From James.eaton@accenture.com Wed Jun 13 02:15:18 2001
Subject:Re: CX3 outputs and split mode

--- In CloneWheel@y..., Bruce Wahler wrote:

<< * Bass pedal support -- I don't use the pedals, but I
recognize that there are a lot of organists who do. It's a shame
KORG left this feature off. Rather than a cost issue, I'm inclined
to think that it was a matter of the processor not being up to the
task of keeping three channels of sound running at once (modeling is
a difficult thing to do, and the closer the emulation, the harder it
gets to do the math needed on-the-fly), so KORG Marketing looked
around at the number of B-3's with lost pedal boards, and
rationalized away the need for pedal support. >>

I agree - Bass support is sorely missed - I would've bought one by
now had it been on there (still thinking about it - and holding out
for BX-3!!! - looks like I am going to be disappointed).

I agree that the hand of marketing was forced by some other issue -
There are compelling reasons to include pedals, and less compelling
reasons to include things like the extended mode (which probably uses
more processor power than the humble pedals and would get used less.
- every current competitor has a pedal section except for the Electra
and the XB-2 (still on sale new in the UK!)

Extended mode was probably included because the marketing people
thought is was a differentiator - but I doubt it helped Roland with
their discontinued VK-1000 for example.

Also, in the early 80s, you could buy a separate pedal tone generator
for the BX-3, so the CX-3 is actually faithful to this design. Maybe
this is possible reason why they followed the same rationale, but
this isn't offered (yet), and wouldn't sound right even if it was
because of the separation from the main organ.

However, on the technical front, pedals tend to be played one note at
a time so I can't see this placing much extra effort on the
processors - not if it can handle playing 5 note 88 8888 888 with
percussion) on the upper manual with a complex LM part going on. (I
assume it can handle this - has anyone done any performance
testing ?).

On the development cost front however there is additional cost and
time of supporting pedals
- Would need to do additional analysis to model bottom 12 complex
tonewheels and pedal mixing circuits and click filter
- Would need a couple of extra drawbars on a reasonably packed front
panel
- Would need additional programming and testing
- additional MIDI connector and issues Roland faced with
sequencer/performance support

I would guess that time pressure to get this thing out on the market
and get on with developing other products was just too great, and
probably why the Leslie connector was ditched as well.

We will probably never find out but it is an interesting discussion.

James