CT-X MIXER FEATURE

[Silvano Silva]

Congratulations to Casio for having hit the CT-X3000 with the MIXER feature

Where when playing the accompaniment and changing the volumes they remain even when changing the variation.

This feature should also be on the MZ-X Line.

As for the CT-X  we hope that Casio will update the AUTO FILL IN that it already has on the MZ-X Line.

Edited February 4, 2022 by Silvano Silva

[Casio Key]

Manual Fill In is much better, because that way Casio gives us the option of being able to change the variation with Fill In or without Fill In.

[Silvano Silva]

17 hours ago, Casio Key said:

Manual Fill In is much better, because that way Casio gives us the option of being able to change the variation with Fill In or without Fill In.

I believe you don't know the MZ-X's Auto Fill in. On the MZ-X you also have the option to disable AUTO FILL IN. In the CT-X you lose precious time when you fill in by pressing twice the desired variation. In this case the MANUAL FILL IN would not disappear but we would have options to activate and deactivate it.

[Akshansh - Alex]

Functioning of Pattern Sequencer of MZ-X is more Smoothest then CT-X

 

But because of AiX Sound output processor, Quality of Rhythms on tones is much better then MZ-X!

 

It's a fact that Casio produced CT-X above from my Hope. 😊

 

In the MZ-X the settings cannot save for the rhythm. The Registration Filter for Mixer is also not good for hold out only rhythm settings of mixer temporarily...

 

At the last, only one option is available, that is Edit the rhythm and leave it if want for temporarily otherwise save it. 🙂

[Silvano Silva]

On 2/5/2022 at 3:28 PM, Akshansh said:

Functioning of Pattern Sequencer of MZ-X is more Smoothest then CT-X

 

But because of AiX Sound output processor, Quality of Rhythms on tones is much better then MZ-X!

 

It's a fact that Casio produced CT-X above from my Hope. 😊

 

In the MZ-X the settings cannot save for the rhythm. The Registration Filter for Mixer is also not good for hold out only rhythm settings of mixer temporarily...

 

At the last, only one option is available, that is Edit the rhythm and leave it if want for temporarily otherwise save it. 🙂

I don't think that in terms of sound the CT-X is better than the MZ-X line because the sound card of the MZ-X is better.

In the context of separate sounds in some situations the CT-X does much better.

But in large volumes and dynamics applied in the accompaniments I believe that the MZ-X achieves a very comprehensive Headroom.

I have both and the MZ-X can go very far in bass depth. And this is clearly due to your sound card.

What I don't understand is this lack of features in both models since they are even simple features to implement.

[Akshansh - Alex]

17 hours ago, Silvano Silva said:

I don't think that in terms of sound the CT-X is better than the MZ-X line because the sound card of the MZ-X is better.

In the context of separate sounds in some situations the CT-X does much better.

But in large volumes and dynamics applied in the accompaniments I believe that the MZ-X achieves a very comprehensive Headroom.

I have both and the MZ-X can go very far in bass depth. And this is clearly due to your sound card.

What I don't understand is this lack of features in both models since they are even simple features to implement.

Well I've Midas XL8 and Soundcraft Vi3000 mixer and lots of Sound Cards. All are having high quality sound input and outputs. 

Yes, MZ-X deeper in bass and everything but I experienced many times that LOWER VOLUME sound is clearly hearable in CT-X. While in MZ-X, it have to increase the volume either from Mixer or from Event Editor.

MZ-X is smoother the CT-X in changing chord or variations and filling-ins

 

Here, I am not comparing both keyboards, but both are very well keyboards in its place.

 

I'm also working on beat which I will upload it on Youtube in some days. The music is created by MZ-X500, CT-X9000IN (5000), XW-P1 and also from other keyboard that is Pa4X and Genos. Actual from MZ-X500 and CT-X5000.

 

I created and recorded almost everythings from CT-X and MZ-X... I also double and triple recorded tones and samples with different settings and effects to make them equalize to Stereo and get some closer to stereo. After that I placed all things in daw and created a project. 

 

So it's a bit more good high quality recorded track from Casio keyboard.

[Executor]

The ctx (except in sounds and effects) has few things that surpass the mzx. The mzx is much more complex and has much more advanced functions (without being the best operating system either). This was the occasion to have made a memorable keyboard by merging the two, but it has not been possible and we have a new keyboard that "talks".

[Silvano Silva]

3 hours ago, Executor said:

The ctx (except in sounds and effects) has few things that surpass the mzx. The mzx is much more complex and has much more advanced functions (without being the best operating system either). This was the occasion to have made a memorable keyboard by merging the two, but it has not been possible and we have a new keyboard that "talks".

This is what I try to explain to Akshansh.

The MZ-X has just a wider range of onboard sound card.

This has nothing to do with using MIDAS digital tables, SSL among others.

This is from the keyboard itself is its feature in which sound technicians get scared and lower the volume gain of the MZ-X on the mixer.

The CT-X has a more up-to-date sound engine but the MZ-X is not far behind just because of its sound card.

A MZ-X with current sound engine would be very good, a perfect union AIX and with the sound card of the MZ-X.

This kind of difference is clearly seen on the Yamaha PSR and GENOS.

And I'm still not adding the editing part of the MZ-X like:

ADSR editing that the CT-X doesn't have, HEXALAYER, DSPs and the special one that is the Sampler function.

The CT-X and CT-S Line are fun keyboards with some very pleasant surprises when creating music.

The MZ-X is a workstation that incorporates many more functions and expansions.