Since the economy may not allow people to buy TOTL arrangers what would be a way for arranger manufacturers to possibly expand their market and keep their current customers happy without making a TOTL arranger?
Why not an arranger module.
Cheap ($1000 or less), full midi implementation, small, under 10 LBS and gives a preview of what is to come in their new TOTL arranger once the economy gets better.

This would be for persons who have keyboards already. And for those who have workstations that have a little of the arranger technology and the player wants to get in to arranger playing but not spend a lot of money.

I am thinking maybe Korg or Roland could take advantage of this (as we know Yamaha does not look at what could be economically feasible for the customer).

So if you have a G70 Motif xs or a T3, and like the Korg sounds and styles, or just want a little variety, if there were a Korg arranger module you could have that an not spend a lot of money (buying a PA 2x pro or PA 800).
The key to it is that it would have to be affordable. Because it would not be a necessary product but a desirable one. It would give a non Korg user a taste and may win them over when the next TOTL arranger comes out for Korg. Any manufacturer could do this Roland, Yamaha, Korg or Ketron. Although Ketron would not be able to do this right.
now.

In the case of Korg, Yamaha or Roland, they can have the module based on their current TOTL arrangers with a few of the sounds and features of their next TOTL arranger.

I just think the Ketron really is in a bad situation releasing a TOTL arranger in this economy. I don’t think that Korg, Yamaha or Roland would be putting out a TOTL until there are signs of the economy picking up.

What this does is that they do not have to rush to release a TOTL arranger they can continue to work and perfect on features before the release of the TOTL arranger.
JMO

No, I think Ketron doing right in try to make a new arrangerkeyboard different from others,
but whats wrong is that they put it into the market way to early regarding to how finished
the product are, and also (at least where I live) they price it at the highest price level
that make me wanna open it to see where the diamonds are hidden.
You know, if you're able to put resourses and money in developement projects during the bad
economic times, it's very often good strategy that may pay out well over time.
when you're at the bottom of a wave, it usually flat out and start go upwards again.

It's good to see that Ketron dare to develope now when others like Technics and Gem are
gone, Roland discontinued the top of the line arrangers, and Yamaha practically just milking
the market by release new top end with minor changes.
Korg seem to be silent and cooled down, and maybe they will pop up and surprice us?

But, Ketron most stop think we are going to pay that high price to be betatesters if they
want to keep happy and stable customers!

Cheers
GJ

And that is exactly my point.
A ground breaking TOTL arranger is going to cost a lot of money.
That is why Ketron is in a bad position.
Now before people say there is nothing ground breaking in the Audya, whether you like the concept or not or whether it performs the way you want it or not, it is doing something that no other arranger does. It plays audio parts in a style other than drums.
It is as ground breaking as T2 having SA voices.

Back to the topic, it may behoove Korg or Roland not to put out a TOTL arranger right now. I think Roland is following this path as they have only put out a low-end arranger (which is a very good low end) GW 8.

And, it seems as if they are testing out some of the new features that would be on their next TOTL arranger.

Since Korg has the PA 2x and 800 out for a whiled, and instead of giving OS updates for free, what is wrong with making a little money and putting a module out and previewing their next TOTL arranger and could possibly attract new Korg arranger fans.

Ketron already do an arranger module called the SD3.

Designing, Developing, Tooling and Producing a new arranger module is just as expensive as a new arranger keyboard, therefore while bringing out a module of an existing arranger may be economically viable, (There is still all the tooling costs to take into account) no manufacture will make one unless they are 100% sure that they can easily re-coup their costs.

Best way to bring it forward is to petition the manufactures so that they know the demand is there.

Bill

If a manufacturer is in business and wanting 100% surety of recouping cost, they should not be in business.

I believe the module helps the strike a balance between Yamaha and Korg’s approach to updating an existing keyboard.

Korg has some features they want to add they release a free update to the OS )no revenue for Korg excellent for the customer).
Yamaha has some features they want to add they release a new keyboard ( New revenue for Yamaha not good for customer they have to buy another keyboard around same price as the old one).

With a module, it is a win win situation. Company gets additional revenue and possibly new customers and consumer does not have to pay full price for a new keyboard but gets some additional features.
The price will be very important in this strategy it MUST be affordable.

Could it be the time for arranger modules? Something that could get in the hands of arranger and workstations users alike?


[This message has been edited by to the genesys (edited 11-01-2009).]

Depend if it's directed to the "pro" or private/amateur market.

If the equipment are a tool for your income, it's more a matter of how long time (number of gigs)
before you start to earn any money.
If it's for fun, it's a question about interests an if your bankaccount are well filled

GJ

I fully agree with the post by "to the genesys"

His comments are almost identical to what I have said when, some time ago, I made a post on here and also on another site regarding the lack of modules.

I have, in the past, already written to Roland and Korg because both of these companies have previously sold some of their products in module form.

Ketron is alone among the arranger manufacturers in that they have always produced a module. I still use a Solton MS40 - still ultra reliable after many years of use and humping around on gigs. This has a few sounds which are still better than some on both my Tyros3 & Technics KN7000.

The Ketron SD3 is a brilliant module, let down only because it has stuck with the outdated floppy disk rather than build in a USB pen drive fitting. It can be bought with a Hard Drive but this is a rip-off by Ketron - the price difference is disgusting when you consider the cheap prices of giant hard drives which are on the market now.

As I have stated before, If every manufacturer offered a module, I would definitely buy them all - easy to swap around (or even use in unison) and there is no better way of sussing a keyboard out without a big spend. It was the use, many years ago, of a Technics SMAC 1200 module, (which I still have - working perfectly) which turned me onto Technics keyboards and led to me buying many of their products. This should be all the incentive any manufacturer needs.
Tony

nah....too may wires to hook up who wants to carry & setup more stuff to gigs........instead I'd like to see them bring back Pro looking "BLACK" keyboards!!
http://www.rolandus.com/products/productdetails.php?ProductId=439

[This message has been edited by Dnj (edited 11-01-2009).]

You are correct about Korg and Roland coasting along and not about to produce a new TOTL (or even an MOTL)in the near, or perhaps, not so near future.

You have to sell new keyboards to make a profit...updating for free is fine, as long as you have something new and fresh to stimulate new buyers.

Neither Korg nor Roland have anything that you could call "new" waiting in the wings...Korg's free DNC upgrade was introduced as a stop gap measure, so they could still compete with Yamaha's relentless forward motion with SA voices, and then SA2.

It seems more like a desperate move, to my feeling, because without the DNC, the PA series was no better than the G70, and not at all in the same lofty category as an SA and Mega voiced equipped Tyros2, let alone a Tyros3.

I also think that Roland and Korg aren't as financially healthy as one might suppose...in fact, maybe Korg will need rescuing by Yamaha once again.

Think of it...neither Roland or Korg have anything to compare with SA, and now, the T3's (and S910's) new Guitar NTT's and the former's new SA2 voices, have them pushed further back.

I suspect Korg and Roland are strapped for cash regarding arranger Research and Development...partly due to the economy, and, especially in Roland's case, very poor MOTL and TOTL arranger sales.

Not sure how Korg arrangers are doing, but in my district, even Roland outsold them in TOTL sales...and there were two G-70's sold here.

Having said that, we do have a healthy arranger market in my territory...I'm doing a lot of clinics on Yamaha arrangers (Roland and Korg don't do diddly), and I'm sure it not only benefits Yamaha arrangers, but arrangers in general, as not everyone is not going to want the Yamaha sound coming out of their speakers (a lot do, just the same) and will inquire about Roland and Korg, if that's their bag.

So, it may also be likely that Korg may come out with a low end arranger (like the GW-8) to compete, and also to try and recoup the losses interred from R&D with the PA-series, and like Roland, they'll use the current technology (maybe even using DNC, to give them an edge over the GW-8 and McPrelude)...I can't see either company coming out with a new TOTL.

Yamaha's strategy, despite all it's critics, of introducing incremental (and not so incremental) changes every three years or so, is obviously working...automobile makers in Japan have been doing this for decades...you have to have fresh produce to bring them to the market, otherwise they'll go the flea-market.

Yamaha, like Korg, Roland and Ketron, look at what is economically feasible for themselves...not what is economically feasible for the customer...if they don't, they won't be in business very long.

Business is business, and business is profit, and profit means staying in business.

Sure, it may seem stupid (or greedy) to us consumers, but if it's stupid and it works...it isn't stupid.

If they weren't greedy ("profitable" is a better word), they'd be out of business, and we'd all have to buy Mediastations, since Dom is not a greedy person.

Of course, with the economic downturn, he may have to put one pickle less on his sandwich, and maybe use Casio styles instead of lifting Yamaha's.

And, there won't be an arranger module by any of the Big Three....Yamaha doesn't need to make one, as Tyros/PSR sales are already healthy, and Korg and Roland can't afford the R&D.

Again, these are my personal opinions...I don't claim any insider knowledge of any of the aforementioned companies...at least no more than you do.

Quote Dnj:
nah....too may wires to hook up who wants to carry & setup more stuff to gigs........instead I'd like to see them bring back Pro looking "BLACK" keyboards!!

Some are not interested in modules & I respect that but some of us love them.

Much easier than carrying 2 keyboards, as I used to before I started using Modules. Wires needed (2) are just the same as a those for a second keyboard - just 1 midi cable & 1 audio lead. Setting up my Solton MS40 module takes less than 1 minute and repays me infinitely with the extra sounds at my command.

Some may be sold on Pro looking BLACK keyboards - I don't care whether my gear looks Pro or not as long as it sounds good.
Two different sources of sounds & styles bring far more variation of the total sound you create and each fills in the other's weak spots.
Tony

Roland and Korg need to get the professional part of the Yamaha arranger market.
They are not going to do that by making another keyboard.
They have to entice customers to buy their product.
They also have to have something fresh to add to the arranger market. It would need to be marketed well.
An arranger module would be the best and most cost effective way of doing so.
If I am a serious musician with a T3 and limited money, I am not going to jump ship and put down a lot of money to get another brand unless I have developed a relationship with that other brand.

O and incremental upgrades on a new keyboard is not necessarily the best way to go. Yamaha could do that because they know the type of market they have. Korg and Roland have a more mature and discerning market. Do you think if Korg came out with a new keyboard with DNC in stead of an OS upgrade that would have gone down well with its market?


[This message has been edited by to the genesys (edited 11-01-2009).]

[This message has been edited by to the genesys (edited 11-01-2009).]

The only way any keyboard sounds good is if the player plays good plain & simple. Ian is right on the money about modules. If you like them Ketron is the way to go. But for me less is more always.

And if your favorite manufacturer does not have a black pro looking keyboard, an arranger module is the perfect solution. You can use your favorite black pro looking keyboard (arranger or workstation) midied to the arranger module and you have the best of both worlds.

So the workstation players who frown on arrangers but secretively would like to use them on gigs, can do so with an arranger module.

And, it would not take but one additional minute to set-up an arranger module for the benefit of having fresh sounds and styles.

Yes, Yamaha know their market well...that's why they are successful at selling to both the mature and discerning client, as well as the one who just plays for fun.

You obviously don't have a Yamaha, so where do you stand? Mature and discerning? Naah...you play a GEM Genesys...you're in it for all the fun you can have, aren't you, you sly fellow you!

"You can tell the age of the boys, by the price of their toys."

If Korg had brought out a new keyboard with the DNC, it would have sold very well, alongside the other PA series.

Yamaha brought out SA2 on the T3, and it sold very well...just like the Tyros2 with SA sold very well.

Tyros2 are very popular on the second hand market....they are still a bargain for the mature and discerning.

Roland and Korg aren't bringing out new TOTL arrangers because they can't.

They have no money, and/or nothing really new technologically.

Meanwhile, we await the Tyros4 eagerly....I don't mind a company selling me "anticipation" as long as the deliver in the end, which Yamaha always manages to do quite well.

Come on, Genny, trade in that outdated GEM for a real mature and advanced arranger...get yourself a Tyros3, or a PSR-S910, and have fun whilst being mature and discerning.

Arranger modules aren't profitable...that's why Roland stopped making the RA-series.

And, as Donny said..."too many wires" for the home, semi-pro, and the occasional mature and discerning player to deal with.

BTW...I am most certainly not "mature", as I play for fun(and get paid well for it), but, I am "discerning" so I chose Yamaha above the rest, even though the rest do make fine instruments.

SPOT ON POST Ian...after all my auditioning of Arrangers in the last few years I can finally say as of today I am very happy with what Yamaha has done with arrangers for my needs.

Another big advantage of modules is that those guys who like more than 61 notes or weighted action (and there are many) could use the master keyboard they prefer and still be playing a Tyros3, Korg PA2X or Roland E80 - IF - these manufacturers produced the modules.
Most would probably have 2 modules on the top - quite a lot to go at there.

Not going to happen! - I know, but it still makes sense and we can dream.
Tony

Are these people so insecure they can't use an arranger on a gig?

Wow! That's pretty sad.

I use what I want, and I only have to please me, not try to impress someone else...it's not what instrument you play, but how you play.

Of course, I might be a little embarrassed if I had to play a GEM Genesys.

Just kidding about the last part.

Totally serious about the first.

I don't think people give Yamaha credit for all of the new S.A. regular voices the T3 has over the T2.

If it were just the S.A.2 voices, and there are few of them, that wouldn't be a big deal, but there are several dozen new S.A. voices and new Mega!Voices and new drums.

Sure, The T3 would have been a complete coup if they had included a TC Helicon quality harmonizer.

An arranger module is an interesting idea, especially if you can assign buttons on your controller.

I still prefer one piece of equipment for an easy setup and take down - in my case, 10 minutes or less.

Beakybird

That would be nice, Tony...no doubt modules would be handy, but as friend Diki pointed out on another thread, the manufacturers have to allow their respective instruments (or modules) to talk to one another.

Sure, a Roland module will work best with a Roland controller, or arranger, and the same for Yamaha with Yamaha...it's when you mix 'em up that you get problems.

Roland got out of making them for a reason...not profitable? Too complicated for the average user?

Whatever it was, they dropped them cold turkey.

Ianmcnll: yes I play the Genesys. But if I were in the market for a new arranger I would not buy a T3, Pa2x nor a G70. As I am unfamiliar with the sounds and styles of those brands. Now if either of them had a module, I would be more willing to buy the module, see how the sounds and styles work for me and then when the TOTL comes out I may be willing to go for that. If I don’t at lease I have another sound and style source and the
manufacturer would have gotten my money.

Arranger Modules are not making money because there are no modules out there by the big 3. You have to make the product in order to make money from the product.


I do agree that Korg and Roland are not making a TOTL arranger not just because they have no money to make it but they are a little uncertain if they could make money from it in this economy.

That is why the module is really their best option.

For Roland and Korg as it relates to arrangers, they have to play or go home.


Again, they have to get those person who may have gotten one of their TOTL arrangers but chose Yamaha instead. A module would be the most effective way of doing so.

And no if Korg had put out a new PA with just the addition of DNC and charged the same as a PA2x pro, they would not have heard the end of it and they may not have had a good number of sales. You see Korg customers are not that gullible as …

Yes Ian, I know that problems with midi specs can arise.

In my case, my Technics KN7000 talks to my MS40 without problems - so does my Roland EM2000 - have controlled both the MS40 & the Technics with that. However, I don't ask the midi to do a lot - change voices for instance on the MS40 using the MS40's own panel.

But midi spec standards are now slipping badly. When you consider how long it is since midi was implemented, it shows that the manufacturers care little for the concerns of their loyal customers and nowadays do the bare minimum they can get away with.
The midi specs on my Tyros3 are a joke.
Tony

Rumor has it TCH & Yamaha are in negotiations .....more to come in future units...

As far as midi implications talking easily with other KB's......don't count on it it a manufacturers only defense. I could see in the very near future that styles and sounds will be tightly proprietary so that you cannot use styles that work properly between different manufacturers either.
And who can blame them?



[This message has been edited by Dnj (edited 11-01-2009).]

Oh yes they are...they bought the original PA without knowing there was an upgrade coming...that was just a nice perk, and a necessary one for Korg to supply, since Yamaha's SA and Mega technology was making the Korg sound rather plain and and dull.

Contrary to what you seem to believe, modules aren't that much less expensive to make than a full keyboard arranger...in fact, they charged quite a bit for the RA-series back in the day.

In my opinion, they were more trouble than they were worth, especially for someone on a busy gigging schedule, that was setting up and tearing down a lot.

Tone modules are much easier to integrate than arranger modules....if I was to add anything, it would just be a tone module, and trigger it from my arranger.

I'm already more than pleased with Yamaha's factory styles and their great 3rd party support.

The majority of RA modules I sold, back in the day, were to organists. Once demographics took care of them, the only customers left to punt them to were Yamaha digital piano owners. Yamaha eventually raised their game with the CVPs and saw that market off. Roland got out when there were no buyers left, simple as that.

I suspect the same explanation holds true for arrangers, sadly.

I really couldnt care if all arrangers go down the tubes.....I could just as easily as I do now record multitrack songs with a Motif, etc etc and play on top no big deal for me to make backing tracks. Yes I'd miss the realtime live play of styles but if needed theres always the alternative.

carry on

True...I used a Clavinova CLP-300 (chopped for portability) with an RA-50, then an RA-90, and the last one I used was an RA-800, I believe.

They were also quite popular with accordionists.

I remember trying to hook an RA-95 up to Electone HS-8 at the last minute, on a store demo...it wasn't pretty.

I have a guitarist/singer friend who gigs every day with a RA95 & sounds great......because he's the "REAL DEAL"
I used to gig with a Korg M1 &
RA90 w/super card...for the times it was the bees knees!!

What some people seem to forget is that a module created today should not and can not be the same type of module created yesterday.
Interactive keyboards, arrangers or what ever you want to call keyboards that make one person sound like a band are much different from 15 years ago.

OMB gigs are coming more the norm and economically may be a necessary thing for keyboardist. So why not now for an arranger manufacturer to create and market an arranger module? With a module, the manufacturer is not ask the consumer to do away with their favorite arranger, but they are saying add me to your rig.

Imagine some one with a G70 who may want the Korg sounds but not able to buy a TOTL Korg arranger.

If Korg had a module, they could add that to their rig and if they like, when Korg does make the next TOTL arranger it would be a top contender.

And the same would be true if someone has the Korg PA2x and Roland made a module.

Remember with an arranger module, the manufacturer would not be reinventing the Wheel. It would be the same cost as adding a low-end arranger.

If the big three don’t do it, may be Casio would think about getting in to the professional market by starting with an arranger module.

In Scandinavia arranger modules still are very popular, but mostly used midied to accordions.
If I'm not totally wrong, that's the main market where modules being sold, but I think it's
like the rest of the market these days, not any really big sales.
Also it looks like Ketron are the only brand left to choose.

GJ

GJ

Actually, Casio did make an arranger module back around 1989, called the CSM-1.

Primitive today, but pretty cool back in the 80's.

I had one here that came with an old electronic accordion I bought at an estate sale.

There are gaps beginning in the arranger market, left by Roland, for one, and rumor has it that Casio has plans for filling them.

Apparently it's an arranger that will sit between the MOTL and TOTL...

For example, Yamaha has the S910, and then there's a big price jump to the Tyros3.

Casio certainly has the clout to pull it off, if they want to...they made great pro synths (CZ-1) and samplers (FZ-1) some time ago.

I've heard, from a pretty reliable source, that they are working on something similar to Korg's DNC....and it's for a new arranger, and perhaps, a digital piano/arranger.

Time will tell.

http://www.synthmania.com/CSM-1.htm

Yep, that's it Donny.

Listen to the DEMO song "Nightbirds" on that page.

I used to play that tune on my Electone for the opening of my demo....

What a cool "plastic" sound the CSM-1 had...very retro....and very dated.

Orla still make a couple based on their organs, presumably targeted at accordionists in their native Italy, but they're nothing to write home about.
http://www.orla.net/xm900.php

The type of arranger module I am talking about is not for accordion or guitar players but for keyboard players.
And, the point of making an arranger module is not to make it the same size as its keyboard counterpart.
I know Ketron and Gem make arranger modules and they would say they do not sell and that is because they made it wrong.

You can not make it big and bulky and you can not make it almost the same size as a keyboard. And, you can not charge the same price you would a keyboard.
I am sorry but the arranger modules that are out there are not for keyboard players.

If people are saying that arranger modules would not sell then they are saying that arrangers would not sell.

The key to an arranger module would be how you market it.

With an arranger module, you can reach more people than you could with an arranger keyboard.

If Roland and Korg can not sell arranger modules (which would be an item that would be an addition rather than a replacement to someone’s rig), why do they think they would be able to sell more arranger keyboards (when they are asking persons to replace a major item in their rig)?

Remember arrangers are much more accepted now than they were years ago. Roland and Korg had arranger modules back in the day. They saw the value of having a module; it was just that arrangers were not accepted at that time.

But from talking with some manufacturers about arranger modules, they use the argument that Yamaha uses when we ask Yamaha for a 76 key arranger (the 9000 story).
Contrary to what some people believe, the reason for not having an arranger module is not that it will cost a lot to make it but that manufacturers are afraid to make it.

You're probably right...how would you go about marketing an arranger module?

What suggestions would you pass on to the manufacturer to ensure success?

I am sure that any ideas you may have to promote such a product would be duly noted by the Big Three.

I am not being sarcastic...I'm serious...how would you "encourage" the marketing mavens to get the ball rolling on the production of such a product?

Well for starters, you can not just market it as an arranger module. How boring!
You have to market it as –this thing that you connect to your keyboard and get great sounds and styles that make you sound like a band--.
Remember, the market is not just your traditional arranger players but more generally those keyboard players who find them selves doing OMB/DJ type gigs.

Do you remember the hyped the SR16 drum machine had when it first came out?


The sad thing about it is that the company who could really pull this off is the company who is least likely to do it (Yamaha).

This however may be something that Casio could take advantage of if they want to get in to MOTL and TOTL arrangers. It would add a fresh name to the professional arranger market.

The best way to sell someone on a product is to "paint a dream" for them.

The mark...er...prospect, should be painted a picture whereby they can envision themselves reaping the benefits of having an arranger module integrated with their keyboard/digital piano/workstation/older arranger.

Start from there, and expand on the advantages and possibilities.

One other advantage of an arranger module is that it could present an opportunity for another brand to have full midi implementation on their keyboard arranger.

If brand A has a keyboard arranger and brand B has an arranger module, then their would be more incentive for brand A to have much better arranger midi implementation on their arranger.
I know when some people think of an arranger module the first thing they think is take away the keys from an arranger and you have a module. That would be the worst way you could do it.
This arranger module I am talking about is not another version of the existing TOTL arranger but it is more a precursor to the next TOTL arranger.

But you must also keep in mind that the arranger module is not just for some one to midi an arranger to the arranger module You can also midi a WS to the arranger module where midi implementation is good.
On the arranger module panel it will at least have the variation, fill, intro and endings, sound and style selection and registration buttons.

And if brand A is making an arranger module, they should look at brand B, C, D E F’s arranger keyboard and see what type of midi capabilities they have and brand A arranger module should have receive midi implementation that could work with them.


A good arranger module that is popular and purchased by people would put pressure on arranger manufacturers to implement midi on their arranger.
And, the company that makes the arranger module would be in the same line up as their competition.
If you can’t beat them, join them.

Regarding your experience with Technics that is a reason that a lot of persons over look for an arranger module.

The arranger module would not be for someone to replace their current arranger but it would provide them with arranger sounds, styles and features from another manufacturer.

You would not have every conceivable button on the arranger. You would have the essential buttons for gigging.

And, as Diki has stated on another thread, a foot pedal can be use to eliminate having to use your hand for some of the most used functions on an arranger. So I think he also understands how an arranger module can be used.

After you have the arranger module, when the real TOTL arranger comes out the customer may have been converted to that brand. And if not, the manufacturer has their name in that person’s rig.

You would have to look at the arranger as a marketing tool for the manufacturer.

Its like the I phone. It has computer task that are best done on a computer. But what the I phone does is saturate the market with Mac tools and products so when selling computers, Mac has the reference to I phones. Same thing with arranger modules.

So if Korg, Roland or Casio wants to get back in to the arranger market (TOTL or MOTL), they may be well served to take a new approach.

Not to mention, they could encourage some of the ws market with this new machine.

I know there is another thread about arranger modules, but that is a completely different product than what I am talking about. Over there, they are just talking about taking the keys from an arranger and selling it as a module. That is far from what I am advocating.