I think style creation and editing is rather like, to use car metaphors, like detailed tuning of a car's engine, mapping the ECM, changing gear ratios, mapping the brake and accelerator curves, fine tuning the spring rates and damper settings...

Most people want to get into a car and just DRIVE.

Here in the west, our music is pretty well represented by the ROM style selection, with very little need to tweak. However, Yamaha and especially Korg went after the middle and far east market, always had some kind of sampler, and those types of music are far more detailed in how the style plays back, and Y&K always had pretty detailed style engines.

But, in truth, when it came to western music, the need just isn't there, and to be quite honest, despite a massively more detailed style editing engine, I have rarely if EVER heard much in the way of user styles that can hold a candle to the ROM styles that come with an arranger. It sure seems an awful waste of resources with next to no upside (at least for western music).

I think Roland kind of figured this out pretty early. Sure, they must have some custom software they gave the ROM dev team, because there's a fair bit of control over note ranges and alteration modes on the styles themselves, but they never saw fit to release it to the users.

Maybe, just like allowing a regular driver to screw with the spring rates, steering rack or ECM, they figured the users would do more harm than good! And spending a chunk of money developing software for at best 1% of their base wasn't a winning proposition?

It's the same thing with one of my pet peeves... why can't modern arrangers allow you to remap every last button knob and slider for external gear control? None of them do. Pretty much all of them got a ton of buttons that can't send MIDI at all, and the few that do rarely allow you to remap what they send to better suit a receiving device.

But, in the end, I realize that arrangers have ALWAYS been designed to be basically standalone, single keyboards designed to do everything in the one keyboard. And those that want them to double as the master keyboard in a larger rig are the 1%. Thus, not significantly worthy of the considerable effort designing that would take.

So, we use them the way they come. For better AND worse. There's something missing from EVERY arranger model, and there's something it does the others can't. The trick is discovering what you REALLY need, then picking the model that does it, and putting up with what it don't!

Lol, when I had my Mustang GT, I did have software for tuning it ;-)

Sometimes it's good to be able to change things, even though it takes a bit of trial and error. I modified a factory style and got it 90% to where I wanted. But the bass would still shift to a higher octave between Ab and G. So when I played a descending bassline for a song written in G major, the bass would go UP when i reached the I chord. It took a lot of experimenting, but I was eventually able to change the wrap point.

It would have been easier to use the master transpose, and send the notes through MIDI Out to an external sequencer, where they could be transposed back to the original key! Crazy!

As far as I'm concerned, it's important for users to be able to make changes such as this. Other brands include the ability to create and edit styles so there IS a demand for doing so. Roland should have made it easier and more flexible.

Thanks guys . Lots of thoughtful input in your posts.Yes when i used Styles more as when I was doing gigs I did edit them. Replace instruments, mute parts, adjust volume and EFX. Mostly to get more punch and simplicity so they wouldn't sound so "canned" Your right about the 1% of users delving deeply into their boards.
I have a friend here who spends countless hours revamping and creating styles on his Yamaha. His band ( wife singer with a Keytar and a killer sax player ) have a regular gig at a club " Ruby Lee's on Hilton Head SC "which caterers mostly to an older Black audience. So he's going from Chuck Brown go go to Frankie Beverly to Neyo and they love it.
But for most of us Roland did give us a decent group of Styles to sork with. After looking at the E50 Style list and listening to a few I think I could find whatever I need but again thats down the road, I'm staying put for now. ! Thanks

Quite honestly, if I'm THAT hung up on having the right bassline, I'll use a sequence. Throw in four Mark/Jump points, I can still jack around with it live.

The whole songstyle thing always left me puzzled. Damn sight easier to use an SMF!

The audience don't give a rats HOW we create our backing. 🤣