Issues and Observations as of 1.10

[chuckbutler]

Let me preface the following by saying that overall I am thrilled with the PX-5S; it has made my gigging life better and easier in more ways than I can count. I mention these issues purely in the spirit of constructive criticism, and of course on the possibility that some of them may have solutions that I have overlooked (so thanks in advance for any suggestions).

 

1. A mono mode for synth leads and basses would be a welcome addition, if possible.

 

2. I don't see any way to trigger the pitch envelope by velocity. This would be used, e.g., to simulate a slide into a note (as on a guitar) in a certain velocity range (typically 125-127).

 

3. As I mentioned in another thread, I find that the pianos tend to "fade away" a bit in the upper register. And while a workaround is possible, it would be nice to have scaling options to deal with this, either within the Tone or the Stage Setting (currently this is only possible within Hex Tones, as I understand it).

 

4. When editing note ranges in Stage Settings, it would be nice to be able to use the keyboard to enter the range value (IOW, if I want the bottom note of the range to be C3, I should just be able to press that key on the keyboard).

 

5. I'd love to know how the compressor ratio values map to real world compression settings (000-127 doesn't tell me much). And I wish there was some way to add a gain reduction meter.

 

6. For future reference (given that CASIO seems to be serious about appealing to pro users) it is impossible to see the position of knobs that are black on black under typical stage lighting conditions. (I've used a permanent marker to draw high-contrast hash marks on the knobs.) And with the volume knob in particular, there need to be some markings *around* the knob so that the user can have a point of reference for the knob position (so that levels are consistent from gig to gig). Related to this is the decision to make the labeling on the *back* panel white-on-white. This is almost impossible to see during setup in poor lighting conditions, and the nicely contrasted labeling on the top of the unit doesn't help when there is a second keyboard on a tier above the PX-5S.

 

7. A small UI quirk is that the naming procedure for Tones and Stage Settings is different (and like some other users I was initially stumped as to how to rename a SS). Good UI design means being as consistent as possible with procedures like this.

 

8. Perhaps my biggest issue with the PX-5S is that there is no way to see the *name* of a Tone or SS that's about to be overwritten. This means that I have to do a lot of meticulous data management outside of the unit (and carry it around to gigs) so that I don't accidentally overwrite something I need--or I have to have the forethought to go through a lot of button pressing to confirm where I'm going to put something before I put it there.

 

9. A related danger is that loading a patch from USB *overwrites* the SS at the selected location! This means that I have to keep a "null" SS location as a place to audition patches. Normally a patch would load into an edit buffer before being committed to a memory location--and it seems like this should be possible in the PX-5S since a patch loaded from the (software) editor doesn't overwrite the patch currently stored in the selected location.

 

10. The biggest hassle with the firmware update was having to back up and then restore all of my (60+) custom Stage Settings. This will be easier in the future with the software editor, but it would be nice if the editor could handle a folder hierarchy for the patch data stored on my computer (currently it seems to only be able to "see" (access) data on the root level of the "Data" folder). A user-definable folder hierarchy would make patch management easier.

 

11. Having spent a few days working with the software editor, I now see why Mike said that he actually prefers to edit from the front panel. I have a lot of issues here, but let me start with two suggestions. First, you need numeric entry of values to minimize mousing around with virtual "knobs." Second, there is way too much scrolling. Different areas of the synth (filter, amp, etc) should have their own tabbed pages. And BTW, I can't think of another piece of modern software where I literally have to quit every other application for it to work correctly. But I get that this is a 1.0 release.

 

Thanks for listening. Again, suggestions welcome.

 

 

[Mike Martin]

1.  We make a product that is practically dedicated to be a mono-lead synth.  Adding a mono mode is a bit of a conflict.

 

2.  I don't expect this to be added but you could add a velocity switch that turns on a layer with the pitch envelope. 

 

3.  Have you tried the other piano Stage Setting in the downloads section?

 

4.  You can do this.  Press the NUM  button on the top right then press a key.

 

7.  They can both be named when you press the WRITE button but because you can create a custom Tone that is within a Stage Setting that only exists there that is why it is different.

 

10.  The software editor was supposed to release at the same time as the v1.10 update so you wouldn't have to go through that work. Sorry it was delayed for a couple days.

 

11.  My preference for working on a device has nothing to do with the UI of this interface.  It is a preference for all products I own.  I'll check with the staff in Tokyo but there shouldn't be any reason for other applications to be quit before using the editor.  Perhaps they meant other MIDI applications because this would prevent the PX-5S from being accessible.

[chuckbutler]

1. Mono mode would be a "conflict" as in: if the PX-5S had a mono mode people might be less inclined to purchase a XW? I can't believe that would be a concern; I mean, you included Hex layers and didn't see that as a problem. Anyway, it's not a big deal; just something fairly obvious that would add to the PX's feature set.

 

2. Interesting. Wonder if I could get that to do what I want. I'll give it a whirl when I have time--thanks.

 

3. Downloaded that piano today; need to spend a little time with it and see if it's an improvement.

 

4. Awesome!

 

10. No biggie. It probably sounds like I'm complaining, but I'm not--knew that there might be a few issues like this for early adopters.

 

11. I literally had to quit every application on my MacBook Pro (inc. Mail & Safari) before the editor would run. This requirement is mentioned right at the beginning of the docs.

[egoaudio]

Hi guys,

Which piano sound(s) from the download section are you guys talking about?

[chuckbutler]

I'm assuming Mike is talking about this one:

 

http://www.casiomusicforums.com/index.php?/files/file/4-pianodynamc/

 

(Mike will correct me if I'm wrong.)

 

I played around with this for a while today. The thing is, so far as I can tell, the main difference is the the velocity range has been reduced from +63 to +43. I actually find that to be a bit of an overreaction; I'm finding that something around +50 or +53 works well (though this will vary according to an individual player's touch and the musical context). But this only addresses my issue (#3 above) in the sense that it reduces the dynamic range of the upper register (along with every other register). Even with the dynamic range reduced, I still find the the upper register trails off a bit relative to the rest of the instrument (and of course I don't want to give up too much dynamic range in any register, nor do I want to make the sound significantly brighter like the Modern Piano patch I use for pop stuff). Let me put it this way. When I'm soloing in a jazz trio context, I find myself needing to "dig in" a lot more than I'm used to in the upper 2.5 octaves (compared to an acoustic)--the sound doesn't penetrate through the drummer's ride cymbal like I'm used to with an acoustic (or even my Fantom X). Let me be clear that I'm not talking about a *drastic* change. As I've said, I'd just like to be able to "tilt" the key scaling such that the extreme low register is a bit less heavy and the extreme upper register penetrates a bit more at a given overall volume. I notice this in certain classical pieces as well; for example, Chopin Op. 10 No. 1 (C major)--on the Casio those arpeggios doesn't snap off with the same brilliance that they have when played on my acoustic. It's a subtle thing; most players probably wouldn't even notice; but I've been playing for over 40 years. I've tried the workaround suggested by another user in the other thread about this; the problem is that it's tough to get the Zones with increased amplitude to transition smoothly. Still working on it.

[Mike Martin]

Hex Layers on the XW are different considerably from the XW series. I've request mono mode but I don't think it will happen for the reasons stated above.

[Mike Martin]

Depending on which piano you downloaded there are other differences. One of them has a lowered initial attack which you should find much more melodic in the higher registers.

[Mike Martin]

Try this one

http://www.casiomusicforums.com/index.php?/files/file/5-pianoaltatk/

[Joe Muscara]

11. I literally had to quit every application on my MacBook Pro (inc. Mail & Safari) before the editor would run. This requirement is mentioned right at the beginning of the docs.

 

While the docs say this, I've never actually had to do it. I am on a Mac as well.

[creati]

1.  We make a product that is practically dedicated to be a mono-lead synth.  Adding a mono mode is a bit of a conflict.

 

Hello, I understand this, but i think that the px-5s has a synthesizer and the special factor in the XW is the Virtual Analog engine not the mono mode.