I’ve just got the Kurzweil PC3k and therefore I’ve been learning about it. So with my current (not so much) knowledge I can tell this synth has really awesome features.

First of all, with Kurzweil you get a really powerful “rompler”, a great organ emulation and a powerful “VA” synth engine. All of those integrated with Dynamic VAST. Therefore, you have more synthesis posibilities compared with Motif XF. Regarding synth engines, it’s more fair to make a comparison with Korg Kronos.

If I have to order “romplers” in order to be able to compare with Motif XF (the VA engine and organ emulator are out of scope for Motif XF), the list will be like this:
1. Kurzweil PC3k: Here you get 32 layers (ELEMENTS) for each Program, which are way more flexible than anything I’ve tried before. Each layer can have a sample or a DSP waveform. Then you build your algorithm which is like saying: I’ll begin to control pitch, then let’s apply a low pass filter, after that I put some ring modulation (having strange math rules to work, called FUN’s) and then I’ll finish with amp. You decide which DSP function goes first, you decide what to include, you decide how to connect. Also, you have cascade mode which lets you send any layer to be processed by another layer. So you can chain your filters and modulation in an endless way… certainly awesome.
2. Yamaha Motif XF: Here we have 8 ELEMENTS with hard wired DSP functions (pitch, amp, filter, LFO and so on) and we have XA which allows us to define interesting rules to decide which ELEMENT will sound. XA combined with the superb WAVEFORMS gives us great VOICES, specially acoustic sounds which have beautiful nuances to play with. Also, when using MEGAVOICES you get guitars that are just not matched by any other synth I’ve ever tried. So the important fact is that Yamaha provides many beautiful detailed WAVEFORMS, really way more that the competitors and that is clearly heard when you play.
3. Korg Kronos: This has the simplest synth engine (talking about HD-1) which gives you just 2 oscillators (ELEMENTS) and each one have up to 8 velocity layered multisamples (WAVEFORMS) You can get at most 4 multisamples sounding at once (by using layering) but you have no individual control of the pairs in that case. However, it has some interesting features like wavesequencing and AMS: a powerful form of modulation, this concept is even better than VAST IMHO and there’s a full world of difference in comparison with the CONTROL SET.

When I first tried the Kurzweil, I began with the Pianos. I must say I was underwhelmed. I even thought I had issues with my unbalanced cables (Kurzweril uses balanced outputs). I recall that some years ago (2005 or maybe less) Kurzweil praised to publish piano comparisons with many other synths, including Korg Oasys (that’s the reason I remember the year) Now I understand why they don’t publish such comparisons anymore. I really prefer Korg Kronos (SGX-1), Yamaha Motif XF, Kurzweil PC3k (in that order)

I think Kurzweil missed the subtle details available right now on the modern pianos, like the keyoff mechanical noise or the damper resonance. Also, you don’t have half-dampering AFAIK. However, the most striking fact is that Kurzweil actually has the damper resonance in the form of a chain effect which is not applied by default to the existing Programs! I only discovered that after watching instructional videos! After realizing that, I made a search of a piano with those mechanical noises and I got one. This new piano I just loaded has restored my good opinion about the (piano) Keymaps (WAVEFORMS) inside the Kurzweil PC3k. Without adding any new keymap, but just existing ones and some modeled DSP waveforms, I got great realistic keyoff noise and the soundboard resonance. What a difference I got! This tells something about the immense power you have with Dynamic VAST.

By now, I also have some knowledge that allow me compare the Setup (PERFORMANCE/MASTER) mode on Kurzweil. This time, I think Kurzweil has a great approach to this. Here you can layer up to 16 Programs (such amount is only available on a MIXING for Motif XF) and each Program can have its arpeggio or riff simultaneously playing (Motif XF will allow 4 at most). Each zone (PART) can play on its own MIDI channel and you can remap (or disable) every performance controller to any MIDI CC you wish so each individual controller can send different MIDI CC on each MIDI channel simultaneously. I find this even better than MASTER mode, except that you can put there anything you want: PROGRAM, PERFORMANCE, SONG or PATTERN. I begin to understand why Kurzweil PC3k is such a great controller (originally, PC was abbreviation of Performance Controller). Regarding the effects section, it’s quite different compared with Motif XF. I still don’t fully understand Effects mode, but here you have 16 units of effects which are shared between the Programs on the Setup. Therefore, if a Program has consumed many effects units, you’ll have issues combining it with other Programs and you’ll be forced to begin deactivating effects. While this is a more flexible approach, I have never liked it (the same with Korg)

I still don’t know too much about computer integration, but on this one Motif XF is the best option around (Kronos is also inferior on this one), specially when using the FW16E. AFAIK Kurzweil will only provide 32 MIDI channels (16 for “normal” MIDI communication and 16 for usage with the PC3 Editor), but nothing about Remote mode for controlling DAW/VST and no digital audio in/out traveling by USB (you don’t have Firewire).

Kurzweil PC3k lacks sampler, but you can import WAV files to build new Programs.

For the Sequencer (SONG/PATTERN), I really have minimal information, so I won’t compare by now…

So in conclusion, I think Kurzweil is really a great synth and nothing compares to Dynamic VAST. If you need flexibility and power, this is Kurzweil with no hesitation. However, this isn’t for everyone. I had the luck to begin with the easier (and less powerful) Korg (AI, HI, HD-1, EDS), then I moved to Yamaha (AWM2) which I didn’t find that complex because previous experience, and now I’m moving to Kurzweil where you need to have solid concepts and experience with synthesis in general if you really pretend to fully utilize (or at least understand) that power.

I think Kurzweil is old fashion in the sense that they still have a “staggering” 64 MB of ROM and 128 MB of Flash RAM for user samples. Honestly, this seems pretty ridiculous by the present standards. However, Kurzweil is able to sound really really great because the keymaps are superb and you have real unmatched synthesis power. However, I’m missing detailed keymaps for every subtle nuance for acoustic instruments (like the missing details for the Piano keymaps), at least this is what I have been able to see. So there is the synthesis power, but the raw material (keymaps) may be missing (lacking). I must say I’m far away to know what keymaps are really available, because I think those are not categorized as they’re on Motif XF and when you add the tiny interface (monochromatic screen), this kind of exploration becomes a real issue, which can be somewhat solved if you use the PC3k Editor. Yamaha has a great detailed selection of superb WAVEFORMS. However, the Kurzweil PC3k Orchestal sounds are great and you have more detail in a single Program, compared with what you can get with a full PERFORMANCE. The Pianos can sound great if you correctly tweak and design, and I personally prefer the organ emulator over the CX-3 (Korg Kronos), but organs are not really the kind of sounds I use the most. If Kurzweil updates the keymaps to present standards and they redesign the user interface to what we’re used those days like big color screens and even with touchscreen, then we’ll get a great workstation which won’t be easily defeated.

Hi MarPabl!

How about a keybed/action comparison between those three beasts? Also, could you comment on the build quality/roadworthy-ness?

Regards,
Vikas

Kurzweil has a lighter touch, using the Fatar TP40L keybed action. I tend to prefer Motif XF keybed action. Anyway, both keybed actions are very similar and feel really nice.

Regarding the build quality, both are built like a tank. However, the Kurzweil is not as depth and high as Motif XF so you it seems lighter and fits better on my keyboard bag.

Regarding available controllers, Motif XF has more to offer, because you get sliders, knobs (with multiple functions), the assignable function buttons and the builtin ribbon controller. With Kurzweil, you get sliders (9 instead of 8 and this is to fit the organ emulation), a swith button, an arp button and sometimes you can use 9 buttons. If you get the external ribbon controller, this is better than Motif XF (and many other workstations out there) because its larger (60 cm) and you can split on 3 independent sections.

I still can’t coment too much about the workflow because I’m adapting to Kurzweil, but I don’t find it that hard. My main concern is the lack of categories for many Programs (and Keymaps, and so on): to better explain this, imagine that the Motif XF only has categories for 3 preset banks and the rest of the banks don’t have a correct category. While you have a search function (this one finds the text everywhere) and have quick access lists you can define, I find the initial process of looking for a type of sound somewhat slow. I miss the big long categorized lists we have on Motif XF.

Thanks MarPabl, for your feedback!

Thank you Marpabl for this detailed comparison.
I must say that I agree to a great extent with you, from what I´ve seen and heard!

Also remember that the category lists of waveforms is a quite new Motif XF 1.1 (?) feature and was not available yet on the XS, at least not as conveniently.

I agree that they should develop a bigger ROM, although I´ve also read that Kurzweil plans an additional 64 mb flashrom update soon…

That said, I like the fact that Kurweil keeps developing their software OS with new sounds and feature.
I´d also like to see that now with Yamaha.

In all, I think the kurz is quite different from the XF, and that´s a good thing!

benoit - 12 June 2012 05:47 PM

Also remember that the category lists of waveforms is a quite new Motif XF 1.1 (?) feature and was not available yet on the XS, at least not as conveniently.

Yes, even with Motif XF this feature still has some issues: when you write WAVEFORMS to the Flash Expansion Boards, the new WAVEFORMS don’t have a category associated. At least this is what I’ve seen. Therefore, the ROM WAVEFORMS are categorized, but you’ll have hard time if you plan to use other WAVEFORMS.

benoit - 12 June 2012 05:47 PM

I agree that they should develop a bigger ROM, although I´ve also read that Kurzweil plans an additional 64 mb flashrom update soon…

I also read this, but AFAIK Kurzweil’s definition of “soon” is measured on galactic units, like light years… Anyway I find the keymaps on Kurzweil awesome, they really sound great! I’m loving many sounds there, but I’m missing synth sounds for Electronica. However, I’ve been able to recreate an AL-1 (Kronos VA) organ on the Kurzweil without issues. I think the synth power is there, you just need to add your Programs. I’ll try to recreate some Access Virus TI sounds to check this…

benoit - 12 June 2012 05:47 PM

That said, I like the fact that Kurweil keeps developing their software OS with new sounds and feature.
I´d also like to see that now with Yamaha.

I think Yamaha has the edge regarding technological integration giving you network access, FireWire connection, big flash memory for user WAVEFORMS, access to Internet, apps for iPad, great DAW integration and so on… Maybe we’re just missing that Yamaha add some other synth engines, like the Motif Classic or the Motif ES, which seems the current trend and I think this would bring us more sound designing power.

benoit - 12 June 2012 05:47 PM

In all, I think the kurz is quite different from the XF, and that´s a good thing!

For sure! Both are great and each one have stronger and weaker points!