You dont have to spend alot on an arranger to sound good...

Posted by: Dnj

You dont have to spend alot on an arranger to sound good... - 06/11/08 02:16 PM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tO9izdwGxJA

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r4aJGLnTYVY&feature=related

[This message has been edited by Dnj (edited 06-11-2008).]
Posted by: zuki

Re: You dont have to spend alot on an arranger to sound good... - 06/11/08 03:43 PM

I liked this board, but certainly not for the professional.
Posted by: cassp

Re: You dont have to spend alot on an arranger to sound good... - 06/11/08 03:59 PM

I had one of these. Nice board and nice sounds, but not enough guts in the style and playback sections. It's a very good entry board, but that's it. Unfortunately, other manufacturers have more to offer in its price range.
Posted by: Dnj

Re: You dont have to spend alot on an arranger to sound good... - 06/11/08 04:04 PM

Agreed but all I'm saying is it sounds good without spending big $$$$$ using it as a "home keyboard" which many arrangers are touted to be or so called "pro" is irrelevant....also being a great player like eg: Ralf is what its all about & is MOST Important..
Posted by: cassp

Re: You dont have to spend alot on an arranger to sound good... - 06/11/08 04:44 PM

Definitely, Donny. The e09 has some very good features and if you are satisfied with A/B as opposed to A/B/C/D in the style section it's OK. Roland tries to compensate by having drum/bass, small combo and full band variations too. As I said, it's a nice board with very good sounds.
Posted by: Dnj

Re: You dont have to spend alot on an arranger to sound good... - 06/11/08 04:54 PM

Sometimes all the new fan-dangled gadgets & features really aren't needed at all. Heck I'm still using a "Home Arranger" on stage every night right? & I dont even put black tape over the brand name either
Posted by: Diki

Re: You dont have to spend alot on an arranger to sound good... - 06/11/08 06:01 PM

Second Youtube demo is E50, right?

For the price, that's a pretty good sounding arranger, IMO (if you can find one!)... Much of the G70's strengths, at a fraction of the price (and still in production ).
Posted by: Dnj

Re: You dont have to spend alot on an arranger to sound good... - 06/11/08 06:05 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Diki:
Second Youtube demo is E50, right?

For the price, that's a pretty good sounding arranger, IMO (if you can find one!)... Much of the G70's strengths, at a fraction of the price (and still in production ).


Correct Diki E50.....nice!
Posted by: miden

Re: You dont have to spend alot on an arranger to sound good... - 06/11/08 10:43 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Diki:
Second Youtube demo is E50, right?

For the price, that's a pretty good sounding arranger, IMO (if you can find one!)... Much of the G70's strengths, at a fraction of the price (and still in production ).



Terrible keybed, and I MEAN terrible!!!

Also sounds pretty ordinary through a PA.
Posted by: Diki

Re: You dont have to spend alot on an arranger to sound good... - 06/11/08 10:54 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by miden:

Terrible keybed, and I MEAN terrible!!!


Should be a good match for the S900, then!
Posted by: ianmcnll

Re: You dont have to spend alot on an arranger to sound good... - 06/12/08 02:45 AM

I always felt that the cheaper Roland arrangers still retained a few of the qualities that made the overpriced E and G models sound pretty good.

Many years a go, I used a Roland E-5 along with my Yamaha CLP-300, which had a nice flat top for stacking.

The styles were decent for the time, although, since then, Yamaha has really surpassed Roland in that category.

Let's hope that Roland does a serious revamp of it's accompaniment/style section on the next E and G series...that's if the latter ever sees the light of day.

Competition always improves the breed.

Ian
Posted by: adimatis

Re: You dont have to spend alot on an arranger to sound good... - 06/12/08 04:39 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by ianmcnll:
Yamaha has really surpassed Roland in that category.


not really.
not to me.

[This message has been edited by adimatis (edited 06-12-2008).]
Posted by: Dnj

Re: You dont have to spend alot on an arranger to sound good... - 06/12/08 05:44 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Diki:
Should be a good match for the S900, then!


I love the lightweight fast S-900 keyfeel for my needs...S900 is on heck of an arranger......albeit it has some drawbacks that need to be addressed in the next S series but Sound is NOT one of them for sure!
Posted by: ianmcnll

Re: You dont have to spend alot on an arranger to sound good... - 06/12/08 05:51 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Dnj:
I love the lightweight fast S-900 keyfeel for my needs.


I like it a lot too Donny...it may not suit someone who is used to semi-weighted, but it is to me, the best kind of action for arranger play...smooth, fast and excellent velocity response....plus it makes the instrument lighter to transport.

Ian
Posted by: Dnj

Re: You dont have to spend alot on an arranger to sound good... - 06/12/08 07:49 AM

Exactly Ian...good points,

Yamaha is on the right track with the
S-series units, I'm dealing with its drawbacks using personal workarounds that allow me to perform in my comfort zone. Sounds/Style wise I'm satisfied for now. Ergonomically I'm OK with it but it needs a better angled or manualy adjustable DISPLY Screen, Navigationally I'm 50/50, it needs a better designed rear input layout, USB should be on the Front for easy access, MIC, In/Outs/Aux/Midi/AC/ etc, should ALL be to ONE Side not in the middle to affect cable positioning when using a KB stand like the APEX deluxe. Feature wise I'm 50/50 eg: VH needs a quality upgrade, MFD needs to save Transpose & Registration info,improvements are needed. Even at a few hundred dollars more to have these things is definitly worth it. I'm trying to wait patiently.

[This message has been edited by Dnj (edited 06-12-2008).]
Posted by: Vadim

Re: You dont have to spend alot on an arranger to sound good... - 06/12/08 08:29 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by zuki:
I liked this board, but certainly not for the professional.

like there is arranger keyboards for professionals..

isn't "professional arranger keyboard" an oxymoron
Posted by: ianmcnll

Re: You dont have to spend alot on an arranger to sound good... - 06/12/08 08:44 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Vadim:
isn't "professional arranger keyboard" an oxymoron


I don't know about you, but I smile all the way to the bank.

The S900 is great little money maker.

Ian
Posted by: tony mads usa

Re: You dont have to spend alot on an arranger to sound good... - 06/12/08 08:46 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Vadim:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by zuki:
[b]I liked this board, but certainly not for the professional.


(Quote)like there is arranger keyboards for professionals..

isn't "professional arranger keyboard" an oxymoron


Not for "Professional Arranger Keyboard Players" !!! ....

t.

[This message has been edited by tony mads usa (edited 06-12-2008).]

[This message has been edited by tony mads usa (edited 06-12-2008).]
Posted by: captain Russ

Re: You dont have to spend alot on an arranger to sound good... - 06/12/08 08:48 AM

I think Ketron is the closest to a "Pro" arranger board. They don't even try to appeal to the mass markets, except with very expensive wooden cased models of the portable models.

Bought a Roland GW-7 to use as a piano and controller from George. For another inexpensive keyboard, some of the sounds are pretty good!
Russ

[This message has been edited by captain Russ (edited 06-12-2008).]
Posted by: John DiLeo

Re: You dont have to spend alot on an arranger to sound good... - 06/12/08 10:07 AM

Speaking of good guys.....When I first upgraded to my S900 I was pretty much confused. But that was pretty much resolved with the gracious help from Donny (Dnj) who went out of his way to help me in so many ways.
Through patient instruction on operation of certain features via email, Style files & Smf & little tricks of the trade as only a Real Pro like himself could offer. It got me started on the right track, & gave me the confidence to perform in front of people. I have a few gigs under my belt & feel much more confident. There are also many here on SZ who offered assistance just by reading their posts on different topics also. This is a great place to learn with many knowladgeable musicians.

Thank You All
Posted by: Fran Carango

Re: You dont have to spend alot on an arranger to sound good... - 06/12/08 11:37 AM

Careful John..keep your hand on your wallet....you may be talked into that Fender Passport system in a few weeks..
Posted by: Diki

Re: You dont have to spend alot on an arranger to sound good... - 06/12/08 12:03 PM

And then the next thing Donny gets, and the next, and the next....

It would be interesting to add up the cost of everything Donny has purchased (and then traded) in the last year Stay tight on Donny's heels at your own (wallet's) risk!
Posted by: RobertG

Re: You dont have to spend alot on an arranger to sound good... - 06/12/08 12:08 PM

It's like T2 meets the E09 because this guy has the personality of a Terminator.

I didn't like the piano sound much in the demo. Subjective, of course.
Posted by: miden

Re: You dont have to spend alot on an arranger to sound good... - 06/12/08 02:03 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Diki:
Should be a good match for the S900, then!


LOL
Posted by: cgiles

Re: You dont have to spend alot on an arranger to sound good... - 06/12/08 02:23 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Vadim:
isn't "professional arranger keyboard" an oxymoron


Yes. But you won't make that case on this board. You will likely be labeled an arranger-basher and reminded that "this is an arranger board". The fact that this misses the point seems to be irrelevant. The fact that a piece of equipment can be used successfully by a professional doesn't necessarily make IT 'professional'. One could use a hammer from WalMart to build a house but that doesn't make it a professional quality hammer.

Despite the protests of those that will go into great detail to explain how they use it in ways not intended by the manufacturer (full piano on top of SMF's, Bass and drums only, vocals over Mp3's, etc., etc., ad nauseum), the truth is, it's primary function is to provide automatic accompaniment. This has always been the province of high-end home instruments, most notably, home organs. They were never designed for, or seriously marketed to, professional musicians. The proof is that you never, ever see one in a first tier venue. You may also notice that the people who take the most issue with this position are the ones with the least amount of traditional (classical) training. No matter how you slice it or spin it, music produced by arranger keyboards, played as arranger keyboards, is not 'live' music.

Using one (in OMB situations) to maximize one's profits is fine, as far as I'm concerned (although I wouldn't personally go out to hear one), but let's not pretend it's about the music. If you believe that, then you don't understand the concept of music as a creative art form. JMO, of course.

chas
Posted by: Diki

Re: You dont have to spend alot on an arranger to sound good... - 06/12/08 03:01 PM

From the dearth of people willing to play for us here, and post demos, I'd say this forum is about music as a form of LITERATURE
Posted by: Diki

Re: You dont have to spend alot on an arranger to sound good... - 06/12/08 03:07 PM

And I hate to say it, chas, but you might have noticed that a large part of contemporary music is not 'live' in any sense of the word. Loops are a form of 'automatic accompaniment', even more so now MotifXS and most of the TOTL WSs can follow played chords... And they are on every chart thing on the radio and most CD's.

Just because OUR kinds of arrangers haven't gotten around to making a serious attempt to sound as contemporary as the WS's do, doesn't mean they are in any way significantly different.

You'll see MotifXS's, FantomX's and Korg Tritons on every major stage. Why are OUR form of automatic accompaniment any less professional?

[This message has been edited by Diki (edited 06-12-2008).]
Posted by: Diki

Re: You dont have to spend alot on an arranger to sound good... - 06/12/08 03:08 PM

Sorry, double post

[This message has been edited by Diki (edited 06-12-2008).]
Posted by: cgiles

Re: You dont have to spend alot on an arranger to sound good... - 06/12/08 03:29 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Diki:
Loops are a form of 'automatic accompaniment', even more so now MotifXS and most of the TOTL WSs can follow played chords...


Then I would also include those KB's if used in that manner. The question is, who is the musician; the guy that triggers the loop or the guy that created it?

As far as posting, I have little interest in hearing someone posting a midi file, whether in the form of a style file or played directly as a standalone SMF. On the other hand, if not using styles, what would be the relevance (of posting) on an 'arranger' board? This leaves (as the only justification for posting) the bain of the music business, the amateur or semi-pro vocalist. Me, I can live without it.

chas
Posted by: abacus

Re: You dont have to spend alot on an arranger to sound good... - 06/12/08 11:40 PM

Hi Chas
Organs are used in plenty of top tier establishments, and arranger keyboards are just single manual organs, (Hence you can add a second keyboard and pedals) so thatís one theory that doesnít hold water.
As to Midi files etc, then if the user has created these themselves, and they play everything else that is possible, then you are still hearing just there own performance, but much more enhanced and realistic.
Theatre organs had pianos, drums, whistles and all sorts added to them which were not played by the organist, but just triggered from the keyboards and or tabs, which in your eyes I presume means even these players/instruments are not professional. (And should not be listened too)
Always look at the bigger picture.

Bill