Why isn't the CT-S1000V just called the CT-S500V ??

[BillErickson]

Looking at the specs between the CT-S500 and the CT-S1000V, I don't see any differences other than the addition of the vocorder features and voices and cosmetic color changes to the body.  So why isn't it just called the CT-S500V?

 

I suspect Marketing had a hand in this....  😉

 

 

[Brad Saucier]

In other words, you don't see any differences, other than the differences.  😄

 

 

[BillErickson]

3 minutes ago, Brad Saucier said:

In other words, you don't see any differences, other than the differences.  😄

 

 

Differences which can be completely covered by the "V" addition to the name CT-S500V.  So why change the version number from 500 to 1000, other than a Marketing decision??   The CT-S1000V appears to be just a CT-S500 with the vocorder capabilities added.  So why wasn't it just called a CT-S500V?

 

Edited February 6, 2022 by BillErickson

[Brad Saucier]

Why change the model number (or name) for anything, other than marketing decisions?  Why have a PX-560 when it's just a PX-360 with more stuff added?  Why does Chevy make a Suburban and Tahoe if they're the same vehicle, just one longer than the other?  

 

And to be clear, a vocoder uses a microphone.  This is a vocal synth.

[BillErickson]

Brad, now your just being pedantic and not even trying to address my point.   

 

Whatever...

 

 

[Joe Muscara]

No he's not. You asked why it was called that and he gave examples of other products that are similar to each other but have different names.

[Brad Saucier]

I think I answered your question.  It's no different than those other products I mentioned.  So yes, it's marketing.  It's always marketing.  Names and model numbers are inherently marketing tools.  The difference in model numbers is there to signify a difference in products, differences big or small.  

[BillErickson]

Thanks guys.  I guess you're just confirming that Marketing has little to do with logic or consistency.  Too bad for the consumer.

 

 

 

 

 

[Brad Saucier]

Welcome to life in virtually any product naming meeting.  The differences in opinions on what something should be called is virtually endless.  At some point, someone makes a decision and sticks with it.  

[Casio Key]

Many manufacturers do this. This is not unique to Casio.

 

Why does Roland make an XPS-30 and Juno DS if they are the same keyboards?

[Joe Muscara]

18 minutes ago, BillErickson said:

Marketing has little to do with logic or consistency

As far as naming products, it varies.  Sometimes companies try to stick with rigid naming rules, and then all of a sudden they'll come out with a product that breaks those rules for no apparent reason.

 

As far as the 500 vs 1000V, my guess is that while they could have called the 1000V the 500V, they would have run the risk of the V getting lost sometimes. "I want that new Casio 500" "500 or 500V?" "Um, what's the difference?" Or a sloppy YT reviewer raves about the voice synth in the "CT-S500" and people buy that model and then are angry it doesn't have the voice synth.

 

IOW, it was probably named the 1000V by the Department of Redundancy Department.  

[BillErickson]

3 minutes ago, Joe Muscara said:

As far as the 500 vs 1000V, my guess is that while they could have called the 1000V the 500V, they would have run the risk of the V getting lost sometimes.

Now *THIS* is a justification that sounds reasonable. 

 

Otherwise, it just sounds like someone at Casio Marketing going "Yeah, it's a 500 with voice synthesis so we *could* call it a 500V, but let's jack up the number to 1000 to make it sound more impressive!"

[Brad Saucier]

I've lost track how many times people have asked "What's the difference between a PX-560 and a PX-560M?".  They get the PX-560 home, open the box, and see PX-560M written on the top panel, and think they have a different keyboard.  The "M" in the name is hardly ever written or mentioned in casual conversation, so it's natural they think it's different.  And then there's "PX-560BE", still the same product.  The BE simply refers to the color blue. 

[Brad Saucier]

17 minutes ago, Joe Muscara said:

Department of Redundancy Department.

 

The what department department?  

[pianokeyjoe]

I have a Korg PA600...QT, Yes PA600QT or PA500ORT. What does THAT mean?? Means Quarter Tone and Oriental respectively. The PA600 and PA500 are the Standard release keyboard with no Special features or special Regional Features.. So the Casio CT-S500V could have been a viable name, as with Korg. But to make the CT-S1000V such a name as it is, DOES pop out more and grabs your attention as being an upgraded model versus a model with a Special function or Regional feature(Arabic,middle Eastern sounds, Turkish sounds,etc). Roland has V-Synth, V-Synth 2, and V-Synth XT.. differences? Yuup, But again, Marketing. Casio CT1(old model numbering) or MT1? Why those never existed? We could go down that rabbit hole lol! But I do understand the question and reasoning behind the question about 500 vs 500V. I was wondering the same.. Casio chose not to go the Korg Arranger model numbering path I reckon..

[Chas]

It's a number, or name, to differentiate between the two products.

 

Sometimes the numbers make no sense at all to the actual product. Look at Roland with their vintage JX series. The JX-3P made some sense as the "3P" meant "Programmable, Preset, Polyphonic". Then they gave as the JX-8P, that used very different architecture and filters to the 3P and shared little with its predecessor,  despite the JX name. Many thought the "8" meant 8 note polyphony, but it actually had 6, the same as the 3P. Following that,  Roland issued the JX-10, that was basically two 8Ps stacked inside (plus other features). It had 12 notes of polyphony, thus why Roland chose the number 10 is anyone's guess. 

 

Then you have an incident a couple of years back where someone bought a Casio XW-P1 and then got all upset when they discovered that it didn't have sampling features. Despite the advertising clearly stating that it was the XW-G1 that could sample, not the XW-P1...

 

Thus Casio are likejy using these numbers to clearly distinguish between the two models and to avoid confusion. 

[vbdx66]

This is fairly simple. The CT-S500 is an Improved CT-S400. The CT-S1000V is the flagship. Pure marketing naming convention.

 

Vinciane

[BillErickson]

4 hours ago, vbdx66 said:

This is fairly simple. The CT-S500 is an Improved CT-S400. The CT-S1000V is the flagship. Pure marketing naming convention.

 

Vinciane

Yes, but there are significant differences in the specs and body layout between the CT-S400 and CT-S500.  The bodies between the the CT-S500 and CT-S1000V are exactly the same (other than the additional back-panel ports for the line-outs and extra pedal, re-assignment of two buttons, and color changes) and the specs are all the same except for the addition of vocal functionality and voices.   In the case of the CT-S400/CT-S500 upgrade, there were significant changes both in body and specs to warrant the the number change.  But in everything that matters, the CT-S1000V is *JUST* a CT-S500 with voice functionality added.

 

As you say:  Pure marketing. 

 

[Shad0wfax]

On 2/6/2022 at 9:17 PM, Brad Saucier said:

And to be clear, a vocoder uses a microphone.  This is a vocal synth.

Technically, a vocoder can use human voice as a signal input or any other signal, such a synthesizer waveform. But it's true that the S1000V is not a vocoder. The vocoder processes an input signal to generate the "synthetic" final sound, whereas in the S1000V all the process is synthetic. As far as I've seen, the final results are quite simmilar, only that a vocoder is easier to use . Personally I don't have interest in the S1000V but I do have it in the S500.  It seems to me that is a very interesting product with a killer value for money. If I want to use a vocoder, I already own a Montage and a Genos.

 

Regarding the topic, it's obvious that calling it S1000V instead of S500V it's a marketing strategy and it's perhaps not a bad one. It gives the impression that it's a "superior" product although the voice synthesizer is the only relevant difference.

[Brad Saucier]

On 2/6/2022 at 2:53 PM, Joe Muscara said:

As far as the 500 vs 1000V, my guess is that while they could have called the 1000V the 500V, they would have run the risk of the V getting lost sometimes. "I want that new Casio 500" "500 or 500V?" "Um, what's the difference?" Or a sloppy YT reviewer raves about the voice synth in the "CT-S500" and people buy that model and then are angry it doesn't have the voice synth.

 

I think you hit the nail on the head here.  A single letter "V" as the only naming difference between two models is way too subtle.  

[Chas]

Same reason that the CZ5000 wasn't just called a CZ3000S ("S" for sequencer). Because in effect, the CZ5000 was exactly the same as the CZ3000 just with the addition of a sequencer. 

 

Many manufacturers have used seemingly illogical numbering schemes for their keyboards. Yamaha once had the SY77, 85, and 99 as their flagships back in the late 80s/. early 90s. From that numbering, you would have thought that the 99 was the most powerful and latest model. It wasn't, as the SY99 followed the SY77, and the SY85 came after both. Not only that, but the SY85 used a completely different synthesis to the SY77 and 99 and pretty much only shared the "SY" series name..

 

Of course the difference in numbering with the CT-S1000V vs the CT-S500 is a marketing decision. As as Joe Muscara said above, it makes it clear to the uninitiated that there is a difference between the  two models so that buyers don't get them mixed up.

 

[zipporaid]

I probably would have called it a CT-S800 or something...
It's definitely closer to the s1000, than the s400.

Until I learned the difference was just the vocal simulation, I was thinking of the 1000v.
I ended up going with the 500 just to save some cash - I just didn't see any scenario where I would use the vocal synth.

[CYBERYOGI =CO=Windler]

On 2/17/2022 at 3:47 PM, zipporaid said:

I probably would have called it a CT-S800 or something...

 

only if it had a ROM-Pack slot. 😉 Early Casios beginning with 8* always came with ROM-Pack. Even the Symphonytron 8000 stage organ had a sequencer RAM-Pack RA-2 which looks like a CZ-101 cart in white.