From: kemp@uiatma.atmos.uiuc.edu (John Kemp)
Subject: K2000 (r.m.s. Summary)
Organization: University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1992 03:24:03 GMT


[ Here is a summary of all of the posts I have saved about
the K2000.  I thought someone might find it useful/interesting 
if they picked up the thread late.  JohnKemp@uiuc.edu]

===============================================================================
Article 31861 of rec.music.synth:
From: JROSSI@EAGLE.AAMRL.WPAFB.AF.MIL
Subject: Re: K2000 teste drive (vs SY99)
Date: 12 Aug 92 14:37:00 GMT

To answer some of the more simple questions first...

The K2000 allows DSP treatment of samples to a degree unavailable anywhere 
else.  You can use a sample as the root pitch material for any of the 25+
algorithms which allow selection of 'pitch material' (i.e., for some of the
algortihms such as the hard synch algortihms the K2000 uses DSP created
waveforms as the pitch sources).  For the most part, however, you can
subject any sample to any king of VAST treatment you desire.  For some kinds
of things, this is easy to describe.  For example, it is quite easy to
imagine the outcome of subjecting a 'brass' sample to DSP treatment which
amounts to a 24 dB LPF with controlable resonance.  It is much harder, on
the other hand, to describe the sound of a 'grand piano' sample treated with
a DSP algortihm which includes sine wave injection, modulation by spectral
content, and real wave shaping.  Unfortunately, since the factory patches
are intended to demonstrate the usefulness of the instrument to the masses,
you don't get a lot of illustration of these incredible capabilities of the
instrument (actually, that statement isn't really true its is just that unless
you actually take the time to look at how the algorithms are used in the
sounds in the presets, much of the time you are fooled into believing that
the sound you hear is being created by some traditional process [resonance,
for example, when the sound algorithm employs no filters or resonators]).
Also, you have to take the modulation routing scheme in the K2000 into account.
It is the modulation scheme which gives the K2000 its enormous synthesis
power.  You see, for almost every VAST function there are multiple levels of
control (roughly analogous to CV insertion points in a traditional modular
analog synthesizer).  Furthermore, most of these control inputs allow the
control information to come from just about anywhere including (but by no
way limited to): the envlopes and LFOs, the FUNs which specify mathematical
relationships among input sources using either linear or non-linear
equations; things you wouldn't expect including MIDI clock (with phase and
multiplication constants); any controller device on the K2000; and any
MIDI controller information broadcast from anywhere in a MIDI network.  What
all of this allows is an incredible amount of control over the DSP processing
functions.  This kind of control is not available anywhere else except in
a very large (several rooms full) modular synthesizer.

As for the effects processor, it is independent of the DSPs which produce
VAST.  Basically, it is the same effects DSP used in the Digitech DSP 256+.
Now, before you jump to conclusions, the chip is the same as the 256. however,
its integration into the K2000 givves it some advantage over its use in the
Digitech box.  In all, I consider it to be a very usable effects processor.
While it is not comparable to the effects processors on an SY99, a Wavestation,
or even an Ensoniq EPS-16+, it is still a very high quality effects unit
which has quite a lot of flexibility.  In my opinion, there are really only
two shortcommings in the effects processor. (1) There are not enough of them
in the K2000.  When you are in the Multi Mode, you only have one stereo
effects DSP to share among the voices.  A reasonable alternative would be to
have given the K2000 at least 4 effects DSPs. (2)  Some of the long decay
and delay effects add some hiss to the signal.  While the thing is still
about 20 dB quieter than the dry machine being processed by a Quadraverb
would be, the hiss can still be heard in a dead-quiet system.  Of course,
if you have an open Quadraverb anywhere in your audio accessable pathway
the noise issue is of little practical concern.  I have personally gotten to
the point of viewing the effects processor as a little something extra
thrown in as part of the bargain.  I use it for single patches mostly, and
go to outboard effects processors when I am using the K2000 in a multi-
setup.

Speaking of multi setups... Over the past week I had the opportunity to learn
some things about the K2000 multi mode and how the on-board effects can be
used in it.  From time to time, prople have heard Nick Rothwell curse the
multi-mode of the Wavestation in application of effects.  Apparently, the
K2000 is not as brain-dead as the WS is in its ability to use effects in the
multis to some advantegous manner.  However, I do not use the K2000 in any
kind of setting which requires me to worry about such things, so I will await
a further post by somebody who can describe this important feature better
than I can.  As for the rest to the multi system... Basically you have 24
voices which are dynamically located to up to 16 multi programs on up to
16 MIDI channels.  Now, there has been a lot of assertion about the 'true'
polyphony of the K2000.  In actuality, a standard program may contain up to
3 layers of voices (where each voice takes up 1 unit of polyphony of the
available 24).  Another, somewhat flexible drum-kit layer mode allows
layering of as many voices as you want (subject to polyphony considerations).
It seems that a lot of people are concerned with the relative lack of
polyphony in the K2000.  While 24 voices doesn't sound like a lot, to be fair,
the K2000 is a much richer sounding device than most other synthesizers and
all other sample players.  In that regard, the polyphony goes a longer way
since there is less of a necessity to use layered voices to achieve
movement and complexity.  Added to the general superiortiy of the voice
structure, per se, is the waveform injection algorithms which allow the
complexity and fullness of a single voice (one polyphonic unit) to be increased
substantially by the addition of sine, square, and sawtooth waves into the
voice.  Again, it is inportant to remember that the waveform injection
treatments are discrete parts of the algorithms which provide for them. They,
therefore, have full sets of control and modulation routings available to
them.  I know that a lot of this stuff sounds like propaganda to some people.
However, unless you actually play with these things you can have no idea
of what they can do.... Another comment about thhe polyphony of the K2000...
The synth uses an incredibly efficient voice-stealing algorithm which I
think would surprise many people.  Also important, yet not directly related
to polyphony, is the ability of the K2000 to intelligently hold voices
through patch changes.  I have seen no other instrument which accomplishes this
better.

As for the use of a K2000 as a MIDI platform controller, I really know very
little, since I don't use itt in this fashion.  I know that it has a lot of
control for velocity curve programming as well as monophonic aftertouch
programming.  I think that the keyboard can be programmed to send at least
3 separate zones on their own MIDI channels.  Again, since I don't use these
features, I don't know a lot about them.  Perhaps somebody who uses a
K2000 as a controller mya want to comment.  I do, however, have a couple of
comments about the keyboard action and response.  While many people consider
it a bit mushy, several others (including myself) find its touch to be
quite pleasing and generally playable.  Personally, I like the aftertouch
lump in the key travel a lot, however, last week I learned that it really isn't
there under the black keys (bummer?).  One should bear in mind that the whole
area of keyboard 'feel' is quite subjective and what appeals to one person
might be hated by another.

As to the assertion that the front panel provides little in the way of control,
it should be remembered that the device was built with MIDI control in mind.
It will respond to any MIDI controller, and the controllers can be used to
control just about everything in the K2000.  So, if you add a couple of
FaderMasters to its input, you get 16 progrmmable faders which can be used
to control anything from portamento rate (and what a portamento the K2000 will
do) to the amount of envlope control which will be included into a non-
linear FUN controlling filter resonance.  Also, if you are using a sequencer
with the fader capabilities of Performer, you can do some incredible things
in real time during sequence playback, all the while recording the fader
movements into the sequencer.  With unlimited fader ability shuch as that
provided by Performer, you can theoretically control all 200+ control
destinations in real time (somehow, I think that this will bog the MIDI
line, however).

Anyway, I hope that this has answered some of your questions.

John

===============================================================================
Article 31877 of rec.music.synth:
From: sef@sef1.slisp.cs.cmu.edu
Subject: Re: K2000 teste drive (vs SY99)
Date: 12 Aug 92 21:42:46 GMT
Organization: School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon

    From: JROSSI@EAGLE.AAMRL.WPAFB.AF.MIL

    As for the effects processor, it is independent of the DSPs which produce
    VAST.  Basically, it is the same effects DSP used in the Digitech DSP 256+.
    ...
    Some of the long decay
    and delay effects add some hiss to the signal.  While the thing is still
    about 20 dB quieter than the dry machine being processed by a Quadraverb
    would be, the hiss can still be heard in a dead-quiet system.

I'm almost as fond of my K2000 as John Rossi seems to be of his, but I
think he's being a bit too kind here.  The effects chip makes a clearly
audible hiss on most of the effects programs whenever the wet/dry mix is
turned up.  This isn't long-decay grunge caused by coarse digitization, but
is real analog hiss, sizzling through the delay line (so it echos, etc.).
It doesn't matter if you're playing a note or not, the hiss is still there
when the effects output is added to the output mix in significant amounts.

Furthermore, if you switch from one program to another in the normal mode,
with the effect and wet-dry mix being selected by the program, you get
different-sounding hiss (louder, softer, reverberating...) for each
program, even if you're not sounding a note -- very distracting at times.
And sometimes you get a pop or ping as something already in the
effects-chip delay line empties out under a new algorithm.  (This was
described by someone as "speaker-blowing glitches.  I've never found it to
be that bad, but it can be startling.)

You can avoid this by disabling per-program effects selection and just
using the chip as if it were a global effects box.  The only problem with
this is that when you use per-voice effects, you have a choice of any
global control source (and there are many) to control wet/dry mix and other
effects parameters; when you use the effects globally, the only control is
the standard MIDI "effects amount" controller -- MIDI 91, I think it is --
and you have to program some slider or pedal to send that for you.
    
Of course, you could also use whatever external effects box you like and
cut the internal effects chip out of the loop.  You get two independent
pairs of outputs.

It may be that John's experience differs from mine for a couple of
possible reasons: (1) I use headphones most of the time, so hiss is very
noticeable; (2) I don't have a Quadraverb around making everything else
sound clean by comparison; or (3) I might have a noisier K2000 than he does
-- the noise is in the analog circuitry, so it might vary some between
units.

As John says, the effects chip in the K2000 is still a very nice thing to
have if you consider it as an add-on.  There are lots of situations in
which the added hiss isn't fatal.

-- Scott

===========================================================================
Scott E. Fahlman
School of Computer Science
Carnegie Mellon University
5000 Forbes Avenue
Pittsburgh, PA 15213

Internet: sef+@cs.cmu.edu

===============================================================================
Article 31904 of rec.music.synth:
From: JROSSI@EAGLE.AAMRL.WPAFB.AF.MIL
Subject: Re: K2000 teste drive (vs SY99)
To: rec-music-synth@ucbbvax.berkeley.EDU

Since mine is the only K2000 with which I have ever played, I can only comment
on what mine does, or does not do.  Both Keyboard and Electronic Musician
(I think) commented on the noise generated by the effects processor.  I was
told at Sweetwater Sound that there had been an attempt to reduce the
effects of the noise.  It could be that there are differing versions of the
mainboard with subtly different wiring configurations for the Digitech
chip.  On the other hand, it could also be that I have a different sensitivity
to hiss than Scott.  I can't comment on hiss through the headphone outputs
because, with its anemic output, the K2000's headphone output barely drives
my Sennheizer headphones to a reasonable listening volume.  If there were
noise in that signal even 30 dB below the main signal, I wouldn't be able to
hear it.  On the other hand, my Mackie is dead quiet (when the Quads' returns
are disabled).  It took me several months of frustration to track down
every source of noise and hum in the studio.  I completely re wired the thing
with high quality audio lines and MIDI cables.  Additionally, I took the time
to foil shield any AC lines which came within a foot of an audio of MIDI line
and ran the shields to ground.  A pair of B&W DM5s remain my main studio
speakers.  Their response is very flat from about 90 Hz up to about 25K Hz.
Now, with the Mackie capable of producing about 60 dB of gain (20 dB in the
input trim section, 20 dB in the channel amplifier, ans 20 dB in the output
amplifier section) I can listen pretty closely to the sounds being produced
by the audio stuff in my system, just by boosting things way out of their 
normal ranges (i.e., anybody with a Mackie will understand the way noise and
distortion can be amplified just by throwing the channel and output faders
to their maximum positions).  It was using this system which I determined
that the quiescent Quadraverb hiss is about 20 dB higher than any other
noise and hum in my systen (i.e., it goes away only after attenuating both
the input and master faders well below their unity gain settings).  In
comparison, the K2000 is virtually silent.  Using the gain available at the
Mackie, I can amplify the K2000 so that the hiss becomes clearly audible
at all times when the effects processor is enabled.  However, this happens
well above unity gain and at a level of amplification at which the Quad
noise would be unbearable.  Also, except for my (ex) Expander, my Matrix 6,
and the Wavestation, the K2000 remains one of the quietest sound modules in
my system.  It is at least 15 dB quieter than the K5 (which is, by far, the
second noisest thing in my system after the Quads), and it is about as
quiet as the Px-MKS20 combination system.  It is also a lot quieter than
a DSP-128, MIDIVerb II, MIDIVerb III, MicroVerb-1, MicroVerb III, ProVerb,
SDD-2000, Lexicon LXP-1/LXP-5 and every other outboard effects box I have
ever tried.  Even the MicroWave has a tendency to output some kind of
digital grunge way above thhe K2000, although this is not noise (hiss), per
se.  As it turns out, in my system, if almost anny other fader or return is
enabled on any of my 32 Mackie channels, I have masked any hiss which the
K2000 might be producing at the time.  So, in my 'real-world' situation,
the Mackie does not contribute significantly to my noise floor.  Again, as
with anything else in compound systems the importance of things is relative
to the things to which they are compared.  As I stated previously, the only 
time I have noticed hiss from the K2000 was in long reverb tails and at the
end of very long delay repeat sequences (where you are listening to the
effects alone and there is no longer a dry signal).  Even then, I really don't
find the hiss to be 'that' objectionable.  However, since I still haven't
replaced the Quads, I seldom get to the point where that the hiss from the
K2000 is even noticable.

Scott:  BTY, my K2000 is currently in Pittsburgh (I assume you are at C-M).
If you want to do an A/B comparison or just listen to it, I should be able
to arrange it.  Send me personal E-mail.

John

===============================================================================
Article 32013 of rec.music.synth:
From: sef@sef-pmax.slisp.cs.cmu.edu
Subject: Re: Tell me about the K2000
Organization: School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 1992 04:30:26 GMT

    From: gilstrap@sbctri.sbc.com (Brian R. Gilstrap)
    
    I'm curious about just how the K2000 produces its sounds.  From what I've
    gleaned reading this group, it appears to do synthesis but it's unclear
    whether it uses samples as a basis for generating sounds.
    
In general, yes, it begins with samples and then puts these through a very
powerful and flexible set of sound-modification options: filters of various
kinds, distortion, nonlinear operations that do various kinds of
wave-shaping, and so on, all controlled by an amazingly flexible system of
modulation routings.  This modification facility is the VAST system.

It's a bit confusing because some of the VAST operators and algorithms mix
in some other simple waveform, such as sine or sawtooth.  Some even replace
the incoming signal with a sine or sawtooth.  So, if you like, you can
ignore all the newfangled sample stuff and have a very powerful subtractive
synth with the usual palette of simple waveforms as a starting point
(including pulse-width modulation).

The samples come from the built-in 8M of ROM sound files, two optional 8M
ROM banks with additional sounds (coming soon), or add-on RAM memory (up to
32M) that can be loaded from floopy disks, SCSI hard disk, MIDI (if you're
patient), or the audio sampling option (coming soon).

    How has the service for the K2000's been since Kurzweil's operation
    was bought by the Korean company (can't recall the name right now)?
    
They seem quite determined to treat their customers well.  My one service
problem was solved quickly by my dealer, but two different Kurzweil people
followed up to make sure that all was well.

    Also, considering the recent discussion regarding the noise introduced
    into the output of the K2000 when using the effects chip, can anyone tell me
    how much you take away from the K2000's sound-generating abilities if you
    don't use the effects chip?

You then have a great synth with no built-in effects.  Then you can use the
outboard effects box of your choice.  I should also say that the effects
chip isn't terribly noisy, just not as quiet as John Rossi seemed to be
suggesting.  After exchanging some mail with John, I now suspect that my
unit is noisier than his -- maybe I have a slightly defective one, or maybe
he has an unusually good one.
    
-- Scott
===========================================================================
Scott E. Fahlman
School of Computer Science
Carnegie Mellon University
5000 Forbes Avenue
Pittsburgh, PA 15213

Internet: sef+@cs.cmu.edu

===============================================================================
Article 32081 of rec.music.synth:
From: shiv@bnr.ca (Shiv Naimpally)
Subject: Re: Tell me about the K2000
Organization: Bell-Northern Research Ltd.
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 92 15:38:13 GMT

I don't own a K2000 yet but I did spend a lot of time playing with one ...
The K2000 uses sample waveforms (like the Korg M1, Kawai K4, Yamaha SY77)
and has a synth architecture (like the M1/K4/SY77). Some of the things that
distinguish it from other similar synths:

- You can read in your own samples from disk. It will read Akai S1000 disks,
   and accepts MIDI Sample dump. So you use these samples and then modify
   them using the synth architecture. Sure the Korg T series (and even M1
   with Frontal Lobe) can do this but they .5M for samples wheras the 
   K2000 can have ... up to 64M. Also, the K2000 has SCSI ports so that
   you can hook up a hard drive to it for storing and retreiving samples.
   Also, a user sampling option is coming out in the fall.

- The VAST synth architecture allows you to pick and choose which synth
  functions you want, and it has some unusual synth functions (eg FM)
  as well.

I was told the effcts chip in the K2000 is Digitech's chip from the 256XL.

I like the K2000 but it uses standard interfaces (SCSI, use of Mac SIMMs
for memory expansion, etc.) instead of proprietary stuff, is expandable,
is easy to use, and above all sound great !

cheers,

Shiv

 

===============================================================================
Article 32106 of rec.music.synth:
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Date:         Tue, 18 Aug 1992 16:10:47 PDT
From:         Peter Uchytil <kentrox!ktxs8!peter@UUNET.UU.NET>
Subject:      Re: Tell me about the K2000
Comments: To: uunet!auvm.american.edu!synth-l@uunet.UU.NET

I just read in the latest EQ Magazine that Kurz is going to market the
K2000R - The Rackmount.  The info given was: list $2895, additional 4 audio
ports (10 total), 2 SCSI giving the ability to daisy chain multiple K2000Rs
to one hard disk.  They said everything else was the same as the keyboard
version.  It was just a little blurb.  This is all it said and all I know.

Pete
--
Peter Uchytil   | ADC Kentrox Industries | "They say that I'm a dreamer
peter@kentrox.com |  Portland, Oregon    |  And I tell them they are right"

===============================================================================
Article 32096 of rec.music.synth:
From: sef@sef1.slisp.cs.cmu.edu
Subject: Re: K2000 problem
Date: 18 Aug 92 19:40:25 GMT
Organization: School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon

    I've seen almost nothing but good stuff about the K2000 lately.
    A friend of mine almost bought one until he learned that
    Kurzweil is struggling with an overheating problem in them.  
    
    Seems that a fan needs to be installed to prevent the system 
    from cooking itself.
    
Yeah, Kurzweil strongly recommends (requires, even) the fan if you install
any of the optional goodies, including any amount of sample memory.  And I
would strongly recommend it even for vanilla K2000's.  It's very quiet and
adds something like $50 to the cost.  Not a reason to avoid the K2000
altogether.

Even with the fan, it's warm inside.  The audio output sockets (metal part)
feel hot to the touch when the machine has been running a while.  I wonder
whether the fan will be powerful enough to handle a fully loaded K2000.
Guess I'll be finding out pretty soon...

-- Scott
===========================================================================
Scott E. Fahlman
School of Computer Science
Carnegie Mellon University
5000 Forbes Avenue
Pittsburgh, PA 15213

Internet: sef+@cs.cmu.edu

===============================================================================
Article 32095 of rec.music.synth:
From: kalin@silver.lcs.mit.edu (Dan Kalin)
Subject: Re: K2000 problem
Organization: MIT Laboratory for Computer Science
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1992 19:55:11 GMT

In article <1992Aug18.164211.23876@brtph560.bnr.ca> trice@bnr.ca (Tony Rice) writes:
>
>I've seen almost nothing but good stuff about the K2000 lately.
>A friend of mine almost bought one until he learned that
>Kurzweil is struggling with an overheating problem in them.  
>
>Seems that a fan needs to be installed to prevent the system 
>from cooking itself.
>

I'd like to clarify this, because it is extremely vague.

The base K2000 with no options does not have a heat problem.  If you 
want to install an internal hard drive, or a huge SIMM card stash
(4 4megs, or 16 meg SIMMs), then you must install a fan.  With these
options you really start to have something under the hood kind of
like a Mac or a PC, which are shipped with fans.  You ought to be able
to put in the sampling option, the Soundblock options, and the program
RAM option, without the fan.  We do recommend (require?) that you put
in a fan when installing any options.  The fan is very quiet, well suited
for the requirements of a music studio.  

We now return you to your regularly scheduled flame wars. ;-)

-Dan Kalin 

===============================================================================
Article 32336 of rec.music.synth:
From: nick@dcs.ed.ac.uk (Nick Rothwell)
Subject: Re: Tell me about the K2000
Date: 25 Aug 92 13:35:53 GMT
Organization: Naff Green Shorts Dance Co.
In-reply-to: JROSSI@EAGLE.AAMRL.WPAFB.AF.MIL's message of 24 Aug 92 14:30:00 GMT

In article <9208242133.AA14473@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU> JROSSI@EAGLE.AAMRL.WPAFB.AF.MIL writes:

   When I brought my Wavestation to the first Team-Metlay get-together in Dec
   90, Nick's opinion was somewhat less enthusiastic than 'doesn't push my
   buttons'.

True enough. However, I was always convinced that the WS had useable power.
The K2000 has power but I'm not convinced it's at all useable for anything
very interesting. The sample manipulation in particular seems quite weak;
the multimode serial filtering can be brought to bear, but that's about it;
all the waveshaping and distortion options don't do anything very interesting
except to the single-cycle wave data.

   He will,
   however, eventually buy a K2000 rack.  Read my lips.

We'll see. I'll probably buy the Peavey SP/SX in the meantime. By the time
I've grow out of that, the K2000R will be sufficiently cheap that I can
buy it with the money left over from going for the Peavey over the K2000
in the first place.

Nick.

PS: J3, I owe you $79. Will see to it ASAP.
--
  Nick Rothwell, LFCS, Edinburgh | "Say, how many contemporary dancers are
               nick@dcs.ed.ac.uk |     there in this bar?"
CASSIEL Contemporary Music/Dance | "Dunno; count the Dr. Martens and
     cassiel@cix.compulink.co.uk |     divide by two..."

===============================================================================
Article 32542 of rec.music.synth:
From: sef@sef-pmax.slisp.cs.cmu.edu
Subject: Re: K2000 Questions
Organization: School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon
Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 02:55:01 GMT

    
    From: kemp@uiatma.atmos.uiuc.edu (John Kemp)
    
    1) Someone with a Sam Ash catalog know what a K2000 would
        go for through mail order?
    
Can't help you.  Pianos 'n Stuff in Pittsburgh is still selling them for
$2096, but that's a walk-in price.  I think most of the mail order dealers
charge more, but throw in assorted goodies to make it a reasonable deal.
That's the case with Sweetwater Sound, which is probably the biggest
Kurzweil dealer.

    2) I am confused by the sampling section of the keyboard.
    	A) What ways can you load samples, floppy? scsi? midi?

All of the above.

    	B) What kind of samples can you use? AKAI1000?

Currently native K2000 patches plus Akai S1000.  Ensoniq EPS-16 format will
reportedly be supported by the 2.0 software.

    	C) Can you map 10-20 samples to different zones?

Yes, or even 128 samples.  Each "layer" is assoicated with a "keymap" (or
with two if it's in stereo).  A keymap is a set of sample roots, each
assigned to a range of keys.  You can assign a different sample to each
MIDI note if you want.

    	D) Is there velocity crossfade?

Not per se.  A keymap can have one, two, or three velocity ranges, each
with a different set of samples assigned to different key ranges.  This is
a sharp cut-over at some translated velocity level (ppp to fff).

To blend smoothly from one sample to another using velocity, you have to
use two layers, fading one out and the other in as velocity increases.  The
"funs" give you a lot of flexibility in choosing the shape and posiiton of
the crossover.

    	E) What are the available rates/options/stereo/etc.?

Stereo samples can be played.  The sampling option (coming soon) is
supposed to offer sampling at 32KHz and 48KHz, according to the K2000
manual.
    
    RE: The CASIO FZ-1 to me was incredibly simple to understand.
        If someone could discuss the K2000 just with respect to 
        it as a sample keyboard, that would be neato, and keen.
    
Just as a sample-playing keyboard, the K2000 is neato and keen.  It doesn't
sample yet, so I can't comment on that.

    3) Would you wait for the next release of the K2000 before
       buying one, and why?

The 2.0 operating system will probably have some new tricks and some bug
fixes, though I haven't found any bugs that really cause me serious grief.
Someone posted here recently that there are new, improved ROM-based
programs and setups on the way.

I expect that Kurzweil will have a reasonable policy about ROM upgrades.
Maybe you can get your dealer to agree to install new ROMS for free/cheap
if you buy now.  (Unlikely if you buy mail-order, however.)

You'll want to install a fan and some sample memory when you buy.  You may
want other options later, such as the sampling option, the extended
object/sequence memory, or the additional 8M byte sound blocks.  I wouldn't
wait around (and in fact, I didn't).

Some people may want to wait for the module, of course, if they already
have enough black-and-white plastic in their setups.
    
    4) Are you getting tired of all of these questions?

Yeah, but I think I see the end of the list coming up pretty soon...
    
    5) Will the SCSI work with a Syquest drive and read cartridges
       formatted on a MacIIcx?

I think it will work with any external SCSI drive, but wouldn't swear to
this.  Mac formatting may be a problem, however.  The floppies (and
presumably also the hard disks) use IBM file format.
    
    6) Does it get easier to program after you use it for a while?

    RE: I looked at some of the builtin patches.  They had anywhere
        from 5-20 functions going into the sound wave generation 
        section of the patch!  It looks incredibly powerful just 
        from a beginners point-of-view, but is it comprehensible
        once you start using it?

I found it easy to tweak the built-in sounds right there in the store,
before I had even cracked open the manual.  Even the more complex features
are laid out in a clean, intuitive way.  However, I'm still learning new
VAST tricks after four months, and there's no end in sight.  Your mileage
may vary.  I have a fair amount of experience with computers and synth
programming, and I know something about digital signal processing, so I
can't really say what all this would look like to the random beginner.  If
you you don't know anything at all about conventional synth programming
(i.e. what a filter is for), the K2000 probably isn't the place to start.

    7) How well suited to you think this keyboard would be as the 
       sound source for electronic drumming?

Great.  Mostly very good drum samples, adequate built-in effects, and the
ability to tune, filter, and layer things to your heart's content.  This
assumes that you do the sequencing on an external computer, however.  The
K2000's current built-in seuqencer is rudimentary, though there are rumors
of a better one on the way.
    
    8) "Keyboard" and "Electronic Musician" must have reviewed this
       awesome looking monster synth.  Anyone know which issues?

See the March 1992 issues of both magazines.
    
    9) Do you think anyone will do a computer based patch editor?

I'm sure someone will, though Kurzweil is slowing the process down by not
releasing the detailed system exclusive specs.  The manual describes the
format for requesting and dumping various objects, but not the internal
data fields in those objects.  They plan to release this info, but have
just been too busy trying to get out the 2.0 operating system and other
goodies.  It wouldn't be too hard to "crack" the format by wiggling various
paramters using the K2000 controls and seeing what changes in the dumped
voices, but this would be mighty tedious.

-- Scott
===========================================================================
Scott E. Fahlman
School of Computer Science
Carnegie Mellon University
5000 Forbes Avenue
Pittsburgh, PA 15213

Internet: sef+@cs.cmu.edu

===============================================================================
Article 32554 of rec.music.synth:
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-VMS-To: IN%"SYNTH-L@AMERICAN.EDU"
Date:         Mon, 31 Aug 1992 00:21:00 EDT
From:         WSCOTT@ACS.WOOSTER.EDU
Subject:      Re: K2000 Questions
Comments: To: SYNTH-L@AMERICAN.EDU

Just an addition to Scott Fahlman's good answers re: Mac hard disks.
K2000 must have MS-DOS formatting on the hard disk. It would be pleased
to reformat your Mac hard disk to this for you, but you'll lose its use
on the Mac.

Bill Scott

===============================================================================
Article 32978 of rec.music.synth:
From: khaberl@BBN.COM (Karl Haberl)
Subject: Some K2000 info
Date: 8 Sep 1992 19:06:07 GMT
Organization: Bolt Beranek and Newman Inc., Cambridge MA
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: bbn.com
Keywords: K2000

I just talked to Ken in Customer Support at Young Chang about upcoming
K2000 options. I learned a few things that may be of interest to
K2000 owners or those considering buying a K2000:

(1) There is a new list price for the sampling option: $595 !!!

    The old list price was $795. The $200 drop in list price was apparently 
    made possible by (negotiating?) lower manufacturing costs for the board.

(2) The release of the sampling option is now set for October. Packing lots
    of new features, extended DSP functions, etc. into the V2.0 SW is
    given as the reason for the slip from the original release date.

(3) For those who don't want to wait for V2.0, there will be a V1.29 OS chip
    set (available for $10) that will feature minor improvements in a number of
    areas, as well as support for the SCSI Musical Data Interchange (SMDI)
    protocol for transfer of samples over SCSI. In addition, this will
    feature support for more external drives. Also, new K2000 units with V1.29
    will ship with a new set of factory presets developed by Sweetwater Sound.
    He didn't know what the policy for distribution of this patch set to
    existing owners would be.

Karl Haberl
Internet: khaberl@bbn.com

===============================================================================
Article 33790 of rec.music.synth:
From: jalkio@cc.helsinki.fi
Subject: Re: Wavestation (+K2000 user interface)
Date: 23 Sep 92 16:06:13 GMT
Organization: University of Helsinki

In article <NICK.92Sep22161228@vaila.ed.ac.uk>, nick@dcs.ed.ac.uk (Nick Rothwell) writes:
> (talking of user interfaces, one wrong keypress and I lose my entire edit...)
> 
> In article <1992Sep22.155051.1@cc.helsinki.fi> jalkio@cc.helsinki.fi writes:
> 
>    The K2000 user interface is as good, or better than the the WS user
>    interface.
> 
> No. There's a loop of half a dozen pages on the same level, rather
> than a heirarchy, which means you have to remember how many presses to
> give left or right, rather than a button location in a heirarchy.

Well, you DON't have to scroll much (actually, not at all) at all in actual
programming. An example:

I press EDIT after I have selected a program I want to EDIT.

I am on ALGORITHM page, first, I select the first algorithm block and
	choose, say a lowpass filter.

I press EDIT. I instantly jump to the LOWPASS filters control page.
	(Without scrolling any pages).

In the control page, I select a modulation source for cutoff frequency.
	Let's say I want to choose a kind of MIDI-clock signal called
	A-Clock.
	Now, I DO NOT have to scroll through the (VERY large) control
	source list.
	I could do any of the following:
		1) Select the control signal from the list BY IT'S
		   NUMBER. You can type it in using the keypad, you know.
		2) Use the "search" function. You can search any object
		   or name very fast and simply. You can even store
		   10 most commonly used search strings in the number
		   buttons. 
		3) Scroll through the list. (on some cases this is
		   fast).
		4) On some cases: Press ENTER and move the physical
		   controller. (Not in this case though.)

Suppose I don't want to use the LOWPASS filter in the first block, after
	all: I just press THE PREVIOUS PAGE button, and instantly jump
	back to the ALGORITHM page. There, I choose a different DSP
	function for the first block.

Now, I could press EDIT, like the last time, to get to the right control
page OR I could press the PREVIOUS PAGE button to get there (because
that is where I came from). As I recall the PREVIOUS PAGE button
remembers 6 lastly visited pages.

And there is also the MARK/JUMP function.

I suppose you haven't actually used the K2000 very intensely.
		
> This, coupled with the fact that button rollover doesn't work
> properly, makes it all but unusable for me.

I don't know what you mean with this? Give me an example.

> 
>    And
>    you can't select a modulation source by moving the physical modulator on
>    the WS (this is part of the UI, IMHO).
> 
> True, but you have to scroll through all the MIDI controller values to get
> at the one you want (though presumably it'll pick up MIDI clock or whatever
> to let you set it automatically).

As I tell above, no you don't. There are many different ways to select
the right control source.

What I really like about the K2000, there are many ways to do things.
You just do what feels right each time.

> 
> Nick.
> --
>                         Nick Rothwell  |  "Say, how many contemporary dancers
>      CASSIEL Contemporary Music/Dance  |     are there in this bar?"
>           cassiel@cassiel.demon.co.uk  |  "Dunno; count the Dr. Martens
>           cassiel@cix.compulink.co.uk  |     and divide by two..."

				Jouni Alkio

===============================================================================
Article 33819 of rec.music.synth:
From: metlay@netcom.com (metlay)
Subject: Re: Wavestation (+K2000 user interface)
Date: Wed, 23 Sep 92 22:13:59 GMT
Organization: Atomic City
Summary: K200 edit buffers &c.

In article <07001992Sep23.130914.1@biostr.washington.edu> kraig@biostr.washington.edu (Kraig Eno) writes:
>Talking about UI's, I find some WS default actions incredibly annoying
>especially since they're not undo-able. [list deleted]
>The worst of it is that all you can do is hit COMPARE and go back to
>whatever you started with, which means saving often and early, which makes
>long forays away from a ROM patch difficult.

>Does the K2000 handle this any better?  Has anyone ever seen a synth with a
>useable UNDO?

Hrm. I didn't work with one long enough to answer with authority, but I 
*can* mention one "dead brill" feature of the 2000 that goes a long way
toward making one's life easier in many respects: The K2000's memory 
structure is more like that of a computer than a synth, in that there
are not a certain fixed number of RAM positions for you. You can assign
any program a number between 000 and 999 and a unique name string (it will
do string seraches!) and plunk it somewhere while you work on it. Whenever
you store a patch, it always prompts you for several options-- you can 
cancel the store, save over an existing patch name or number, or stash 
the program in a new slot. I found it very safe to work with, although 
I can see it getting a hair redundant once one has become facile with the
machine. But the idea of as many or as few patches as you need is very
freeing, in a way.

No Undo button, tho. Still, it could be worse, like editing the Rhythm
Setup on the U-50. Every other part of the machine's architecture
requires a save command to be stored, and you have to flip the write 
protect switch on the back of the machine-- but the Rhythm Setup always
stores any edits you make instantaneously into memory and you can NOT
undo what you've done, except by reloading from card or MIDI. UGH!

-- 
metlay                    | 
                          | General MIDI is God's way of saying "Duh."
                          | 
metlay@netcom.netcom.com  | 

===============================================================================
Article 33855 of rec.music.synth:
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-VMS-To: IN%"SYNTH-L@AMERICAN.EDU"
Date:         Thu, 24 Sep 1992 10:06:00 EDT
From:         WSCOTT@ACS.WOOSTER.EDU
Subject:      Re: Wavestation (+K2000 user interface)
Comments: To: SYNTH-L@AMERICAN.EDU

Kraig Eno asks (after tale of woe regarding ROM to RAM overwrites):
"Does the K2000 handle this any better?"

Yes, yes. The K2000 asks you if you want to save or rename, then when
saving always shows you clearly what you're replacing. But, better than
that, it allows you to "overwrite" ROM. You can save your tweak in the
ROM position (the K2000 adds an asterisk to show you that it has been
modified). If you "delete" this ROM patch, the original pops back.
Wunnerful. Wunnerful.

Bill Scott

===============================================================================
Article 33913 of rec.music.synth:
From: dougt@netcom.com (Douglas Terrebonne)
Subject: Re: K2000 Software Status
Date: Fri, 25 Sep 92 05:19:12 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 

Stephen.W.Berkley@dartmouth.edu (Stephen W. Berkley) writes:

>Does anyone know what the currently available Kurzweil K2000 System
>Software is?  How much does it cost, etc?

>Thanks in advance-
>Steve Berkley

I bought one a couple weeks ago and it came with OS 1.28...

Anyone else out there got anything later?

Doug

-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Doug Terrebonne, N6VMI                           Cogswell Polytechnical College
dougt@netcom.com                                 Music Engineering
CI$:74106,311                                    Cupertino, CA
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

===============================================================================
Article 33950 of rec.music.synth:
From: ercolessi@uimrl7.mrl.uiuc.edu (furio ercolessi)
Subject: Re: K2000R should be ready shortly.
Organization: MRL - UIUC
Date: Fri, 25 Sep 1992 22:49:08 GMT

A local store here has an announce letter from Kurzweil,
saying that the first units should appear in the stores
around december or january, as far as I have understood.
There was no pricing info.
--
Furio Ercolessi
Materials Research Laboratory           |   Intl School for Advanced Studies
Univ. of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign   |   Trieste, Italy
furio@uiuc.edu                          |   furio@sissa.it

===============================================================================
Article 34453 of rec.music.synth:
From: scott@bbx.basis.com (Scott Amspoker)
Subject: K2000R followup
Date: 5 Oct 92 22:29:59 GMT
Organization: BASIS International, Albuquerque NM

As I posted last week, I brought home my K2000R which is obviously now
shipping.  I promised I would give a few more details today.  Since
the K2000 keyboard has already been beaten to death in this newsgroup,
I will spare you kind folks a review of the synthesizer itself (although
I will make some brief personal observations).

The K2000R is a rackmount version of the popular K2000 keyboard.  As
far as I can tell, it lists at $2895 which is about $100 less than the
keyboard version (I paid about $2400 for mine).  There is no
apparent or obvious explanation for the small price difference
between the K2000 and K2000R.

It occupies 3 rack spaces.  While this may seem a tad greedy it seems
to require it.  The well-designed user interface probably would not
be as nice with a 2u module.  Also, the unit is *heavy* and feels
solid.  I haven't looked inside but it doesn't feel as though there
is much dead space inside.

It has a 1.4Mb floppy drive, two SCSI ports (one is SCSI-thru for daisy 
chaining), and ten 1/4" output jacks acting as 5 stereo pairs.
There are panels for installing the optional user sampling feature.

The 5 stereo pairs are labeled A, B, C, D, and MIX.  The signal
routing is very straight forward.  Any patch layer may be programed
to output to any of the 4 main output pairs A, B, C, or D (with
panning).  Furthermore, each MIDI channel can be configured to
override its programs' output selection and force all programs on
that channel to any output pair (with pan override as well).
By default, all output pairs are combined via the MIX output pair.
By inserting a mono phone plug into an output jack, its signal
is removed from the mix output.  The internal effects are added
between the A outputs and the MIX outputs.  This means that effects
will be applied only to signals sent to the A group and *only* if
the A group is coming out the MIX jacks.  If plugs are inserted
into the A jacks then the effects are not included.  The manual
states that the direct (non-MIX) outputs "are connected almost
directly to the 18-bit digital-to-analog converters with a minimum
of noise-inducing circuitry."

Stereo plugs may be inserted into the direct outputs for outboard
effects processing (ala Emu Proteus/Procussion).  In this case,
the returned effects are routed to the MIX jacks.

The K2000R comes with a cooling fan already installed.

For MIDI purposes, the K2000R can behave as though any connected
MIDI controller is ITS OWN KEYBOARD.  There is a parameter called
"LocalKbdCh" which may be set to any MIDI channel or "none".  This
causes the K2000R to collaborate with an external keyboard contoller
and behave as though it were a K2000.  It will transmit MIDI data
on the MIDI out port instead of the MIDI thru port just as though
you were playing the keyboard on the K2000.  Also, you may assign
different MIDI messages to several of the keyboard's controllers 
(such as the mod wheel).  All other incoming MIDI data (from a 
"non-local" keyboard) is simply processed with no special handling
and echoed to the MIDI-thru port.  This seems to be a clever way
to build a K2000 out of a K2000R+controller.

The O/S is version 1.28.  A separate sheet of paper identifies the
following as "new features" in the software:

    * SMDI (Sample Data Transfer over SCSI)
    * Improved SCSI device support
    * Import stereo samples, layers
    * New programming functions
    * Streamlined functional access and operations
    * Hard reset function
    * New degree of operational stability and reliability.
      [I guess that's one way to put it - SDA]

The ROM programs/setups/quick access bank are new.  An enclosed floppy
disk contains new demo sequences as well as the original K2000
program banks.

A seperate addendum more specifically documents some of the new
enhancements.  More notable are:

    * a new control source is available (Chan Cnt) measuring the number 
      of voices in use by a given channel.

    * Layers may be imported from other programs.

    * Stereo samples are supported at the layer level (uses two voices)

    * A "BendSmooth" parameter improves performance when playing a MIDI
      guitar controller.

    * The "load everything" disk operation will ignore a few
      configuration settings (such as display contrast) which are
      deemed to be undesired on a disk load.

COMMENTS
--------

Since I don't have much experience with a K2000, I can't say exactly
what is different about the K2000R other than the obvious things.
The software changes in the K2000R are available as upgrades to the 
K2000 so there is no real difference in features per-se.

It's a good thing I'm not writing a full review of the instrument
because in 4 days of intensive diddling, I still don't know what
to say about it in a nutshell.  I have never been so inundated with
power in a synth before.  There are control sources I've never
imagined, not to mention the FUN's which will simply take hours
of experimentation to learn to use.

The drum kits are very good but alas, my E-mu Procussion has me
hopelessly spoiled in this area.  The sound quality of the samples
is first rate and the resonant filters have an *attitude*.  There
is enough warmth and grunge in there that, after a while, I started 
to think of the K2000R as simply a wonderful analog synth.

The user interface is easy to use considering the flexibility of the
instrument.  I must confess that I find the large selection of
algorithms a bit confusing.  A glance at the algorithm charts in
the manual shows a great deal of overlap in the way different
DSP functions may be combined.  For example, the difference between
algorithms 8 and 9 is merely the list of functions available for
the F3 block.  I fail to understand why they needed two algorithms
for this instead of providing one algorithm with a slightly longer
list for F3.

Also, I'm impressed with the large list of control sources but
can't figure out the difference between GPhase1 and GPhase2.

All in all, I'm very happy with the K2000R and intend to spend
a lot of time with it in the upcoming months.

-- 
Scott Amspoker                       |    
Basis International, Albuquerque, NM |  Too bad ignorance isn't really
                                     |  bliss.  Then it could be outlawed.
scott@bbx.basis.com                  |

	id <AA25948@unmvax.cs.unm.edu>; Tue, 6 Oct 92 09:06:03 -0600
From: Scott Amspoker <bbx!dino.basis.com!scott@unmvax.cs.unm.edu>
Subject: Re: k2000 algorithms
To: unmvax!uiatma.atmos.uiuc.edu!kemp@bbx.basis.com (John Kemp)
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 92 8:59:37 MDT

> 
> 
> Nice review!
> 
> Since you brought up the confusing subject of "algorithms",
> might you take a stab at describing them and posting to r.m.s?
> If someone would just list the darn things, we'd have a better
> idea of the capabilities of the machine...  
> [...]
> That is an outrageous request, I know, but I thought
> I might as well ask.

It is too much trouble to post everything.  It would be much easier
to go to the music store and ask to look at the manual.

Generally, an algorithm is like a "virtual synthesizer".  You start
with a waveshape (sample) and route it through various signal
processors.  There is a long list of available signal processors
from filters to frequency enhancers to various mathematical
convolutions.  There is a limited amount of DSP power to work
with and some signal processors take more DSP resources than
others.  The different algorithms allow you to combine different
signal processors in thousands of ways but preventing you from
attempting an illegal combination.  The concept is simple
enough but there are so many permutations it's hard to become
familiar with all the possibilities.

===============================================================================
Article 34482 of rec.music.synth:
From: sef@sef-pmax.slisp.cs.cmu.edu
Subject: Re:      K2000 Questions
Organization: School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1992 14:14:24 GMT

    I don't think it's currently possible to keep all this on your computer and
    download via a SCSI connection (faster than MIDI), but this may be an
    option in future software.
    
I was wrong, or at least a bit out of date, in this earlier statement.  The
1.28 software ROMs for the K2000 do support transfer of samples via SCSI
using the SMDI data transfer format.  This is available in Passport Alchemy
and Opcode MAX on the Macintosh.  Don't know if there's any support on
IBM-flavor PC's, Amiga, Atari, etc.

The new software, with new and considerably improved patches and demos, is
now being shipped in newly-manufactured K2000's (including, I think, all
rackmounts), and the ROM upgrades are or soon will be available to current
owners at minimal cost.

So one good option to a dedicated hard disk on the K2000 itself, at least
for Mac users, is to put a big disk on the computer instead.

-- Scott

===========================================================================
Scott E. Fahlman
School of Computer Science
Carnegie Mellon University
5000 Forbes Avenue
Pittsburgh, PA 15213

Internet: sef+@cs.cmu.edu