Here's an arranger keyboard setup that should suit everyone's needs. However, setup time may be a bit long and cumbersome, but it does it all.



Enjoy,

Gary

It won't all fit in my front room Gary, there's some old tosh there, no sign of a G70...

Gary what the song at 4.57 Each time we meet I can't control the love inside, know some of the words but can't think what it was called, YOU ARE MINE ????

Tony

Tony, the song is somewhere in the cobwebs of my mind, but for the life of me I cannot recall the title. You Are Mine is a religious song written many, many years ago.

There was a guy down the Jersey Shore who did a similar but even bigger thing before the Midi days. Al Rondo. B3 with 4 leslies, Conn theatre organ on his left with 4 gyro speakers ( 2/12" speakers on a spininng disk to give the string sounds a real vibrato) Mic'd baby grand on his right, two mini moogs on top of the B3. And probably about 8 15" speakers just for the pedals. Used a drum tracks 8 track drum machine and made the whole system sound like a symphony. Bus trips used to come to the Beacon Manor in Point Pleasant NJ to hear him. He could play ANYTHING AND he was blind. He was or still may be around but unbelivable !!! He could hold the crowd until midnight when he did his patriotic tribute and made the whole building shake. Waitresses would come out of the side doors with red/white/blue cupcakes with lit sparklers for the crowd. I feel fortunate to have seen him many times. Years later he moved to a place called PJ Ruggles and updated his system using synths, yamaha organ and 8 JBL 18" 3 way cabinets to be even more powerful. He invented "Live" Kareoke" People would come to sing and he would back them up-- any song, any key, all by ear. Last I heard he was just doing private parties with a Yamaha keyboard. If this guy in Florida is from Jersey, and he talks like he is, he must have known him

The last time I seen Al..he was in SeaGirt....He was playing two Kurz MIDI controllers and the Yamaha organ (the Kurz's flanked the Yamaha on each side)...There was a rack of sound modules...Al had a big sound...he had a polished sound, and like Bill said...He played anything you wanted to sing too...

http://www.lifealizer.com/2010/11/03/brennans-steakhouse_monmouth_county_restauran-r/


Al Rando was playing here a year ago...

WOW !! didn't know he was still playing. We used to go see him every year for my birthday. Last time was Brennan's but that was a few years ago. He was playing the Yamaha board doing mostly piano with strings back round music. Still great. We sat at the bar next to "Big Joe Henry" from Nj 101.5
A neat sidebar about Al. Once he met you he never forgot your voice. Every year I would go say hello and he remembered my name and that I was a musician (Not like him !!)) First time he heard an arranger keyboard was at my friends music store in Sea Girt " The Music Place" After hearing the Korg do a big band Style he just said " Sounds like a Japanese Big Band" but, like everything else he bought two.

So glad to hear Al is still doing it and I will make it a point to get there to see him one more time. Thanks Fran !!

Tony, I think it's called 'The World Outside'. I think it's based on a classical piece, but can't remember which.

124 that helped me find it thanks its THE WARSAW CONCERTO

Here it is a bit heavy use of the bass for me

You know, for an arranger that has been out of production for several years, it is quite astonishing how often the G70 is still brought up by detractors. Tony and Ian can barely post anything without trying to get a dig in about something that isn't even being MADE!

Perhaps it has been much more of an influence than many are willing to admit..?

Certainly, it seems that nobody is always taking a dig at old Yamaha's, or Korg's, Technic's or Bontempi's. Always the G70.

Me, I'd ALWAYS prefer to use something that is never forgotten! It's been what, 8-9 years since it came out..? I don't hear Tony or Ian ragging on the BK-5, or the E50, or G1000's, or VA7's. Somehow, mysteriously (as long as you discount malice, and we KNOW they have none of that, don't we?!) it's always the G70.

Sounds like the ladies doth protest too much!

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.

You last point there, Larry, touches on something I mentioned in an earlier post. I don't know if such figures have been published in other countries, but here in Canada the population in the 55-64 age group outnumbered that of the 15-24 group for the first time in history. And it's a widening gap, evidenced by governments pushing back retirement age qualification, and so on.

So it would seem to me that arranger manufacturers would be pleased by such population changes.

This, of course, is pure conjecture as much as any other theory put forth so far.

WOW, Bill, that is quite amazing!

It's really a shame. I think manufacturers should simply stop marketing arrangers as distinctly different products from their workstations. As styles are nothing more than a realtime MIDI feature I just think all workstations should all have style mode as well as conventional sequencers. Then the same keyboard would appeal to both markets and avoid having to create separate products. I would be much more inclined to buy a Motif or a Kronos that also provided a style mode. Then arranger buyers would be pleased to get the additional workstation features and workstation buyers would enjoy the additional style options. It would be a win-win siutation and the manufacturers would get better sales on the one model.

It is really nothing for manufacturers to add style software features to a workstation. Yamaha and Korg have already done the RD for the Tyros and PA series ... so just add that to the Motif and Kronos and make everyone happier. Maybe they may have to add a few more style dedicated buttons but mostly it is just incorporating the software they already have. And I could even live with them simply reassigning existing buttons for style use like they already do for other modes.

Nigel, sounds good except that I could forsee this problem. A combination device such as you describe would (necessarily) cost at least 1/3 more and many arranger players might not want to pay a premium for features they will never use (particularly home players) and vise versa. Also, as long as it has full-featured arranger features, it is GOING to be viewed as an arranger (with all the baggage that is attatched to that label). Look at the PA3x; very close to being a full featured WS but probably not purchased by any 'pure' synth/WS players. Still, as you said, it's probably the only viable solution. But first it (arrangers) will have to overcome the stigma it has with younger players.

chas

It shouldn't cost anymore really. It is really just an addition to the software which wouldn't increase the cost of the hardware. Maybe some more ROM, though in the case of a keyboard like the the Kronos it would just occupy some more hard drive space. The cost of style software development would be paid for by the extra sales to arranger users just the same as it is now even though currently they are having to buy a different product.

And I don't think any stigma of arranger features would matter if they were just another feature on a WS. Like the realtime control provided by a Karma they are just another performance tool to use if you choose to use them. I think the stigma only exists when that is the primary focus of a keyboard.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bQJr0hklTjw

in the demo above which we have all seen before it raised the bar in terms of how arrangers are percieved . read the comments . If Korg were to demo the workstation functions of an arranger they would sell more arangers. If they were to demo the sound creation functions , sampling functins , expandability in terms of sounds that could be purchased etc they would sell more arrangers. The deliniation between arrangers and workstation is only perception and i have made the point many many times before.

Come off it Spalding, 15-20 years ago that demo played on a Workstation would have been very good, nowadays however it just shows how limited arrangers are.

BTW: If you can find some recordings of Peter Baartmans playing Kurzweil in the 80s, then do so, as they will easily blow away any modern day arranger both in sound and capabilities. (In case you’re interested the Kurzweils he is playing were released in about 1983 so are almost 30 years old)

Bill

Adding Arranger features to a Workstation

Sounds:
When you select a trumpet voice on an arranger all the balance effects etc. are set up to give as realistic sound as possible. (Jazz Trumpet, Big band Trumpet etc.)
When you select a trumpet voice on a workstation, you just get a trumpet and it’s up to you to set it up as you want by creating your own pre-set.

All the voices on the workstation would need to reprogrammed for arranger users, (As most arranger users prefer to play using someone else’s settings) to get a properly balanced sound. (Sounds easy, and with arrangers it is, as they have very limited editing and features, but for a workstation the job is mammoth due to the editing and features available)

NOTE: The above applies to styles, OTS and all the other easy play features on an arranger.

Interface:
A completely new interface would have to be designed (That could be switched to) that arranger players would understand.

All the above would then need to be tested (Beta Testing) by a large number of users, to prevent any crashes due to incompatibilities.

Consequently the cost and time involved would be considerable, and until manufactures can see a market (Plus the Workstation and arranger designers start talking to each other) it probably won’t occur unfortunately.

Bill

Marco is a GAS! GREAT chops. A really together left hand.

He'd sound good playing a toilet seat.

R.

Is he part of your bluegrass band with you on spoons?!?

He can play anything he wants...Gut Bucket...Kazoo...washboard...any of the GOOD STUFF!

R.

Why is it you continually miss the point Bill.

First of all Niether Petter Baartmans or anyone else 30 years ago could have done this demo on a workstation because he would have had to programme the drums , horns etc in a sequencer and would not have been able change , styles,go back to the original pattern , play variation 1-4 ,drop in and out sounds at wil as intuitively as an arranger. The workstations of the day were not set up like that and in the main are still not like that .
What exactly are you disagreeing with in terms of my statement ?

If people percieve that Arrangers cannot deeply edit sounds or import and alter sounds/samples , what makes you think that peole interested in sound and sample manipulation might not start to get intersted once they realise exactly how deeply sounds and samples can be altered on modern arrangers ?

What makes you think that the average workstation users has any appreciatio of sound manipulation and sampling generally nevermind what the differences are between a workstation and an arranger ?????

Go on any workstatio forum and see the discussions that are taking place currently whether hats the roland clan forum , korg forum, neko forum etc. See what sorts of comments and quetions come up time and time again. Yu will find that the level of knowledge generally amongst workstation owners is very basic just like that of arranger owners generally. They buy the product based upon perception not actual knowledge for the most part. Even the pros for the most part only dig into the bits of the keyboard they are interested in and leave 80-90% of the instruments capabilities untouched.

Tell you what


Post up some demos of peter baartmans on the Kurzweil for us and then we can debate whether anything done in the demo could not be reproduced function for function on todays arramngers.

Spalding, I just returned from a week on the roads doing Yamaha clinics...just to support your statements, we sold two Tyros4 arrangers to two different professional studios.

Information gathered from the owners was that they could do a totally professional sounding demo (including vocals) on a Tyros4 in far less time than on a Workstation...in fact, they were totally shocked at how advanced arrangers had become, especially in the past two or three years.

Over the past year or so, we also sold several S910 arrangers to studios as well, but some of these were more amateur type users...in fact, my boss, who is mainly a guitar player, has an S910 in his studio, which is quite a professional setup, with 100's of thousands of dollars invested in gear. He says the S910 is indispensable.

Arranger instruments are far easier to use than workstations....plus, with Tyros4, there is an included PC based editor for those wanting far more capabilities than the basic one on-board...it is every bit as flexible and powerful as the one in the Motif and MOX series.

Ian

Hi Spalding

You obviously haven’t looked into workstations, as I can assure you that the best arranger editing features pale into absolute insignificant compared to workstations.

Regarding the PC editor for the Tyros that Ian mentioned, I have seen it, and can assure you it also is very basic and simple, and certainly nowhere close to the advanced editing facilities on a workstation.

Bands are not interested in styles, for the simple reason that they are too limited for live band use. Studios have arrangers as scratch pads but that’s all, after that it’s onto workstations and computer based systems to make the professional productions.

I would love to post some samples of Peter on the Kurzweil, but all my recordings of him are copyright, so it’s illegal to post them. (I’ll keep looking though)

BTW: even if the modern arranger was as good as the Kurzweils that Peter uses, it is still not a very good advertisement for them. (Hey my brand new TOTL arranger is as good as a 30 year old workstation)

Bill

Sorry Bill...I do not agree, but, again it is your opinion, and you are certainly entitled to it.

In my opinion, the Tyros4's PC editor is almost as sophisticated and powerful as those for Motif/MOX, and is actually a little easier to use...it is the T4's on-board editing that is basic (but very handy)...I work with both divisions and products.

The guys that bought the Tyros4 were also very impressed with incredible flexibility (and of course, the sound) of the styles, which now utilize SA/SA2 voices.

These are people who are working in studios and making their living at it (as Donny says, "In the trenches")...it is their opinions that matter to me....you need to get more, perhaps?

Ian

PS...By the way, I meet up with Peter next month...I am really looking forward to meeting such a talented man, and a super duper Yamaha demonstrator.

I often use an arranger for score roughs...that's what brought me to Synthzone.

Sometimes, I use the arranger for complete scores for really low budget or charity projects.

R.

That's great news, Russell...I've seen them used for charity projects as well...usually for out of work studio players.

Low budget and/or rough scores don't have to actually sound "rough"...they can sound quite deluxe and polished when done with any of the newer arrangers by Korg or Yamaha.

Ian

Bill , and in fact anyone that actually has an interest in sound creation , watch these 3 videos which consist of some very good tutorials on the tools used on all workstations for making sounds , any sound you care to imagine. This will be intersting even to those that have never made a sound on their keyboard before.

After watching the videos, i want you to ask yourself Bill if these same components and functions and much more are not available on pretty much every arranger made since 2000.

http://www.korgforums.com/forum/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=73730&start=0

Your arguments about how much more contemporary workstations can do are straw man arguments because the vast majoriy of ALL keyboard players (both arrranger and workstation ) will not ever go beyond the basic principles of sound creation. At best they wil tweak some sounds to make the sounds darker or lighter , thicker or more thin, with slower attack or more aggressive attack, decays etc. There are very few workstation users that create their own sounds which is why third party commercial sounds are so readily available for workstations such as korg, yamaha, kurweil, roland etc. Does this lack of knowledge generally prevent most workstation customers from purchasing workstations ????? The answer is no. But this same lack of knowledge will and has prevented keyboard palyers from purchasing arranger keyboards. they make the same error you have made . They compare specs and because one might have a more detailed spec than the other they make their purchase based upon technicality , not on quality or best fit for their needs. The Korg kronos for example boasts 9 synth engines. How much do you believe the average purchaser of the Korg Kronos understands about the differences in the synth engines or the sounds that could be made from each ????? Go ion the Korg forum and read for yourself if you suspect i am just speculating to win an argument.

Korg have sold a boatload of Konos's based upon the boast of having 9 synth engines where as to my ears the Yamaha XS/XF sounds better than the Korg Kronos in almost every category from only one synth engine that is more than 15 years old . Are folks still buying the XS/XF even though on paper it potentially is 8 times less able to reach the same sonic capabilities of the Kronos ??? Yes they are.

The point i am making is that its not about the spec of the keyboard. It about what you undertand and percieve those specs might mean in translation to helping you make music.

Ther is an inaccurate perception of arranger keyboards and your blind assertions about perceived differene in capabilities demonstrates that every time.

have a listen to this demonstartiion from the same guy that did the PA3X demo .

Answer this, could he programme the pa3X to do a similar demonstration ?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HGKiVHVCHVc&feature=plcp

last post

Here is a clip of the same Korg demonstator Marco Parisi playing the yamaha tyros 4 (i think) in a live band situation playing strings and electric piano live. Maybe he doesnt realise he should be using a workstation ha ha !!

Or maybe he realises that the instrument has more to it than just preprogrammed styles.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kKDJOkftl6I

and this one

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NRTimNhXfEY&feature=plcp

and have a look at this last one where Marco uses the Korg PA3X in arranger mode along with a live guitarist and a couple of workstations to boot.

Take the blinkers off folks

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yVFCc3CoXoU

HI Spalding

Videos:
Hardware arrangers cannot, as all hardware arrangers have sampling engines, (Exception is the Pegasus Wing or OAS 7 instruments which have genuine software synthesis on-board) which is totally different to synthesis engines. (Dort be fooled by the terms manufactures use to describe their instruments, as they are purely marketing terms)

Regarding the rest, I am familiar with or have used all that you have mentioned, I have NEVER made a decision on anything using tech specs or demos, and I have always WITHOUT exception tried them first.

In addition I am regularly out listening to live music played by real players, playing real instruments; NOT relying on what I think is real because of some impressive demo.

From my PRATICAL experience of using and having access to these types of instruments, (From the late 80s my main systems have always been computer based software equivalents) you are totally missing the point, an arranger is like a BMW X5, a jack of all trades, however when you want to really go off road (In depth with your instrument) then it is lacking, and you need to go onto something like a land cruiser (Workstation) to get the job done.

Like I have said many times, if you want to know how good your instrument sounds, get changed and go out into the real world, to hear what real instruments with real players sound like. (Be warned, you will find all these impressive arranger demos you have heard, will become totally lack lustre when you do)

If you want to know what a workstation can do, (Or software based system (VSTi etc.) then spend plenty of time with them experimenting, and I can guarantee without exception you will come to the same conclusion as I have.

Ian

The PC editing software you mention is not even close. (Unless you’re comparing it with something I was using 10 years ago)

Bill

Whatever, Bill...I'm not going to argue with you...what do I know?

I've only been a professional clinician/demonstrator on synths and arrangers for the past 23 years, and a professional keyboardist for over 40.

We obviously see/hear/experience things differently, but hey, that's what makes life so interesting.

Enjoy what you play.


Ian

The one thing that Korg simply refuse to do. And is possibly the only area really where the Yamaha universally outshines the Korg.
(The rest of the differences are mainly only according to personal taste)

Korg Italy are just totally block-headed when it comes to releasing the sysex data need to write a PC editing suite...

Yamaha, to their continuing credit (and Roland) have always been public with the sysex...hence the plethora of superb programs (vis-a-vis Michael Bedesem)

Just curious, how many of you sound enthusiast can really play the keyboard? I don't mean demonstrate 20 tunes perfectly; I'm talking jam, play, swing whatever. You know something like I say give me a 4 bar turn-a-round. I count the tune off and we swing, jam make happy sounds or maybe soul even funk like Chas, hell even great CW like DonM can do etc.?

Don't get me wrong even the worst of you on the forum should be able to play better than me! Don't forget I'm neither a pianist or a keyboardist. I'm a saxophonist who knows chord theory. As a matter of fact most all saxophonist that I know of, knows chord theory. If he doesn't, we refer to him as an entertainer or showman who makes a lot more money then a saxophonist makes.

Go ahead and tell on each other. You could say something like Boo, John Doe can really play or John Smith is the best Jammer I ever heard.

It is not the sound people, I mean the keyboard, it's the keyboardist. Is there really anyone, I mean anyone here that disagrees with this statement? People it's so true.

If I hit the lottery I want all of you to send me your addresses and I will have shipped to you every workstation and arranger ever made.

Will that help everyone to learn music? You know music, chords, harmony, melody, improvisation and a host of other things pertaining to music besides sounds, sounds and more sounds. Isn't 5000 sounds enough or do you need 5 million.

Hey the only way to get a real sax sound is to learn to play sax. The only way to get a real trumpet sound is learn to play trumpet. The only way to get a comb and tissue paper sound is to go out and purchase a top quality comb and a roll of toilet paper.
Geeeezzzzzz!

Nigel what’s your problem man? When are you going to change this to the “SOUNDS ZONE” forget Arranger forum. Ha ha!
Just joking Nigel!! Russ or someone mentioned to get on you sometimes to encourage you to comment more. Maybe it wasn’t Russ, I just don’t remember. What’s today?

Bill,

Funny, I just had a sneaky feeling you would mention the Wersi Wing somewhere in all of this, and prey tell me the main difference IYO is the difference between a BMW X5 and a Land Cruiser. Bill, where the hell do you go out listening to live music in a one horse town where you live, it's a retirement conurbation, perhaps it's where Dom got all his ideas from. Still Bill I would love to have go on a Wing, but not in a shop near me or you or anyone else for that matter. Bill you are the only man on the island, that's and interesting thought, what records did you take to play, please not jazz bill, BTW you once told me you never use styles, I was curious to know how you play, do you do your own left hand. It's all an acquired taste Bill, but a long time off I broke all my train spotters pencils a long time back


Regards Tony

Bill I hope you watched the videos. You might actually learn something.

I am a church musician. I play live music with real musicians every week. Most of them have never edited a single sound on their workstation. Too busy playing i guess. You might want to try that some day.:-) .good luck with making music.


Cheers

Worth

last thing ha ha i promise

Here is some great work from a guy on the korg forums that has posted up a track he made using just the Kronos Workstation. Its good work but every track and every sound could be repoduced on my 10 year old PA1X arranger workstation. including the sampled voice in the track.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2TJsT8ruWlA

search on the Korg forums or yamaha motifator. this is typcal of the kind of music produced.


Seems like a whole lot of the diffeences between workstations and arrangers is going to waste......

anyway thanks again for th debate bill

Hi Tony

It’s the exact opposite, having to decide which band to go and see is the problem, (My last post was written after I had just returned from watching the tribute band The Darkside of Pink Floyd) with the added advantage that most places serve REAL Ale, so you can really go to town.

Fortunately I was a teenager when the best music ever made and played was produced, (Pink Floyd, Led Zeppelin, Wishbone Ash, and King Crimson etc.) so that is my primary, however I was also bought up to be tolerant of others which is why I also like classical, Big Band, Euro, Jazz etc. (Jazz is interesting as when I was younger I just could not get it, whereas now I am older I do)

My playing is experimental, which is why styles have little relevance. (There just too limited and repetitive)

X5, Land Cruiser

You have obviously never had the pleasure of driving off road, or you would know the difference, but basically when the going gets challenging the X5 will falter (As does an arranger) whereas a Land Cruiser will just carry on going to give you really in depth excitement. (Workstation)

Spalding

If you think Keith Emerson, Rick Wakeman, Jon Lord, Chick Chorea, Tangerine Dream etc. could have achieved what they did, on an arranger keyboard, then you really are out of touch with the real world.

Bill

And don't forget Yes. Rick Wakeman is a masterful keyboard player.

Bill said
'Spalding

If you think Keith Emerson, Rick Wakeman, Jon Lord, Chick Chorea, Tangerine Dream etc. could have achieved what they did, on an arranger keyboard, then you really are out of touch with the real world.

Bill'


how many musicians reach the levels of skill these musicians did ?? Perhaps the did not buy the right work station ??????

Come on bill be honest , do you think that it was the fact that they reached the dizzy heights they did because they played a workstation or because they had talent ????

there is the nub of it Bill . I hope you can see that . If not then its you that has lost touch with reality .....

Spalding

99% of keyboard players have accepted the fact that an arranger and a workstation are two different types of keyboard, designed for two different types of users, with some overlapping components, so why try and change it when it serves no useful purpose.

Be proud that you have an arranger which you are happy with; just like workstation owners are happy with their purchases. (Some people like cheddar cheese, others like Gorgonzola cheese, but cheddar eaters don’t try and convince anybody that cheddar can be made to taste the same as gorgonzola just because they are both called cheese)

Bill

.

Nigel, did you see what the guitar player was using on that Roundabout piece?

It's a Gibson Switchmaster...the size of an L-5, with three pick-ups and a 5 way switch. Works much like a Strat.

Interesting choice for that kind of music...had a real feedback problem at high volumes.

Ultra valuable now!


R.

Er, workstations/arrangers, Bimmers/Land Cruisers, cheddar/gorgonzola. I'be gotta go lie down, I'm getting a stomach ache.

You probably ate the wrong cheese

Bill

Er 124,

SZ as nothing to do with arrangers anymore, had you not noticed, BTW Billy 124 is not complaining about stomach ache something he ate, it's the laughing that did it, SZ is working for him...

Just for Scott with his poorly thumb, its Hands Knee and Doompsy a Daisy

Spot on diagnosis, Dr. Hughes.

Enjoy

Bill

For the type of music that the vast majority do here at SZ, the arranger is probably the better tool (and probably why we choose it).

The problem starts when you try to do anything from the last 20 years or so... The nature of loop based music doesn't translate as well to arrangers as you might think. Arpeggiators are NOT merely dumbed down styles. They do things that the note lookup tables of arrangers don't do. They also don't revoice as you transpose, or move to another chord. Plus, much of the loop production DOESN'T transpose at all, while other elements do.

In truth, if you aren't involved in contemporary music production, you really have no idea of the issues that make the arranger an unsatisfactory tool for the job.

Now, that's not to say for LIVE performing, the arranger can't outshine the WS. As many of you know, I have preferred live band gigging with my G70 over my Kurzweil and Triton for years. The WS is of course FAR more flexible in sound creation, but all of them are utter pigs to quickly create setups on the fly, to create splits and layers, to route effects and controls, and do it fast enough to not interfere with the song. In this area, WS could learn a LOT from arrangers.

But bring them into the studio for modern music production (much of which is done inside the computer these days anyway), take the pressure of instant gratification away, and the arranger struggles to compete. If you are doing mockups for dated types of music, then yes, they can get the job done quickly, more quickly perhaps than a WS, but if you are producing hiphop, dubstep, or any of the bewildering explosion of types of music I am sure virtually none of you listen to, the arranger is a buggy whip in a smartphone world.

But, bottom line is, they are all simply TOOLS. Arguing ad nauseam whether your spade is the best, or the merits of Phillips vs. straight head screwdrivers somehow seems absurd. Don't we have more creative things to do?

Right Diki, like practice, practice, practice and learn to play that thang eh?

I think some us are just banging our heads against a wall. A big BRICK wall.

this is highly amusing.

Bill used a graet analogy about the BMW x5 and a land cruiser in terms of their ability to go off road to demonstrate the difference between a workstation and an arranger keyboard in terms of sound creation, or editing or whatever the point he was making.

If you were to ask a BMW X5 owner why they bought this type of car they would most liklely say because of its looks styling and association with the way they feel about being able to own a vehicle of its type (their own personal image ) and of course its potential off road capability. But what percentage would you guess actually took their vehicle off road routinely for 99% of their daliy use of the car ? I bet it will b a very low percentage . I will bet that if you asked a land crusier owner the very same questions you would get very similar answers including the low percentage that actually took their land cruiser off road ! There would be an even lower percentage of land crusiers owners that would take their vehicle off road over terrain that a BMWX5 could not reasonably cover admirally .

And so it is with keyboards and making music . The vast majority of keyboard owners dont test the instrument to the limits of its capabilities. They scratch the surface.They only use if for 99% of the daily practical musical applications they come accross which surprisingly is not sound creation or editing but they like to know the tools are their if they need them!! How many of us have bought a new keyboard just because it was the latests one out ? Guess what....workstation owners do that too !!! How many of you pushed your current keyboard what ever it is to its limits in sound creation, sequencer, effects editing and routing ? i know it will be a very low number and thats representtive of most keyboard users including workstation users.

If i want to make a sound like a barking dog with a bone stuck up its ass from the planet zargon , then i guess a work station might get closer to that theoretical concept but .....really how many musicians actually have the skils or desire to make that kind of out there sound on thier instruments ?? really ??? If i need to make dub step music , i can buy drum and bass samples just like all the other workstation users do but for my arranger. The same size ram that the Korg M3 Workstation takes can be bought for the PA3X and fits perfectly the same, . I can buy the same sample loops commercially available just like most other workstation users and create away to on my pc/laptop to my hearts content just like most other workstation usrs!

All i am saying is that if yamaha or korg were to spend some time demoing the traditionally believed 'workstation functions ' of its arranger keyboards , more workstation owners would consider an arranger just as Ian who is actually selling and demoing yamaha arrangers has experienced.

Ah, the arranger keyboard...loved by some, loathed by others, and totally misunderstood by more than a few, including a number of SZ'ers, if some of the comments on this thread are actually to be taken seriously.

The important thing to remember is that the distinction is not that one is professional and the other is not, regardless if it's an Arranger Keyboard or a Keyboard Workstation.

There was a time, not too long ago, when Tony was a tot, when good ole Arranger Keyboards were thought to be little more than home entertainment, much like the chord organs of bygone days.

This is no longer the case.

In my opinion, and in my experience, arrangers have evolved into a necessary tool for the professional performing musician.

There are those of us who have embraced the instrument and think it is simply a wonderful and marvelous invention, especially in a one-man band situation, where an arranger will give a more "live" feeling to the music by the unscripted use of intros, fills and variations within a style.

If you have an arranger that allows you to create your own styles, you can make accompaniments suited to the type of music you play, your playing proficiency, and with as much live feeling as you need.

As Fran said in a post on another thread (OMB or DJ?)...”arrangers are just "tools".

Personally, I feel, like any other electronic instrument or keyboard, it really depends on the skill and creativity of the player to make the most of it.

For my use, an arranger is both a "live" performance, and a recording instrument (the awesome Tyros4/S910 are basically self contained studios, as are the incredible Korg PA arrangers).

I use styles when I play/record, and I don't use them to color my songs, I create songs by using styles...they're a crucial part of what I do...I don't consider styles a crutch...they're part of the art.

Most importantly, an arranger keyboard lets me sit down and just spontaneously “play” a tune with a deluxe sounding band behind me...a band that can vary from just a drummer and bass player, to the whole orchestra, with brass, strings, choirs. This is where the arranger shines because the 'instruments' are set up to respond as though they are being played "live".

In fact, Yamaha's "Mega Voice" technology was created for that very purpose.

In music, especially nowadays, the more versatile you are, the more you work, and, a good professional arranger can keep you in the game, whether it be playing out "live" or recording music for advertisements, films, or maybe to back up a singer/songwriter.

Actually, in most cases, people who hire composers don't care how you come up with the music, as long as you do.

So, I am unabashedly an arranger aficionado...it's far better for my needs than a workstation, and, more importantly, for me, as a pro keyboardist, it has kept me employed.

Ian

Finally Spalding, you get it

Your last post sums it up well, if you want to go in-depth then you use a workstation, if it’s just general playing and tinkering then an arranger is all you need.

Bill

you got great jokes bill :-)

The more he tells 'em...the Wersi gets...


Mmmmmmmm...., Spalding, according to the description on this site, the old Wersi Abacus that Billy plays is an "arranger", or more accurately, what they call, an "organ/arranger".

http://www.wersiabacus.plus.com/

From the above site...
"The Wersi Abacus is a computer based Organ/Arranger that runs on Windows XP, it was first introduced in 2000 and has been continually updated over the years to keep pace with modern sounds and innovations."

As Bill says above,..."if it’s just general playing and tinkering then an arranger is all you need."

Let's just be very grateful we have choices, and Korg and Yamaha arrangers are available as superb alternatives for our "general playing and tinkering".

Ian

I agree with you Diki, once seen never ever forgetten the G70, don't forget I had one for about 4 weeks, when I tried to sell it I couldn't, they are not a good seller in the UK, I have never seen another one since, not likely to and don't care if I do. Your G70 is almost has old as Billy Wersi Abacus, mind you as Billy says, it is been updated on a regular basis, the G70 isn't, if you like it Diki thats all that matters, I got rid of my dead wood a while back

Well, your list of things that you tried and rejected got quite long, Tony. Plus the list of things you speculated about and showed considerable interest was sort of up there too. I'm just not sure what it was you were looking for. You certainly, with the Audya and apparently the G70, don't seem to be able to make a decision BEFORE you buy something! Perhaps you aren't sure of what you are looking for yourself?!

Let's face it, if you are happy with the Tyros now, you would have been happy with the Tyros back in the G70 days too. Strange.

Next time you get a hankering for a new arranger, might I suggest you go to the store that stocks it, and PLAY IT for at least an afternoon? I took two full days before I was sure I was going to be content, and have never had a moment's doubt since (nor had any issues trying to sell something I just bought).

Plus, in fact (that you didn't keep yours long enough to find out probably lead to this misinformation) the G70 was the MOST upgraded and improved arranger in Roland history, with no less than TWO major upgrades over the years, and several smaller bugfixes. OS3 is where it is now, and it is capable of doing SO much more than when I bought it. Obviously, not as upgradeable as the Abacus, but at a fraction of the price, one can't complain. We'll revisit the issue of upgrades when you sell your T4 to get the T5 because Yamaha only bring out new models, never adding capabilities to the one you have...

The ONLY reason I have kept my G70 this long is I am STILL waiting for something superior to come out with the features I consider important. A world class piano sound, a superb action to play it on (with enough notes to play pianistically) a live and vibrant sounding drum section, easy comprehensive style and sequence editing, and styles that leave room for a PLAYER... And something that doubles as the best live band keyboard in the world!

You let me know when that comes out will you..?

And talking about dead wood, is there any chance of you actually CONTRIBUTING anything here, other than criticism of others' equipment choices and making weird jokes at everyone else's expense?

Hi Spalding

Sorry to disappoint you, but I only deal in reality, not fiction which you seem to enjoy most.

Hi Tony

I suspect you had V1 of the G70 which was always a bit of a joke for anybody other than die hard Roland Fans, however when they introduced V2 then all this changed and it became one of the best arrangers out there.

BTW: There are still a lot of voices and features on the G70 that leave a lot of manufactures current TOTL arrangers’ way behind. (Plus when it comes to styles, then for me personally Roland leaves everybody else for dead)

Hi Ian

What did you think of the website (I realise there is only one page active at the moment, but I am rather busy at present however I will find time to finish off)

Bill

It was Bill I think a V1, I bought it off a chap who lived in Melksham, met him on a motorways services, when I tried to part exchange it the guy in the music shop in Manchester looked at me like I had two heads, he didn't really want to buy it off me, he said he didn't think he could sell it on, I don't think Diki believes me, I have never seen one to this day, that's 3 years back, he did take it off me, but it took ages to find another nut like me to buy it.

Bill, I thought the site looked great...I was actually disappointed there wasn't more to explore.

Nice job.

Regarding your take on the G-70...I had to babysit one here for a month or more...again, it's what we want to hear coming from our speakers, and, except for the piano sound and the keybed (and build quality), I was not overly impressed. In fact, the guy who had me look after it, came home and tried the Yamaha PSR I had at the time, and ended up selling the G-70 and bought two PSR's...I think they were either PSR-3000 or S900's. Like many other people, the G-70's weight was also a deciding factor for him to make the switch.

As far as styles/sounds, I worked as a clinician/demonstrator for Roland in Newfoundland, and, at that time, the styles (the E-70 was current) were way ahead of anything else, and basically stayed that way till Yamaha came out with the PSR-8000, and then they lost more ground again to the first Tyros and new mega voiced styles.

I thought the G-70's styles weren't a whole lot better than what was on the earlier models...yes, they did utilize better sounds, but the patterns themselves weren't very fresh or inspiring (the Latin stuff was pretty good), and I had to keep shutting off parts to make room to play over them...I will say the G-70's drum kits were better than earlier models like the G-1000 and G-800.

Styles and sounds will always be a personal and subjective preference, so what's good for one, will not work for another. I know there are a few here that love the G-70, and that's great, but, overall, the "Roland" sound itself, is not for me.

I did try the Roland BK-5 recently (the advantage of road trips), and really liked it, except for the key feel (again a personal choice). I thought the sounds, and especially the styles, were very nice with improved detail over the G-70/E-80. They seemed more spacious, although that may have had more to do with the tone generator and effects, than the actual style programming.

If anything, my second choice for a TOTL arranger would be a Korg PA3X (61 key).

Ian

I actually enjoyed my G70 right off the bat. After all, I was already used to the 'Roland sound' from my G1000, tested and true, and have always eschewed factory presets for my own setups. The V1 G70 came OOTB with a VERY 'European' style mix, quite drenched in reverb, and it seemed obvious that the style voicing had been rushed, to get it out quicker, I guess.

But it took only a short time to fix the reverb and voicing issues, thanks to the easiest style voicing tools in the industry, and I was enjoying it immensely.

V2 brought out the OTS improvements (stored with the Style, now, not in the Registration) and the brand new Guitar Mode (although sadly, only a realtime feature unlike Korg's... mind you, Yamaha have YET to add one of these) plus many other improvements, along with a complete reworking of the Style defaults, to lessen the reverb and address some of the imbalance issues.

Then V3 brought about the per Part and per Drum 3 band Parametric EQ and some other additions, and again, a revoicing to accommodate these new additions.

All in all, I would have had to have bought TWO more Tyros's, to have seen the same degree of OS additions from the original (I don't think Yamaha have EVER added a major feature from newer arrangers to the OS of older ones). That's a bit too expensive for me!

I haven't heard the BK-5 yet, but own a BK-7m. Yes, there are a few improvements (a few new kits have made the already excellent drums even better) and some of the guitars are much improved, and basses over the stock G70 are MUCH better (but mine has the SRX-07 card in, which addresses this), but at the cost of some of the sounds as well. Saxes are a bit less detailed, and some sounds have a smaller choice, but what do you expect from a sub-$1000 unit compared to a $3500 one?

But one thing that Roland HAVE done is spent more time EQ'ing these styles, and I think this accounts for much of what Ian is hearing, over the old G70. But as the EQ capabilities of the G70 are on a par with the BK series, all you have to do is copy some of the default settings from the BK's styles over to the G70, and much of what was missing can be addressed.

Having BOTH G70 and BK-7m, I must admit, I so far have no burning desire to take my BK out on the gigs along with the G70, as close as I can get the G70 to sound, and the way I use them (I'd rather the show was about ME, not how much my gear can do!), and that's not a bad admission for an eight year old piece of kit!

I had a PA3X in my house for a few weeks while I worked on porting Roland styles over for a friend, and I must admit, some of it is VERY nice. But the bottom line for me was, several of the basic areas (particularly the pianos) still took a back seat to my G70, and editing ease was dismal compared to the G70. You COULD do most the G70 can do in this area, but it's MUCH slower and less intuitive. And add to that, the library of US styles for Korg's is still a fraction of what is available for Roland, and once again, it is ALL about the styles in the long run. Plus they have that over-produced edge to them, like Yamaha, that makes it harder to add much of YOU to the mix other than the melody.

Trust me, nothing would make me happier than to dump my behemoth and move to something more modern (and preferably, a bit lighter!) but until someone actually MAKES one (in a 76), I am content. My modus operandi has always been to wait until there is a hugely noticeable difference between what I have and what I want.

Still waiting!

My friend's G-70 was a Version 2, as he had just updated it before dropping it off (thankfully not literally) at my place.

I don't think he had a lot of trouble selling his keyboard...it ended up in a church somewhere in Scarborough, Ontario.

That was one of only two G-70's I saw in my territory; the other was in Fredericton, New Brunswick, and the dealer, Michael, was using it in church as well...they did a big Easter extravaganza using the G-70, along with guitar, bass, drums etc. He has since replaced it with a Yamaha Motif XS8, and the Roland was donated to a huge Seniors complex in the same city.

The G-70 was a very rare beast, at least here in the Maritimes, and, it is nice to see people like Fran and Diki get lots of mileage out of the instrument, which says a lot for both it's durability and flexibility.

Tony, my favorite Roland, which is not an arranger, is the new Jupiter 80, which I was fortunate enough to try out on last week's road trip, and if this technology (especially the SuperNatural Voices) is used in a new TOTL arranger, the company will have a winner on it's hands for sure.

Ian