Have you ever wondered why Roland released the MP3 player in a new operating system ..only for the E-80 and not the G70?

Think about it..There is no hardware advantage the E-80 has that it could not have been included ...also the G70..

Want to know my thoughts?

Who cares if you don't.. Here they are..

There is and has been on the work table a new Roland top of the line arranger work station...(GX90)??

Not only does it have an MP3 player, but 8 track recording...(secret specs)...

Roland would be shooting themselves in the foot if they released the MP3 option in a new OS..for the G70...Most of us would just keep the updated G70 rather than buy a new Roland G series...

Along the same line of thought..there will not be a new top model E series this time around....possibly a model that would fall under the E80 with some of the goodies ..vocal in put and harmonizer...

Fear not ..The new G series is on it's way...Than I hope that Roland releases the MP3 upgrade for the G70..

Sure I will buy the new model, but I want to keep the G70 too..hopefully with the MP3 modification...

I'm waiting patiently....I hope the T3 & Gx90? come out together at years end so we can compare and weigh our needs.....If it looks like & built like the new Fanthom with that big color theyre off to a good start....
http://www.rolandus.com/products/productdetails.aspx?ObjectId=919&ParentId=83

I reckon you guys will be waiting a lot longer than the end of the year for a new 76 note arranger from Roland. And almost certainly nothing when the T3 is released which according to some sources is in September.

Dennis

Fran, it's well known that there ARE considerable hardware differences between a G70 and an E80.

There are quite a few features from the E80 that Roland explained (a long time ago) could NEVER make it to the G70 because of the hardware. The lyrics viewer in style mode, the .bmp viewer, amongst others. Remember there are TWO Mastering Tools sections in an E80 (one for the Keyboard Parts, one for the Style/Song Parts), two extra MFX sections and a different output structure.

The E80 is anything but a repackaged G70...

And where are the differences for the audio path...I say none..

I think it is as simple as making use of the insert effect path..

Well, who knows, Fran?

I certainly take Roland at their word when they say there ARE considerable hardware differences. Plus, I don't think the mp3 player has anything to do with the IFX section. AFAIK, when you use the mp3 player on the E80, it doesn't disable any of the effects blocks, so I don't think that is the mechanism used.

But finally, to be honest, adding an mp3 player to the G70 is the LAST thing that Roland should do to it! There are still a few OS niggles that need changing a LOT more than adding yet another marginally useful NEW feature.

And BRING BACK THE CHORD SEQUENCER...! The hell with MP3's!

I have never owned either of these boards , nor have I ever seen either , so this may sound like a dumb response.

But ,

Is there a reason you can`t hook up an MP3 player to the audio inputs ?

Or would that not work ?

Sorry , but I had to ask , thanks.

Gary 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by jedi:
[b]I have never owned either of these boards , nor have I ever seen either , so this may sound like a dumb response.

But ,

Is there a reason you can`t hook up an MP3 player to the audio inputs ?

Gary, that works fine with it's own volume control too..



[This message has been edited by Fran Carango (edited 07-12-2008).]

Sure you can, with separate controls, but it would be strictly outboard; no integration with the board at all. In other words, you couldn't tie it to a user program.

I don't want to start a flap here, but does anything say 'amateur hour' more than someone playing (or faking) along to an mp3 recording? I realize that an on-board mp3 player may have a few more bells and whistles and possibly some navigational advantages over a standalone player, but aside from 'break' music, what's the point? Why not just put a buck in the jukebox and play along with that. Sorry, I just can't see it, especially with a band. I thought the whole purpose of a BAND was to provide LIVE music. Maybe some of you 'PRO's' can 'splain' it to me.

chas

Thanks for the clarification guy`s !!

So what you need with a built in MP3 player is total integration and file control within the keyboard.

Got it !!


Thanks ,

Gary 

This was known in January this year Fran, when Roland were still considering a replacement.. But according to Roland Australia through their rep, nothing this year.

The GW-8, and maybe some further upgrades to the E-80 at Winter NAMM, but thats about it.

But if Roland go to historical form, when they go into these really quiet stages of development they usually end it with a machine that absolutley blows everything away.

So I reckon in about 12-18 months we will see something pretty stunning, along the lines of the Audya.

I think they pulled the pin because they found some of the issues that are still dogging Ketron. But of course, this is only speculation on my part, but it does make sense...... to me

Dennis

C'mon, chas..! Give us all a break, here!

'Amateur hour', indeed First of all, this is the "general' arranger forum, NOT the 'pro' forum, so there are LOTS of 'amateurs' here in the first place. Secondly, this is an arranger forum, so let's face it, the primary thrust of this place is for players who DO use some kind of artificial backing. It certainly isn't a 'pro' KEYBOARD player hangout (you know, the ones who play with bands, exclusively - there are plenty other forums where you can go and poke fun at players that use machines and be in like minded company!)...

Now, you know my feelings about mp3's, but they primarily apply to the worry that, after making them from SMF's or live players, whatever, if you upgrade your keyboard, the backing still stays the same, so not much change to your sound. And they lose the flexibility of being able to mute parts if a player sits in, artifacts in the sound if you transpose them or change their tempo's, etc., or just generally mucking with them while you play.

But the mp3 is, in effect, no different to an SMF backing. How much, or how little is in them is entirely up to the player (if he makes them himself). Bass and drums and that's it could be all they contain.

Now, I know you don't play arrangers out at all, but probably most here, if they gig at all, probably gig with the arranger (makes sense, given the forum title!), some use just the arranger section, some just SMF's, but most probably a combination. And mp3's, for all their problems, can be used pretty exchangeably with SMFs for backing.

I know you only play out with full bands, but in today's economical climate, most of us don't have the luxury of saying that, if the band can't find a booking for tonight, we'll just sit at home and collect Social Security We go out and do solo work, duo work, whatever we can find. And this entails some backing, if the venue wants more than a cocktail pianist. Arranger, SMF's, mp3's, it really doesn't matter which, once you decide to go down the autobahn.

So give a little slack to a keyboard that includes all three methods of backing a player... not all of us are retired and can pick and chose our gigs and band personnel with no financial considerations!

Sure most of us are amateurs and play arrangers. But it's a bit weird when guys who claim to be a PRO need an MP3 or SMF player onboard ?!
I'm with Chas, he's right.

Deleted this post as it was not really in keeping with the OP.

Dennis

[This message has been edited by miden (edited 07-12-2008).]

Look, there's a lot of bull being bandied around here...

Let us not forget that SMFs are merely long form arranger loops (or the other way around ), and mp3's are merely an audio form of that... Plenty of people salivating over the possible addition of these so-called audio loops to their arrangers.

Let us also not forget that most pros, and maybe a few amateurs here can actually play with TWO hands, not sit there with their left hand tied up making simple chords for the arranger to do all the work. If you think you are actually PLAYING a keyboard to your best ability by holding down a chord and playing a melody in the RH, boy, have I got news for you! You are doing no more, and probably a lot less actual PLAYING than someone using both hands to their fullest over an SMF rhythm section.

And, once again, I repeat... just because YOU might have only tried playing over full, commercially made SMF's doesn't mean you HAVE to. An SMF can be as little as a drum part, or maybe bass and drums for a song. The rest, if you have the skill, can be done entirely by playing. Don't blame the tool for how SOME use it...

The way I see it, you use ANY auto accompaniment at all, whether arranger, SMF or MP3, it's all exactly the same. How much, or little of it is you, and how much is the backing depends entirely on your skill, and desire to play. Don't forget, you can make SMF's out of arranger output, and then fine tune them to a degree that simple arranger only play cannot approach, and then actually PLAY fully two handed over them, while still being able to use Markers in the SMF to re-order the song structure.

Welcome to the 21st century, kla4, take a look around and realize that things have changed. And how some things have stayed the same. 'Pros' have ALWAYS used whatever technology exists to make their shows the best they can. Amateurs can afford to pigeon-hole themselves into one technique for it's own sake, whether it suits the song or not. It's not like they HAVE to do it the best it can or they lose their gig!

Diki, you know I agree with you 90% of the time (maybe even 95% ), and much of what you say is true, however, I still hold that I don't see the point of using pre-programmed backing (in whatever form) for a bar/club/lounge-type gig. There is a difference between what we generally think of as a 'gig' and a 'show'. A show is a PRODUCTION where the 'band' is not the primary focus. If the band WERE the focus of the 'show', then they'd be playing live. I really don't have a problem (and who would care if I did) with using an arranger in a OMB situation (although if I were a paying customer I'd personally rather hear solo piano), but in a BAND, as in three or more, I just can't see it. My own feeling is that I don't think arranger keyboards were ever intended as a professional performance instrument, anymore than the auto-accompaniment organs that preceded them. Sure, the technology is there, the sounds are there, the price is certainly there. But there is no way you're going to convince me that a keyboard with little instrument and drum icons painted under the keys is an instrument designed for professional players in professional venues.

As far as Herbie Hancock using backing tracks, I've been watching Herbie since he played with Miles (at least 25 times in person) and I've never seen him using any backing tracks.

As far as being retired and financially able to pick and choose gigs, isn't that one of most common goals of most musicians?

Look, I don't want to pick a fight and I probably shouldn't have shown such disdain at the concept of calling the playing of mp3's a gig. I guess I'm just 'ol' skool' where playing a gig meant 'playing' a gig. Hey, different strokes for different folks, right.

Hey, I still enjoy my arrangers (the Tyros2, not so much) but hardly play them anymore as I'm still trying to get my chops back on organ (you know the joy of rediscovery, after a long hiatus). Plus, when I hear that 'B3' voice (even if it's coming from a Nord C1), it still makes my sphincter tighten up the way no synth ever has. Have a good one.

chas

Ditto.

What does any of this Purism BS have to do with the G series as in the topic title?

Absolutely NOTHING!! And I apologise for getting caught up in the hijack of the thread.

We should all, either make a comment directly related to the OP or keep quiet, or create another thread.

Dennis

Well, it sure is handy to have all the ammunition in ONE keyboard (everyone knows what I have). Tonight, I got paid WELL for a 5 hour private party - that's a ton of songs. They allowed a mix of live and mp3. The dual sequencer was truly FANTASTIC. Oh, I did have to carry in my pen drive

I'll probably not play mp3s for quite a while again, so it's kind of nice to have the cake and eat it too.

Call me a non-pro? Who cares.

[This message has been edited by zuki (edited 07-12-2008).]

Well, thanks for the vote of confidence, chas but I think you are getting a bit ahead of us here. I don't see the reference anywhere to using the mp3's, or even sequences, in a full band situation. Yes, I see them used in shows, as you rightly point out, but a regular club gig with a real rhythm section? Much rarer... About the only place I see this now, much, is bands that don't have a keyboard player at all..!

OTOH, there are outfits that are primarily singers, with maybe a couple to back them up, or just a solo. To be honest, I see this situation as much more of an extension of the OMB... an OMB with multiple singers, if you will. For this kind of act, economics dictate a reduction in the rhythm section unless you can find the rare gig that supports a six piece or more on a regular basis. Those are getting harder and harder to find these days.

But you are right... amateur hour indeed, using tracks in a full club band, IMO, too...

You might have noticed that Fran's original post was something of a paean to getting an mp3 player in the G70, Donny. This is the usual path to this particular debate, with extremist on both sides getting all worked up about a more complex issue than anyone cares to bother to think through.

But, in the end, it's nothing much to do with the technology... it's much more important how much (or little) you use it as a crutch that matters, IMO. Sure, there's a place in the world for acts that are little more than pro karaoke (ask Ashley if you don't believe me chas!), but to describe them as 'keyboard PLAYERS' is often a stretch, if playing the keyboard is actually a large part of the definition

Sorry, but one last thought here...

Go to any guitar players' forum, and ask them what they think about using tracks for the guitar part, and just faking (or playing minimally) over the top of them...

At least there's ONE group of players that haven't got lost and confused about the difference!

[This message has been edited by Diki (edited 07-12-2008).]

I really couldn't care how anyone makes music as long as its good ....lets face it you aint changing the world of technology....its out there people are using it in any way they can in so many different way & guess what?.... its going to get even more used, tewisted, faked & abused in the future as more gear is introduced......embrace it, accept it, use it, get over it & make some music.....the Music Train continues to roll forward big time baby....hop on-board or you'll be standing at the station waving Bye Bye! BTW Fran's Band will be fine....tonight they'll blow the roof off Da Club as usual, people dancing, drinking & having a great time down the shore!!!....
life goes on & so will the music....



[This message has been edited by Dnj (edited 07-13-2008).]

Donny, let me start by saying that I really DO respect what you do......not many of us here have the ability, talent, or personality to do it, and by all accounts, you do it very well (keeping a room full of older, musically unsophisticated, well-lubed, party-goers entertained). There is a market for that type of entertainer and entertainment and someone needs to fill it. The best of them will make a good living at it. I sure you fit into that latter category. But.....let's never confuse this (or the technology that supports it) with MUSIC.

Let's face it. This board is not about music, it's mostly about technology and how we can use it to further estrange ourselves from our musical roots, from the thrills of musical discovery and the hard-earned skill set that led us to pursue this as a profession. Phil Graham was right; we HAVE become a nation of whiners; golly gee, a 'pro' keyboard with no mp3 player, no synced lyrics , what on earth is the world coming to? How are we going to make 'music'. We have already progressed from three finger chord recognition through two finger to one finger. Well, it had to happen, the NO finger chord (aka the mp3).

The reason there are so many disagreements on this board is that usually the parties aren't talking about the same thing. Singing over an mp3 or SMF in a club has little to do with music, other than the skill of accurately matching the tune to the general level of sobriety in the club.

None of us is actually wrong. We're just talking about different things. Or at least, from a different perspective. The needs of the musician are different from the needs of the club entertainer/DJ. There are two extremes on this board and they will probably never come together on anything such as 'wish-lists', etc. There's the pure musician on one end (Capt. Russ) and the pure entertainer on the other (Donny). Everyone else is positioned somewhere right or left of center, that's why someone like Diki craves a chord sequencer but could care less about an mp3 player. One is more useful to the musician the other more useful to the entertainer.

Hey, it's all good. If keeping people on the dancefloor is your thing or getting paid well (Zuki) is your criteria for musical fulfillment, then go for it. Polite applause and the sense that your audience is actually LISTENING to what you are playing, does it for me. Like I always say, 'different strokes.......'.

chas

Well Chas...I think you have covered it all with your last post....especially with this statement ....

"None of us is actually wrong. We're just talking about different things. Or at least, from a different perspective."

Now that clears it all up....but I think its the underlying "LOOK DOWN" upon each others chosen craft when reading a post that really starts the agitation.......lets just respect each others chosen Musical Talents & Choices and enjoy the conversation shall we?.......

PS: gotta run, I have about 400 of the older, musically unsophisticated, well-lubed, party-goers waiting for me at a big outdoor Pavillion BBQ celebration this afternoon.........

l8tr

I guess I can just play my accordion tonight...but I really don't want to...

And I bet my audience hopes I play with all my tools tonight...

If the 4 Jays drop in tonight..I am sure Junior will appreciate me backing them on accordion..although it will be "pure"..

By the way..tonight I am playing on the "borrowed" G1000...and a laptop..

Chas,
Methinks you have spoken too much on this sub-subject; most of it pure crap.

I see arranger development as simply integrating items that were once separate necessities for many players who are minus a drummer, bassist, guitarist, etc. Lyric sync-ing is just using modern technology to do away with books and charts, what's wrong with that. 1 finger, 3 finger, 7 finger chords, who cares - at least you know something about chords, maybe even something about harmony and rhythm. This forum is for people who PLAY arrangers, if you're going to knock the use of the new developments maybe you should expect some criticism.

I, for one, use SMFs much more than styles, why, because it works for me. 'nuff said.

BTW - Fran I hope there IS a Gx90 coming in the near future. I also hope it's about 5 lbs. lighter than the G70

What do you think Junior will be happier to see... A guy with karaoke tracks for him to sing over, or a professional rhythm section with taste and chops and ears?

Here's the deal, Donny... you are only one step of technology from feeling the same way that perhaps chas and I do. You see, at the moment, it is possible to basically replace, or at least marginalize the accompaniment for your singing. The audience has finally got to the point that they don't care whether it's being played or not. But your vocals are still important to them, your showmanship, whatever...

But imagine a world where they don't even care if you are singing, where anyone with 'the moves' can stand in front of them, lip synch to a CD, and they are just as oblivious to it as they are to whether you are actually playing anything or not...

Not such a pretty prospect, is it? When the skill level to provide this drops to the point where ANYONE can do it to the audience's satisfaction, the pool of potential competitors for your jobs increases exponentially. In fact, just as MTV has shown us over the last 30 years or so, as soon as you start to LOOK at musical acts, rather than just listen to them, the pretty ones and the ones with more image than substance pretty much drive out the talented... Of course, being the Adonis you are, this won't worry you, Donny, but none of us are getting any younger!

But, essentially, you are one step away from the technological scrap heap like the straight ahead musicians here that you dismiss as irrelevant. One piece of technology, one change more in the public's willingness to accept artifice over reality, and you'll be sitting here like the rest of us, wondering what happened, why are they willing to accept this, and who is to blame...

There wasn't a hint of fecal matter here until THAT sentence, cassp. But at least it serves to demonstrate your attitude and vocabulary.... My condolences.



This forum is rapidly turning into one for people that press 'Play', not actually PLAY the arranger, as big a difference as perhaps between those that play keyboards, and those that hold down a one finger chord, and play a simple melody over it, and claim they know how to 'play music'.

It's not whether it's one finger, two finger, seven finger, whatever, it whether the bloody chords are RIGHT with whatever method you chose, or whether the melody is correct or whether you can play a solo over the changes that isn't embarrassing to listen to. Which, from listening to innumerable user demos over the last couple of years, I would say is darn few...

The thing is, an arranger makes it possible to play something that sounds pretty decent (if you have no idea in the first place) out of something that, if played on a keyboard that didn't actually do everything for you, would sound like the worst thing you ever heard. But whether you allow this to convince yourself that YOU are actually playing it all, or stay honest and try to recognize that you are merely the conduit for the ARRANGER to actually play it will be a sign of your integrity and musical honesty.

Simple question.... are you playing the arranger, or is it playing you?

If you are going to PROMOTE the use of new developments and technologies, perhaps you should expect some criticism, also...
-----------------------------------------------

OTOH... lyrics viewers, sheet music displays? Best thing since sliced bread! You don't HAVE to use them (as you don't HAVE to use almost any auto stuff in an arranger, depending on skill level), but they are sure handy when you do... After all, no-one criticizes the NY Philharmonic for using charts, or the Duke Ellington Orchestra, despite those being players that could easily memorize their charts

Ah.... technology Some of it enhances the player, and some of it diminishes him or her. Which part you chose to embrace says a lot about your musicianship...

"What do you think Junior will be happier to see... A guy with karaoke tracks for him to sing over, or a professional rhythm section with taste and chops and ears? "

Diki..I guess you do not have experience with these drop in celeb acts...

They all prefer and rely on their own backing tracks..usually a CD..In fact they carry the Cd's with them..some even use remote players to play the CD's..

The key is "drop in"..not a scheduled performance...and yes we do back acts the latter way too..

A solo artist[singer] is more likely and willing to sing with me backing her/him by myself...usually just piano and left hand bass..with drums...

Well, E X C U S E me, Mr. all- knowing Diki.

BTW, it looks as though the features you like are OK, but not the others...

Well, sounds like the Gods have spoken. At least we know the location of the only opinion that matters. So yassuh, mista Cassp, suh. I guess I just go sit down and shut up now. Guess I forgot my place.

chas

Let me clarify, Chas. You and Diki went off on this topic and it just seemed to me to be a lot of words and not much substance. When you and Diki get started, it's hard for me to keep track of who's the pope . I usually don't get nasty and I apologize for getting nasty with you. It's just that I wasn't in the mood for all this pontificating when all Fran asked was if we thought an mp3 feature would be forthcoming in a new Roland G machine. I really could care less for most opinions regarding OMBs, including mine. So let's call a truce and go home happy. Same apololgy applies to Diki - I'm sorry for calling you names

Hey, don't apologize to Diki. He'll take that as a sign of weakness......and then you're dead .

Seriously, no need for a truce as I was never at war. With the possible exception of Rikki, all of us here have posted something at one time or another that has rankled SOMEbody; Diki and I just do it more frequently than others. We also have to face up to fact that sometimes the truth makes us a little uncomfortable. Funny thing is, if I read back all your posts over the last 6 months or so, I would walk away with the clear impression that the XK1 is your favorite keyboard; maybe not the most used or the most practical, but definitely the most enjoyable. IF that's true, then you should be somewhat sympathetic to my point of view (not necessarily the RIGHT point of view, just MY point of view).

Look, these types of 'discussions' always occur when we start to blur the lines between making good music and making good entertainment; between making good money and fulfilling one's soul. Those who are able to combine the two lead rich and rewarding lives; those who can't become either the poor, homeless, tortured souls represented by so many ultra-talented jazz musicians, or............Ashley Simpson. There's also those that sit around pontificating on the pro's and con's of each. I resemble that remark .

We should never be so arrogant as to think that only OUR opinions have value or who should or should not be allowed to speak. That sounds too much like organized religion, and you know how Ian and I feel about that .

Chas, "change we can believe in"

I don't care one way or the other with whether you like my opinion or not, cassp.... and I reserve the right to feel the same way about yours. But what you WON'T see me write is that your opinions are 'pure crap', even if I thought it...

No-one expects everyone to agree here, it would be a dull place if they did, but what we should be able to do is disagree with each other without becoming verbally abusive. That's all...

Is that too hard?

Has it occurred to you, Fran, that many of these 'celeb' singers do this precisely because it IS getting harder and harder for them to sit in with any bands that CAN play their material decently?

Back in my day of cabaret backing, they merely turned up with charts, and expected the band to be able to play them well. Perhaps now, when half the time they turn up at places that don't even have a real band, just some kind of karaoke act masquerading as a band, it is merely more expedient for them to provide their own tracks? Expecting the house act to be able to really play seems rarer and rarer...

Gee, Diki does that mean you do or don't accept my apology?

Oh... that was an apology?

The thing is, cassp, you are no moderator here. If you don't like the direction a thread is going in, there's always the 'back' button. It isn't your place to castigate those getting OT (or you'd be doing nothing else all day long!). And, before you criticize the mote in your brother's eye, consider how many times YOU might have drifted OT yourself... (and haven't received a verbal slap for doing so).

You might have noticed that SZ is FAR from a technical, 'stay on topic' forum, more of a kaffeklatz, free-wheeling discussion type of place. Probably 50% or more of the threads go OT from time to time. You might also consider (as I pointed out earlier) that a discussion about whether the G70 will get an mp3 player is probably going to bring up a discussion about the necessity or lack thereof for the darn things in the first place...

But, like I said, should discussions like this get up your nose, consider the 'back' button before you call someone's opinions 'pure crap' next time, eh?

'Apology' accepted...

Well, Diki if you couldn't figure it out from the words "Same apololgy applies to Diki - I'm sorry for calling you names," then maybe it wasn't an apology after all. If I need a sermon I'll go to church. I know you'll have to reply because you need to have the last pontifical word, so go ahead...

Fran - sorry for ruining your post.

Um.........yeah.

Anyway, I'd like to add a simple comment directly related to the topic:

This weekend we're playing a Top 40 gig at our local (I mean literally a few streets away from where we live....handy!)

So there's a brand new Top 40 song just come out (it's not important which one it is) and I can't find (for love nor money) an SMF backing, AND there's no arranger style - that's appropriate - on my PA1x.

BUT

I found a dance remix of the song I want, AND being a (slight) remix, it has a minimal backing (eg no guitars or backing/lead vocals)

SO

I get to use a great sounding, thumping, appropriate backing track, and play a nice dirty Organ (ooh err) part, and sing backing, while my wife does a big lead vocal and nifty guitar part.

It'll be a "like the record" sound (something that we aim for) AND sound like "us" (something we aim for too) and the sound quality really will trump an SMF or a style (not that I'm dumping on THAT because we use both, much more than MP3s).

Isn't an MP3 just another form of backing, another avenue, another tool to use when others have been exhausted, or aren't available at all in a solo/duo situation?

Having that option saved my bacon this week I can tell you.

(Do I have to say "peace out"?)

I think that is exactly what MP3's should be used for, other than break music. There are some songs that are so specific that live backing is not feasable, no matter what level you are.

And that is what DJ's are for, IMO.

Since when did it become imperative to cover EVERY tune, whether we can play it or not? Be careful, folks. As soon as singing over a backing track provided by the artist (or their record company) becomes acceptable entertainment, all you are left with is karaoke...

Trust me, when the audience hears something IDENTICAL to the record with you singing over it, there goes any pretense that you have had anything whatsoever to do with the playing, and the words 'karaoke' rightly spring to mind of your audience (and employers).

Personally, someone comes up and requests a tune we don't do, I have no problems telling them 'we don't do that one... here's something else you might like'. Maybe I'm just in a different market, but I've never felt the need to go out and start singing karaoke over a remix, just to do that one song...

And, before we forget it, if you actually ARE using an arranger (you know, actually PLAYING it rather than using it it as a karaoke machine ) NOT ONE of your tunes sounds identical to a record. Hasn't stopped you from being successful, has it? Why the need to sound identical? You know, every time I hear a major artist cover another's song, somehow, magically, they never even TRY to sound identical to the original. In fact, most of the time, they try to sound as different as they can. And yet this results in success for them... Maybe there's something we can learn from this?

The audience doesn't care if you play it identically... just well!

Surprise, surprise. I'm in the Ian, Chas, Diki corner when it comes to the subject of mp3's.

But that's simply a function of my orientation and approach to music performance, and not meant to knock another approach.

It's just not my style. And if a national act...ANY national act, came on my bandstand and wanted to use mp3's or even wanted to call the tunes,other than to suggest material, I'd ask them to leave. Obviously, that approach wouldn't be appropriate for anyone else and I'm not recommending it. Anyone who can hold their own on MY bandstand is welcome. But I call the shots, and a certain level of respect for the job is essential. If they can't cut it on my material, they don't need to be there.


So there!


Russ

And its not appropriate for you either.

It shows a total lack of respect for that persons art, and exposes your total arrogance..something not desired in a musician.

Miden, you have no idea how little your opinion matters to me. I tried to ignore your caustic attitude before, but now I just choose to suggest that we simply ignore each other.

We will never be on the same page and I have no interest in ANY interaction with you, ever.

Russ Lay

Wow Russ..it's looks like you have a lot in common with Chas, Diki and Ian..

Yes I can see that by way of your reply.

For my part, you were finished with me after the issue with Zuki, when he and I were looking to swap some keyboards earlier this year...

I suggested he ask you about helping out with shipping to Australia and you told him you cannot do anything about shipping to Australia.
Yet you told ME,(when you and I were talking about a swap of your then G70 for a SD1+) shortly before Zuki approached you, that shipping to Australia was no problem as you already dealt with an Australian company and were shipping all the time..(I still have your email on that)

So, yes from that time on I considered you as a person of a non-reliable nature, and treated everything you said with a "pinch of salt" so to speak, and a measure of scepticism.

So, in conclusion, I have pretty much the same attitude toward you.

But I have to say that, apart from voicing my thoughts, I have actually DONE nothing to you, as far as I know, nor made disparaging remarks OUTSIDE this forum.

Please don't change, Fran...we'd like to remember you as you aren't.

Ian

Update on the MP3 backing (kinda on topic).

I was able to get a demo of a pro SMF of the song I want (but not the dance remix - just the straight radio edit) so I have compared the two, and though there are some reeeally nice onboard sounds I can use for the SMF, I think the MP3 wins hands down.

The decision was made all the easier when the wife and I rehearsed the song and she came up with a spontaneous "wah-pedal Reggae" part that fitted in a weird and wonderful way. I think it works because instrumentally the dance mix is different in texture and sounds to the Radio Edit, but not in the Groove.

The more straight ahead heavy guitar part also works though, so we'll probably end up using both.

I think we'll play it weird for the Audience we have this weekend (the hipper than thou alternate crowd) and the more straight ahead way for the mainstream clubs.

Incidentally, we've had a lot of fun lately playing another brand new Top 40 song (a #1 hit here, right across the Country) for our Rock n Roll shows.
We play regularly to a great group of dancers who are able to adapt to anything, and even though the Top 40 isn't normally their cup of tea, this song is a fantastic 8 step, and some of them have been making up their own choreography and wowing us on the dancefloor.
They request the song wherever we see them now.

An older lady came up to me after one show and told me proudly "I can tell my grandaughter I was dancing to a Top 40 hit tonight!"
She had a big smile on her face and so did I.

That's what it's all about.

But the use of MP3s was inevitable because of the feel for the need to sound like the original recording of a song.

And because persons keep advocating for perfectly made factory styles on an arranger rather than encourage style making and editing and creativity, then just sounding like the recording of a song that you hear on the radio is the way to go. So Styles, midis, or MP3s it does not matter as long as you sound like the recording that is all that is important.


Why can’t you find another style to use or better yet create a style or midi; taking in to account that you will be playing on top of the style or midi (I am assuming persons can actually play).


The more persons push for perfectly made styles whether it be through audio styles or midi manipulation, the more arrangers will become mp3 players.

That is why for me the on board styles are not the most important things for me when getting an arranger. It is great sounds, creativity capability, and easy OS and easy integration with other equipment and instruments.

Mp3's will be a thing of the past just like all past media types....
records/8 tracks/cassettes/CD/Mp3's...etc etc ............smaller storage size, less compression, better sound............
more features to "ARRANGE" be happy to be a part of this technology...it's an exciting time to be alive!

Its already starting to happen....
http://us.creative.com/products/product.asp?category=213&subcategory=214&product=17810

[This message has been edited by Dnj (edited 07-15-2008).]

That Zen X-Fi is sweet!

Which brings me the thought I had driving home this morning. Were there ever any complaints or tirades regarding 4-track recordings or mini-discs as backing possibilities. It seems the mp3 (because of its size and convenience) is a target that really isn't any different than the media other "bands" used previously.

If it works for you and you can live with it, then go for it - musically, that is.

I don't care if it is mp3's or 24/96 wav...

What we are talking about primarily is the willingness to play over an audio file, and, in my case, more particularly, an audio file that you had nothing whatsoever to do with the creation of...

There are two weaknesses of using audio (at least!), the first, and probably primary one, is that compared to either styles or SMF's, you have minimal editing possibilities. You can't mute a part, you can't make it louder or quieter, you can't apply an effect to it... Everything you do to the file affects everything. Got a guitarist sitting in? Forget muting the recorded guitar solo. Someone playing congas with you? They are going to have to play over the existing conga part. Want to change the feel of the track (swing it a bit, perhaps) after having played it until you are sick to death of it always being the same? Best of luck, mates.

All easy to achieve with SMF's and styles (and pretty common scenarios to all but the loneliest of the lonely OMB's)

Secondly, as I've mentioned before... You have a repertoire of hundreds of mp3's. You change arrangers, for one with a far superior sound (no point in changing, otherwise, eh? ). Your act still sounds essentially the same. And, even if you DID make these mp3's from your own playing and SMF's, rather than buying karaoke tracks, you SURE don't feel like re-recording your entire repertoire, so you end up playing primarily with older gear you have long sold...

Curiously, the ONE thing I see as the strength of using MP3's for seems to be the thing most use the least... The opportunity to hire a REAL guitarist, maybe even a real drummer, and prepare backing tracks that are REAL... but YOU did them, so it's still not commercial karaoke, and your act is your act, not you singing over the same stuff everyone else is. Very few doing this, AFAIK.

But whether the delivery medium for audio tracks is mp3, .wav, .aiff, or some future system TBA, they will all suffer from these pretty insurmountable problems...

Anyone know exactly HOW the Zen X-Fi makes MP3s sound better quality wise?

"Indulge in rich audio where you can hear your music in crystal clear clarity. Take in guitar strumming, crisp cymbal clashes and deep pounding bass as detail lost during file compression are now beautifully restored. The built-in X-Fi technology intelligently moves a conventional left/right earphone stereo source away from your ears, virtually expanding it for an audio experience with a breathtakingly realistic depth of field. You'll feel as if you were listening to your music from a pair of high end speakers."

Doesn't really explain it in enough (convincing) detail for me...

Maybe the insurmountable problems of editing audio are starting to be solved.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jFCjv4_jqAY

While this IS a breakthrough technology, Bernie, I have a sneaky feeling that this is NOT going to be the answer we all want for editing entire mixes.

Note how all the examples are of single track sources... In other words, this may be possible to extract the pitch and timing information for just one sound, but add in the complexities of an entire mix, with pitched and non-pitched sounds all mixed together, and this starts to sound a LOT more difficult to do than these simple examples.

Note also that everything done in these examples are all fairly simple, quite percussive sounds (fast attack, fairly quick decay) with not that complex a sound spectrum. Nor are they whole mixes. I sincerely doubt that this system will be able to edit whole mixes for the foreseeable future, if ever...

There IS one system existing today that COULD allow us editing possibilities with multitrack audio, without having to go the full monty and actually use a multi-track DAW inside the arranger, though... Surround sound files. This is ONE file, all interleaved, with eight channels of audio (for 7.1 surround) or more, with other formats. If a surround sound player were incorporated into an arranger, different parts could be recorded to each of the channels, and a simple MUTE on any of them could eliminate a particular sound...

Of course, it still doesn't address the possibility of changing the sound, and pitch and timing changes would be difficult to achieve without artifacts, but it is one possibility... and if the Melodyne algorithm could be appied to each channel individually, a lot more could be achieved, also.

But don't forget, at the moment, Melodyne is an off-line process. In other words, it can't be used in realtime on an arranger, even if it COULD work on full mixes....

Strangely, just at the time when MIDI instruments are getting SO close to live audio that it is hard to distinguish the two, we in the arranger world seem to be hell-bent on moving to audio loop technology, with it's far more primitive editing possibilities. Personally, I'd MUCH rather have GIGA sized MIDI instruments and them played by MIDI instruments as the basis of our styles than an audio loop of exactly the same thing played and recorded on real instruments, with no possibility of editing.

The system we have now is amazingly flexible. All we need are better quality, multi-velocity samples, and the SA system to add nuance, and we have something entirely under our control that sounds within a hair's breadth as good as the uneditable full loop...

That is quite an involved assessment, and, I'm sure, generally correct. As far as midi is conscerned,I too, prefer it. I do a Wednesday keyboard and Karaoke show. I have plenty of CD&G disks, but when I want the crowd to dance, I use good midi's or the G70. For some reason the CD's don't stir them to dance, nearly as well. I suspect it is compression. In fact, the only reason I prefer CD's on occasion, is backgroung vocals.

Bernie if you play the right music at the right temp Dancers will dance no matter what vehicle is used........most commercial songs have to be edited to strict tempo.

Donny, that's well and good, but I am referring to R&R where the they need a good kick to get motivated. The percussion has more of a dynamic presence. My dancers might be older than yours, and their hearing might not be up to snuff.

Good luck Bernie.....make em dance

[This message has been edited by Dnj (edited 07-17-2008).]