I do agree the PA will have ALL the B+B sounds, but what I was trying to say was that if you want styles to be played using MORE than just the bread and butter sounds on the PA2 (or 1), then sending the data to a Motif XS and using some of the great sounds on the XS makes a huge difference.
I get ya now. Yeah that would make a huge difference for sure. Back in my Technics days I used to do that myself with a KORG M3-R sound module. Worked quite well too and gave me a sound back in those days that Arrangers just didn't do.
As for the new toys, I tend to look at it a bit differently. I think a user needs a good grounding in loops and loop/sample technology AND PC's/Macs to even get something half decent out of them. And then the ability to put it all together into something musical.
Mind you having said that, I am not too au faix with all the current crop of audio loop and sample gear, so I could be wrong in that view.
I have no doubt that YOU could do this with ease, and I daresay using just those tools, would have a song up and running in minutes, but that expertise has taken you a few years to acquire, yes?
Yeah, working with samples is like a black art in many ways. Someone people master it, and some just never get their head around it at all no matter how much you try explain it to them. In my time I've even written small little applications that actually tell people where the loop points of samples are so they can loop their Beats without knowing exactly what they are at. It helps, but you would be surprised just how may people can make music from data that simple does not match up at all.
I feel sad in a way saying this, but modern dance music as evolved or devolved whichever suites the way you want to look at this to the point where all noise is music. It's now cool to take a sample that's not even looping right, throw an effect on it and call it music.
Just like there is a very good reason why all people who write hip hop music own an AKAI MPC. These kind of toys are for both musicians and those who have no musical ability at all. Both will still write music with it.
I DO agree with you that it would be super if Yamaha do drop their top of the line arrangers and instead add these functions (intro/ending/fill etc) to , as you say, the sequencer section or similar.
That, as you say, COULD be where Yamaha have been aiming all along, and if so, perhaps the arranger per se may be in decline but will be carried on in another form.
It would surprise me in the least to also see Korg move down that path.
They, like Yamaha, already have the technology in existing boards (although Karma in the M3 is way ahead of the arp technology in the XS), so perhaps they too may incorporate the top end arranger into a top end workstation?? And retain a small range of budget arrangers.
In the last few years I've been wondering will keyboards like the OASYS be the future of all Keyboards. Something entirely software based, but as stable as dedicated hardware.
Something that is sold to the end user as basically a shell, and from there they can pay to activate certain modules of software as their needs expand.
That way users of all levels can grow with the keyboard and only activate what features they need which in turn gives them a keyboard prices exactly to their needs.
Basically they don't have to pay for features they would never use. The OASYS is a lot like that right now. The different synth engines are all there in Demo mode and you simply activate and pay for only what you need.
Regards
James
Previous Topic
Index
