AJ, Good topic . This is truly an exciting time in arranger keyboard development but there's still a vast untapped arranger keyboard buying market out there. Previously, arranger keyboards were marketed primarily to the home hobbyist. As sounds and styles have improved and & more pro features have been added, there is now increased interest by pro players and schooled musicians as well.

Unfortunately there's still a degree of stigma associated with arranger keyboards, especially among schooled musicians. Unfortunately, its' past reputation as a one fingered K-Mart toy for kids & hobbyists still prevails. We could say, "screw the uptight intellectual effete musician snobs", but I think this is short cited. The challenge for arranger keyboard manufacters now is to find a way to appeal to the traditionally trained keyboard musician market as well. This can only raise the respect of arranger keyboards as a legitimate musical instrument for both pros and hobbyists alike. I look forward to the day when arranger keyboard 'performance' & 'composition' classes are being offered at Julliard or Berkely School of Music in Boston. Maybe then I can send my resume in for a teaching position there.

Here are feature which I think will greatly enhance both the arranger keyboard sound and its' performance capabilities:

1) Implement 'User Customizable' Chord Recognition Tables:

This will allow us the user to determine how WE want our chords voicings interpreted. There are many chord voicings which have a 'duo function'. Such as the notes (from left to right, played as a chord): C-E-G-A. This is most typically recognized as a C6. But, this SAME voicing is also commonly played and recognized as Amin7. With a 'user customizable' chord recognition feature, we could set up our own customized chord tables to meet the needs of the style of music we are playing at that time. With this flexibility, keyboard playing possibilities are endless.

2) Improve Style Pattern & Sequencer Recording/Editing Capabilities:

Currently, recording and editing styles on the arranger is cumbersome, partly because of the limitations & limited power of hardware sequencers. I would like to see an arranger keyboard brand & model specific PC software program available which could access directly with the keyboard for the purpose of composing/editing styles and sequences. This would ultimately make both style creation/editing a breeze as it's much easier to view all editing parameters on a computer screen instead of the relatively small keyboard screen on the Keyboard. I realize that there are already programs like Cakewalk & Cubase that support many of these features but having a PC program all ready to go 'out of the box' to directly communicate with ALL of the keyboards functions (sounds, styles, chord recognition and other arranger specific commands, etc) would be an added PLUS.

3) Improve the 'timing resolution' of arr. keyboard hardware style playback sequencers:

Here's a VERY important issue which has NOT been discussed much on this forum. The hardware sequencer & style playback 'timing resolution' is a critical component in how a style pattern will end up sounding. Basically the 'timng resolution' reflects 'how accurate' the sequenced style pattern will sound compared to when it was played in (recorded) originally. Whenever you record something, be it via midi or in digital audio, the music gets quantized. The higher the supported 'timing resolution', the more accurate (less quantized) the recorded style pattern will sound on playback. The midi timing resolution supported by most software sequencers like Cakewalk Sonar, Cubase, and Logic Audio is over 1,000 ppq (parts per quarter note). Unfortunately hardware sequencers currently support a much lower timing resolution because higher timing resolution takes up computer memory. My Technics KN5000 hardware sequencer regretably supports only a maximum of 96 ppq . But, my Yamaha QY70 hardware sequencer supports 480 ppq , so I know it is possible to increase the timing resolution on hardware sequencers. Some people may say you can't hear a difference. You may not hear it right out, but you will definitely FEEL the difference. What I notice is the LIFE (excitement) of the music gets taken away when you listen to music recorded or played back at a timing resolution of 96 ppq compared to 960 ppq. You really lose the exciting 'LIVE' sound when music is quantized even to 96 ppq. Even if you convert a style or sequence which was recorded on ANOTHER brand arranger keyboard (which may have a higher timing resolution), the playback of that SAME style will only be as good as the arranger keyboard you end up playing the converted style on. This is just one example of why converted styles may not sound as good as it did when played on the original keyboard it was composed on.

I hope other forum members can undertand how important my above requests are to improving both the sound & features of arranger keyboards.

Scott
http://scottyee.com