Here is the problem with the point the Yamaha apologist are making.

They say that Yamaha has �the most successful arranger keyboard on the planet�.
We can assume that they are talking about the T2.
Well, if that were the case, then there is no need for the T3.
Why mess with success. Even worst, the changes Yamaha are probably going to make with the T3 is going to be to the Sounds, Styles and he OS. Ironically, those are the selling points for the T2 and for the T2 success. So why would Yamaha take a chance and make changes to that winning formula?

Yamaha is taking a very big business risk by making changes to the Sounds, Styles and OS of the T2 and making a T3. Where as it relates to a 76 key T3, there is no risk to Yamaha because people do not buy the Tyros series for the number of keys so an extra 15 keys would not prevent them from buying. Yamaha can only gain from having a 76 key T3 because the persons who would not buy a 61 key T3 would buy a 76 key T3.

What company would not create a product that would present no or very limited risk (any new product would always have some risk) but creates a product that changes the very core of their product?

O I forgot we no the answer to that; YAMAHA.


[This message has been edited by to the genesys (edited 03-28-2008).]