Most modern arrangers, you usually get four Variations. What you DON'T get is enough fills to transition between them all....

The hardest thing to do, when designing styles for an arranger, is to come up with a fill that smoothly transitions between more than one set of variations. It's a piece of cake to design a fill that goes smoothly from, say, VAR4 to VAR3, but to design one that goes smoothly from VAR4 to VAR3 AND VAR1 is much harder. In fact, it is one of the things that makes arrangers less 'musical' than SMFs, that every now and again (depending on the skill of the style composer) a fill just doesn't sound right for the job it is doing.

But wait, you say, won't all these extra fills make style creation MORE complex? To be honest, no.... As long as you know what the fill is going to have to do EVERY TIME, it is a snap.

So I encourage you all to try to put pressure (by discussing it, talking with reps, etc.) to get arranger manufacturers to address this. For the smoothest flow, and to make style creation easier, we need a fill to go from each and every VAR to every other one (including itself!). That's sixteen fills, counting Fill-to Same. Roland currently have seven, not sure about the rest.....

Another feature I would love to see expanded (or even added to Rolands!) is the Break/Fill concept. Why have just one? Why not one per VAR? Once again, it is FAR easier to design 4 Break/Fills that trigger at only one level, than it is to design one Break/Fill fit for all occasions.

While current arranger manufacturers are trying to improve arrangers by adding non-essentials, like HD recorders and samplers that are too slow to use, they are ignoring the fundamental ideas that make arrangers easier to use, musically. I would love to see a return to features that actually improve the ARRANGER, not turn it into a poor imitation of a workstation.