Hi

I just stumbled over the description of what seems to be the ultimative keyboard.

This arranger has been patented at April 15 this year. Can't wait to see it!
http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/7358433/fulltext.html

Enjoy ;-)

Regards
Jørgen

------------------
The Unofficial YAMAHA Keyboard Resource Site

Hi Jorgen,

If this is a legit patent, I would LOVE to know who/or what company lodged it??

Dennis

Yamaha...(see Assignee listing in the right-hand column).

[This message has been edited by ocomain (edited 07-03-2008).]

Thanks, I saw that but didn't realise that was the company who lodged it...Cool.. Be interesting to see how this develops.

Band in a Box does pretty much the same.
There is also other software available that has similar features.
The patent looks like it refers to hardware, so it will be interesting to see how it compares to the software already out there
Regards

Bill

Web Patents.... USA people like just WEB patents all what they dream when they are sleeping and then maybe only 0.1% of this patents become a prototype or a real products.
Fortunally this all USA web patents in Europe and Asia are not covered and we can simple read the ideas and make a real products without pay any Fee.

Anyway..the features are really interesting IF they can then realize this hardware/software in short time...
For this all new features need for sure the power of one good PC CPU and amazing OS developers...forget under windows...is not possible at all.

i told before..you have to waiting the Tyros 5 Pro, 76 keys...for sure will make this all features...
For sure then Diki is the first one that will order and replace the G-70....)

[This message has been edited by LIONSTRACS (edited 07-04-2008).]

Now why on earth would anyone want to provoke DIKI????

I don't want to provoke DIKI at all!
DIKI is only the best specialist on arranger know how and for sure can find some wrong on this all new future arranger features.
Or for sure will ask: STYLES STYLES STYLES....
don't worry...on Tyros 5 Pro you will get the BEST styles available on the world!
Maybe in less than 10 years you can enjoy it..let we see...
cheers

Actually, if you read the patent, it states that you can take an ordinary style and then the patented algorithm will add variations to it to make a new type of style using any of the available tracks.

Isn't this similar to the Korg Karma technology? Only Yamaha is applying it to styles in an arranger.

So the big question is; is this being introduced in the Tyros 3?


------------------
Al Giordano
http://www.arrangerworld.com


Korg Pa2xpro, Roland VK8-M, DW Collectors Series Drums, Roland TD-12 Vdrums, Roland SPD-S.

This is the one feature I've wanted for years in an arranger, but never really expected to see. Something to make the styles seem less static.

I would hope it to work something like a Karma effect more so than like Band in A Box. What I mean by that is allowing real time ( live ) control, via sliders or knobs. I can control BIAB to a point by changing weights of a style part, but not while using it in real time.

For the first time in a long time something in the arranger realm that actually has piqued my interest.. A while back, I was considering a PA800, but I think after trying it out a bit, it isn't giving me that much sound wise that distinguishes it from my PA80. The 800 is an improvement, no doubt.. just not enough of an improvement for me. Think I'll wait this out a bit.. maybe let some others betatest the Tyros 3 while we're at it.

If this ever does get "off the ground", I hope Yamaha adds a better drum sample palette to the mix, or if not, at least a better sampling system. The T2's sampling function is an exercise in frustration at best, and pretty much worthless for making new drum sets.

At least that's been my experience with it, and after reading everything I can possibly find on the net, it seems like that's pretty much been the experience of others who have tried working with it, at least for new drum kits anyway.

Thanks Jorgen for the info...

Cheers,

AJ




[This message has been edited by Bluezplayer (edited 07-04-2008).]

Actually, this is what I've been talking about forever...

Forget audio loops. You are a) at the mercy of whoever makes the loops in the first place - and whether they can decently record ALL the chord and inversion/root combinations you might ever need, and b) at the mercy of the hardware and whether it's latency is matched to the latency of the hardware sounds in the arranger. And forget about editing them, changing the sounds, changing the rhythm, changing the swing, etc.. What you get is ALL you get.

Anything that takes the MIDI end of things, with it's inherent ability to edit, change sounds, change anything you feel like, and apply more natural performance behavior, including, as seems to be mentioned here, the ability to add a hopefully MUSICAL degree of randomness or change to the pattern can only drive along the progress of the arranger as a viable accompaniment tool.

More natural guitar emulation is already a thing we all take for granted, nowadays (or hope makes it to OUR arranger!), more natural performance emulation of other instrument's particular 'flavor' and more musical chord changes, less jumpy jumpy, more smooth voice leading, and now this, the possible hint of a self generated quasi-random variation to the parts, and we start to see the possibility of auto accompaniment sounding less repetitive and plain 'auto' than it currently does.

To a certain degree, this already exists in software... BIAB, even when given exactly the same chords, will generate a MIDI file with subtle variations in it every time you ask. Something that does this in realtime does not sound like something that is too difficult to achieve...

But then again, what possible use could this be to a poor beach musician? Jimmy Buffett's music is ALL done with tiny, short, repetitive four bar loops that never vary

Diki wrote: forget the audio loops..

Ahhh... now I have all understand how the arranger must be working..for that Roland and yamaha arranger not use the audio loops..

I think you can be the best R&D for arrangers..
maybe you can talk direct and convince the ketron guys that they are in a totally wrong way with the Audya or maybe with the korg and others that they use the audio loops too...

yes, you are totally right...better eating the same secure good warmed soup than explorer new field...

better that the developer of Melodyne NEVER read this topic...

I can't believe I keep hearing the same old warmed over bull from the guy that cannot get a decent demo out of his own company's arranger...

You would think, by this time, that SOMEONE, somewhere, would actually offer a little 'proof of concept' here. But noooo...

You see, Dom, that, while most at SZ seem to be petrified of posting any music, for whatever reason, NOT ONE of us is willing to BUY an arranger that we have never heard, or never heard sound good... We might be willing to listen to each other spout away without the slightest idea of whether they can actually play or not, but when it comes to parting with our well-earned cash, a little more 'show-me' is usually necessary...

But, perhaps this IS the hiphop age... you don't actually need ANY talent or skill, as long as you boast loud enough...

You know, I can sit here and brag that I am the best player this forum's members have ever heard (for example, it ain't true!), but I'm pretty sure that the minute I post any music that sucks, no-one will ever take me seriously again. This is what you are doing with this constant barrage of hype. When you fail to back it up with anything audio that even slightly reflects the hyperbole, how can we take it (or you) seriously?

The day you post something at your website that even begins to rival a T2, G70 or PA2X Pro, maybe we'll start to take you seriously... But c'mon! Virtually everything posted would be an embarrassment to any other manufacturer out there. Talk all you like (it's pretty amusing, really, in a sad, sad way), the only thing anybody is REALLY listening to are your web demos...

Hey, that's a thought...! Why not give us all a rest until you post something that you aren't apologizing for, all the time ('don't blame me, the loops weren't done by us', 'don't blame me, these are all conversion styles', 'don't blame me, it will work when the next OS comes out', blah, blah, blah )..?

How about it...?

Audio loops, random Midi sequences, real time variations, who cares how it’s done so long as it moves arrangers forward.

Bill

Diki..I pity you because I see there only a frustated poor man....and every time you reply and post you will be more ridicolous.
This are not my only words..just look aroud on the all other topic...we just support you because we know how you are....ridicolous....

Before you continue blame me and the others TRUE musician..make yourself one examination of your conscience. Show you first what you can really play...I have also listen your demos...better not talk about this...

you told that you are working in the studio with important musician..who they are??

I had also working on recording studio BUT I have the probe and not only words like you..www.mediarec.it are my partners and IF you looking well in internet, you can also find my OLD lionstracs Vinily disk that still are in resell.

mediastation is a new generation of keyboards and we have wrote the all software available till today in less than 4 years and NOT like the others that are recycle the same code from 30 years!

Qranger is born and integrated on MS just 1 month ago and not 30 years ago BUT this do NOT mean that the MS is not able to play the styles...ok...we can also importing styles from others brands like the all brands made the same and we have ready now 360 midi styles too.

for sure the MS will have the OS bugs, but just look around how many other keyboards are Full of bugs too ( just look the Fusion6HD topic) and we, like the all others brands we are here to fix.

I don't have to shown you really nothing IF the MS will sounds better than the all others keyboards because we already know ( 9 SZ member have the MS too but they dont want that I tell the names)that the VST and GIGA streaming support is better than the ROM soundbank.
Do NOT need a good an famous musician to probe with some amazing songs/patterns that the MS sounds much better than the others..just have to press the keys for playing GIGA and VST/ASIO sounds in realtime!

The another probe is that 2 well know brands asked us the license for use and integrating in others products the Linuxsampler..
Maybe they don't care at all about the styles that I offer right now BUT for sure they have listen the possibility and the quality that the Linuxsampler can offer.

technology continue grown but I see that you prefer to use the old stable technology like this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MQwj0EqOQJw

Now you can continue reply, blame me and reply..anyway you will be only ridicolous..

[This message has been edited by LIONSTRACS (edited 07-07-2008).]

I think he means riDIKIulous !!!

good one!

If every Inventor listened to all the
NAY SAYERS we wouldn't have anything today....
persevere your dreams regardless, & follow your dreams no matter what!!!

Hi

Could we discuss the SUBJECT of this thread?

Dom, you do not need to write about your "fantastic" arranger in so many threads at this forum. We have heard it SO many times now.

Diki, you do not need to bash Dom every time he writes about his "fantastic" arranger. We have heard it SO many times now.

I started this thread to discuss the subject. And I think it is bad behaviour to hijack a thread.

At least I am SO tired of your (apperantly) endless discussions! (Everybody talks, nobody walks).

Just my opinion!

Jørgen


------------------
The Unofficial YAMAHA Keyboard Resource Site

Bravo Jorgen
Down-to-earth and mature sense will always take first place....
cheers

------------------
Eddie from Rotherham
Skype:eddiefromrotherham
www.yamahakeyboards.info



[This message has been edited by eddiefromrotherham (edited 07-05-2008).]

That's all I want, myself.... THE WALK

We're all fed up of 'THE TALK'

The difference between what I post and what Dom posts is that I'm not telling everyone that 'I'm the future, all the rest of you are obsolete'. Were I to do so, I would deserve the raspberries I would so likely get! Most of what I've posted has been simple little live recordings of my acoustic duo. They are not studio quality performances, they are not edited, they are simple documents about what my duo, and my G70 sound like.

Unlike Dom's demos, which, for a major manufacturer, SHOULD be highly polished, studio productions to show his product off at it's best. It's what ALL his competition does, it is the game that is played. Except, he don't play it.
All he does is TALK. It's a novel marketing technique, but, at least for me, completely unpersuasive.

You want to know what really gets my goat, and why I tend to respond to Dom's comments (and HIS frequent hijacking tactics)?

Because he is the only arranger manufacturer and designer that posts here at all. Yamaha don't come here to smack down all their competition. Korg don't come here to ridicule Roland. Wersi do not post to flame Ketron. But Dom does... He CLAIMS that everything else is obsolete, compared to his product, yet mysteriously, that NEVER translates to any kind of demo that backs him up.

Maybe it's just me... But SOMEBODY needs to stand up and say what everybody is thinking...

"The Emperor has no clothes!"

Quit insulting your customers, Dom. We are not stupid. Until you can provide demos that sound better than your competition, why waste your time (and ours) with endless braggadocio? None of us are ever going to be able to go down to our local stores and play one. Perhaps this is what is confusing you? You get to play them all the time. Perhaps you KNOW that it can sound better than the demos.... But none of us do, or ever will, based on how hard they are to find to demo ourselves. So, you have to understand that the web demos are the ONLY source of unbiased review available.

Go and listen to them again... If this was the ONLY thing you knew about this arranger (forget your entire personal experience), what it sounds like in these demos, would YOU buy one? There's a reason few of us have an MS on this forum. And, whether you want to admit it or not, those demos are that reason, pure and simple. Tech specs don't mean bupkes.. What sells arrangers are demos. Demos that ROCK! Demos that blow us away. Demos that make us go "I GOT TO HAVE ONE OF THESE!"

WALK THE WALK....

Hi ,
like AJ ,I think it certainly sounds interesting, but I tend to think also, you'd have to have some sort of control over it or you could end up with inappropriate phrases popping up during your song.

With BIAB recording , you just hit the play button again, & it comes up with a slightly different version, or a style can be modified to make it more suitable, or you can edit the song,
but in realtime arranger playing, you wouldn't a phrase that doesn't suit, pop up out of the blue.
Be interesting to see how they implement it.

Yamaha could possibly do with a bit more variety in their style tracks. The 16 tracks they use must be a bit limiting, compared to some of the other brands.

Thanks Jorgen for an interesting article.
best wishes
Rikki



[This message has been edited by rikkisbears (edited 07-05-2008).]

Rikki

Well I have now read the description several times; and tried to draw some boxes and lines to illustrate the function. It sure is hard ;-) and I am not sure I have caught all the details yet.

I get the same initial understanding as you; but I wish there were some kind of diagram. This would be easier - at least for me - to understand.

It would really be interesting if some kind of intelligent variation/modifications were possible. Maybe some ideas from algoritmic composing are included.

However the variation must be realistic compared to the style type; e.g different variation pattern/posibilities in swing and in 2beat.

The MIDI data (which are the main content of styles) are static; always the same pattern. This means that the variation must be in the hardware Operating System.

Today the MIDI data are - in a small scale - changed by the collaboration between the style CASM data and the operating system.
- The chord pattern in the MIDI file is transformed to the chord you play.
- You can have different patterns depending on the chord type played.
- Handling of chord changes etc.

That's all. The basic MIDI pattern IS the same. But this might change now.

From a style programmers and a style software programmers view this will be a new challenge. How is this implemented?

If the MIDI format still is the basics of a style; you can communicate from the style file to the hardware through SysEx commands in the style file.

And you can communicate to each model seperately; e.g. a SysEx message to Tyros 2 telling a Tyros 2 how to variate this specific style; and another SysEx message to S-900 telling a S-900 2 how to variate this specific style; etc.

Wish I had some Yamaha specifications; but... keep dreaming.

Well, I have to think and read this more.

Jørgen


------------------
The Unofficial YAMAHA Keyboard Resource Site

Megavoices are professionally played Midi loops which get additional variations when notes outside their range are played, but not heard by the user.
I would guess that something similar will occur with the arranger style system mentioned in the patent.
To achieve this it would not need any specialised hardware, as it could all be done in software, and while it could not be added to existing hardware boards due to the current limited amount of Flash Rom that is onboard, this will change in the future as Flash Rom gets larger and cheaper.
Patents are designed for lawyers and designers, so don’t expect it to give any description for the person in the street to be able to understand it. (At least not until it is pre-production)
Regards

Bill

Hi Jorgen,
to be quite honest, I've only had a brief look. I was going more off the comments that a couple of members made as to what it was all about. ( I am familiar with BIAB, though)

Is it possible that they're just changing the style structure to more closely resemble how some of the other keyboards handle styles??
ie Ketron & ( I think Roland) have up to 3 sets of style tracks, 1 for maj, 1 for min, 1 for 7ths, to add variety. Korg uses up to 6 sets of tracks .

If they end up creating a really complicated system, may also become too complex for users to create styles which would be a pity.

The days of being able to convert current styles seem to be dissapearing.
EMC currently can't read korg PA800/PA2x styles (guessing, but Guitar Mode function may have had something to do with it).
Ketron Audya's audio loops will possibly be another big challenge for EMC.
If Yamaha ends up changing it's style structure, earlier Yamaha models may no longer be able to read styles from brand new models.
That has always been one of the great features with Yamaha, nearly any Yammie keyboard could read any Yammie style with a bit of editing, via programs like your own.

Anyway, be fascinated to hear what you manage to work out. Some of the technical jargon is way over my head. haahaa

best wishes
rikki

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Jørgen Sørensen:
[B]Rikki

Hi Rikki
The changes in style formats that you mention is not new to Wersi owners, as when OAS 5 was introduced none of the styles could be played correctly on earlier versions. (Also earlier styles had to be converted (Facilities that were included within OAS 5) to play correctly on OAS 5)
When the OAA was introduced this also had a completely new format that cannot even be recognised by standard OAS instruments. (Not even OAS 7)
As to the Major Minor chord sets you mention, from how I understand it reading the manuals, the OAA has 16 sets for each part of the style (Currently up to 18) i.e. each fill, break, variation etc (Part) can have their own setup, and can be edited using the style edit functions onboard, (It also gives greater control when converting Midi files to styles)
Still, so long as arranger technology moves forward it can only be a good thing.
Regarding converting the latest PA800 styles then this also applies to Wersi which also cannot convert them; however we are promised that it will be implemented in the not too distant future. (The Wersi style converter, like the Korg style converter is based on EMC Styleworks, and so the conversions should also become generally available)
The future looks bright

Bill

Hi

The implementation of the described features must require a change in the style format. Something must trigger the right changes in accompaniment.

In an earlier of my posts I suggested that sending a SysEx event could trigger the hardware operating system to create variations according to music/style type.

This triggering could also be achieved by changes in the CASM format - or by introducing a new chunk (section) in the style file. Anyway the features require some changes somewhere.

A major problem for style creators and for style software programmers (like myself) will be how we can utilize these features.

Until now Yamaha have never revealed the internal formats and functions of the operating systems. This has done it very hard to write software, as all formats and functions have had to be revealed be reverse-engineering. Which means a lot of try and error. And no guarantee for finding all features; and for the correctness of your findings.

Maybe this is an attempt to make it imposible for anybody else - than Yamaha - to create styles. Who knows? And what about backwards compatibility?

Jørgen

------------------
The Unofficial YAMAHA Keyboard Resource Site

Does anybody else think that this new "arranger" keyboard may in fact be an arranger "module" instead?

This invention is by a couple of Japanese dudes who have the backing of the largest piano and keyboard manufacturer in the world i.e. Yammie! So R&D should not be a problem in my opinion and which also leads me to believe that we may see this beast to the marketplace in a couple years or less.

Think about it?? If Yamaha is unwilling to bring a 76 key totl arranger to market their next best option would be to bring this all encompassing arranger technology to the masses in the form of a Rackmount or Tabletop arranger 'module'?!?!?

Food for thought anyway.

I would be the first in line to buy it so they will at least recoup some of their R&D back. I'm sure others will follow suit as well. In other words, it would no doubt be a hot seller from day one and Yamaha would again make beaucoup $$$$ on another arranger product, albeit, this time an arranger "module" product.

Best,
Mike

[This message has been edited by keybplayer (edited 07-06-2008).]

Or they may just incorporate it in the 61 note Tyros 4 or whatever replaces the forthcoming Tyros 3

This is the more likely scenario.

Ian

If Yamaha were to do that they would be able to recoup the R and D cost two times.

By putting it in a module, they would get sales from the initial hype of the new technology.

And for those who would not want to buy a module but like the 61 key keyboard, they would get it when Yamaha puts it in to the T4.

hi Mike,
I wouldn't be far behind you.
Would luv an arranger module.

best wishes
Rikki

Hi Bill,
I upgraded my EMC Styleworks to XT, last Decemember. The BLURB says that it reads PA800 styles. I think it may have been able to read the original 1.01 format?? but it can't read the upgraded 1.51os styles.(That's when Guitar Mode was introduced.) EMC haven't managed it yet, & korg's talking about another fairly large upgrade in the not too distant future. May well be back to the drawing board for EMC.

The manufacturers appear to be making it more & more difficult for styles to be converted.

Would I give up Guitar Mode for the sake of EMC being able to read my PA800 styles , definately not, but I possibly may not have bothered upgrading if I'd realized it couldn't. Styleworks 2000 converts TO PA1x format , and that's all XT converts to, also.

best wishes
Rikki

If I understood well, they filed the patent in 2004, the patent was granted in 2008. This "automatic derivative accompaniment" thing is going on for some time now.

They also filed what seems to be the same patent way back in 2001, and they re-filed it in 2004.

Click on the "inventors" names, one of tham has patents dating from 1984

Hi Jorgen,
that's interesting.
The fact that there is so much software around written by 3rd party programmers,
one automatically assumes Yamaha must have released some info that helped you guys.

Interesting to find out it's the opposite, & you had to do it thru trial & error.

best wishes
Rikki

It seems to me that audio tracks, that are manipulated by midi is a way to over come how styles are created , you can have humans creating the parts , which in turn increase how authentic the instrumentation sounds within the style...

Midi is a robot (strictly numbers)...programmers that create styles via midi, need help manufacturer to have their midi generated styles used ....

Correct ?

The ultimative keyboard...A 76.keyboard not more than 3cm uotside the keys...see the Audia The weight...it does`nt bother me.. it is more of a problem when they are to big. And on the ult. keyb.there will be a smaller klav. 49 keys for a second sound
comb. The sounds..mostley Tyros-sound 3+3 on the right and 2 sounds on the left. Masterkeyboard-funktions like the Motif.
Arranger..PA2X Pro. Display like the Tyros
No motor on it..Silly.Why not the arpeggiator from the Motif XS to combinate
with the stylearranger. Click-button like the Tyros.This arrangerkeyboard together
with a..say Clavia organ-rack or Hammond rack would be the ultimate keyb. for me.
But I dont think Yamaha will make this
keyb. But I can dream.

Sorry for the spelling, from Sweden