That's because the G70 is Roland's best keyboard ....maybe....the industry's best..

The only thing I never really liked about the G-70 was the weight - just too much for an old codger like me.

Cheers,

Gary

Gary...I remember the "old 'days...the G70 is lighter than that Hammond I hauled around in the 60's ..or the Rhodes and Wurlies in the 70's and 80's .. ...even that accordion after 4 hours playing while standing ....now the G70 doesn't seem that heavy...

Can't argue with that... we ALL wish they could have made it lighter (but at no price in feel or touch or capability).

But given that it CAN'T (the action alone in a G70 weighs nearly as much as some budget keyboards... the price you pay for having weights in an almost piano sized key), I'm still waiting anxiously for something better to replace it with. There are many newer arrangers with bells and whistles that I really wish that I could have. But I can still stick recordings of the G70 next to state of the art arrangers like the Audya, and have it's MIDI drums compare VERY favorably to the Audya's streaming audio samples, I can put its' piano up to the latest offerings from Yamaha and Korg and have them fall short, I can still edit faster, more comprehensively, and vastly easier on the G70.

Perhaps it is something about this that makes some people here continually bring it up as a comparison to what they prefer?

After all, no-one here would EVER consider that those of us that don't have one continually referring to it could EVER possibly be doing it out of malice, spite or just to get a rise.... After all, there are plenty of PA50, KN's or VA76 users to do that to!

Nope. Must be something memorable to make it all worthwhile..!

I remember those old day as well, Fran - 100-pound speakers, two hour setups, and 8 trips to the van just to get the gear inside. Back then, though, we were young and invincible!

There were lots of great features on the G-800 I owned for a couple years. In some ways I wished I would never have traded it in, but that's all water over the dam.

If there were just one thing I would wish to have on any keyboard is a high-end vocal processor. Some are pretty good these days, but they're still not quite to the level of the stand-alone processors.

Cheers,

Gary

Makes me wonder why Roland, after making the near perfect G70, all but ended moving forward with the arranger business.

It may have been a great keyboard, but not everything great is popular.

Poor marketing?
Too expensive?
Not portable enough?
Difficult OS?

It's a shame...Competition, inspires something future arrangers need... Innovation.

I can still take my old E50 to the job on any given night, and nobody but me knows the difference.
Almost my only criticism of the Roland line is the lack of break/fills. Yes there are workarounds, but shouldn't have to be.
I would really like a BK7m with vocal processing and break/fills.
But, since there isn't a suitable Roland, I am truly happy playing the PA3X. I've barely touched the capabilities it has.
DonM

That's because all the capabilities you need are in your hands and your voice !!!

You can tell from Roland's marketing, and their almost comical bending over backwards to avoid using the word 'Arranger' either on the products or in any of the literature, that they must have done some serious market research, and discovered that there is an association between 'Arranger' and cheeze (or at least lowered sales because of it!).

Perhaps we have ALREADY become the 'home organ' in its' declining years? Too square to be even mentioned?

Perhaps it is time to get on over to the Synth/WS forums, and start to make noise about bringing some of the practical things from arranger operation to be ADDED to existing WS OS's..? Rather than this self-delusional idea that the existing arranger manufacturers are going to come to their senses and admit to themselves that they are being KILLED by the WS/Loop player segment, sales-wise, and if they don't adopt some of what makes them so popular, it's game over.

I must admit, I am stuck between a rock and a hard place. I really don't want to lug TWO bits of kit to do a job, but increasingly, WS's like the Kronos and MoXF are able to do things no WS can really approach, but no WS is as easy to use on a gig as a good arranger. One of the two needs to adopt the best features of the other.

But I think I can tell from the head in sand attitude here, and the almost puritanical approach by the arranger manufacturers that they had better not adopt anything remotely usable by a younger player (lest we get confused too easily!), that nothing is going to improve on OUR side of the fence. I guess we can only hope that WS/Loop players gradually morph into something we can use...

I think Roland's gradual disappearance from the high end arranger market is simple admission from them that there ISN'T a high end arranger market, at least not one that sells in the kinds of numbers they used to have, and paid for the R&D it needed. I am pretty sure that, if the figures were public, we'd see a drop in high end sales by ALL the manufacturers. Some are big enough, or have cornered the majority share of the dwindling market to survive, some aren't, or have just decided it's not worth fighting over an ever disappearing market segment.

Roland's move into the downmarket segment I think reflects what has happened to our arrangers... Losing market, losing relevance, only kept in production to satisfy us old fogies!

Shame, really...

I'd like to see the numbers for world wide sales of Yamaha and Korg Arrangers vs Yamaha and Korg Synths/WS.

It would be an interesting comparison and could provide some information on the future of arranger keyboards.

Are sales so overwhelming down for arrangers that indeed the end is near?

My guess is that sales are good enough, as many baby boomers (me included) who comprise a huge segment of the World population will keep on purchasing arrangers and they will not let arrangers die...at least not yet.