Kurzweil vs. Proteus

I've programmed a Kurzweil 2000 and it was just about what I
want, I think the 2500 would be fine for me although it's a bit
pricey for my wallet right now.

I was just talking to a friend who suggested that the Proteus
keyboards are tunable and actually easier to program.

I'm going to be working mostly with tempered scales if that
matters. Not interested in just.

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "doren " <cordedpoodle42@y...> wrote:

/tuning/topicId_46923.html#46923

> I've programmed a Kurzweil 2000 and it was just about what I
> want, I think the 2500 would be fine for me although it's a bit
> pricey for my wallet right now.
>
> I was just talking to a friend who suggested that the Proteus
> keyboards are tunable and actually easier to program.
>
> I'm going to be working mostly with tempered scales if that
> matters. Not interested in just.

***The Proteus modules are eminently tunable and inexpensive.
Unfortunately, they don't sound very good. I went into a music store
with "synth lust" and a wad of cash in my pocket hoping to buy a
Proteus. However, after I spent some time listening to it (they
finally kicked me out of the store when it closed...) I concluded
that even my SoundBlaster soundcard had better sounds... The sounds
of the Proteus 2000 were a disappointment and I never bought it.

(Even the TX81Z has *much* better sounds: particularly the FM bells
and such, which are virtually unmatched...)

J. Pehrson

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Joseph Pehrson" <jpehrson@r...> wrote:
> ***The Proteus modules are eminently tunable and inexpensive.
> Unfortunately, they don't sound very good. I went into a music store
> with "synth lust" and a wad of cash in my pocket hoping to buy a
> Proteus. However, after I spent some time listening to it (they
> finally kicked me out of the store when it closed...) I concluded
> that even my SoundBlaster soundcard had better sounds... The sounds
> of the Proteus 2000 were a disappointment and I never bought it.

Joe, I realize this is very subjective, but there *are* quite useable sounds in the Proteus line. I don't know how much they might have compromised in the 2000, but in general those instruments sound a lot better than you've given them credit. Maybe "they didn't work for me" might be more appropriate, and I have to think that both context of useage and smart application of effects (like a little verb) would make a big difference.

> (Even the TX81Z has *much* better sounds: particularly the FM bells
> and such, which are virtually unmatched...)

Ahem, my Z's are pretty much boat anchors at this point. Having used them for many years, I'd never give them *that* much credit. Virtually unmatched? You haven't listened to enough synths, m'boy.

But as to the basic initial question, I think any of the Kurzweil tuneable boxes will beat the Proteus line hands down. Much better sample quality, much more flexibility in crafting those samples into music.

Just my HO.

Cheers,
Jon
>
> J. Pehrson

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Jon Szanto" <JSZANTO@A...> wrote:

/tuning/topicId_46923.html#46939

> --- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Joseph Pehrson" <jpehrson@r...>
wrote:
> > ***The Proteus modules are eminently tunable and inexpensive.
> > Unfortunately, they don't sound very good. I went into a music
store
> > with "synth lust" and a wad of cash in my pocket hoping to buy a
> > Proteus. However, after I spent some time listening to it (they
> > finally kicked me out of the store when it closed...) I concluded
> > that even my SoundBlaster soundcard had better sounds... The
sounds
> > of the Proteus 2000 were a disappointment and I never bought it.
>
> Joe, I realize this is very subjective, but there *are* quite
useable sounds in the Proteus line. I don't know how much they might
have compromised in the 2000, but in general those instruments sound
a lot better than you've given them credit. Maybe "they didn't work
for me" might be more appropriate, and I have to think that both
context of useage and smart application of effects (like a little
verb) would make a big difference.
>

***Well, Jon, they sure didn't sound too good on that day. Or let's
put it *this* way, the $800 in my pocket felt better staying there
after listening to the Proteus 2000. I could give it another shot, I
suppose... I was really ready to buy one.

Maybe you're right, though, that a "little verb" would help... I'll
try "is"... :)

JP

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Joseph Pehrson" <jpehrson@r...> wrote:
> ***Well, Jon, they sure didn't sound too good on that day. Or let's
> put it *this* way, the $800 in my pocket felt better staying there
> after listening to the Proteus 2000. I could give it another shot, I
> suppose... I was really ready to buy one.

Well, I don't mean to dis your decision, and you *definitely* don't want to drop that much money on something that you aren't pretty much in love with already.

I'm not any help in this regard, but I would seek out places or people where you can find recordings that have been done with primarily the Proteus modules. I think if one hears what another can do, after getting to know the instrument and finding it's strengths (and weaknesses) it often times gives one a better impression than going into a store, plugging in some headphones and playing away on the box.

Cheers,
Jon

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Jon Szanto" <JSZANTO@A...> wrote:

/tuning/topicId_46923.html#46939

>>
> > (Even the TX81Z has *much* better sounds: particularly the FM
bells and such, which are virtually unmatched...)
>
> Ahem, my Z's are pretty much boat anchors at this point. Having
used them for many years, I'd never give them *that* much credit.
Virtually unmatched? You haven't listened to enough synths, m'boy.
>

***For BELLS?? Really? The bells sound really great to me. I even
got a good review for them... :) I can't imagine bells sounding
better... (I'm not saying they *couldn't*; I just can't imagine it,
outside of "real" physical bells...)

> But as to the basic initial question, I think any of the Kurzweil
tuneable boxes will beat the Proteus line hands down. Much better
sample quality, much more flexibility in crafting those samples into
music.
>

***And they are about 3 times as expensive, yes??

JP

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Joseph Pehrson" <jpehrson@r...> wrote:
> ***For BELLS?? Really? The bells sound really great to me. I even
> got a good review for them... :) I can't imagine bells sounding
> better... (I'm not saying they *couldn't*; I just can't imagine it,
> outside of "real" physical bells...)

Many of the Roland boxes have great bell-like sounds, certainly with more depth and timbral variety. And that is coming from someone who pretty much wrung out the possibilities of the TX bells. I used to use Sound Quest and another old program (on an Amiga!) that would morph entire banks of sounds from two patches, looking for all the possible permutations of bell and mallet instrument sounds (duh).

> ***And they are about 3 times as expensive, yes??

Oh, I'm know they're more expensive. Chinese factory-made violins cost a heck of a lot less than Italian instruments as well. The cost-benefit ratio is up to you (and your audience?).

Cheers,
Jon

Thanks guys.

I will look into the TX81Z

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "doren " <cordedpoodle42@y...> wrote:

/tuning/topicId_46923.html#47064

> Thanks guys.
>
> I will look into the TX81Z

***This is not a bad choice until the new softsynths get going. It's
a *very* tunable unit, and the bell-like FM sounds are superb. I've
gotten quite a bit of variety out of it, as Aaron Johnson kindly
mentions. I would ask further questions on Jon Szanto's
MakeMicroMusic forum:

/makemicromusic/

J. Pehrson