Here is a young guy jamming with the Yamaha XS using a performance (what we would call a style) which he pre-recorded with the chord changes and then jammed over the top in real time.

What do you think ? Is there a potentially untapped youthful arranger market ?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dli60f5s5WQ
and this one. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=05FyCE7AZZ4

and this one using a hiphop style http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cTFHJKwYE5M


heres another guy using the styles on the minimo and then recording his own tracks on top http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PQgouZbpI6U&feature=channel_page

[This message has been edited by spalding (edited 05-15-2009).]

Yes..., there really is one. Sadly many of the youth are going for the workstations based on price alone compared to arrangers. I've seen this guys vids before and he's pretty good. He's playing a top end Yamaha Motif XS6. A well built pro workstation with amazing sound quality. If he wanted to go the arranger route with Yamaha and not sacrafice major differences in build quality his only option is the Tyros 3 (even though the Tyros line isn't even built to the level of the XS) and look at the price difference between the Tyros 3 and this Motif XS6. Tyros 3 is nice.., but doesn't hold a candle IMO to the XS line. Sonically the XS IMO is stronger..., but the pro arranger equiv for this in the Yamaha arena cost damn near $4000. Hell it costs more than the full 88 weighted key version of what this kids playing!

Loranzoellis also did a smooth and catchy one using the Motif XS too. Been a while since I've seen Loranzoellis's vids. Thanks for posting them too




[This message has been edited by squeak_D (edited 05-15-2009).]

yes Loranzo sure is a beast!

I think too often people on the forum stereotype the younger generation. So many people here just assume that all the 20 something's are all into pop, hippity hop, rap, techno, ect. That's not the case. There are large numbers of youth interested in the styles people play here.

If ALL the makers started pricing their top end arrangers at least close to their pro workstations (which they should be doing anyways) you'd see more youth playing them. Put yourself in their shoes..., you're young.., not as much income as some of the older keyboardists out there.., you want a top quality arranger but find that'll run you over three grand.., you then find you can get a pro workstation that sounds just as good.., but built better AND for MUCH LESS. If you were them.., what would you do in that situation?

The type of arranger that I do well selling to younger people (20's and up) are the PSR-S550, and PSR-E413...sold several in April and two of each this month.

We also sold an E413 for use in a buddy's studio,.,wicked analog control over the sounds.

Ian

Ian.., when I demo I get a lot of 20 something's asking about the upper end arrangers. These are younger players that often already have an upper end workstation..., but want a pro arranger too.

I got a guy to buy a Tyros 2 before the 3 was released. He had a Motif XS.., but wanted an arranger and wouldn't accept anything in the mid or low range. He ended up buying a Tyros 2.., but returned it within a week. I'll use his words exactly "I'll never waste that much money on a plastic keyboard again". He said he expected more in that price range considering how much it cost compared to his Motif XS. He said it sounded amazing.., but he couldn't accept the quality of it compared to his workstation. He's a heavy gigger and was worried about the T3 holding up on the road. I told him there were a lot of pros giggin with it.., and even suggested he visit the Zone.., but he wasn't intereseted.

Well Squeak, I don't know what to tell you other than I know what I've been selling, and I know what the salespeople at the stores sell when I'm not there, or after I've done a clinioc/demo because the clients usually contact me afterwards.

The Tyros3 has sold very well...I sold a lot of T2's...they are both plastic, and I've heard nothing but praise, and no mention or complaints about any "plastic" keyboard.

Years ago I sold a lot of DJX...they were plastic...all young customers...no complaints...the S900 is a better quality keyboard...I know because I've played both of them, and I use an S900 for gigging.

You had a DJX...the plastic didn't seem to bother you then...you can rest assured that no arranger in your price range of $2000, from any company, is going to have any metal panel...it's not going to happen, so you're out of luck.

You'll have to be content with some sort of workstation from Roland, I guess.

Ian




[This message has been edited by ianmcnll (edited 05-15-2009).]

It really differs by area too I guess. I live in West Virginia.., so there are a lot of folk, country, and bluegrass players here who want top end arrangers. I've been seeing a lot of PA-80's around here lately. A very popular local country band was showcased on the news last week and the keyboardist had a Korg PA-80 and a Yamaha PSR-3000. Many (that I come by here) are in their 20's but do go with the pro workstation for "ease of mind" really. I guess some of these kids are playin some rough-neck gigs on a stage behind chicken wire with beer bottles flyin everywhere

I personally liked the Tyros 2's sound. I loved the keybed on the T2 as well. I've had issues with some plastic bodies though. They scratch and chip more easily IMO.

Honestly as much as I do like Roland Ian.., my next top pick in workstation isn't from them or Yamaha or even Korg. I've got my eyes on a Kurzweil for my next purchase. I'm moving the majority of my set up to software.., but I want one kick ass hardware unit with 88 weighted keys that'll double as a workstation and a killer midi controller.

Won't be long and I'll have quite a few items up for sale. Got my eyeballs on the Kurzweil PC3X. Kurzweils orchestral patches are to die for! Anything I want to do (modern styles) will be convered with software synths and FL Studio


[This message has been edited by squeak_D (edited 05-15-2009).]

The Motif XS is a totally different animal then a Tyros 3. I have both and use the Motif 90% of the time for creation of NEW music. We use the Tyros to recreate cover songs as it has no peer as a time saver in that regard.

The Motif has style but only 4 parts which is pretty much representative of a five piece band with the player the 5th wheel.

Younger SERIOUS players are workstation oriented. Very young beginners seem to prefer the less expensive 413 and PSR550.

The only voices I use consistently from the T3 are the SA 2 voices, The rest of the voices are more than covered by the XS.

We need a complete new batch of modern styles. Listen to the younger players' advice and go in that direction. I'd like to see some more US style R&R and pop styles and cool jazz.

When it comes right down to it, here in Cape Breton, we sell more 88 note digital pianos and/or 88 note workstations to the younger experienced players, than workstations or arrangers.

Lots of Celtic and Scotch fiddle music, and lot of Jazz, so there is a rather large demand for piano players.

Couldn't agree with you more cassp. Problem is you got a lot of workstation owners wanting more modern sounding styles on arrangers.., but the di-hard arranger playes screamin no modern styles.., no way not on my arranger. There's gotta be a halfway meeting point here.

I still say makers need to treat it exactly how Roland treats the GW-8 line. There's several models.., all having the same base styles but each having a special area of styles specific to their region. The same thing can be done but make it an entire set of modern style rather than a region specific board. When I say modern I also mean modern styles based on that styles PLACE OF ORIGIN TOO.., and styles written by people who actually know what they are and are well seasoned in those style areas too.

[This message has been edited by squeak_D (edited 05-15-2009).]

It would be pretty simple for a company or a third party style maker, to make a batch of region specific styles on a flashdrive and just load them in (or play direct)....it would be a piece of cake for PSR instruments.

Will the GW-8 load/play styles from a flashdrive?

Of course, then we are dealing with style swapping/theft, unless there is a way to protect the drive itself.

Ian

We've got to key the style to the hardware itself of the arranger. How do Yamaha protect the IDG stuff and sound packs?

Until the styles can be protected, and yet still allow a certain amount of user editing and tweaking, any appreciable style development is basically confined to new models (the hardware to play the styles acts like a kind of dongle - you can't play T3 styles on a T2 if they use the newer features without a LOT of work). If Yamaha, Roland, Ketron, Korg, whoever don't work on a way to protect new styles, they will never put much effort into it (or third party style houses either).

And, I'm sorry, but basically, user styles are a pale shadow of the factory ones, by and large. Little Mega voiced parts, stiff drums, no feel...

I almost feel this is the #1 thing we should call for from our manufacturers. Having to buy a new model to get fresh new styles because the factory can't even break even on style packs for older models is insane...

Actually I have quite a few 3rd party Tyros/PSR styles that are excellent and make very good use of mega voices, but they are not really contemporary enough to appeal to a lot of the younger arranger players.

That shouldn't be too hard to correct.

What is rather enlightening, is that the CVP owners I've sold to, ask for more classical styles, I guess to suit the nature of the 88 note keybed and to create appropriate backing tracks for the budding Mozarts out there.

The biggest failing I've found for both Yamaha and Roland arrangers is their jazz ballad styles, Roland's being the worse off.

I haven't yet had the pleasure of playing the Korg, so I can't comment directly on their styles at all....the conversions I have are not tweaked enough yet to pass any real opinion on them either.

Ian

[This message has been edited by ianmcnll (edited 05-16-2009).]

Working with a material 10 times lighter than steel - but 250 times stronger - would be a dream come true for any engineer, right? If this material also had amazing properties that made it highly conductive of heat and electricity, it would start to sound like something out of a science fiction novel wouldn't it? Yet here it is: >>

Buckypaper is made from carbon nanotubes - amazingly strong fibers about 1/50,000th the diameter of a human hair that were first developed in the early 1990s. Buckypaper owes its name to Buckminsterfullerene, or Carbon 60 - a type of carbon molecule whose powerful atomic bonds make it twice as hard as a diamond. Sir Harold Kroto, now a professor and scientist with Florida State University's department of chemistry and biochemistry, and two other scientists shared the 1996 Nobel Prize in Chemistry for their discovery of Buckminsterfullerene, nicknamed "buckyballs" for the molecules' spherical shape. Their discovery has led to a revolution in the fields of chemistry and materials science - and directly contributed to the development of buckypaper.

Among the possible uses for buckypaper are:

… If exposed to an electric charge, buckypaper could be used to illuminate computer and television screens. It would be more energy-efficient, lighter, and would allow for a more uniform level of brightness than current cathode ray tube (CRT) and liquid crystal display (LCD) technology.

As one of the most thermally conductive materials known, buckypaper lends itself to the development of heat sinks that would allow computers and other electronic equipment to disperse heat more efficiently than is currently possible. This, in turn, could lead to even greater advances in electronic miniaturization.

… Because it has an unusually high current-carrying capacity, a film made from buckypaper could be applied to the exteriors of airplanes. Lightning strikes then would flow around the plane and dissipate without causing damage.

… Films also could protect electronic circuits and devices within airplanes from electromagnetic interference, which can damage equipment and alter settings. Similarly, such films could allow military aircraft to shield their electromagnetic "signatures," which can be detected via radar.

"The potential applications are mind-boggling."

Although, even though cost is a huge obstacle at the moment, it nevertheless demonstrates that "composite" materials are out there that don't have to have the negative connotation that "plastic" seems to imply i.e. lighter composites like certain plastic(s) = equals cheap and/or flimsy'. That is not necessarily so and the near future could prove a massive migration "away" from steel or metal in the construction of certain products, and be replaced with "lighter" and "stronger" composites like buckypaper.

For instance, the Motif XS8 weighs 63 lbs. If buckypaper were used instead, the XS8 would probably weigh under 30 lbs or so, since the majority of the XS8 weight is its metal casing. As an example, if indeed 100% of the XS8 weight were its metal casing i.e. the total 63 lbs, replacing it instead with buckypaper the weight of the XS8 would then be 6.6 lbs. i.e. 10x lighter. PS: I allowed a 20 plus poundage difference to take into account the innards of the XS like the Motherboard, Amplifier(s), power supply, the weighted key bed, and all the other parts inside the casing to come up with the guestimate of "under 30 lbs" figure if buckypaper were used instead of its current metal casing.

Lighter/Stronger composites are the wave of the future in my humble opinion, and since they will be lighter/stronger than "steel" they will replace many of the heavy metal fabricated products that are currently on the market. Hopefully in the future that will include the ultra heavy fully weighted 88 key workstation keyboards too huh? You could then, theoretically speaking, carry around an 88 key Motif XS8 (or some other 88 key Workstation) under one arm like you can now do with e.g. a PSR S900 etc. - that is, one of the 'many' "plastic" Yamaha keyboards currently produced. See, we're laughing at Yamaha's "plastic" keyboards, no? But if they were made of e.g. buckypaper, etc., then there wouldn't be a need to laugh anymore. But since Yamaha still continues to make these flimsy cheaply made plastic keyboards like the S900 or T2/T3 etc., we can still laugh right? lol..

>> Although down the road, the ultra heavy METAL workstations will be the thing that young hip hoppers will avoid like the plague and instead will aquire and vouch for the much lighter and stronger 'composite' constructed keyboards and wondering all the while how they EVER got along with the ultra heavy "metal" ones to begin with. Much like how they now avoid the current crop of plastic arrangers, etc. But if they were made with the "lighter/stronger" composites there would definitely be a greater market for young people getting Arrangers too if you ask me. [img]http://www.synthzone.com/ubbs/cool.gif[/img]

All the best,
Mike

Yamaha would get my money for an S-900 if they changed 3 things about it.

1. Make the panel metal. It doesn't have to be some heavy piece either.., just something stronger than the plastic on it now. They could even keep the end caps plastic.., just put a half decent metal panel on it.

2. BETTER QUALITY PITCH/MOD WHEELS!!! Anyone else think it's pretty shotty that Yamaha gives the MM6 far superior wheels?

3. More durable button contacts..., that aren't so prone to wearing out.

If Yamaha changed those three things they'll get my money on the next S-900 replacemnt. Seriously.., take away the request for a metal upper.., really.., how much more would it increase their production cost to give the S-900 the same pitch/mod wheels found on the VERY VERY LOW budget MM6.., and give it better button contacts?

Mike,

Interesting post, Mike.

No doubt the materials like buckypaper, new plastic composites, and even carbon fiber will be the wave of the future for electronic enclosures.

Think about...how many TV cabinets are made of metal anymore...very very few.

Same will be with keyboards...there probably will be some parts of the casing that will be metal, but these will only grace the higher end workstations, and digital pianos.

Wouldn't surprise me one bit if Roland's (and Korg's) next batch of arrangers are all plastic, with maybe a metal panel on the TOTL model, but somehow, I think they will be all plastic.

Cheaper, no need of painting, as well as strong as needed for the intended application....plastic, or some form of composite will be what we'll get in the near future.

Ian

have a look at this you tube clip of the Korg M50 using 'templates' to write songs.

What struck me is that i could reproduce what the demonstrator did in half the time using the PA1X by simply using an existing style drum pattern, muting the other voices and then over dubbing my own original chords , instruments etc either using the style to get the chord structure of the song done or simply using the drum track and then recording all the other parts myself. This is precisely why the youthfull arranger market is ripe , all that needs to be done is to show the complete flexibility of a totl arranger like the Korg range.

anyway here the clip
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I6023Hs-vVs

This looked much more like a demo for making a style, than making a piece of music... Little eight bar chunks are not a song... (but they are a style!).

This is SO primitive compared to what you can do with the arpeggiators, loops and samples in a modern WS. This stuff goes all the way back to the Triton and before. Templates are an OLD idea.

The thing is, you are STILL hampered by the non-contemporary sound of most arrangers in making anything remotely modern sounding. I keep saying this (and have no idea why it isn't obvious to the manufacturers) that it isn't the OS and the word 'arranger' that puts kids off. It's the largely dated sounds and styles in them. Especially drums. I know even the drum grooves in my ancient Triton sound phatter and more radio ready than anything in a contemporary arranger's ROM.

Until this changes, the kids are going after M3's, M50's, Fantom's and Motif's, despite song creation being harder than an arranger. But what's the POINT of easy song creation, if what you create sounds like your Dad's music?

"Kids" also don't have two grand (sterling) to spend on a keyboard. The future, if there is one, for a "youth" arranger segment, is surely in comparatively low cost models like Roland's new GW8.

For as long as the high-end market belongs entirely to those of us in Europe who are north of thirty with plenty of disposable income (and that's mainly semi-pros whose gigs pay for their kit, plus the one-finger pensioner contingent), the flagship arranger offerings from all the manufacturers will remain unchanged.

Why do you guys think the budget workstation market is so hot right now These budget workstations (such as the Juno-G that you can't really ignore with its latest update) which has turned it into a budget powerhouse. Fantom sound engine.., 128 note poly, large screen, 4 track audio recorder that syncs with the midi track--and will do a full audio/midi mixdown internally-not to mention all the effects available for audio too, 16 trk seq, real synth engine, FULL SAMPLING ect, are offering more to the youth.

Look at the M50 and MO6 too. Both of those boards are loaded with features. The youth are going to the budget models not just for the price.., but THE SOUND. These models also have good acoustic instruments too (MO line having arranger signature voices). They not only cover the classics quite well.., but the arps, patterns, ect on them are up to date not to forget UP TO DATE DRUMS.

Another HUGE thing to take into consideration that sets these semi-pro workstations ahead for the youth compared to the semi-pro arranger is SOFTWARE EDITORS! Many of these semi-pro workstations are BUNDLE PACKS. You get the synth, dedicated software editor, and seq software all in one package for a VERY low price. They're sometimes called "a budget studio in a box".

These software editors are VERY popular because they allow you to use your workstation like a VST for your software. The typical CPU killing load is handled externally by the keyboard meaning those on a budget most likely don't have to upgrade their computer either. You get more seq power and your computer can breathe easy

You don't find these types of features on the semi pro arranger. You don't find these things shippng to not only cover the classics, but modern styles of music. You don't see the developers shipping semi pro arrangers with dedicated software editors bundled with seq applicatons. You don't see any of this stuff. Yamaha makes a low end arranger that ships with a bundled seq app.., but they refuse to call it an arranger though.

I don't think the makers have any interest in updating these arrangers. They know if they do the crowd they have been catering to for years will get pissed. They KNOW the youth won't pay those prices too. Think about it for a moment.

Yamaha PSR-S900 costs nearly $1,700. Sure it covers the classics but doesn't hold a candle to anything modern when you look at it's budget workstation cousin on the other side of the fence.., Yamaha MO6. MO's poly may be less, no harmonizer.., but it's sound set and up to date patterns, synth engine, way more advanced seq, and arps are far beyond the S-900. It too is plastic.., but built better than the S-900 and it too has the full SOFTWARE PACKAGE that attracts the youth. The MO's selling for just over $1,000. Hundreds less than the S-900.., if you're a younger individual on a budget looking for MODERN flavor and a Yamaha fan.., which way would you go?

What I've noticed is the makers seem to think that ARRANGER LOVERS ON A BUDGET have more money than WORKSTATION LOVES ON A BUDGET. Broke is just broke.., regardless of what type of keyboard you play



[This message has been edited by squeak_D (edited 05-21-2009).]

Exactly my point.



What isn't?

Here's the thing. People on the forum IMO too often assume that modern music is all about SYNTh type voices and that's NOT true. Acoustic instruments are HUGE in modern music. Hip Hop thrives on orchestral samples. It's not at all uncommon to hear the same type of brass, strings, woodwind, and acoustic pianos patches found on current arrangers in modern music.

Look at it like this. With these modern styles you gotta "bump it". It's in the beat. All these arrangers today (even some on the lower end) already have the good quality acoustic instruments needed for those styles. What they DON'T have is the drums. Lets not even take styles into consideration at the moment. Modern players typically write the majority of their work from scratch.., but will also take advantage of patterns and arps.., but the thing that really gives their tracks Ummph on these workstations is DRUMS.

The PSR-S900 could EASILY make a modern style just by adding ONE let me say that again ONE good quality hip hop kit. One hip hop kit that had better samples than what you find now. Hip Hop kits aren't typically played in the same fashion we see done with acoustic kits on arrangers. There's 61 keys there just waiting for a few good samples. All Yamaha would have to do is assign some good bass drums to one section of keys, snares to the next, rim shots, and IMPORTANTLY.., GOOD CLAPS, and a few other one shot samples. There's 61 keys.., I'm sure using a few of those keys for some better quality modern kits wouldn't be so hard.

Just ONE decent modern kit would open up a whole world of modern style creation to the buyer who wants an arranger to use to create modern styles on something like an S-900. A few kits would be great..., but just ONE well sampled kit would make a huge difference. The S-900 ALREADY has a KILLER set of acoustic samples that would sound AMAZING in modern styles. It just doesn't have ONE kit worthy of modern style production.

Arrangers CAN make modern music..., and do it well. The makers just have to get over themselves.., allow their divisions to break bread at the same table every so often and either hire a few new styles writers.., OR allow some writers from the workstation division to play in the same ball pit.

It wouldn't take a major overhaul on the current arranger either. Hell 15 good and well programed modern styles (that use just ONE good quality hip hop kit) would make a huge difference.

The keyboard makers just have to be willing to let go of this age old business practice of theirs. You can only milk a cow so much.., she'll eventually dry up.

[This message has been edited by squeak_D (edited 05-21-2009).]

I suspect the next S-series will be a smaller version of the Tyros3...much like PSR-3000 and S900 were of the T1 and T2 respectively.

It is targeted at those who want some Tyros sounds and features, at a lesser price...and because it is, I don't see them adding anything other than some of what's in the T3.

Besides, $1700 or thereabouts, is a lot more than most younger buyers can afford.

Something under a grand would be more likely to appeal...something on the order of a new type DJX would be perfect, and who knows, something of that order could be in the works.

Roland has to pull up their socks and get with the program before they can compete at all...nothing in their arrangers remotely comparable to SA voices, let alone SA2, and nothing like mega voices either....even Korg's DNC is far ahead of them.

I think Roland has lost the edge it had years ago with the G and E-series....their sounds are still okay, but far from leading edge like they used to be...they'll just have to get used to the snickers from Korg and Yammmie owners for now, I guess.

I do know my S900 sounds so good, and is such a blast to play, that even I am jealous of me.

Ian



[This message has been edited by ianmcnll (edited 05-21-2009).]

To be honest Ian.., when you compare the feature list of say the Juno-G to the S-900 in terms of what it offers to the buyer.., I think that in itself is probably one of the best examples of "how can Yamaha justify that price".

Sure..., I know the S-900 is an arranger Ian.., but you gotta look at it a little differently though. Yes the S-900 has the harmonizer and color screen.., but really break down the core of these two BUDGET semi-pro models for a moment. The S-900 is a budget Tyros.., the Juno-G had replaced the Xa and became the budget Fantom.

-Both have 128 note poly

-The S-900 offers USB audio recording.., well the Juno-G blows that away by giving you a full 4 track audio recorder that BPM syncs with the midi tracks and is FULLY editable.., not just a one shot recorder, but a 4 track with physical sliders and many options that will even do a full mix down internally of audio and midi.., which by the way could be used to add VOCAL HARMONY to sequences as the audio will BPM sync to the midi.

-The S-900 has NO expansion options.., but the Juno G's sample memory AND patch set can be expanded. Not to mention that many NEW features that have been added with OS updates.

-The Juno G's actually built better than the-S900.

-The Juno's patch editing way surpasses the S-900.

The Juno-G is exactly what the S-900 is to the "budget buyer" in the arranger market.., but the Juno G is more PRO orientated.., sells for less (much less).., is built better, offers JUST AS MUCH bang for the buck if not more in terms of HARDWARE when comparing it to the S-900.

Yet the Juno-G can be had for less than $1,000 while the plastic PSR-S900 sells for $1,700!

It's pointless anymore to keep blaming all this on number of units sold. ARRANGERS ARE A HUGE MARKET. The US is such a small part of a HUGE number of arranger sales across the globe. Arrangers of all levels literally saturate the keyboard market globally.

What's really upsetting is that older arranger players so often (for a lack of a better word) discriminate against the YOUNGER GENERATION that DO want arrangers. Workstations aren't just being used for modern styles.., they're EVERYWHERE in EVERY style of music out there.

Yet so often the older generation discriminates against the youth showing their obvious discontent for anything modern on THEIR arrangers. The YOUTH want modern sounding arrangers.., but are forced to turn to the workstations because the older generation won't let them in.., and are VERY vocal about it. THAT'S JUST WRONG! Why is it no problem for workstations to be used in EVERY aspect of music.., but not ok for arrangers to give the youth what they want?

What's so upsetting is how the arranger makers know and continue to MILK that older generation and will continue to cater to you guys because they know you'll CONTINUE to pay these unjustified price differences.

It's time for a change..., it won't even take a major overhaul. Hell the GW-8 has multiple models that ALL have the sambe base in styles sections.., but have a special style section devoted to a region. How hard would it be to add ANOTHER category to modern arrangers.., and include one or two modern sounding drum kits? How hard would it be to write a few modern styles that don't reek of cheese?

It can be done.., but the older generation won't allow it to happen.., and the keyboard makers will keep catering to you guys because "apparently from their history of arranger sales and THEIR target market" your genertation is easier to milk. That's not me saying that.., the keyboard makers clearly have this position.

Workstations are designed to cover EVERYTHING out there. How often do you hear workstation buyes go up in arms because their $2,000+ synth is also capable of producing Polka.., Waltz, Jazz, and Big Band, ect. These current workstations produce the SAME quality of music in those styles as your arranger.., but the users aren't forcing genre specific buyers out.

There's no reason these arrangers can't cater to a younger generation AND the older crowd. I think the problem is that the makers know that if they do make them.., they'll have to build them better..., and price them accordingly.




[This message has been edited by squeak_D (edited 05-21-2009).]

Here's something to think about fellas. Lets just say any one of the major keyboard makers actually produced a modern sounding arranger keyboard (even on the pro end)..., and they gave that arranger the exact same fluff and buff pre-release hype that they do to arrangers now.

The US may be only a small part of the arranger market for upper and semi pro models.., but if you want to see that number climb sky high..., watch how fast those numbers would go up in the US if a MODERN SOUNDING ARRANGER was produced and marketed with all the hype.

The shere volume of sales from the DJX in the US proves that! Which guys and gals by the way is "offically called" the PSR-D1 The DJX is a PSR and has always been a part of the PSR family too..., just had a different flavor to it.., which clearly was successful. There were times that many online retailers couldn't even keep the DJX (PSR-D1) in stock here in the US because of a huge rush of orders.



[This message has been edited by squeak_D (edited 05-21-2009).]

Ian, Ian, Ian.....Of course Yamaha has "some " great sounds..but you are hand picking a select "few".....We Roland "fans" can do the same with our G70's...as an example, pianos, scat/vocals, Drums, and any expansion board sound....totally are superior to Yamaha and Korg...


"Snickers"..believe me, if there is any snickering..it is coming from the Roland G70 users...you know ..the guys that really know the score, when it comes to all around quality, sounds, editing, and tools for the "pro" user..

I would be just as content with keeping what I have....and watch the other 's {Yamaha, Korg etc}, try to convince their users, that they have the superior instruments.....they DO NOT!!!..

What most folks are not aware of...are the features that make playing , editing , sequencing, ( still the best on board sequencer)..a great go to piano, a great drawbar organ, a great vocal harmonizer.....these are things ...collectively...the other's have not obtained...yet..

Take a realistic look at what is available, before you think Roland has any catching up to do...I think Roland is also "snickering"...

I don't know why we keep saying that younger players are too poor to buy TOTL arrangers... Unless you are talking slacker teenagers! Who the hell do you think buys MoXS8/7/6's? FantomG8's, G7's etc.? Oasys's, K2600's, Nord Stage's, and the myriad of keyboards that come in in the $2500-3500+ range? Senior citizens?

IF... arrangers could make modern sounding music, they would buy them. They can't, end of story. Price is irrelevant.

And older arranger players happily put up with useless genre's in their arrangers (can't remember the last time I ever used any schlager, and most on this forum have never touched the techno section ), they wouldn't give a damn as long as what they DO use is in there!

But if the arranger makers want the younger player (<30), it wouldn't hurt to have a whole separate model geared towards this segment. First, that won't piss off the old farts, and it would allow them to drop the ballroom and polka sections. In fact, I've LONG said that arrangers don't NEED a ROM section any more (most of them can be changed, anyway)... get rid of the panel graphics that say 'Ballroom' and 'Bossa Samba' and just have numbers. Now they wouldn't even NEED two models. Just load up the Contemporary set for an MI store, and load up the 'Oldies' set for a Mom and Pop old fart store...

Kids won't use arrangers until the SOUND like WS's. And if making music on them is as easy as we find making OUR music on them (which is a bloody sight easier than how WS's make it), they won't CARE how much they cost...

Right on Diki... I think people on the forum often categorize younger generation as drop out pot heads with no money. The younger generation ARE dropping big money on the high end workstations.

The reason the DJX was so popular was because it WAS an arranger that well..., sounded like a workstation.

I should post a demo for you guys using one of the most medicore drum kits on my VERY inexpensive Zoom StreetBoxx. Hell.., ANY arranger could benefit from just TWO of the kits found on my Zoom Streetboxx.., and they're not big in terms of memory either.

Firstly, we are focusing and beating up on Yamaha, but it is quite clear that Roland's arrangers are doing the same thing...so let's be fair, please.

Yes, the Juno is cheaper than the E-50 or S900, but it isn't an arranger..it can't do what the S900, or Roland E-50 can do, which is let you sit down and play with a full backing band in real time, and following your chord changes.

That's what you pay for when you get an arranger...that's what is "extra".

You are comparing apples and oranges...maybe the line has blurred with arps and drum pattern, but the arranger still has a big edge when played as I described above.

The S-series is mini Tyros2 for less than half the price...a bargain, and everyone is aware of that fact.

Compare workstations against workstations...arrangers are still in another league, at least for now.

And, I think they are priced fairly for what they do...certainly they are priced competitively against other arrangers.

Ian I HAVE SAID THAT IN PREVIOUS POSTS. It's not just Yamaha. IT'S ALL THE KEYBOARD MAKERS. They ALL milk the older generation.

Ian..., the biggest problem I see (especially on this forum) is arranger players who seem to think that the tools on a workstation are far less valuable to the player as you'd find on an arranger..., and that's not the case.

Workstations have arps and patterns. Those acoustic style arps on the workstations take just as much IF NOT more work to prodcude than the styles found on an arranger. Producing GOOD sounding patters on a workstation isn't easy either.

What I am saying Ian is when you look at the core..., the S-900 to the budget arranger player is EXACTLY what the Juno-G is to the budget workstation player. People so often on this forum degrade the tools on the workstation and their importance as "beneath" that of the tools on an arranger. No one is more important than the other. Both cater to the budget line and ARE on the same line for the budget player. One however..., offers just as much if not more and IS more pro orientated.., but does it FOR MUCH LESS! People talk about Chord recognition like it's the mother of all things. Synths have been chord based with their arps for YEARS...., and now are functioning more like an arranger (which is exactly what Yamaha was getting at with the new Motif XS)




[This message has been edited by squeak_D (edited 05-21-2009).]

Ian.., look at it this way. As Diki pointed out.., how many here ignore the techno/dance section of their arrangers all together! Well..., what difference would it make if the companies added a modern styles section.., and some new kits to cater to those styles to attact the younger generation?

What would YOU or any other traditional arranger player have to do differently????? Shit..., just ignore that style section all together as you would the other style sections that don't interest you

Current arranger players COULD benefit from this guys. If they started catering to a younger crowd AND an older crowd..., that alone might reduce the major price gap.

[This message has been edited by squeak_D (edited 05-21-2009).]

Well, obviously the manufacturers feel an arranger should cost more, and you don't...good luck at changing their minds.

The topic of this thread was, "Is there a youthful arranger market?"

I'd say, no, there isn't.

Will there be?

I'd say, no, there will not...unless Roland, Korg or Yamaha make another DJX type instrument, the younger buyer will go for the workstaion every time.

Ian

Ian..., YOU just said the other day that perhaps YOU should take REGION into consideration. Wasn't it not YOU who just said that your position was based on YOUR region?

There is a HUGE market for a modern arranger in the USA..., and I'm willing to bet it too would catch on in other parts of the world. Just because YOU don't think it would sell well in your neck of the woods doesn't speak for the globe.

Even if the younger players were to buy into the MOTL arrangers, then the price would have to be halved at least, while the feature content remained the same...I seriously doubt that will happen.

The PSR-S550 might be appealing, if they sold it with the styles younger players want...but they don't...the GW-8 has the same limitations.

Why doesn't Casio go for that market? They have the R&D clout, and they can keep their prices low?

If this is such a potentially lucrative market, why aren't there any takers?

I'm sure these manufacturers aren't that stupid to miss a big market.

What do they know that we don't?

Any one of them could do it Ian. Someone just has to take the step and DO IT. Yamaha took a shot and was hugely successful with it as you and I both know the DJX tickled a lot of toes

I think YAMAHA should be the one to step up and do it AGAIN. They had great success with it before.., but I'll say that when I was in retail.., I got whispers from reps that the DJX line in the US did cut into sales of the upper gear (more than expected really)

Let me ask you something Ian... I've played the S-900 numerous times (sounds freakin great too).., but there's one section I never really looked at with the S-900. I know you can do basic patch editing with the S-900.., but will the S-900 allow you to do basic editing with the drum kits? Can you go into a preset.., and adjust the level, tuning, and panning of the individual parts of a kit on the S-900..?

No, you can't edit individual parts of a kit..you can only change kits, and edit the whole kit.

I believe you can edit individual drums on the Roland G70 and E-series....I don't know about Korg.

You do have two drum tracks on the Yamaha, so you could essentially have a snare or other drum, from one kit and use it with another (after erasing the first), and that track containing that particular sound, could be edited for panning, filter/brightness and effects...it is essentially a workaround, and not nearly as good as Roland's system.

I'm just surprised that if the market for an arranger for the younger player is as healthy as you describe, that no one has tapped into it...surely they must be aware?

Ian.., the market was tapped here in the US several years ago.., and in some places over in Europe. The company just decided to let the line die even though it was a big hit

Pitty you can't tweek the parts of the preset kit. That ALONE would open up HUGE door for creating some styles with a different flavor.

Yamaha clearly knows that even minute changes to their preset kits gave positive results! A former Yamaha PSR I owned is proof of that. Someone or one's over at Yamaha when creating styles for the PSR-550 decided that the preset Hip Hop kit just wasn't going to cut it. They did something a little sneaky.., but sneaky in a good way. The Hip Hop kit used on some styles WAS NOT available from the preset list. It was really more of a Hip Hop (variation kit--based on the preset). Someone over there did some minute tweeking to that kit (I think most of it was actually adjusting the tuning on some samples).., but it def sounded better than the preset kit.

The trick though was that this kit was not available from the panel voices. If you wanted to use that "variation kit" you had to edit a style that used the kit. Doing that gave you access to this particular kit.

Yamaha could essentially just do some tweeks of the package they're already using. If Yamaha added basic drum editing to the next model..., that'll open up a lot of wiggle room for sure. If the Korgs and Rolands do this..., then those arrangers also have HUGE possibilities. All it takes is for someone on whichever team to set a group down and say..., "for the next few weeks.., your job is to tweek these preset kits.., and then USE those variations to create a group of MODERN sounding drum/bass grooves." They could keep it simple..., and offer them as "genre specific packs".

Ian.., you may not realize this.., but there are many people out there who are into modern music who for the exact same reason arranger players buy their arrangers (being the STYLES) who themselves are looking for the same thing! Not everyone can record drum parts or even create a full backing track. That's why arrangers are so popular..., it really makes life easy for those who can't creat drum tracks and full backing tracks. There are a lot of younger players (even older players) who are on the same level on the modern arranger side and have trouble playing keyboard drums for example. No amount of quantizing can help them.., and you'll find many that are willing to admit it too An arranger keyboard that offered them a section of modern sounding drum/bass grooves would make a large untapped market very happy.

The closes thing to that today is the MM6.., but it's REALLY limited in so many areas.

Ian.., what are you opinions on this.., and I'm asking since you work for Yamaha.

What about Yamaha (or any of the top three) opening the door and "contracting out" for content..... Hell they really could contract within by simply breaking down the wall that separates the developers on the arranger team and workstation team

Let me give you a good example. Let's look at Zoom for a moment. Zoom contracted with the Beat Kangz label. Zoom provided the hardware and B-Kangz provided the content and skill. What happened..., well the result of that partnership was the Zoom SB-246.., also known as the StreetBoxx. Zoom literally recycled a current model of theirs (RT-223).., and that unit turned out to be one of the hottest selling hardware drum machine over the last few years.., and even broke sales records for Zoom. There were parts of the world that couldn't even get the thing as it was in such high demand. I got one myself and can't put it down. The result of this was a $179 hip hop drum machine that (even today) in terms of "drum tracks" can still hang with every hardware unit out there (in regards to presets).

Why can't anyone of the big three contract out. They provide the hardware and a third party provides the content. Alesis had to use a 3rd party sound developer to literally save the Fusion synth line.

I know Yamaha, Korg, and Roland.., considering the money they have could contract out. What Zoom paid the Beat Kangz group would have been pocket change to the big three

Zooms contract with them turned out to be so successful that B-Kangz has their own unit coming out now (however.., it's rumored that Zoom still has a hand in the hardware development).., but if this thing delivers it'll blow the roof off the market (because of what it's supposed to do and the price). It's called the Beat Thang.., and if you see the YouTube vids..., you'll need to really look past the ghetto fab attitudes of the BKz crew.., and look at the unit itself though

Any one of the big three could tap that market..., and use the popularity of a beat making label to put out some killer content in partnership.




[This message has been edited by squeak_D (edited 05-21-2009).]

You are missing something huge here.
Younger players don't want to play COVER tunes. The don;t want Prepackaged songs

they want to put the parts together themselves. The Zoom allows that. We sell them and the guys who buy them are not about the presets. They are about the VOICES. Even in a production the beats are just a piece.

They prefer the Motifs of the world where they get the best of all worlds. 4 part "styles" programmed in MODERN arrangements that can be very easily edited to a degree even the Tyros would not even come close to and with an ease of the same magnitude.

They can create everything from scratch with editing possibilities they will never fully realize. Voice choices that are unlimited with 8 elements per voice to edit and put together in combinations.....

what I am getting at is CREATIVITY....Arrangers have a huge percentage of their content ALREADY CREATED.

Workstations are BLANK slates with some creative jump off points. As a hack songwriter even I could not do what I wanted to do on the Tyros alone. I was forced to do what IT COULD DO..The Motif is the exact opposite.

And the price of entry for all that creativity is even LESS than the arrangers!!!

No I don't see youth running to any Arrangers above the 413's of the world in any great numbers. Arrangers market are the HOME ORGAN players and we the age market of that demographic today ....as does Yamaha.....

Yeah..., but there are just as many out there into modern styles (who like arranger players) look to auto accomp and preset styles/patterns because they are unable to record everything from scratch. How many of those radio hits out there do you think were actually created from scratch Most of that stuff is just a sampled.., sliced and diced loop provided by another label.., with a little added flavor from the artist.

Many people out there actually rely heavily on the preset patterns found on these workstations. The DJX was so popular because well.., it has out of the box up to date "instant gratification" styles. It didn't take long for midi gurus to open the DJX up for midi apps either.

The thing is.., the need IS there. Someone just has to be willing to step up and meet that demand. Yamaha took a stab and was successful. Roland took a little stab at it with the EG-101. The need is there..., but with all do respect.., we have all the OLDER GENERATION arranger supporters who don't know the first thing about creating a modern style making all the noise saying NO don't do it. People who don't even play those style who (if those styles were available on an arranger) would simply ignore them as they would any other preset style that doesetn't interest them.

[This message has been edited by squeak_D (edited 05-21-2009).]

It's hard to say why they don't contract out.

My job is to do clinics and demos...mostly just helping the people who bought Yamaha arrangers and CVP how to use the different features and functions, and to show potential clients what the instrument can do.

I do stay in touch with head office and voice any concerns or questions.

All I can do is offer suggestions, and I do; but, I certainly have nothing to do with the outcome.

I'm sure Yamaha and Roland are looking at all their options, and constantly checking out the market...I'm thinking if there was anything out there that would make them more profits, they'd be already evaluating the pros and cons.

It's a business, after all.

Ian

I'm keeping my fingers crossed..... Yamaha could actually reach back and grab what they already made really. Even the dated DJX has some samples in those kits (and the presets) that would do wonders for the current line. They could just update the style set from that board.., put those as a special section on a new model and be done with it (carrying over some DJX kits though)

Yea they did and do use pre recorded loops. but those loops were often made on worlstations not arrangers. I know kids who sell those loops and none would think of creating them for or on an arranger. there is professional gear for that purpose. Fantoms. M3s, Akai, Motifs which are LIMTLESS.

From what I have seen and heard, the kids making today's music would rahter use CD loops and Acid or Fruty Loops before buying a prepackaed 4 mode "dance" style they cannot manipulate. One CD can provide 1000's of editable loops. Far more than a $1600 Arranger, but not more than a Motif or Fantom can generate,

I am older and even I know the limitations of Arrangers insofar as ace,electronica,Hip Hop et al music. I also know the TOOLS to create that music are ALREADY THERE and LESS EXPENSIVE!!

It's really a no brainer why kids don;t buy arrangers and takes about 3 minuites of thought and a knowledge of the tools that ARE available to do the same to a far greater extent.

Arrangers are sold to the traditional Home Organist market and OMBs playing popular songs fomr a wide swath of time and styles.
That is their strength....People don;t create hit songs on Arrangers. At least I don't know of any Charted songs that were done on a Tyros using Yamaha Styles....in any modern genre. On the contrary they RECREAT songs already made popular/



[This message has been edited by Kingfrog (edited 05-21-2009).]

Kingfrog.., NO THEY WERE NOT created primarily on workstations. I suggest you spend a day in the field doing this style of music before you comment on how it's made.., rather than going by "from what you see or what you've heard".

Many of these loops created are done and produced WITH SOFTWARE! Sometimes the workstations get used.., but the majority of the radio hits are software produced and their beats have come from samples and loops done using software. It's not just modern styles either. You'd be surprised how many alternative, and rock songs today are done using software. Even some country hits have a lot of software influence.

I mean no disrespect Kingfrog.., but you are actually an excellent example of an older individual who has no experience in the field commenting on a style of music you do not produce.

The thing is YOU COULD hear arrangers being used.., but ONLY if the makers decide to break the wall between them and let developers on both sides share a few things every now and then.

It was only natural that DJ's were eating up the DJX and it wasn't uncommon to find them being used in clubs. There IS a market for this. Like I said.., Yamaha did it once.., it was successful (possibly a little too successful), but later killed the line.

There is a newer version of the DJX.., which is the MM6.., BUT the MM6's package isn't as "hard" as it was on the DJX.



[This message has been edited by squeak_D (edited 05-21-2009).]

Do you really think one needs a PHD in Eletronica,Hip Hop. Trance etc.... to understand the way that music is CONSTRUCTED? Of course they are not ALL done on workstations...but they CAN be and many are indeed created on workstations. To think otherwise would be nieve. Modern music is not created in a traditional way in as much as It's "constructed" from pieces of what someone else may have already created. Arrangers don't apply either process well by design. One only has to have ears to understand that...... not practical experience. But yes I do have and have used Acid Pro for years and have a ton of Loop CDs. I have had to make that type of music for projects before. Its not my thing. Too much reptition and far more focused on the technical rather than "musical" for my tastes.

Four parts, an intro and ending in a style is hardly enough to construct a modern dance song. even I know that. No matter how MODERN the styles would be. Why would someone who creates that genre want to limit themselves to an Arranger? By its very purpose and design, an Arranger is extremily limiting in loop creation.

You cannot slice measures on an arranger,nor can you slice an audio file to create a loop. not even on the tyros Sampler. you cannot construct patterns in various time signatures easily and string them into a 16 track song. ..

Why would anyone looking to create modern dance music want an arranger?? It flies against exactly waht they are trying to create. Original work using pieces of already made loops...AND the means to create those loops from scratch..

The MODERN music "arrangers" are already out there!!! They are called Motif, M3, Fantom, Junos, Mini Mos.......

Yamaha has no reason to make a "dance" Arranger. Nor does Korg, or Roland. If they saw the market they would sieze it. They know the market far better than you or I.

Why anyone who creates dance music would want a pre packaege arrangement is beyond me. Its all about music CONSTRUCTION. Not the "already constructed". Yamaha and the rest of the big players in the gear world understands that.....why can't you?




[This message has been edited by Kingfrog (edited 05-21-2009).]

Uh...., what the hell do you think the style sequencers are for? You're talking like it ends with the presets. You give the user good preset modern styles AND THE ABILITY to create their own it'll sell.

No you don't need a PHD to create modern music.., but there's a fine line between shit hop and hip hop. You get someone who programs modern styles that really hasn't a clue as to what's even half modern.., well you end up with every arranger currently on the market. You act like it's easy to create hip hop and modern styles. Anyone can throw down a beat.., but making it sound up to date and not like it's from the 1980's is another story.

Anyone can make a keyboard sing like Vanilla Ice.., but it takes great skill to create a style that bumps like what you hear on the radio KingFrog. You'd know that if this was actually your style of music.

What do you think the DJX was KingFrog! That arranger was designed soley for DANCE, TECHNO, HIP HOP, RAP, R&B, CLUB, HOUSE, DnB, and so on... Was the original a flop NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO it sold so freakin well it ain't even funny. It can be done.., Yamaha proved it with the success of the DJX line. It had its limitations.., but for the price it did what NO OTEHR ARRANGER TO DATE was capable of doing.... Hell.., Yamaha could put the entire DJX style set with all the kits as an add on to one of their arrangers and it would STILL sound more current than any other arranger out there. The DJX had a patch and style set that WAS NOT on any other Yamaha arranger. So many don't even realize that upper models released AFTER the DJX got some of their modern styles taken directly from the DJX.., they were revoiced.., but didn't sound half as good as they did on the DJX.




[This message has been edited by squeak_D (edited 05-21-2009).]

Who can do Hip-hop better than a Froggy can...?

King frog i dont think you understand what can be done on a modern arranger. You are talking as though you cant create beats and loops or sample loops or import grooves from
sample CDs or sequence tracks linearly or import audio into modern arrangers. That can all be done right now. When ever we get into these discussion we act as though the way music is created on an arranger is different to how music is created on a workstation. If you were to open your mind a little you would see that the PA1x/2X for example isnt just like a work station IT IS A WORK STATION. I can sit at my brothers Motif XS and make soulful rnB or hip hop and i can sit at my PA1X and do pretty much the same. The difference is that with the PA1X in addition to working completely from scratch i can also use the styles as a 'suggestion' for what i want to create. The XS tries to do this but it is not as intutive as the PA1X.

The point i was making when i raised this thread was that the similarities between the way arrangers can be used (by people who actually get under the hood of the thing rather than just play and exchange a few months down the road) are very close . But the features that are inherently similar between what is deemed a work station and what is deemed an arranger are deliberately overlooked and confused by the manufacturers to maintain market segmentation.

The arranger market and the workstation market are deliberately kept separate to maximise the profitability from each range .

There is absiolutely no reason why every 'workstation 'produced shouldn't have arranger functions. It simply makes more commercial sense to keep the markets separate

Four parts intro and ending is MORE than enough for a creative person to work with.

And in response to the "you cannot slice audio files on arrangers" maybe you should have looked deeper into the OS of the PA2xPro you said you had Particularly the sampler and the tools available to the user.

I know you CAN.....But there is such a thing as the RIGHT tool for the right job. Thats why I have BOTH an Arranger and workstation. Sometimes one can use a carpenter's hammer when they should be using a ball peen...No way the PA2x I had was as flexibkle or as intuitive as the Motif..LOL although I bought it becasue i THOUGHT I could have the best of two worlds. It wasn't. It was half of both.

Workstations DO have arranger funtions. The Motif does in spades. But No one on the Motif forums seems top care much about the "arranger" part. They do care about the 6000 arpeggios though they can put where they want in any are of the song or pattern, mapped to velocity and or keys.

As for plug an play arrangements....no one I have heard from or ead buys a Motif for that purpose.

The arranger market = home Organ market
Workstation market = Players in bands and home recordists. (no schlagers in a Motif)

Two markets with SOME overlap. I personlly do not see much overlap in the Tyros 3 and the Motif XS8 at all. They are distinct in purpose and result. If I could use one solidly in place of the other I would not have both. As it stands the Motif allows 1000X more creative ouput and choics than the Tyros and only slightly less than the PA2x I sold.

YES you CAN create beats on a Tyros...but can you RESAMPLE them? Can you slice an Audio file into a loop? Can you edit an audio file's waveform visually and adjust the sliced beat peaks...to change tempo and not affect pitch? Can you cesate a Lo-fi effect arpeggio from scratch? There is a whole list of things one cannot do on any arranger in the modern context...You can on the PA2x to some extent but it's not as intuitive nore does it have near the flexibility and capabilitys of the M3 or Motif. ..Arrangers are like th SB256. Nice and they give you a "hint" of modern music but one needs a whole lot more to truly create something original,

You guys need to wrap yourself around a real modern Workstation for a few months and realize the differences. They are huge. And there is no substititute for the INTUITIVE work flow when in the creative process rathet then have to find "work arounds" and make concessions due to technical limitations.



[This message has been edited by Kingfrog (edited 05-21-2009).]

The Korg has the best sampling modes and tools. In fact I originally bought the PA2x becasue it was more workstaion like than any Arranger keyboard both on the MIDI side and sampling side..... There shouldn't be a comlaint regarding the crossover from the PA2x to a workstation....until one looks closely at the M3, Fantom or XS...Way different animals.

However the Korg is the Arranger to get if one wants a workstation/Arranger.

[This message has been edited by Kingfrog (edited 05-21-2009).]

KingFrog the SB-246 gives you WAY more than a hint of modern music. The difference between it and an arranger is OUT OF THE BOX it CAN produce modern drum tracks WITHOUT any tweeking. I know this personally KingFrog.., I own a Streetboxx. The preset kits on the SB blow away EVERY arranger keyboard on the market INCLUDING all the top end models.

Just ONE of the good preset hip hop kits from the Streetboxx would make any arranger out there sound more up to date.

I simply think that everybody is making a mistake when they talk about the arranger market and the workstation market... To my mind, it is all one big KEYBOARD market. The only reason it is so balkanized is because the manufacturers have deliberately made it that way.

Sure, you've got BASIC chord following in the MoXs's and M3's. But you have no slash chords, no 'on bass' and few performance controls to quickly change the status of the chord following. You've got BASIC pattern triggering on WS's, but you can't drop into fill patterns any time you want, it's all 'one bar at a time', a fraction of the arranger's flexibility. And, for me, the biggest difference is that the OS for arrangers is designed SPECIFICALLY for playing live. WS's are geared more towards creation and assembly of finished product, but they are tough beasts to take in the field, and make them jump through hoops at the drop of a hat. From patch selection to loop (style) control, the arranger is DESIGNED for performance.

And this is where the arranger has a window of opportunity. WS's are still pigs on stage. And don't kid yourself for one minute that younger players that create music on WS's don't wish they were easier to be spontaneous and creative, live, too... They have the money for a decent arranger (they buy Nord Stages and FantomG's and MoXs's, they can afford it!)...

But squeak is right. Until the loop and arp design teams, and drum sample creators of WS patterns are turned loose on arrangers, no young player is even going to get a CHANCE to realize how easy it is to be creative and spontaneous on stage, simply because they can't get past how hokey most of the styles and sounds are...

But don't kid yourself... the only reason there appears to be two markets is because of the CONTENT of each type. In fact, fifteen years ago, WS's were MUCH better at making the kinds of music that most of us do. No 'gap' back then But they moved on, and the arranger remained frozen in time. And you know what happens to things frozen in time, don't you?

They end up in museums

as usual we are going to get confused with technical specifications and actual musical applications. The XS can layer up to 8 elements in one go and they boast this in their demos all the time. But my brother actually owns the XS. How many sounds in the XS actually use actually use up to 8 elements in one sound ? . You will struggle to find more than 20. The only genuine application yamaha have for this is in their drawbar organs. Any other sound that uses anymore layers than 4 or 5 make very little musical sense unless all you intend to do is make lush pads that oscilate and crossover and fade over time. Put a few of them in a song and what do you have....one hot mess !!! The korg PA2X can layer up to 16 . I have never had the need to layer more than 4 or 5 at a push..so what ?????

And another thing ..how many records do you know where the sole instrument used from start to finish and all production was done entirely on one keyboard King frog? None ! Zero Zip! Whether i use the Korg, XS or Fantom it is only the basis for the scratch pad (a decent one yes) but never the less the scratch pad for my production. An arranger such as the PA series can fit in very well as part of that production.

Listen to a commercial RnB or Hip Hop record King Frog and tell me what you hear. Pick one you think cant be done on an arranger . Send me a link to it on youtube and i will do my best to reproduce it on my PA1X. Just bare in mind i don't have a multi million dollar studio :-)I#

I dont want to keep debating this with theoretical talk , i want to show you with a practical example. WE could even have some fun with it and see who on the forum can get the closest to it on an arranger :-) I am game

That sums it up pretty darn good...and it won't change much in the near future, either.

Casio, Ketron, Wersi and Lionstracs don't actually make WS's (although the MS makes a passable one from a bad arranger ), so you would think that they have no reason to NOT try to break into this market. The MS tried, but couldn't come up with the content (and isn't what I'd call a 'user friendly' OS ).

And if those guys did, and made a profit, you don't think the Japanese wouldn't follow? In a New York minute, they would!

But, be it all as it may, I think we are obviously NOT 'preaching to the choir'... A bunch of old farts happy to the gills with the way things are aren't really those that actually CARE about this stuff. But move on over to the MoXS forum, or M3, or FantomG, and you might get a LOT more receptive crowd for these ideas.

Once someone showed them how easy improvised song performance is, live, with an arranger, compared to the clumsy WS's they now have, with the caveat that 'don't listen to the styles or sounds, just imagine if YOUR WS could do this, this easily!', and you might have a lot more people on your side compared to here, with it's 'it's good enough for me, it was good enough for my father, it ought to be bloody well good enough for my kids ' attitude that exudes around us...

Eight Elements can be used in a hurry if you use them for things like the sound of the dampers hitting the strings on a key off. Other elements for the guitars such as harmonics, slaps, squeaks. Multi sampled velocity alone on different parts of the keyboard can easily use up 8 voice spots each with their own key assignments,
velocity assignments, Effects, arpeggios, controllers on and on...the possibilities are endless...One may not use 8 elements all the time but certainly it's nice to know one can add a sound(s) to a voice to make it sound more realistic then determine how and when that voice triggers, and being able to get it done without delving into layers of menus using available keys, knobs and buttons. You are right,most of the XS voices use 4 elements and they are good enough.

The idea is EASE and intuitive work flow. Sure you can create anything on a PA2x as someone on a Fantom or Motif. But the guys using the WS will do it in half the time, and with far less "left" brain activity.IMO The Work stations are more intuitive and geared toward the creative process and not manual intensive, few multi depth menus to dig through to change an envelope or filter. Lots of buttons and controllers that can be tweaked then saved. Every part of a voice can be muted or soloed using buttons...Can't do this on the Tyros. I cannot even play the MIDI part selected on the Sequencer on the Tyros!! On the XS just select the track button and go.....easy. Now the PA2x is easier and like I said as close to a workstation as an arranger enthusiast will get.

The idea is what is a particular keyboards PRIMARY purpose? It's "workflow design"

Arrangers are designs to pick a style set into endings parts and go....Any more than that and its dive into the screen menus...
find workarounds...

Workstations are just that. They are designed for those to tweak things quickly no deep menu layers to do simple things like filtering,velocity switching, envelope, voice part soloing, adjusting, transport controls for the DAW,,,,,,on and on...s very intuitive.

Like building the same exact house with a hammer or nail gun.....the result can be the same but the nail gun will be faster and easier which means a lot if someone values their time and would rather spend more time experimenting then chasing through LCD menus to so the simplest of things......



[This message has been edited by Kingfrog (edited 05-21-2009).]

There is nothing wrong with the 256 but its no MPC2500. And no the Arrangers cannot do beats like the SB . I'm guessing there are Not many arranger players that even use those "modern" Dance Styles. That simply is not Yamaha's marlet. they have the MM6, they have the MOs, the M50s, Junos...to do that job. Different markets..Even Different DIVISIONS within the company!!!!!!

They already know what the arrangers can do. and view them as over priced Buicks for the most part. Plus they already have 4 part arrangers on the XS that track chords, notes with the same split points etc.

The dearth of After market XS "Styles" and wealth of voice sets is a testament to the indifference regarding about pre programmed "styles" to play along with. But put a new voiceset up there with 8 elements or an onboard USB wave recorder/player and the excitement is ramped up. In fact the ONLY thing Motif users want the Tyros has is the friggin tilting Screen....LOL

T

[This message has been edited by Kingfrog (edited 05-21-2009).]

Yeah.., but the SB was never designed to compete with and MPC samplers either. It was Akai that later released the XR-20 to compete with the StreetBoxx.

Then MM6 is an arranger.., but its styles don't quite hit as hard as they did on the DJX. The MM6 is kinda like a softened version of the DJX.

W A Y....

But the MM6 is an amazing little keyboard. As is the M50.

KingFrog.., the MM6 is an excellent example actually. The MM6 is an arranger and in many ways is what the DJX was (or at least targeted at that crowd).

The MM6's styles aren't ass full as you'd find on a typical arranger..., but although basic it's an arranger with chord recognition. Look at what Yamaha has provided for this arranger. You get the MM6 in the box AND seq software bundled together to open the MM6's recording up to more possibilites. Yamaha even provides the instrument defs for the MM6 at Motifator.

This is an arranger keyboard bundled as a budget studio in a box. If Yamaha has done this on the low end of the keyboard market.., why can't they do something for the semi and pro level market?

They can call it the Mini-Mo all they like.., but at the end of the day it's still an arranger. Yamaha even confirmed that at Motifator and released info that the MM6 is made in the PSR factory.

Learning an operating system is learning an operating system. Understanding how your instrument works and how to get the best out of it is the same practical learning curve you have to go through whether its a korg , roland kurzweil or yamaha. There are people on the motifator forum who used to use the Fantom who cant get their head around the XS operating system and it kills their workflow. The same is true on the fantomised forum from people who have switched from another manufacturers instrument to the fantom.

Once you have learned how your keyboard works , you can develeop your own workflow that can get the job done efficiently. I accept that a keyboard like the tyros 1,2,or 3 might have serious challenges in terms of sequencing from scratch a musical composition because the target group this instrument is aimed at might never ever produce an original piece of music but that is not the case with the PA series. It comes from the triton workstation stable and not just in terms of its sonic qualities.

You cant compare building a house with tools that are blatantly inadequate for building a house. Making music is the house (all kinds of music) in this example and if you cant do that using a keyboard be it an arranger keyboard like the tyros or the pa series then you cant make music period. How you get there is just a matter of preference . All i am saying is that arrangers like the PA series facilitate music production using workflows that traditional workstations in comparisson struggle to do but the PA can work in the traditional linear sequencing method with more than adequate sampling and editing facilities just as readily.

I've been saying this in pretty much every p¡ssing thread there's been on here for the last twelve months. Case in point, the Tyros that lasted less than a week in my ownership, before being sold on and replaced with my venerable E86. After twenty years playing nothing but Roland, I couldn't make head-nor-tail of Yamaha's user interface in live performance.

Don't feel too bad... half the people that own arrangers of ANY kind can't figure out the OS too well Go to any support forum for proof if you don't believe me.

I guess the difference is, if something SONICLY is so good that you absolutely MUST use it, however long it takes you to unlearn your habits from the previous, it is worth the work. No doubt, if I ever make a move to Korg or Yamaha, it will be me pulling my hair out for quite a while but if the sound is THAT good, for me at least, it will make me knuckle down and do it.

It's all about MUSIC and sound, after all. Nobody in the audience cares how good the OS is Just how good you sound.