One thing that is very noticeable in arranger performances; you rarely hear jazz/exotic/rootless/inverted/revoiced/11th-13th/dim-aug 7-9th/etc. chords. Without these variations and depending on the genre' (but especially jazz), it is hard to make an arranger performance sound either authentic or professional. This is not a knock on the musicianship of the arranger player, but more an acknowledgement of the unpredictability of how a given arranger will respond to being presented with these non-standard chord variations. In some cases, arrangers can be set up to respond a certain way regardless to the 'root', but that feature is pretty much restricted to common/standard fingering (voicing). So......how to get around this. Simple (in some cases ); play the desired chords MANUALLY over a very simple, but otherwise appropiate (and complimentary) arrangement. Sometimes it can be as simple as just adding the 1 or 2 missing notes. The downside is that you may not always get the BASS note(s) you want (provided by the arranger). I'm not sure how the A.I. used in chord recognition in arrangers would or could handle this (which is why playing with live musicians is so much more rewarding and why you probably won't see arrangers used much in the more complex musical forms such as jazz).

Obviously, the above is only my take on it but I would love to hear other opinions on it (but hopefully not from a defensive posture).

chas

yep have to agree with you especially when most are playing one finger or three finger chords...
arranger kb chord recognition certainly has it's limitations..

Some years ago Scott Yee began a campaign to have rootless chords recognized and I think the big companies do now have this capability. I haven't tried it. I only know 3 1/2 chords and they all have roots.

Of course Don is being modest. He does EXACTLY what I propose, which is, not to pick totally unrealistic, super complex, over-arranged, styles to begin with, and then PLAY IN the missing pieces. He usually does this with piano, organ, or (really good) guitar simulations, and so we tend not to focus too much on the arranger portion of the arrangement. Sadly, most do just the opposite, that is, RELY on the arranger to 'do all the work'. So what (in my opinion) is a GOOD arranger player? One that makes the arrangement NOT sound like AUTO-accompaniment. So the goal, to me, would be to sound NOT as PERFECT as possible but as LIVE as possible. If you wonder why I don't give a shout-out to those who choose to play 'organ style' (comp and LH bass), it's because that basically defeats the purpose of using an arranger in the first place (sorta'). Noting that these are only MY opinions and that there are many others, I turn it back over to the only opinion that really counts, YOURS.

chas

exactly, we are "automatic arranger keyboard operators" you push a few keys the computer delivers the music accordingly to match the chords...add a few top notes sing a bit, and your in business.
no surprises there..

Check out Scott Yee's post on this thread.
http://www.synthzone.com/forum/ubbthreads.php/topics/144614/1/Chords_and_Accomp

Hope Scott doing OK. Haven't seen him here for years.
If look to his last post at SZ, it was back in april 2014

I exchanged emails with Scott a few days ago. He is another field but still playing music some as well. He seems to be doing well. I invited him to stop by here and say hello.

Thanks a lot for the info Don.
Good to know he is fine and doing well.

does he have a genos yet ?