King frog i dont think you understand what can be done on a modern arranger. You are talking as though you cant create beats and loops or sample loops or import grooves from
sample CDs or sequence tracks linearly or import audio into modern arrangers. That can all be done right now. When ever we get into these discussion we act as though the way music is created on an arranger is different to how music is created on a workstation. If you were to open your mind a little you would see that the PA1x/2X for example isnt just like a work station IT IS A WORK STATION. I can sit at my brothers Motif XS and make soulful rnB or hip hop and i can sit at my PA1X and do pretty much the same. The difference is that with the PA1X in addition to working completely from scratch i can also use the styles as a 'suggestion' for what i want to create. The XS tries to do this but it is not as intutive as the PA1X.

The point i was making when i raised this thread was that the similarities between the way arrangers can be used (by people who actually get under the hood of the thing rather than just play and exchange a few months down the road) are very close . But the features that are inherently similar between what is deemed a work station and what is deemed an arranger are deliberately overlooked and confused by the manufacturers to maintain market segmentation.

The arranger market and the workstation market are deliberately kept separate to maximise the profitability from each range .

There is absiolutely no reason why every 'workstation 'produced shouldn't have arranger functions. It simply makes more commercial sense to keep the markets separate