more I look at everything else, the more I keep the XW, and with my gearlust, believe me I look!

Edited January 5, 2022 by Jokeyman123

[Chas]

Hard to believe that it's coming up to 10 years since I purchased my XW-P1, and a year or two behind that since I purchased my XW-G1. 

 

I'd be the first to agree that the XW UI isn't the most intuitive, and that some of the features and/ or implementation of them could be better executed (though it's partly to do with the fact that they are very deep synths). And ideally the feature sets from both should have been put into a single keyboard. However...

 

...Both my P1 and G1 are still permanently set up in my studio. I have WAY too many keyboards, and also tons of VST soft synths including many of the powerhouse analogue polysynths, string machines, mono synths, and also Cherry Audio's PolyMode PolyMoog emulator. Yet many times that I need a sound that just fits, I reach for one of my XWs and they always deliver. The G1 does sterling duty as a bass machine, and the P1 excels with pads, organs and polysynth sounds. And the G1, even though its sampling abilities could be better, still managed to provide multiple lead parts all from samples for one of my tracks. 

 

Oh yes, @Jokeyman123, though it's nice that Casio included the CZ waveforms in the XWs, it was those 8 stage envelopes and the DCW acting on the resonant waveforms that made the CZs sound so unique.  Why oh why Casio won't reissue an updated and expanded CZ synth is anyone's guess. Or even include a CZ emulator within one of their modern synths. 

 

Still, I am excited to see what this new AIX Casio will turn out to be. Really hoping it will be a more synth based Casio, though I am holding off buying any new synths as I've got way too many already. Then again,, if it were to combine the spirit of the CZs and XWs and bring something new to the table, well, maybe then I could be convinced to break my rule!

[Jokeyman123]

Right-it is pretty amazing what one can do with 8-stage envelopes-I lost months back in the 80s programming every conceivable sound from the "CZ cookbook" which I wish I had kept. and i didn't record any of those sounds-the "concrete" sounds. I remember one in particular-was a series of sounds-a car passing, skidding sound, crashing, and police sirens following it up-in one key-for one tone-with PD and pitch, amp and filter envelopes. Such was its power. Could get animal sounds, that shocked me with how realistic this programmer was able to achieve-no samples, just PD. Sure this had no real musical value necessarily-but after going through a veritable minefield of DX/Korg/Sequential Circuits and my old DSS-1 sampler-was pretty impressive at the time. No, I can't do that with the XW-P1-there just aren't enough envelope steps-although conceivably with a hex layer or performance layer, but I would have to have separate tones for each effect and create different start points for each tone a bit more cumbersome than just programming one tone. I've tried some of that with the XW, and the PX560, but i still can't achieve that level of changes over time as i could with the CZ's.

[Executor]

5 hours ago, Jokeyman123 said:

Many musicians passed over the CZ's back then-as imitations of the DX FM synths-many people never even noticed how different the PD synthesis could sound-I wasn't one of them! Now these have become ( 40 years later) coveted synths, and by the way in case some of you newer to the game didn't know-scan through all the CZ waveforms in the XW-you can do it just by installing the XW-P1 software-even without connecting the XW-it has a complete list of all the factory waveforms in the XW-and there is a huge collection of CZ waveforms.

 

And Executor-look at the newest or newer "analog" synths that have come out-almost all except for pieces like the Behringer DeepMind and similar-are monophonic too. I remember when, for 5000 bucks you could buy a Prophet 5-5 voices of polyphony-or for twice that-10,000 US you could get the Prophet 10-yes 10 voices of polyphony!  Yes it would be nice to have polyphonic analog tones, but then with 3 oscillators per monophonic tone-most of the new Korgs, Rolands etc. or clones of the classic analog machines-have 1-2 oscillators and are monophonic. so the XW-the more I look at everything else, the more I keep the XW, and with my gearlust, believe me I look!

practically all modern analog synthesizers have 4 voices of polyphony ... even the volka keys which costs about € 140 .... they all have paraphonic mode. In the xw to make a pad (xw-g1) you have to do it with the pcm sounds because even the release cuts out when you hit another key. I like the xw but only for bass and some solo sounds.The Behringer Deepmind 6 have 6 voices and the Deepmind 12 have 12 voices.

Edited January 5, 2022 by Executor

[rsaintjohn]

My Minimoog lacks polyphonic analog sounds, any effects, and has no sequencer. Same with my CZs. I would never call them incomplete synthesizers. In my experience there are more great synths with mediocre effects and rather pointless sequencers, features that are not really standard on synthesizers. No one calls the new Rev 4 Sequential Prophet-5/10s “incomplete” because they lack effects and a sequencer.  Some modern synths actually bury the mediocrity of their basic tone in effects and distract with features like 16 or 32-step sequencers. So let’s agree that there is no single definition of a “complete” synthesizer, mono or poly, analog or digital.

 

I know what I like, I keep what I use. I sold a lot of prominent gear this year. Not because they were bad, but because I wasn’t using them. There was overlap with other gear in sounds and/or features, and I just didn’t have the room. I kept the Minimoog, JUPITER-X, the CZs, Studio Electronics, System-100, Sub 37, a Yamaha Reface, UNO Synth Pro, and some others. I even got a Sequential Take 5 with the sales proceeds. 
 

But not once did I consider selling the XW-P1. Hex Layers are fabulous, as is the Solo. I love the look and feel, and its sliders and assignable knobs. The MIDI and sequencer are a bit cryptic but they’re nearly as effective as anything in my studio (and sequence other gear admirably). As far as I’m concerned it is unusual, unique and, yes, complete. I’m proud to keep it in a studio alongside other synths from the past 45 years. It was a daring synth and a daring part of the Casio Music history.

[AlenK]

Craig Anderton's review was what convinced me to buy the XW-P1, even though by the time I saw the review (in 2014), all the links to Craig's audio examples were dead. 

 

Personally, seeing where Casio has gone since the MZ-X500, which was perhaps their most complete keyboard (a synth in arranger clothing), I think there is zero chance they will re-enter the professional synth market again. If by some chance, they do try again, true CZ emulation (and not just samples of some waveforms) is not likely to happen. After all, people have been begging them for exactly that for years, maybe decades now and it hasn't happened. There must be some good reason for that but we'll never hear it.