I didn't forget, I just didn't get around to it.
Anyway, to answer Masterdog's question...
There are several differences between the M3 and the M50, and I'll try to cover as many as I know of (as well as similarities):
The Synthesis Engine - EDS (Enhanced Definition Synthesis) is the same on both instruments. Same wave roms. The programs and combis are not the same, however... in terms of numbering and probably naming as well.
The sequencer is practically identical - but the M3 has in-track sampling (never used that myself)
The M3 has about 600 more programs than the M50, and about 30 more combinations (performances, I think Yamaha calls such things) Combis are made up of several programs.
You gain polyphony on the M3; max of 120 voices compared to 80 on the M50. Half those figures for programs using 2 oscillators.
The M3 has expansion options - some of these are free, but require the addition of the EXB-256 memory module to have them all loaded at once.
Brass and Woodwinds (2 sets), a new Grand Piano that replaces the original that shipped on the M3, and because many users complained that the original shouldn't have been replaced... Korg provided that as another expansion set. Again, for free.
There's the EXB-RADIAS, which provides the same MMT (Multi Modeling Technology) Synthesis as that found on the physical Radias Rack module. It can be linked to KARMA of course, and although you lose the lovely twiddly knobs on the real instrument, you gain some more flexibility with some other areas, although exactly what they are - I forget.
I think you lose the step sequencer too. The technology's implemented in a different way. I have all these upgrades and I'd recommend them. The stock Brass sounds in particular were awful, compared to the rest of the sounds. These actually sound good... not bad for free. I like the potential of the Radias option, but I've yet to unleash it fully...or even partially.
Program structure is the same for EDS, as are Combis and Drum Kits.
M3 has sampling, M50 does not.
Effects are largely the same, except there's no AUX bus on the M50.
M3 has X/Y control feature on the touch screen, the M50 does not. This is like a cut-down Kaoss pad, but any parameters can be assigned to it, makes for some pretty cool sound possibilities. Also has a motion feature, to simulate you moving your finger around (I think this can be recorded) so you can repeat performances with the pad more reliably.
M50 has dual Arpeggiators. M3 has KARMA. KARMA is not a posh arpeggiator.
You can buy 3rd party software to give the M50 KARMA functionality - written buy the guy who created KARMA - Stephen Kay.
You can buy KARMA software for the M3 too, which lets you create your own generated effects (GEs) - and load them into the M3 - You can't create your own on the M3 itself. Not yet, anyway.
M3 has midi in/out/thru - M50 has in/out.
M3 has more/different USB connectors - for storage as well as connecting to a computer (usb midi). There's no external HDD/CD/Sticks support on the M50.
M3 has more audio outputs: Some individual ones as well as L/R mono, also has S/P DIF.
There's an optional Firewire expansion board for the M3, but apparently this is arse and can have huuuge latency issues - generally doesn't seem to work very well for most people.
M3 has more control surfaces. More chord trigger pads (8 instead of 4) - it doesn't have any rotary knobs, but it has sliders instead, more switches too, also a ribbon controller.
I think that's about it.
I own the M3-88. I bought it because my old Alesis QS7 had silly start/end points for its 76 keys and I couldn't play one of my favourite piano tunes on it.
The M3 comes in 73 and 61 key flavours too. These are semi-weighted keybeds, mine has the RH3 hammer action, which I'm quite pleased to say is nice to play. In hindsight I should probably have bought the 73 key version... it wouldn't weigh about the same a 5 elephants and would've been more portable. I didn't buy mine with portability in mind, though.
Does weigh an absolute tonne though.
It has some great and very usable sounds, plus you get a PC editor with it, which makes editing stuff a bit easier to navigate. Everything's on lots of pages within the M3's GUI, and I lose track of where things are.
I bought it just before the Fantom G came out from Roland, but compared it to the Fantom X and the Motif XS.
KARMA is great, it's not an auto accompaniment, nor an arpeggiator in the traditional sense, but I find it a really good inspirational tool. Plus some of the stuff other users have created is pretty amazing.
Unfortunately I've never read any of the manuals properly, and haven't even begun to scratch below the surface of what the instrument can be used to create. Would I buy it again? Yes, but a smaller version - 73 keys starts at C, I think... instead of whatever the QS7 started at. Much more friendly for a nubbington like me.
It misses some useful features, particularly on the smaller versions - there's no octave up/down buttons. I don't miss that because I have 88 keys - but it's grounds for complaint from many users.
It's (KARMA) very overwhelming. If you take the time to dig in properly and learn how it works, and how adjusting the GEs' parameters affects things... when you have 4 KARMA modules working together... my puny brain can't quite work it out, but like I said - I need to RTFM.
Other people have done it, so so can I.
This isn't really a review at all. I don't think I'm qualified to give a proper one. It's certainly a fascinating instrument with infinite possibilities. Is KARMA worth it? I'd say so, provided you experiment with it and use it as it was designed to, for creating your own sounds rather than sticking with stock stuff.
It seems well supported too, by Korg and Stephen. And I'd repeat that I think the expansion options are 100% worth it, except for the firewire thing.
I use a MOTU firewire audio interface anyway, which has rock solid drivers and no complaints from me there.
This probably didn't help at all, but I hope it did. Best thing to do is go back to a shop and have a play.
