i didn't find it to be as bad people made it out to be, you just need patience. i thinking i've seen the phrase 'like trying to paint a room through a keyhole' mentioned in regards to it. also, with the SR, a lot of people complain about the interface. for cheap, i think it'd be at least worth checking out. actually, iirc, i think the waveforms can volume fade into each other as well (? - it's been years since i owned one). a bit like sending very fast program change messages i guess? not sure if the Waldorf can do similar, without the interpolation.

the wave-sequencing aspect doesn't interpolate between the waveforms like the Waldorf does, it just quickly switches between them. like a quad mixer, with the levels based on the axes. these can be 'traditional' ROMpler patches or wave-sequences. the vector aspect of the WS is basically just a 4-way mixer, mixing the volumes of 4 (or less, depending how you set it up) patches. This is brought up every once in a while, but they work quite differently.

It sounds like vectoring has more realtime wave shaping going on.this is brought up every once in a while, but they work quite differently. So even though they are both based off wavetable they are different.

Korg wavestation sr sounds