I agree Don 100%...on top of that I think arranger players are so much more talented ...why because we are controlling and playing the parts of the whole orchestration instead of just one single part....."who cares" is the right answer.

Don, the musical establishment I'm referring to is rarely out of work. They have degrees from Juliard (or at least Berklee :)), can read a chart 'cold', play for 'The Tonight Show' or Letterman or some 25,000 member mega-church, and are on first call at half the major studios in the country. They also teach at the nation's finest schools and universities and are generally unfamiliar with the term 'my day job'. When they DO play in bars, it's usually for fun and 'letting off steam'. The words 'mainstream' or 'musical establishment' almost by definition excludes the 'weekend warrior' or those who have some other primary occupation. I only say this to distinguish between my and your definition of 'mainstream'. This is not to demean those OMB's who have carved out a nice comfortable living within that venue, but I think they make up a very tiny minority and therefore are not who I would consider the 'mainstream' of the PROFESSIONAL musical community.

Respectfully,

chas

Of course you do, Donny. After all, he DID have an opinion different from MINE.




Yep, it takes talent to hand sync (similar to lip sync) all those parts.





So, even though the arranger keyboard is the instrument of choice for most people here, you don't consider how it is perceived by the rest of the music community as a topic even worthy of discussion? BTW, there is no such thing as "THE right answer".

chas

Thanks Chas, there is a difference for certain and I wasn't thinking along those lines.
However, I'll still bet most of these mainstream musicians are totally unaware of even the existence of totl arrangers.
I'm thinking the general perception by them, and indeed the population at large, is one of toy Casio-type keyboards.
Many years ago I was offered a spot on trumpet in the Tulsa Symphony orchestra. At that time it paid pretty well, but circumstances prevented my taking it. (I was still making more money at my "real" job).
However, in our area, the Symphony has endured countless budget cuts to where it is a mere shadow of what it once was, and the shell of musicians still active in it or there more for the love of playing than for monetary reasons. It's truly a shame, but I suppose another reflection of our "progress". I hope it's not like that in other areas of the nation, but I suspect it is.
I believe even the traditional studio musicians are hurting in this respect too, because one person on a synth can replace an entire string section, choir, horn section, etc., for a tiny fraction of the percent of budget that used to be the case.
In fact, an increasingly greater part of pop music is now being created in private studios where one or a few people play and produce the entire song. At the very least, many of the top artists have some type of home studio where they can lay down the basis of a song, and perhaps only need studio help fleshing it out or mastering.
Relating to what I DO know about, I personally know several first-call Nashville studio musicians. Yes they can read charts, although most don't know the music notes, but they are first-call because of their abilities to improvise and create parts within the parameters of the charts.
I think I'm getting far away from the subject of the thread, but Chas always makes me THINK more than I'm accustomed to doing!
DonM

chas you know i love you and have genuine respect for your music chops.

Listen to this demo http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rwj4YN1eg4o

and if you have time this one by Jordan Rudess http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZG7Ddzo7k80

Then answer these simple questions :

1. Who is this instrument aimed at ?
2. During thes demos particularly steve Mcnally, can you tell if a sequence has been used, an arp/style midi SMF or just a combi ?
3. What, if anything distinguishes this performmance from what could be achieved on a high end Korg arranger for example ?
4. The demonstrator clearly did not play all the sounds you heard from the demo himself. Like arranger keyboards. Do you think real musicians might take this insrtument on stage or in the studio and use it in a similar way to this demonstration ? If not whyu do you think it was demonstrated this way ?

Whether people look down at arramngers or not its clear that auto accompaniment /arps are useful to both arrangers and pro workstation users .....

Jordan Rudess said that when he touches a musical instrument he is looking for inspiration . He was using Karma in one of his demos to illustrate the fact.

if that were not true you would not be seeing arranger features creeping in on EVERY Pro workstation from the motif to the M3,M50 Krono Roland fantom G etc

Its only a matter of time before we wont even be having a debate about arrangers and worksation. Trust me on that.

And i still respect your views my brother even though they are blinkered :-)

Cheers

Worth (arranger user and proud of it)

Don, there IS another difference between 'us' and the professional 'mainstream' musician; they wake up with a splitting headache because of a brutal 8 hr. rehearsal the previous day. WE, on the other hand, wake up with a hellava hangover because we had a great time on (and after) the gig (might have even gotten 'lucky' - can't remember - better get tested, just in case), and can't wait to get back to the next gig. Just something to consider when choosing you musical career path . Are we still on topic? The right answer is, "WHO CARES".



chas

Now your getting it

Yep, they probably are. That's because I'm old, opinionated, and very much a traditionalist......but not to the point of resisting the advances of technology. But music isn't science or technology, it's ART. Well probably a blend of both at this stage. I tend to lean in the direction of art. Let me be clear about this; I really love my arrangers (well, the PA1x pro anyway, the Tyros 2, not so much ). Everything you said in your post is of course, true, and the lines between workstation and arranger are certainly blurring. However, I think there is a distinct difference between an arpeggiator and a style player. One assists you, the other plays it for you. Well, it's more complicated than that but you know what I mean. I have nothing against arrangers OR arranger players (other than what Scott originally cited). I guess I have a small problem when they're used to deceive or misrepresent or, more importantly, be used to allow one (especially kids) to bypass the process of learning a 'real' instrument (one without auto-accompaniment). One does not start out flying a fighter jet or driving a formula one car. Learning the basics are important, in my book.

Hey look. Don't say "I'm an arranger player and proud of it". That sounds defensive. How about "I'm a MUSICIAN and proud of it". Sounds healthier .

Peace,

chas

PS: I still admire your work with those adorable kids. After a couple of hours with my grandkids, the only thing I want to do with kids is strangle them .

That's a terrific way of explaining it

Dennis

if that's the case, then who cares if . . .

you purchase tickets to an exclusive museum showing, expecting to see the original "Mona Lisa" painting and later learn you were only viewing a fake !

you dine at a fancy expensive restaurant and order "Kobe Beef" to only later discover it wasn't at all.