Fran, I really don't think there's a solution to the reverb on audio drum parts. It's recorded into the loop (remember, these are entire loops, not time sliced like Ketron's). If it wasn't, and the kit was recorded bone dry, the only option would be to put reverb (from an insert, perhaps) on the entire loop, and one thing none of these arrangers do well is a decent drum room ambiance. Not to mention that the kick would tend to get too 'bloomy'.

In a perfect world, perhaps there would be TWO loops, one of the kit dry and one of the overheads and room mikes, and you could mix and match to taste, but odds are slim...

Anyway, the entire issue is moot... Ditching the whole bloody idea, and simply putting some well recorded KITS, with some 'air' sampled into them is the solution that makes Korg, Ketron and Roland's so superior to Yamaha's. Korg even allow you to vary the balance of the room mike samples separately from the dry drum...

I am amazed how utterly blind to this obvious, simple, and well tested method Yamaha are. They went to all this hassle and expense (not to mention, providing so few patterns it's a gimmick at best) all the while ignoring something they already HAVE. Korg, Roland and Ketron, back in the G1000 days all used the same system that Yamaha find themselves STILL in. Sterile, dry drum samples that you have to use a send effect to get any space around.

Korg, Ketron and Roland have moved on into the 21st century. Why do Yamaha still cling to their outdated method, and instead, provide a VERY flawed and marginally useful alternative? It's not like Yamaha don't know how to make great drum kits... their electronic drum it line is one of the best sounding out there. But it's like Yamaha have forbidden any cross pollination between divisions. Somehow, Roland don't seem to mind some of their V-Drums samples making their way over to the arranger division to improve things.

But Yamaha can't seem to realize this....

Shame.