The final comparison of Kurzweil K2700 to K2500

Very nice video. I love It.❤ I was one of the first programmers to have the K2700 and I programmed many sound libraries for Kurzweil too. What I regret is seeing people criticize such a powerful keyboard, without knowing anything about it. The K2700 is a very powerfull Synth/Workstation

Thank you very much för this helpfull video. Please continue to make more ones...

I agree with everyone that's been saying that you should offer these sounds for sale. You could call them Grim25 or something. This is your work! YOU have painstakingly recreated these sounds from a vintage instrument. People do this all the time. I would buy them for sure. And now a question, have you converted the sound Alaska? I used to use that quite alot back in the day. ❤ Keep up the good work! 💪😎👍

The John Carpenter theme alone is worth a like

Great job! 🎹

In the K2500, the Digitech chip is the default for effects. To mitigate the noise, here's what you can do: internal to the effect you are using, there is a Wet Gain and Dry Gain or Mix (I forget the real name of it as I use KDFX with my K2500 but you'll know on editing the effect). Set that to Max for the Wet one. Save the effect. After you do that, you can then use a smaller Wet % outside the effect. This reduces the noise. A KDFX can also be installed, but it's rare to find a separate one nowadays. So what oyu can do, since you also have the K2700 and the latter has KDFX internally as well as audio input to it, is to set the K2700 effects as AUX Sends in your Mixer. Then you can disable the Digitech on the K2500 and route the K2500 to your mixer and make it benefit of KDFX too.

Thank you for the video, you could make as many as you want on the 2700 for us newer users. In the Moog comparison the 2700 isn't using the KVA oscillators, that by itself may make a difference? And Obviously any EQ and/or compression will make a difference. The biggest difference I heard was in the attack on the 2500, the first 40 milliseconds, a slightly slower attack and decay envelope opening. This may also give it the illusion of more fullness. But I agree with you the difference is easily compensated for in a mix, or on stage with EQ/compression/envelope change. Been playing keys since 1967, and hearing about this VAST synth since around 1990. Every Keyboard magazine I read back in those old days had a Kurzweil advertisement speaking of their "superior" sound design architecture. After hearing them boast for 35 years, last year finally bought one :) !! I chose the PC4 because it is going in a studio and the plastic construction is just fine. My first synth was a JunoAlpha2 bought new in the mid 1980s, then about 100 synths since then. So I am not new to sound designing. My first shock with my Kurzweil was the unstable operating system corrupting with just simply auditioning patches, then when sound designing even worse corruption. Thankfully these are minor corruptions that can be corrected by using the MIDI PANIC button, so once I discovered this fix, I didn't need to power down to clear anymore, and am okay with it, but certainly not impressed! And it will corrupt while working on as little as 4 modules. I have not gone to 32 and probably will not. This PC4 has the full VAST sound engine including the KVA's and a full DX7 FM engine, plus the samples (keymaps). So, I don't think I am missing much by not buying the 2700... besides memory. I really like the 4 pedal inputs giving me up to 6 pedals to modulate patches in real time, nobody else offers this (plus a ribbon). I am going to keep working with this synth because I am curious and not afraid of any new OS. VAST isn't the most complex OS I have used, since I create my own style patterns in a Roland E-A7, arranger style creation is the most complex OS of them all, and I have used 7 different arrangers so far. It just takes a little time to full understanding and that is my motivation on any synth, full understanding so I can create 80% of the patch in my head before sitting down in front of the keyboard to finish.

As far as I can remember, I haven't seen any chipboard in my K2500XS. There is, however, a long metal bar all along the board.

Thank you! Very helpful! Please, continue the comparison and the demonstration k2700 videos! Very useful and highly appreciated!!! Cheers 😉

You can remove the rubberized coating from the plastic using acetone or IPA. If you don't and don't keep that rubber lubricated, eventually the rubber will start to melt and become sticky.

About minute 7:00, you compare both keyboards' effects in terms of noise, which is of course very notorious on the older K. The K2000/K2500 Digitech FX chip was always criticized for its noise level. Did you run the test using that stock chip or with the KDFX option? Thanks.

What are you doing to get that sound? Love the John Carpenter vibes!

not saying it's never correct, but there are always people who will say old stuff is better and new stuff sucks. No matter if they hear it or not, their mind already said it is the case.

The big problem the K2700 has isn’t how it compares the K2500. It’s how it compares to the Fantom, Nautilus, and Montage. Those boards have modern, larger touch screen interfaces. The K2700 is stuck in the past with a smaller, non touch interface. Those who cross shop find it harder to take this older design seriously. Also, the soft touch plastic elastomer materials aren’t durable and should’ve been abandoned years ago. Yamaha, Korg, and Roland aren’t building their keyboards with a built in failure point like this. The K2700 would be great if it had a more competitive interface.

Sorry, you focus on what you may use/need, not in the apples to apples, like you did with the noise. But if you play the Pink Panther like you did .... man ..... stop doing this