Thanks for your reply. It sounds like the Roland is a little better suited for live performance (transition between patches, trigger pads, etc.)?
Maybe... depends on your priorities. Having the touchscreen for patch selection is a nice Krome advantage for live performance, too.
The Midi on the DS works well enough.
My only gripe was that it would not output midi from the step sequencer during performance.
On the Krome, you can easily set any of the 16 parts to either an internal or external sound... and for an external sound, you can specify any MIDI channel, any Program Change number, and (crucially for some applications) any MSB/LSB bank change numbers. I did not find a way to do that on the Juno DS.
Some Korg keybeds suck, and all the 88 key units I have tried were all vastly inferior in feel to equivalent and below (in cost terms) keyboards by Roland, Yamaha and even Casio.
I have played some 88 Kross and Krome that have felt better than others. On paper, they're all the same, but IRL, there seems to be variation. But regardless, I'm not a fan of the Ivory-Feel G that Roland uses in the Juno DS88 (it seems slow to fully return).
I did have a Kross 2 and setting up Splits was vastly quicker to set up than on the Juno that I tried, plus setting a split up for a fast recall via a Pad when they are in favourites mode was also easier in a Kross 2.
I have no reason to believe a Krome EX is vastly different.
It is different... Kross 2 has a dedicated Split button to quickly set up a split, Krome does not.
As for split on Kross 2 vs. Juno DS, I'm surprised to see you say Kross was "vastly quicker." On Juno DS, it's literally one button to engage a split (vs. two on the Kross 2); and from there I think the Juno DS is actually quicker in terms of letting you then alter which sound you want on top, what you want the relative volumes to be, any octave shift you may want for one sound or the other... and importantly, these things can easily even be changed in real-time as you play. So for example, if you're playing LH bass, and in the middle of the song, you decide you want to try a different RH sound, or change its level or octave, that's much more do-able on the Roland. (Also, if you tend to work a lot with splits, and don't necessarily want the bigger/heavier 88, it's nice that the DS is available in a 76.)
But maybe you meant splitting
more than two sounds? In that case, both get a bit more complicated than their quick split functions, and I'm not sure which is easier/faster.