Hello all
I've been using those kdbs for more than a year, and I got some conclusions about them.
I'll start by saying my opinion about the pros and cons of each kdb.

3000:

Pros:
Good voices with emphasis on pianos, eletric pianos, strings, flutes and wood winds, sax and some accordions. I dont like the sinth & fx voices. The most part of the voices are well equalized, with proper level of volume.
Another good point are the styles. Well constructed and suitable to my repertoire.
Menu: pretty easy navegation!
Style control: well placed buttons and easy to opperate.
Memory control: perfect.
Multi pad: very usefull for who knows how to create according their necessities.
Microfone input.
Style Creator: very easy to use
Fade in, out button.

cons:

Lack of a second input for mic.
Vocal harmony: not suitable for profi use.
Lack of harmonizer and sustain buttons.
Difficult visualization of the screen in very ligthed places.
Smart media slot: unnecessary
Lack of bass inversion button


ROLAND E50

Pros:

Some excellent voices with emphasis on organs, accordions, vocals (scat voices are awesome!), sax and sinth voices.
Styles: few innovations. It makes me feel like playing my old G800. Otherwise something is usefull: Live band, Jazz and Latin banks.
Usefull bass inversion button.
Very interesting cover and Style Makeup Tools( To modificate styles and arrangements).
Usefull Easy Setting Buttons.
Screen: visible in any place, with any luminosity.
Lighted buttons, easy to opperate.
Very usefull balance knob (acc x kbd).

Cons:

Kbd touch: Although roland's fame, the kbd is hard to use with some voices as sax for example. For the first time, I had difficulties playing a Roland.
Menu: a bit confused and user program as well.
Intelligence Melody (harmonizer): not suitable to second (layer) voice.
Lack of fading in out button.
Lack of dedicated buttons for intros, fills and endings.
Transpose button: hard to use
Octave change via menu.
Storage system: slow and confusing

Finally I'll say that I like both of them, but if I had to choose one, I would prefer the 3000.

cheers
Chico

Great review of both keyboards, Chico, and pretty well right on the money.

I agree wholeheartedly on the lack of an ON BASS panel button on the PSR-3000(also absent on the S900)...I get around it by assigning a foot-switch to that function, or storing the ON BASS and key split under a panel registration.

Thanks for the assessment.

Ian

Great work ChicoBrasil!!

But you have there one mistake. You wrote in roland e-50 cons "Lack of fading in out button." You can call this function(and many other functions) with V-Link button. But firstly of course you have to setup it in menu...

Thank you Chico for answering my question from the other post.

I am wondering if the sound quality is about the same on both in general and also specifically for the piano.

Thanx again

Scott

Huh?! Are you sure you tested the E-50? No dedicated buttons for INTRO, FILLS and ENDINGS? What do you suppose are the buttons INTRO, ENDING/RIT and the 1-2-3-4 variation-buttons for?

Fade in/Fade out: As of OS v.1.08, you can program the VLink button to tons of different functions, including Fade in/Fade out.

Transpose hard to use? Press it and the display will present you a keyboard where you simply press the desired key you want to transpose to... How much easier should it be? It can't ever be a "one button solution", since the E-50 will never know where you want to transpose to. It will always take 2 'clicks' at least.

Unlike you, I would never prefer the 3000 over the E-50. Not so much because what you wrote about it, but only because of the difference in sound. Roland feels "live", Yamaha feels like "over-produced CD-recording". Mind you, that is just MY opinion. :-)

Are you able to mute style parts as easily as the 3000 on the fly?

Mmmmm...the last time I looked, the 3k had dedicated transpose buttons on the panel for up(+)and down(-)...ONE press...you're up/down a key...much easier to do on the fly, unlike the E-50 which is harder to manage, having to use TWO clicks.

BIG difference when you're in the middle of a tune and want to transpose without fuss or muss.

Ian

Burk

I am not Yamaha or Roland endorser.
I just wrote my impressions about 2 kbds that I bought and own for more than one year, answering a Scoot question.
All my comments are I M O.
If you want to start a fight about this issue, you don't know me.
I am not a member that like to discuss about personnal tastes.

Andre
I was refering about dedicated buttons.

Ian
Tks for reply.

Scott

About pianos, my choice is always Yamaha (Grand piano on right 1 and Gary piano on right 2).
On the whole I prefer Yamie voices.


Cheers
Chico

This is not about personal taste. I'm just saying your claims are not true. You can't find INTRO, ENDING, VAR 1-2-3-4, obviously. Nothing about taste. You don't know you can program VLINK to do FADE IN/OUT (among tons of other things) If you put that VLINK FADE function in your default settings, you'll have your dedicated button. Should you need it to have another function in a certain song: program it to your liking and save it in the UPG. That way you can use that single button for a different function in every other song. Awesome.

Again: not a matter of taste, more a lack of knowledge of the features of the instrument. If you write a review, at least make sure you got the FACTS right. Otherwise your review will be (at least for the facts part) useless to others.

Again: personal taste has got nothing to do with this. Your remark about "starting a fight" is hilarious by the way. Nobody is fighting. I'm only questioning your review. If you can't handle that, don't write them.

[This message has been edited by Burkels (edited 10-08-2007).]

Burkels

I wrote about DEDICATED BUTTONS for Intro 1, 2,3, breaks and Endings 1, 2, 3.
I wrote about dedicated button for Fade in out.
Can you understand me ?
I don't want discuss about multi function buttons.
If you don't like my comments, it's easy : forget it.

[This message has been edited by ChicoBrasil (edited 10-08-2007).]

My old Yamaha PSR-2000 lacked dedicated buttons for Intros 1.2,and 3 and ditto for the endings.

It was fiddly and a BIG pain to use, but was happily corrected on the 3k and the S900.

Not having dedicated buttons(a la E-50) is a poor design...no doubt about it...even worse than the transpose design.

What were they thinking?

Or, more realistically...what were they not thinking?

Ian

I like some of the organs and guitar voices on the Roland more than the ones on the Yamaha, but the Yamaha has better brass section and solo instruments. I have 2 rigs: the 3000 paired with a Motif 6, and the E50 paired with a Fantom XA. I find the Yamaha combo is a lot more versatile, and nothing beats the Motif's Electric Pianos...

They ARE dedicated INTRO 1,2,3,4 buttons. Programming the VLink as FADE by default leaves you with a dedicated button. How much more "dedicated" do you want any button to be if it has a label INTRO? Sure, you need to tell the instrument WHICH Intro or Ending you want. Seems obvious to me.

"Liking your comments" or not has got nothing to do with this. You state your observations, I state mine. And my main observation is that you don't know how to handle the E-50 and as a result are posting misinformation. Like I said: if you want to write a review, make sure you got the facts right.

[This message has been edited by Burkels (edited 10-18-2007).]

[This message has been edited by Burkels (edited 10-18-2007).]

As you said,I don't know how to handle the E-50, so
I need to learn :
I want to play something in solo Keys with two hands( for example,piano), while the kbd is running Intro 3 and intro 4 in sequence ,then I go to arrang. 2 .
How can I do it?
Playing my 3000 or S900 I just press DEDICATET buttons 3,4 (intro) and DEDICATET button 2 (arrang.).
It's easy .
Chico




[This message has been edited by ChicoBrasil (edited 10-18-2007).]

From my short exposure to the E-50 I faintly recall there was an intro button. However, in order to access the various intros available didn't you have to open a menu that allowed you to select from intro 1,2 and 3? Somewhat like the PSR-2000 intros, which were also contained within a menu for both the intros and endings.

The PSR-3000s intro 1,2 and 3 are all on dedicated buttons, as are endings 1,2 and 3. This eliminated the problems associated with accessing a menu while performing and loosing eye contact with the audience.

Good, unbiased review Chico,

Gary

------------------
Travlin' Easy

no, no, no!

after using my e60 for some good months now, i can tell you it is as easy as yamaha or korg to use intros/main/endings.
while someone not used to the way it works might believe is a bad design, i can tell you it is not al all like that, i would say even that it allows very cool combination between all of these.

gary,
no need to go into menus. if you want to start with intro 3 and then continue with main 1, it's very easy: press 1, press intro, press 3, ready!

ian,
what i think is missing from roland's design is something else: a fill-in in non-auto mode, as yamaha has. but it's really not a big deal.

it is maybe hard to explain, but you can trust me when i say it is not difficult at all, and e60's style control is quite clever, even tho in the begining is confusing a little bit. like any other thing, using it gets you used to it!


[This message has been edited by adimatis (edited 10-18-2007).]

According to the E-50 manual...

"press the [INTRO] button (so that it lights), one of the VARIATION [1]~[4] buttons to select the “complexity” of
the introduction."

So the buttons are there...it just takes TWO button presses to access the intros...the 3k needs only ONE press.

The E-50 has similar operations for the endings...TWO button presses as opposed to the 3k's ONE.

Transposer on the E-50 requires TWO operations...one to activate the display/menu, another to choose the key...the PSR-3000 need only ONE.

So the E-50 has slightly more complex operations than the 3k...I guess it depends if you can live with them...or not.

Ian

On the Yamaha you can skip a fill between variations by either turning off the Auto-Fill In, OR by pressing the main variation button you are going to twice(quickly).

I couldn't see it in the manual, but maybe the E-50 will do the latter method.

Two things the E-50 has that aren't on the 3k...

1.A Half Bar button. Quote from the manual,"Certain pop songs in 4/4 contain bars that only last two beats. The usual place for such a bar is between the first and the second verse.
Another favorite position for “halved” bars is at the end of a chorus or the bridge. Pressing this button icon does not change Style playback right away. Only
when a Fill-In starts will the Half Bar function be activated and play half the number of beats of the fill
you selected."

2.A Fill Rit. button...Again from the manual, "The tempo slows down while the fill is being played. At the end of the fill, the Style returns to the previously set tempo."

I think those functions are very cool and wish the 3k(and the Tyros/S900) had them.

Ian

Ian

I said about 2 intros or endings in sequence.
You can do it pressing intro 2 ,at the end you can press intro 3 .Then you will have a double intro with intro 2,intro 3 sequences.

About rittardando, with any style running, press 3 times any ending button to have a rit.
(suitable for any Yamie arranger)

Regards
Chico

My Roland has single button pushes for all of the features mentioned including the half measure features and the single touch transpose feature too..

Maybe these better options have to deal with cost of instruments..

Doesn't the "new" price of the PSR3000 reflect a higher price tag of the E-50..


And My lower priced tag G70 has many more features than the higher priced Tyros2...Go figure..

The G70 also keeps you in good physical shape..



Chico, you mean like my "roadie"..

[This message has been edited by Fran Carango (edited 10-18-2007).]

The dismal sales of the G70 also played a part in it's lower price according to my sources.

The G70 has different features than the Tyros2...not "many more"...both have their strengths and weaknesses...and their loyal followers.

Ultimately, it's what each does for the player, both aurally and in tactile feedback that will determine that person's choice.


Ian

Fortunately each one has a taste.
I prefer Yamahas
Mr. Fran prefer Rolands
I prefer to post a girl pic ...

G70:

Low impedance jack for mic , with separate vocal outs..

Microscopic edits for sequences and styles.

Make up tools for styles and sequences..

Half measure fills and ritardo features..

Real drawbar organ module..

Guitar mode..

Touch screen..

SMF to style converter..

Lyric edit capable for sequences..


These are just a few extras on the G70[without mentioning extended areas of the same features as the Harmonizer, fills [6]..etc]..


Tyros2.

Record to hard drive..

Text feature..

How many options constitute many?


Ian , you may not want to rely on your "sources" too much..

The reason sales were down on the G70, because of the marketing decision to use only the CK dealers..instead of the IM dealers.
.Also CK dealer products always have a higher list price, as the dealers have always made a better mark of profit..
Thus the drop from $4,995 list to $3,995..after the decision to market the G70 in IM stores..

The INITIAL MSRP and street price of the G70 was still about $500 less that a T2. It was ALWAYS higher priced that the G70...

Mind you when first announced, before shifting sales to the CK division and their overpriced Atelier and KR dealers, the G70 was going to be nearly a grand cheaper than those bloodsucking leaches made it...

Just be grateful, Ian, that Yamaha didn't follow suit, and only allow PSRs and Tyros2's in Yamaha dealers that mainly sold $40,000 Yamaha pianos, and make no requirement that they even be in stock!

There never WAS anything wrong with G70's, even from the start (got mine happily during OS1), and the upgrades have only made it better. But Roland's MARKETING... That gets an F minus. A child of ten could have figured out why they were languishing in the sales figures, but a big corporation? It couldn't POSSIBLY be their fault, could it, now?

Hi Fran,

Still up to your old tricks and still wanting to initiate another contest of how far urine can travel.

Sorry pal, but I have much more important things to do.

Why can't you just be happy with your little keyboard and spend some time playing it?

Ian

Ian, I only answered your "not many" response..No problem here..

Diki,

There probably wasn't anything "wrong" with the G70 other than it being what it is....

The G70 seems to be regarded as a home keyboard by some, especially the pros, and a pro keyboard only by Roland and a few users like yourself.

Yamaha went through similar issues with the PSR-9000 Pro...gee, if you have to put the name "pro" on it...

A keyboard with auto-accompaniment will always scream "home keyboard" to the pros, and even though Keyboard Magazine features arrangers, the stigma is still strong and alive.

It's tough marketing an instrument like the G70 because it has no on-board speakers(at least the Tyros had them as optional attachments)so it must be a pro piece, yet it has auto-accompaniment so it must be for the amateur or home user.

Quite a dilemma...no wonder it didn't sell well.

Ian

My topic is just about Psr3000 X E50 .I didn't write about G70 and other pros kbs made for Pro musicians.We was discussing about home kbds that eventually can be performed by pros, no more.

It's a LOT tougher selling a keyboard if you price it out of reach, AND don't have it anywhere for people to look at.

But your form factor argument ignores an important point... What was one of Roland's most popular arrangers ever? Yes, the G1000. No speakers, 76 notes, 38 lbs.

If these things were TRULY a detriment to arranger players, then IT wouldn't have been popular, either. But it was, and still remains one of Roland's best arrangers. Why was it SO much more successful than the G70? I honestly believe my pricing and availability issues are the REAL reason, not that, all of a sudden, all those G1000 fans decided that they really DID need speakers, and a lousy 61 note keyboard, and suddenly were incapable of lifting more than 25 lbs!

And your reference to 'pros' not wanting to use arrangers at all ignores the MANY, many working ARRANGER users out there. Are we not 'pros'? Do we not need keyboards built to WS quality? Pros come in all flavors. Sad to say, Yamaha arrangers DON'T.

Like I said, Ian, just be grateful that Yamaha have their MARKETING a lot more together than Roland. Or you would have to sit and listen to US tell you the reason PSRs are not selling well is because of the shoddy construction... while all the time knowing that if they were just MARKETED right....

Diki,

If you want to believe the G70 is a "pro" keyboard, that's okay buddy...you believe whatever the Roland marketers tell you.

But deep down, you know I'm right...the G70 is a home keyboard that Roland are trying to market as a pro instrument, and failing miserably.

The G1000 was no different, and once people caught on that it was regarded as a home keyboard, there was no way they were being fooled into buying another one...hence the slow sales for the G70.

The Tyros2 is successful because it doesn't pretend to be anything but a terrific home keyboard...even the name "Tyros" means "hobbyist"

The S900 is successful for the same reason.

Roland really shot themselves in the foot with their marketing jargon...all it did was confuse the buyer.

Ian

so, since we're here...

what is really a "pro" instrument?
in my native language "professional" mean more or less something to be used for making a living. something like a profession. occupation. making a living.

the issue is old, but we tend much too easy to call something pro or not accordingly to our own perspective; is it "pro" only if a studio guy use it? or a stage guy? what is it really? if i use a psr to record a simple piano line in a studio, togheter with other players from the band, does it become pro? on the other hand, the amount of controls, filters, sounds, LFOs, is to decide if something is or ist a "pro"?

this is more of a rhetorical question anyway. but really...

and getting back to the subject, what works best for you is better. if you make money out of it, i call you professional. if you have oasys at home and only play for fun...?

Yep...remember the Casio VL-1...better known as the VL Tone?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casio_VL-1

Calculator or pro instrument?

Neither the E-50 or 3k have calculator functions...too bad...you could add up your tips, or work out your monthly payments.

Ian

Making a living with an instrument doesn't make it "professional"; it makes YOU professional.

I think there is some crossover of meanings between PROFESSIONAL and COMMERCIAL. In that sense, "build quality" MUST factor into it. The equipment used by a PROFESSIONAL lawn service company is not the Sears or Wal-Mart special you'll find in your neighbors garage. You COULD make a living with it but you won't see many professionals using it because it's not "commercial grade". Will it (Sears/Wal-Mart) do as good a job cutting your lawn? Well, yeah, FOR AWHILE. But there must be a reason that "pro's" don't use them, just as there is a reason that most professional musicians don't (or won't) use arranger keyboards. Look at the Tonight show band, or Letterman's, or MTV, or 99% of every live music venue, and see if you can spot an arranger. Check all the music mags and see how many arrangers (if you can find one advertised) are endorced by professional artists. That should be a clue.

Ian is right, of course. And although you'll get the expected rebuttals from (what else) a group of hard-core arranger enthusiast who, of course, want to see their instrument of choice "be all that it can be", the proof is right in front of our eyes should we choose to embrace it.

Does the fact that they (arrangers) are clearly targeted at and marketed to, home users, in any way diminish them as legitimate musical instruments? Well, apparently so, at least in the eyes of professionals who have made it to the "next level".

So, does this mean that this "home user" instrument can't have "commercial" build quality? NO.

Does it mean that it can't employ the same (or greater) technology as it's "pro" brothers? NO.

Does it mean that it can't have the same level of complexity, flexibility, or even playability, as it's "pro" brethren? NO.

So then why can't it be considered "pro"? I don't know. Maybe it's like the difference between art and porn; it's hard to explain but you recognize it when you see it. JMO.

chas

Oh, and another thing. As Ian and others have pointed out many times, if it has auto-accompaniment and you can play it with one finger, then it's mission is clear; to make you sound a lot better than you really are. That sweet music that your audience hears is not really you playing, it's you triggering. If you tell yourself that you're using SMF's or MP3's so you can "free up your hands to play in full piano mode" then you're wasting an awful lot of money. Why lug around a 40lb keyboard to play mp3's when you could do the same with a 2 oz. mp3 player.

I know that some members have difficulty accepting the fact that an arranger, when used in it's primary role, may not be what is usually thought of as a "pure" musical instrument, in that it is similar to pieceing together a bunch of loops to form a song. None of the loops were performed by you, but by musicians of (usually) greater skill. True, there is some artistry in putting them together in a musically pleasing way, but ultimately, how good it is depends a lot on how good the original loops are.

Organs were originally developed to (cheaply) simulate an orchestra (ha), but you STILL had to PLAY the darn things. Perhaps someday arrangers will reach a level of complexity and difficulty that those who are able to master them will indeed share the same status level as organist'.

BTW, this argument will never reach a conclusion.

chas

Well, my pa800 has the words "professional arranger" right on the box. That's good enough for me.
If tools that make work easier negate their professional roots, then roofers would not use auto hammer guns, cars would all have manual transmissions, and Rachael Ray would not own a microwave.
Come on - let's get off the home vs. pro talks. Use it if it does the job for you. In the hnads of a pro, the tool becomes secondary. In the hands of an amatuer, the tool can make a huge difference in improving the sound. Either way - the listening audience is the winner.

If I never turned on the arranger section of my PA800, I would still use it on stage with any musical ensemble in any pro venue. It's that good.

So the Korg marketers got you too...but, if you want to believe the PA-800 is a "pro" keyboard, I wouldn't poke fun at you, even though it is quite obvious it is a home keyboard with "easy play" features and auto-accompaniment.

I like playing my S900 home keyboard at pro gigs as well...

Think of it, if you like, as a librarian with a G-string under the tweed.

I do, and it helps.

Ian

DITTO UD
A cheap arranger played by a "good" professional can sound as interesting as a "profi" kbd.
Chico

With all due respect, Dave, Why? Perhaps some of us are interested in hearing other people's point of view on the subject. It's like saying, "Ok, I have made the final pronouncement on this subject which we all know is gospel and therefore no other points of view need be entertained----so sit down and shut up".

I think these threads will (and should be allowed to) die a natural death, although we know from history that they will be resurrected in about 30 days. They'll probably even involve the same ol' combatants, but if it amuses them and remains civil, what's the harm. It's still a (semi) democracy here, right?

chas

even though i have some medical training, i wouldnt like to "artificialy maintain" a dying subject! still...

1. having auto accompaniment (even one finger triggered) feature does not necessarily means i am not able to really play an instrument - it just means that i have an "orchestra" playing along. as good an instrumentist i am, still i couldnt play drums, bass, guitar, flute, piano, accordion... and tambourine, all in the same time so, i have the auto-accomp.

2. using someone's else work in my music (styles) is not much different than what "professionals" do by using loops, phrases, midi sequences, etc. in their studio work...

3. at some degree, i believe it is more about marketing and appearences... i see no real reason why "big guys" wouldn t use g70 for instance, as a piano. good sound (not worse than xp80 for sure) and very good keybed. so, why not?

4. what korg put on their pa arrangers for instance, the "professional" label, i think is real. it is triton/rx. so, why an arranger couldnt be pro? and more or less the same can be said about any TOTL arrangers.

5. i also believe it has to do with the beginnings. casios with auto accomp for home musicians, but synths for studios. today, sound-wise or feature-wise this is sooo not true.

so, are you professionals guys?

To use a car analogy, if a my car has a cigarette lighter, does that mean I MUST be a smoker?

They put one finger chords onto TOTL arrangers for the convenience of the few that buy them for their status, when a MUCH less expensive arranger would do.

But who do they stick samplers on for? Or style creation software? Or full sequencers? Or the other hundreds of esoteric functions? SURELY not 'one-finger' players...? No, they put these on for the arranger's INTENDED user.

The reason you don't see arrangers much on major shows is that they already have full bands...! And the players that play such gigs NEVER (OK, mostly never, chas!) need automatic backing for pro gigs.

OTOH, pros are a LOT more uncaring about WHAT you play, and a lot more concerned with HOW (unlike most here!). I have been bringing arrangers to 'pro' gigs and some sessions for a long time, and NO-ONE has ever called me out for it. I guess, once I start PLAYING, and they start listening, there goes the issue. Now, maybe if I sucked, I might get the benefit of the doubt and they might go 'you need to get a more 'pro' keyboard', but I doubt it. They will probably think (quite rightly!) that it is ME sucking!

What is it that makes these keyboards you see on the TV 'pro'? Is it that they are bought primarily by 'professionals'. WRONG! The majority of WSs are bought by players no more professional than most arranger players. Is it that they have NO automatic accompaniment? WRONG! Most modern WSs have all kinds of loop players and arpeggiated 'grooves'. Is it that they are PLAYED by professionals? It MUST be, because I can't think of any other reason these keyboards are so designated.

There is only one other thing that all 'pro' keyboards have in common... They are built to take abuse from the road, and from the player. MOST pros play fairly muscularly (most having learned on pianos) and expect a fair degree of touch and response from what they play. But this does NOT rule out arrangers. PLENTY of arrangers built to these standards (and some that aren't).

So, in the end, it is the PLAYER that determines whether a keyboard is 'pro' or not.

So, Ian... you go home and play your 'home' keyboard. I am off to my gig to play my 'pro' arranger!

Cigarette lighter? Don't smoke, don't need it...

Diki, I love playing my home keyboard, that's for sure, and I wish you could learn to embrace the fact that you play one as well...but, I guess you just aren't ready.

All the best,

Ian

Ian... I 'get' it.

PSR good.... others BAD!
PSR good.... others BAD!
PSR good.... others BAD!
PSR good.... others BAD!
PSR good.... others BAD!

Happy now, Reverend...? Now, off back to the Rectory with you, and go press a One Finger Chord for me, will you? I am waving which finger to use

Diki, did you 'cut and paste' that? That's like auto-accompaniment, you cheater.



chas

Gee, Diki, all you got left is name calling and crude remarks?

Sorry bud, I'm not into that stuff...but your tactics are clearly more desperate and make it all the more clear that my remarks have struck a nerve.

Why not be proud that you can use a home keyboard in a pro situation? Many people on this forum do so, and seem quite content and not the least bit insecure about it.

I know you're an excitable guy and you need to sound as bright and informed as possible, but please try to do it more politely.

You seem to regard yourself as a "professional musician"...why not carry that a little further, and present your posts in like manner.

Ian



[This message has been edited by ianmcnll (edited 10-20-2007).]

One thing you don't get is Ian,ALL Korg arrangers have their PRO workstion sound board with EXACT same editing power unlike BOTH Yamaha and Roland(not to mention SAME full blown sequencer with same memory,sample editing feature on a arranger). PSR s900 is nowhere close to Motif XS (It doesn't use the same board)(may have SA sounds which are great).Roland G 70/E80 is nowhere close to latest Fantom series.KORG however uses TRITON/Triton Extreme board in PA800 (minus Combi mode and less EFX)but the sound engine and editing is the SAME.

That's why even PA50 beats all e50/60 even 70 ,PSR 3000,s900/T2 in overall INDIVIDUAL sounds wise.Yes PSR has better Ac guitars,Sax , Roland have better piano,but overall individual sounds wise KORG arrangers are the only arrangers to fit in a live band.Almost all sounds are Sweet!,Live! or Cool! or better in Yamaha's terms.


Especially in older days -
(Roland arrangers -GS + some good sounds ,Yamaha arrabgers- XG +some good sounds ,KORG -full blown workstation sound board)-So who's talking about Pro?


KORG I3- uses X3 board(first workstaion with GM,O1w was not GM) in 1993 (No roland did't use their Jv80 board for E86)nor their XP series board for g1000(same old SC88/pro and GS format with very little JV sounds),.Yamaha all MU80 XG board(Yes no Sy 85 or W or EX series here) to their arrangers with some longer samples like Sax and so on.

Korg i30 will blow psr 2000/9000 pro or G1000 anyday in a band situation.

PA80/50 will again blow G70/80 or PSR 3k or tyros 1/2 anyday.

So in band situation KORG arrangers still stay at the top since their use of current workstation board.

But in arranger world it's a different story.PSR 2000 has pads playing loops that PA80 can't.Smoother fills and simpler yet more effective 8 beats that PA 80 does'nt have.Not so great VH but more flexible than PA 80's primitive VH that costs extra)Better OS that PA 80 doesn't have.Though PA 80 has overall better sound,punchier drums,better sound engine it fails as an arranger in the market.That's why psr 2k /2100 ruled the market in the early 2000's in WESTERN arranger market(Like Roland did in early to mid 90's).

Their secret is simple - light,less than $1500 KB with 4 variations, good OS and navigation ,direct disk play,user style writing (basic song recorder but other features outweighted),not so great but usuable VH,video out,score display etc-so many users -meaning great 3 party support and that KB will live on.Remember 3k had no competition (no less than $1500 KB that offers USB to device and SM card slot feature for storage,VH and video out).The competition was using floppy drive (PA50) and no storage at all (Rolands EXRs) though they cost the same as better equipped (feature and OS wise ) psr 1500.They did have better sounds(PA50),more keys(EXR 7),but not so great OS and 2 variattion with no user style writing (EXR series -what were they thinking?).

Again most PSR's popularity is in US(also some UK)plus Asian market(that plays westtern songs in clubs -Eg. Philippines to Thiland) who uses simpler 4/4 beats.
But not in mid east or EU(Germany) market when they use more ethnic user styles (9/8 rhythms)and sample loading/editing.Korg,Ketron and some Rolands have good market there.(Yamaha could have gone into that market too).PSR A1000 series doen't compare to PA series there).


Starting from PA1x(also in 800) they put this pads that play loops,bigger display(PA80 dislay was primitive compared to 2k). (they still doen't have Yamaha's Drum sync feature to SMF which I think is great great feature that both Roland and Korg lacks)(I would personally choose these feature over G70's primitive guitar mode feaure and Korg's great feature but not so great acoustic guitar voices'guitar mode).


So you may play PSR s900 with the band (but it won't sound like a Motif XS),or E80 (will not sound like a latest Fantom).But when you play a PA1x or PA800 you do know that you are playing a Triton /Triton X treme with controls(yes including 2 assignable switches,mutiple outs etc).yes it loads Triton programs , where your T2 or E 80/G70 can't do (from their workstations).

Just try a PA1x ,play Program mode ,and play all the sounds and side by side compare with G70/e80/Psr s900/T2 and you'll understand what I mean .(in overall sounds).

Again ,Design wise (buttons sharing dual function)is not perfect ,but then again I'm reffering to overall sound.(sorry if I offend g70 or T2 fans)(I like their workstation sounds anyway).



[This message has been edited by jamman (edited 10-20-2007).]

-

[This message has been edited by jamman (edited 10-19-2007).]

Well, Jamman, one thing I do "get" is that the Korg's arrangers, like the Rolands and Yamahas, have easy play chording and auto accompaniment which firmly ensconces them in home keyboard land in spite of whatever sound engine they use.

The rest of your post is informative, but still doesn't change my view.

Ian

It's Ok to keep your view.I'm a Yamaha fan in OS , navigation and some sounds + ease of use wise in their arrangers.

But I would take PA2x PRO anyday over JV80/SY22(entry level synth with no auto accomp) even if some ignorant people insist that Jv80/SY22 is more PRO because there's no drum machine built in.

Noway.I know what I can do with a PRO arranger with true PRO sound board.

Peace to all arranger lovers.




[This message has been edited by jamman (edited 10-20-2007).]

Chas, Thanx for the respect - right back at cha ! No one here is qualified to "tell" the others what is pro and what is home. The manufacturers market a unit based on research that suggests a target demographic.....the consumer buys it as such, and uses it as he/she pleases. Ian's remarks are opinion only, and he is well entitled to them. I just feel that when someone speaks out so strongly as if their opinion was fact, then others need to supply point/counterpoint ... just to keep it honest and upright.
I believe that the home market is larger than the pro market, but I also believe that several manufacturers are making pro level keyboards with simple, easy play features as well. I own one.

Well I'm impressed you want to keep things honest and upright, Dave...shouldn't that be the norm?

The home market is what started this whole arranger thingy...and just because they write "professional" on the box doesn't suddenly launch the instrument out of home keyboard territory...it's called "marketing" and some people are inclined or gullible enough to believe it.

Personally, I don't, and when these "simple easy play" features are no longer offered on arrangers, they will be one step further away from being home keyboards....again, my own honest and upright opinion.

Counterpoints always welcome and encouraged.

Ian

My 2 Cents

Home or Pro Keyboards ?

To me it is how you make use of what they have to offer.

A "Pro" can take a $99 Casio Special , and make 10 times that in one night.
There by turning it into a pro KB !

How the KB is used , might be better than "home" or "pro" KB.

Just my opinion !

Gary

[This message has been edited by jedi (edited 10-20-2007).]

Gary,

Wouldn't you agree it is the musician who becomes the "pro" when an arranger keyboard is used for profit/livelihood...not the instrument?


Ian



[This message has been edited by ianmcnll (edited 10-20-2007).]

Hi Ian,

Yes , of course that is correct.

As much as the instrument makes the player , the player makes the instrumnet !!

Of course , it must work , the KB , that is !!

Gary

Thank you Gary, I had a feeling you'd see it my way.

So, have you decided on what kind of an arranger you'll be getting?

Or will it be a pro keyboard like a workstation?

Ian



[This message has been edited by ianmcnll (edited 10-20-2007).]

GENTELMEN, GENTEKMEN, GENTELMEN....Please, did we forget the title of this thread....
"Psr 3000, Roland E50 face to face"...with respect to all posters, I'm sure CHICO didn't mean for this thread to go south.....
pro verses home was no where in the title of this topic......at least every one seemed to be civil, congratulations, as UD said, let's get off the home verses pro...
every body make music, not important how or with what, the results are what COUNT, IMO
TR

Ian ,

No , I have not decided on what arranger KB I will buy.

Any real suggestions !

Later,
Gary

[This message has been edited by jedi (edited 10-20-2007).]

[This message has been edited by jedi (edited 10-20-2007).]

Gary,

The Roland E-80 is really nice...well made, great sound, excellent styles and although a bit expensive, I'm sure it's worth it.

Same goes for the Tyros2.

I can't recommend the PA-800, which seems to be the current heartthrob on SZ, until I've tried it...that may be sometime next week if my buddy brings one back from Toronto.

It must be frustrating not to be able to try out the instruments you have expressed interest in...buying without trying is a big gamble...especially when it involves big money.

Good luck with your choice.

Ian




[This message has been edited by ianmcnll (edited 10-21-2007).]

Hi Ian,

Thanks for the kind words as well as your thoughts on the S900.

I will always say that " Yamaha gives you the most bang for the buck with there PSR series" , but with Tim getting a 4th "bad one" it does seem like the US is plagued by more than just a few bad ones.

Larry mentioned this in Tim`s 3rd tread " more music stores should carry arrangers , most ...if you go in and ask about an arranger , it no we don`t carry them"

I called a few other places today , this time an organ studio and asked they were a Roland or Korg dealer and that I would like to try either a Pa800 or an E-80 , same deal , "we can sp. order a Pa800 , but don`t carry arrangers" , I asked why , "we just don`t have the room".
Ok like they are really that big !!

I do appreciate your help , can I get you to do something else . if you have a chance.
You see I have this keyboard table that I made out if my old Casio CT-701 keyboard stand from years ago and the wood top I made I don`t think would fit an E-80 , but I like it because I built a "notebook" drawer underneath and between the 2 chrome up-rights.

Anyway , is there anyway you could measure the distance of the rubber feet underneath the E-80 , both depth and width.
That would sure help , I would hate to trash that table/stand that I custom made.
Of course I could always put a new top on , but then it would be to high and I would have to design and make legs and well as lateral supports to hold the weight.

Well , thanks again and in advance for your help !

Take care,
Gary

[This message has been edited by jedi (edited 10-20-2007).]

Gary, the store that had the E-80 couldn't sell it so they sent it to another branch which is a 5 hour drive from my place.

Perhaps one of the members on SZ who owns one can help you out?

Ian

Hi Ian,

Thanks anyway , if I did decide on the E-80 I think I would have to either make a new top or modify it in some way , or just go with the stand that Roland makes just for the E-80.

Still have a lot of thinking to do

Take care ,
Gary

You ONLY need to press TWO buttons if you want the ENDING to be in another variation than the MAIN your playing at that moment.

Example: If I'm playing in MAIN 4 and I want to use the ENDING 4, I only have to press ONE button: "ENDING". Only if I want to use another ENDING, I have to tell the E-50 which one by pressing TWO buttons.

Same goes for intros that I want to play in the middle of the song: In MAIN 3, I just press INTRO to get INTRO 3 to play, after that MAIN 3 will take over again. ONE button, again.

I don't know where you got that idea, but according to Merriam Webster it's "beginner" or "novice" in English.

"Tyros" is also Mecynean Greek for "cheese". Guess it's a cheesy keyboard. :-D

No, it's not a cheesy keyboard, but it makes you feel like the "big cheese" when you play it.

Look that up in your Funk and Wagnalls.

Ian

I though it was Greek for "Plastic"

Maybe it is...but at least the Tyros2 is cool looking and sleek.

The PA in PA-800 means Plastic Abomination....butt ugly blue...eecchh!

Thankfully the sound seems to be passable, but I'll reserve my comments on that aspect until I play one.

Ian

And to hand in my two cents on the amateur/pro discussion: Is a pianist in a band more "pro" than the pianist who performs without a band but with the help of an arranger? I think the last one is at least smarter: he doesn't have to split the income in four or five

I consider a keyboard only to be "professional" if it's built to carry around a LOT. In and out suitcase, bumpy rides in cars, it has to withstand that. Where it comes to features, the top-ranges can all compete, no matter what the brand is.

Sound quality doesn't make the difference between "amateur" or "pro", IMHO. I mean, come on guys, even with the best PA system available, the sound is always "average" at best. Unless you play a concert hall, the conditions are hardly optimal.