No argument there... quite obviously, that is the case. But the arranger's capabilities are also important.

Neither playing skill nor operational skill is going to overcome the fact that an arranger may only have ONE Break/Fill for the entire style, or that asking it to go from Var4 to Var1 might introduce a jumpy transition, etc..

This is why I spend quite a bit of time posting on these issues. Presuming you consider yourself to be good at BOTH the playing and operational aspects of arranger playing, I am often surprised at how dismissive you can get whenever these ideas and issues are brought up.

You've been playing arrangers since the early days, no doubt, Donny? Two variations, one fill, many chords unrecognized, no break/fills, no guitar NTT's, ROM OTS only (if at all), etc., etc.. Were you saying back THEN how all those new-fangled ideas weren't necessary, and it was all about the player, yada, yada, yada?

A LOT has changed for the better since then. I only wish you could acknowledge that there is STILL a lot further it could go. No-one is criticizing YOU, no-one is criticizing YOUR choice of arranger. These issues exist for ALL arrangers, mine including (mine more than most, on some issues!). But if we all sit around and try to deny that they exise, that there is nothing further that is needed, and that much we ALREADY have is useless because YOU choose not to use it, we are sending a VERY poor message to the manufacturers...

We are happy little campers, and don't bother making them better, because we barely use what we have! You don't honestly think that do you? But it's easy to assume you do from how you post, sometimes.

Who needs more fills? YOU DID... back when you only had one or two! Who needs MORE fills? YOU DO.... because you'll be happily using them when they finally arrive.