Hi Tony,

I suppose they are all right, depending on your perspective.

For me the arranger is a much handier tool to use than a workstation, so that's why I use a Yamaha Tyros4. I have the features of a workstation that I need, like a 16 track midi recorder (plus Audio recording), and I also have the spontaneity of having incredible editable (try saying that after half a dozen Scotch) styles.

In all my work, from recording to playing "live", the arranger allows me to work faster because I find it much easier to use.

As far as arrangers not being on TV or pro stages, I've used mine in several pro situations, and never got so much as one wayward comment that it wasn't a "pro" instrument, and quite frankly, I could care less, as I'm far busier than most pro keyboardists in my area (when I'm working-I'm off on self imposed sabbatical right now) because I can cover so many genres, and fit into so many kinds of situation, from pure solo work, to duo, trio, or whatever.

We see workstations, instead of arrangers, on stage or in bands, because usually they aren't used as workstations in that situation, but rather just a instrument that makes many types of usable sounds and that has key split ability and layering (and maybe arpeggios).

However, arrangers are used by film composers, professionals like Melissa Manchester and Sting, and are also used on Nashville Row as songwriting tools....at present the latter are using Yamaha PSR-S910

Ever since they stopped sounding too repetitive and featured great high quality usable voices, my first choice for an all-in-one keyboard has always been an arranger.

The way I see it, workstations still do not have enough arranger features, whereas , the arranger has all the workstation features I need to make a living at playing music, whether it be "live" or strictly for recording.

Right now, I'm quite content with the one instrument that does it all for me....an arranger keyboard...the awesome Yamaha Tyros4.

Great topic, Tony.

Ian