Dom, I did not give you permission to use my file. You are welcome to link to it at the Roland-arranger.com site, but it is NOT your right to simply lift it and use it on your own website. You'd be in big trouble if you lifted any of the great Roland factory demos, or any of the T3 demos, but somehow you feel MY work is fair game?

And, in the spirit of fair comparison, you included NO information about how the demo was done. This was OOTB. Factory ROM style, factory ROM OTS's, no tweaks of any kind whatsoever. I even randomly picked the style! You want to make a comparison, have someone sit down at the MS and randomly pick ANY style, and simply record what comes out without any tweaking or substitution. THAT was what that demo was about.

Given plenty of time, I could no doubt do MUCH better.But the point is, you DON'T NEED 'big work is to remap the sounds on qranger'.

It already sounds great... Doesn't need a fortune in VSTi's, doesn't need months of work tweaking styles or loops.

Yes, some of those demos sounded very good. And some of them sounded very bad. And there isn't the slightest information up there to tell you HOW any of them were made. With a 'closed' arranger, you KNOW how a demo was made. Whether sequenced or style play, it was made 100% on the internal sounds of the arranger. Without more information, there's simply no way to tell WHAT was doing what on most of these demos.

You see, if an arranger (say the PSR S900) has an MP3 or .wav player built in, you could play a recording of the London Symphony Orchestra, and 'technically', it WAS 'played on an S900' But, of course, you don't see Yamaha stooping to that. For a keyboard as 'open' as the MS is, informing your customers HOW something was produced (in real English, too - sorry, but your halting mixture of techno speak and bad English loses a LOT in translation!) will help them decide if what the MS does is right for them.

It appears you have found some good players with MS's (whether you lifted THEIR work or they did these for you is open to question, though ). But if these WERE produced for you, NOW is the time to ''open the box' have them sit down at an MS, and record something without tweaking. Let's hear, finally, what we are going to get if we buy an MS, and let's hear what we are going to have to do for ourselves afterwards.

We all knew all along what you can do with a bunch of VSTi's. Let's face it, listen to the radio, you can hear that every day, by talented producers working in studios with big computer systems. But for the MS to be anything more than a VSTi player, we have needed to hear ARRANGER produced music. And, sadly, these demos still leave a LOT of unanswered questions...

Well he has already lifted the factory sounds and styles from the Tyros, so I don't think he cares what anyone thinks.

[This message has been edited by Irishacts (edited 08-17-2009).]

This is the true point!

James...I posted this demos NOT for make comparation BUT because the MS is able to running and play simple and complex VST/ASIO and also the Gigalibrary.
Roland Hypercanvas is the last version 1.6.0 available from march 2009 and is not so old.
I hav used it because is full GM/GS 16 tracks, simple to use with the double midiplayer, load the file and play.
The Gigasounbank GM2, is only 1200Mb of data and are not included the full Roland GM/GS program change, so..for some midifiles will be played the first available sounds.

Same happen with the Livestyler with the YXG-50 VST, is NOT a T3 sounfounts and are missing the SA sounds and for that you get some strange sounds.

Now back to the Genesis post:
On the MS the problem is who will play it and not what the MS is able to produce.
Take for example the "Romance giga" demo, for sure you like the strings...but you know how much cost the complete Vienna giga library? are around 900 euro now...

The example is really simple: give one G-70/Tyros 3 to Diki and then you know how will sounds...
Then give the same G-70/Tyros 3 to Michel Voncken...for sure will not sounds the same..

Now about the styles/qranger:
The Qranger is a standard Audio-Midi SEQ with the addons of Chords layers TAB's and patterns system.

IF someone there DO NOT have years of experience to use one SEQ, like Cubase, logic, for sure under qranger is NOT able to develope nothing...we already listened some demos..

Give the MS with qranger to people ( like you James, or Mel or Pieradis Rossini.. ) that you guys have worked around for years on this Sequencer, you wil be able to compose the all stuff that you like.

Just take the example of Mel demos, simple tracks with the right VST and Giga sounds, one simple Audio-midi editor and the game is done.
Qranger is unlimited of audio-midi tracks, midi Outs for each chords layers, depend ONLY who will compose the style/song.

Anyway James, I will contact you by email and maybe we can find some agreement demos with the new GROOVE X6...

is years that we are waiting some nice legals letters..still waiting...maybe now I get one from Diki?
Are you scared that I resell your demo song?
Honestly...I get ONE legal fax letter from Roland,many years ago...
I was posting online the word: we design the future"
the next day I get the Fax from Roland Italy, to remove asap or they will proceed legally...
Changed to: " We create the future"...no more problems.

Now...after this all chaos about the Qranger..finally I get a nice call conversation from one of the big 3..Qranger and Linuxsampler license and porting engine...
we will see...

Fair enough, I understand your reasons and it's great that you can run Hypercanvas, I just believe that you should always put your best foot forward and in this case your Giga files are superior to the Hypercanvas. If you give people both versions of the same tune human nature is to question why one sounds better than the other. They are not going to automatically look at in the same way you explained it to me.



Sounds interesting and I'd certainly be up for that. I assume this is a new product as I don't know the name Groove X6 ?

Have you made any of the detail on that public yet ?



lol.... Your a hilarious. I know it's a gray area because your not reproducing the Yamaha Tyros technology that produces the sound, but it's a risk your taking. I think the fact that you have a non-profit price tag on the library helps you greatly as the copyright on styles allows you to legally do the same and get away with it.

James.

[This message has been edited by Irishacts (edited 08-17-2009).]

Let's put it this way, there's probably a lot LESS difference between what Michael and I can do on a T3/G70, and what an experienced VSTi/style programmer/sound designer and I can do on an MS...

As is so apparent from most of the MS user posts, the skill set to use and create great music on the MS is FAR greater than that needed to create great music on most closed arrangers. No offense to Micheal Voncken, but somehow, I doubt that even HE could pull a masterpiece out of his hat on the MS without CONSIDERABLY more work than it takes to get one out of the T3. Bottom line is, he CAN switch on his T3 and make it sound amazing OOTB. I defy ANYONE to do that on an MS...

So, fair enough... As I've been saying forever, you SHOULD be able to make great music on the MS. But what your customers REALLY need to ask themselves (before they buy one for the 'potential' ) is, do they REALLY have all the skills necessary to turn what is essentially a blank canvas into a masterpiece..? Because I think you'll find the majority of the arranger market (and, to be honest, a fair proportion of the WS market, that certainly wouldn't buy a MotifXS if it came with NO arps already programmed and a soundset that needs the majority of it replaced with other samples) are more a 'paint by numbers' crowd.

In other words, few of us start with pretty much NOTHING, and manage to create great music out of thin air. That's the whole PURPOSE for arranger styles and WS arps... To give us a leg up on creating professional sounding music. Sure, we want to put our own touch on things, but the whole point of an arranger is to help provide the backing tracks as a jumping off point for our own creativity.

NOT have to learn programming styles, loop manipulation and DAW skills just to get a bloody tune out to our friends and families (let's face it, arrangers are still mostly home keyboards, as are a large percentage of even WS's like M3 and MoXS).

I USED to use WS's, samplers, all that stuff, back in the day when arrangers basically sucked, and had to create all my music by hand, slowly, laboriously, tediously (and expensively, like when I had to hire drummers to come in and play my Hart Dynamics kit so my drum tracks didn't sound stiff ). But those days are over. I can use arrangers like G70, T3, PA2Xpro to make superb backing tracks, and use their MIDI data to drive VSTi's at home for recording purposes. All in a FRACTION of the time it used to take.

And I can take that same arranger out on a gig, and it just WORKS. Very little setup, no drama, and all the arranger features (like OnBass, fer Chis' sake ) that a gigging pro needs. Not to be TOO modest, but I think that I AM your 'top end' demographic. I am a pretty technical, computer savvy arranger user. And even I don't want to mess with this. There's a diminishing return with technology. And it diminishes more, every year. To make something noticeably better than a 80's model arranger didn't take that much work But to make something that is significantly better than you can make on a PA2/T3/G70/M3/MoXS takes a LOT of work.

And, lest we forget, the arranger is primarily a LIVE music tool. Most people that NEED to work with VSTi's and loops are already doing it with GIGA, Ableton Live, ProTools, etc., in a studio. But, out on stage, doing what we do for a living, the stability, ease of use and ease of setup is what marks what MOST arranger players need. You can continue to go the course you have chosen, and ignore 99% of the entire arranger/WS market, or you can pay SOME attention to what would make the MS sell in huge numbers, make you a rich man, and make our jobs easier. You have the hardware to do it.

Or, you can continue selling to a tiny handful of people that ARE capable of taming the MS, and quite a few more that simply don't realize how impossible the task is, and think that magically, the MOST technologically advanced arranger will automatically equate to advanced music. Which is VERY apparent (to those not self-delusional) that it doesn't...

Your choice.

BTW, no, you won't be getting a cease and desist letter from me. But it would have been POLITE to ask first. Oh, whoops...! WTF was I thinking? Forgot who I was talking to!

Not jumping on any bandwagon to bash the MS, but to emphasize Diki's point about having usable styles instantly available right out of the box, I stumbled across a 'secondary' (as indicate by the 2) style on my PA1x called Acid Jazz 2. It sounded kinda hip so I decided to play an approximation of the tune 'Summertime' over it (probably the wrong tune for the style). Ten minutes later, this was the result. 'Rhodes' in the beginning and piano solo (such as it is) is Roland Fantom G7. Unmixed, unedited, and lots of clunkers, so ignore 'me' and evaluate the style compared to something similar from the MS. Remember, this is a second tier style that I hadn't even checked out before now (and I've had the PA1x Pro for about three years now. Still a great sounding box even though the Roland pianos are better (to my ears). Recorded volume is kinda low so you may have to download it and play through something other than computer speakers.
http://www.box.net/shared/u861xryr6k

chas

That's pretty cool, chas...

Did you overdub the sax solo? Me, I'd take a crack at hanging a bit of bending and scooping on it to get it a hair more realistic. You know you can't find a sax player anywhere that's going to play dead 'straight' even if you wanted it! But that's a pretty good style. I'll have to see if I've got a translation for that one...

I use the Acid jazz styles (korg)..on "all" my keyboards..
http://www.yousendit.com/download/YkxMRFFYTmFvQnRFQlE9PQ

This is a converted Korg style from PA series...I filtered out the annoying sax and brass..I like it more basic..just a show off bass player and drummer...It uses a combination 808 kit and new rock...So Diki ..is that a "Hip Hop"??

It was the default E80 sounds...less the sax and acc brass...

[This message has been edited by Fran Carango (edited 08-18-2009).]

I'd take another crack at that one in the Makeup Tools, Fran... The whole POINT of 'acid jazz' is the acid!

Playing the same rhythms on conventional drums kind of loses the whole point. Try working on this one with one of the Hiphop kits, and you might end up with something more along the lines of chas's sound...

(You are going to have to shed to get up there with chas's PLAYING, though! )