Never have understood that one..... Who, in their right minds, that have enough money for a PA1X, haven't already got a CD burner in their computer or laptop? And if seriously interested in recording themselves haven't got FAR more capable software with vastly greater capabilities than available in any arranger?

I think there is so much R&D money wasted on putting features like HD recording into arrangers, at the cost of short-changing other, more performance oriented features. It would be NICE if it all was combined, but the price you pay is too high. Inflexibility, only 16/44-48 recording quality (if that!), no flexibility with effects, forget plug-ins, tiny, non-intuitive displays.

Some may THINK recording a whole production on a computer is complicated, but trust me, trying to do one on a built-in HD recorder, unless it is moronically simple (a voice over a recorded backing, e.g.) is FAR more difficult, and cannot easily be made to sound as good.

Remember, an arranger only gets SO much money for it's R&D, and the more spent on gewgaws like HD recording (and samplers that are too slow to load to be practically useful), the less gets spent on style development, or fancy new OS ideas like multipads, or more fills, breaks and variations (or a Chord Sequencer!). Stuff we are going to use 24/7.

Let's just keep the arranger as an ARRANGER......