can a 15 year old Roland still compete?

I was speaking to Bill a few weeks back and he made an interesting remark: "people don't care about good (instrumental) music anymore...they just want to hear vocals with a solid drum beat that they can dance to."

The other day I was talking to Don about our PA3x's and he said something similar: "do you really think anyone knows, or even cares, that you're using a $4k keyboard?......does anyone really listen that closely that they're going to come up to you and remark that the snare drum is not the right one for that song?"

I had a gig on Saturday night that I booked by boasting to them about my new PA3x. I spent the whole of last week learning the functions, programming songs, setting up the instrument cominations, etc etc. I finished it all by Friday and when I went to review all my settings I found many of them had "vanished" and I was left with a PA3x almost in default mode.

I decided to put what Bill and Don said to the test. I took out my 15 year old Roland E-300 and used that. I used my best EV's and sang my butt off. Lo and behold.......they're right. No one came up to me and said they could tell that was a 15 year old keyboard I was using! I couldn't tell myself 'cause, played right with a lot of pitch bend and vibrato on the onboard sounds, it sounded almost as good as any of today's keyboards (I'm thinking right now about Fran and Diki and their Rolands).

And that bring up another point. I've always played either Yamaha's or Roland's in the past. Roland was always my first choice as, at any given time, they were always years ahead in arranger keyboards.

Now I'm wondering why I bought a PA3x Yes, it's a great keyboard. But if all I need is "good vocals and a strong drum beat" I might just as well use a cheap-o keyboard with an industrial strength speaker system!

As the butcher said: "liver and loin!"

Sadly, this may be true, but you have to please yourself knowing that you are bringing the best sound that you can to your audience. I believe that this would reflect in your presentation, regardless.

Mark
Glad the gig went well. As Bernie said and has been discussed before we buy all this new stuff to please ourselves and make the jobs fun more than to please the audience.
Why do you think all these Kareoke acts are working? No one cares, give them a beat and a decent vocal and they're happy.
Maybe it was a good thing the other keyboard went down. As I think I told you you would of been too distracted trying to use it for the first time.
BTW how did the piano search go??

Mark,
First, I don't sing and all my gigs are purely instrumental. Yesterday I had a gig to play and have recently had some severe lower back problems and decided to take my little Korg Microarranger rather than either my Tyros 4 or my s950. The folks loved the little $500.00 micro arranger and I even spent and extra 30 minutes after the gig showing several people how it functioned. They said they loved the sound and rhythms. Don't know what that says about the TOTL vs others debate but that is what happened. By the way, it was a kick playing the little KMA again.

Deane

In this part of the world, you need quality vocals - the keyboard is of secondary importance. I've been using the PSR-3000s since it first came on the market, and the 3000 continues to do a fantastic job. In my case, I'm a singer - not an instrumentalist, therefore, my vocals are my best attribute. I'm confident this gives me an edge over guys who don't sing, and I'm booked solid a year in advance. Until this past year, NYE was booked 3 years in advance.

Good Luck,

Gary

Mark, I believe that if you hang in there with the PA3X, in the end you will be glad. All the controls make playing live very easy, and the vocal processor/harmonizer is fantastic.
As we discussed, any current, or even not so current, arranger will get the job done, but the bottom line is "make it easy for yourself!"
In the past I have played for the same audience several nights in a row, and switched back and forth between arrangers on different nights. Nobody ever asked if I had changed something. Of course this is after everything was set up, tweaked and optimized for me.
DonM

For me, I guess it all boils down to how EASY any given arranger makes doing the usual tasks that you need to do to fully personalize your arranger for YOU.

How simply is it to edit and create Performances. How easy is it to edit styles, and SMF's? How easy is it to link lyric readouts with the style for that song? How easy is it to organize your data, to cover different types of gigs?

Basically, the harder any arranger makes any of these tasks, the less likely you are to actually DO IT!

I'm still an ardent Roland fan not necessarily for any technical reason, but simply because Roland make all of these tasks pretty simple, especially editing styles and SMF's, so tweaking a legacy style to use the best new sounds is not a daunting chore, but a minute or so of simply button pushing, and done! Re-working your SMF library to take advantage of newer, better kits, a snap!

It's the little things that make the biggest difference, IMO...

Exactly! And it's very easy to do with Korg PA3x, AFTER you become familiar with the OS and all its intricacies.
Roland is more intuitive, especially the models that read directly from USB drive.
Of the primary arrangers, i.e. Yamaha, Korg, Roland, Ketron, Korg is the hardest OS to learn, but it may well be the deepest and most versatile as well.
DonM

Sometimes I wonder why I can't figure these things out for myself?

Quotes.......

Bernie: "but you have to please yourself knowing that you are bringing the best sound that you can to your audience."

Bill: "we buy all this new stuff to please ourselves and make the jobs fun more than to please the audience."

Don: "All the controls make playing live very easy, and the vocal processor/harmonizer is fantastic.....any current, or even not so current, arranger will get the job done, but the bottom line is "make it easy for yourself!"

ME: It appears GREAT MINDS THINK ALIKE....

....and great advice! You're all absolutely right.....I never thought about it that way. I'm going to re-think my thinking.....and I'm already thinking now I'm glad I bought the PA3x. I can't say I didn't have fun playing it last week just for myself.

Bill......I went to Altenburg. Nice fellow.......nice conversation......no pressure. Unfortunately, I didn't see anything that appealed to me. But......an enjoyable visit to the store.

I did a really nice job this evening, on a patio overlooking the lake, about 2 minutes from my house! It was a reception for an Air Force Pilots Retiree golf tournament. All they wanted was Country, but I didn't know much.

Anyway, I had to show them how the arranger worked and that I was really playing. These guys and their wives were amazed at the technology that we probably are taking for granted.

On a related note, I am trying to make it look HARDER than it is, so the audience can see I'm working at it! Thinking about putting a mirror of some sort behind me so folks can see my hands, like we used to do at piano bars. I'm even considering letting more cables and gear be visible to the audience, so it doesn't look like K******.

It's all good!
DonM

I had a gig on Saturday night that I booked by boasting to them about my new PA3x. I spent the whole of last week learning the functions, programming songs, setting up the instrument cominations, etc etc. I finished it all by Friday and when I went to review all my settings I found many of them had "vanished" and I was left with a PA3x almost in default mode. – By Mark

Mark, I can understand your frustration and disappointment. I agree with most of the statements that have been made, especially what about what the audience wants these days. But when you look at the amount of time Gary and others have spent on one keyboard and compare that to your statement above your chances of success on the job was not very good. One week???

Values:
1-Voice – the better you sing the more they like it. There was a time many years ago that I played one vocal to every 10 instrumentals, that’s gone.
2-Connecting with the audience: Always a winner., people just love to talk to the man performing.
3-Playing the right songs for the crowd that present.
4-Knowing your instrument well; being able to make a move without much thought – instinctively

My last thought; the keyboards today offer so much, but that creates a learning curve. The performer who spends the time understanding/learning his keyboard will have a far better sound and feel for our audience and ourselves. I am not against staying with older keyboards is not good but to say that they do the same job is not real.

A few years ago I used my Kn7000 on the job instead of my S900; same audience – same room – they noticed and complimented my instrument – but I know that keyboard very well- second nature I think they call it. I am now working on my Pa 800
All the major keyboards will do a great job if we spend the time – Diki made some very good points.

So our decision is not which keyboard; it’s what do I want? And what and how much am I willing to do? If singing so important, then how many of us have taken voice lessons?
B
ut it’s all really great fun, John C.

Right on, Don ... I am feeling pretty comfortable with the Pa600 now, but still nowhere near how I felt with the kn6000 ... BUT, truth is, I most likely have forgotten how many hours I spent on the technic forum with Alec Pagida (technicsplayer), Gunnar, BeBop and countless others learning how to use that wonderful board ... after 12 years or so I switch to KORG and expect to do the same things overnight ... it doesn't necessarily work that way ...

BTW ... I have a gig at an assisted living place today and the theme is "COUNTRY/WESTERN" ... hee-haw ...

I can only echo what Don said. Last week I performed for a large group of nursing home volunteers at a banquet. A man and his wife sitting in the front row about 10 feet away began whispering to each other while glancing my way. Over the years, slowly loosing my hearing, I've been able read lips to a minor degree. The guy said to his wife "It's not him singing - he's lip synching to MP3s." The song I was performing was Have You Heard by the Duprees, which requires the use of the vocal harmonizer. When I finished the song, I said, "Yes ladies and gentlemen, it's really me playing and really me singing." The guy said "Oh year, then where did you get those other, invisible singers?" At that point I had to provide the audience with a demonstration of how everything worked and sounded. They were amazed. And, I was amazed at the number of people that thought it was recorded music and I was just the DJ.

Good Luck,

Gary

The point is, ENJOY WHATEVER YOU PLAY! In any one week, I play a digital Yamaha piano, one of my old MS-60's, my little NP-30, a B-3, an XB-2 and a whole lot of stringed instruments.

It's challenging to remember the differences in real time.

R.

Hell, sometimes it's challenging to remember anything!

Gary

I have a very good friend who has been playing his T2 for about 8 years now. everything he does on it has been honed to perfection and he sounds terrific when he plays. My trumpet player, a music professor who has played all over the world, played a gig with him recently and told me "that's not him- he plays with discs or recorded music". I had to explain to him how that was not true and how many hours that he, and I, have to spend with our boards to make it sound like that.

It is very ironic that when we get to the point that we can sound like professional recordings, we get no credit for that from the audience that thinks its being "faked".

Mark, you've seen us play- maybe you have seen me "working the crowd" between sets, talking to everybody around the room and never really getting a chance to sit down with my guys for a break.

I agree that the Korg OS is deeper and more intricate than any other arranger. BUT... the price you pay is a formidable learning curve!

I've had and programmed some of the most complex synths and workstations ever made over the years, and I have to confess, the PA3x is right up there with the most difficult to fully understand and use. Simply the file structure is far more complex than necessary. As the OP points out, it is all too easy to delete work you have done and not know it, every separate element in the arranger has its own save screen and separate file structure. All well and good if you ARE a power user, but for the player coming from far less complex arrangers (particularly Roland and Yamaha), you are treading in a minefield at the start.

Personally, I prefer a far simpler structure... after all, why do we use arrangers in the first place? To make creating music live simpler! TBH, the idea of an arranger with the complexity of a full blown WS is a bit of an oxymoron!

IMO, the Korg's weakness (or strength, if you want power user flexibility!) is that each separate element can be saved independently. The voice edits can be saved as user voices, the style tweaks can be saved as user styles, multipads and samples, linked MP3's and SMF's, Songbook entries... all have a separate save structure. Roland don't use that. Everything gets saved to the one place, basically. This loses you a bit of flexibility. But it sure makes learning it all, saving it all (and not messing stuff up by accidentally overwriting a voice edit used in another song or style or performance, etc.!), and using it all a bit more intuitive.

Simple is good (up to a point!)

Vocals are important as well as a good drum beat. But the actual sounds are very important too needless to say. You want a piano sound to sound like a real piano. You want an organ to sound like a real B3 if possible. The list goes on. Higher end keyboards have superior sounds and authenticity is what should you should strive for. Whether a guitar, sax, clarinet, strings or any other sound in any other category, realism is the best insurance for a fabulous performance. Yes, good vocals are a must and superb vocals are even better. Good sounding Drum kits are actually necessary to produce that "good sounding drum beat" in a song.

I listened to some of the latest demos of the Roland BK-9 and, quite frankly, I'm more impressed the more I hear it. A fifteen year old Roland arranger simply cannot compete with today's Roland arrangers. Technology has vastly increased and that includes in the realm of sound realism. An audience likes good vocals and a good drum beat driven through an expensive sound system. They also no doubt appreciate instrument sounds that sound like the real thing if possible. A cheesy piano sound combined with a cheesy organ sound combined with a cheesy bass sound could end up backfiring and your audience possibly diminishing as a result.

Now if that fifteen year old Roland suits your audience then more power to you. We are in the 21st century and therefore authenticity of the instruments cannot be understated. Realism should be the goal. Whether vocals or "drum beat" or whatever.

All the best, Mike

When that 15 year old keyboard is a Roland g1000, I still would feel comfortable..

Our band still uses the MP3 backing tracks I made with the G1000...maybe 60 percent of our tracks are still G1000 based..

The biggest lacking sound is the better drums of the newer Rolands...but probably still on par with the competition's drums

I should redo the tracks with the G70 or even the BK5, but that is time consuming (we also record backing vocals)..The newer tracks would be hard to beat with my newer gear....but for now...15 year old Roland still covers the bases...

If you still have the multi-tracks from the least recording session, Fran, all you have to do is rerecord the MIDI Parts (I'd go with the BK-5 simply for the better drum kits) and mix in the vocals you already did. Doesn't seem much point doing them over, is there?

And Mike... You'd be amazed at how LITTLE the audience cares whether you have the latest, greatest, or an old 15 year old arranger. If you entertain them, it's job well done. Retro sounds dominate the charts, and audiences, unless presented with a nice simple A/B comparison, will happily listen to just about anything and say it sounds great (if you play it well!). Push comes to shove, I'd go out and gig on a G1000, and doubt I'd get ONE comment about how old it sounds!

Yeah, I realize that most audiences don't care if it's a new model arranger or a 15 year old arranger ready for the Smithsonian, if the sounds are adequate. But they probably do care (if they're a discriminating bunch) if the sound is particularly sub-par. In other words, if a 15 year old arranger sounds fairly decent then yes the audience will probably be happy. And if a new arranger has a piano that sounds like a Steinway Concert Grand and an organ that sounds like a real B3 (or close to it) and a string section that sounds like a real orchestra then I think the audience would be even happier.

The G1000 was a great arranger in its hey day but I'm guessing Fran will scoop up a BK-9 once it hits store shelves. And I wouldn't blame him. The BK-9 has some drawbacks e.g. low resolution LCD screen(s) that may in fact cause many people to pass on the BK-9. Plus it doesn't have a vocal harmonizer although aftermarket harmonizers are all the rage and vastly superior to the on-board harmonizers which is unfortunate. You'd think Yammie and the rest of them would have the ability and know-how to produce an excellent sounding harmonizer for their arrangers but so far that hasn't been the case. The Korg PA3X probably has the best on-board harmonizer but I've heard complaints that it too falls short. But I digress.

Entertaining an audience is essential and a top priority needless to say. I prefer superb sounds in today's arrangers because I think it "adds" to the entire package. That is to say, entertainment value, sound system, good vocals (if you sing), good beat (lively atmosphere) are all important, and if at all possible superb instrument sounds that make you sound like a real band that's even better. As opposed to a not so real sounding band from a possibly not very good sounding arranger. Although you get a bunch of senior citizens together - God bless them - where many of them potentially have a significant amount of hearing loss and likely wouldn't care whether its a low-end Casio or a Tyros4 etc., because a lot of the sonic headroom and realism (high/low frequencies and everything in between) would be diminished in the ears of the audience because of that notorious hearing loss. In other words, if you play exclusively at senior centers then sound realism is not as important to the audience. If you play to a younger audience that can truly appreciate all the nuances of superb instrument sounds you might want to invest in something more suitable to that particular audience. Or risk large amounts of red ripe tomatoes being thrown in your direction. Or so the theory goes.

All the best, Mike

Mike, I hear what you are saying but I personally feel the older audience appreciates realistic sounds more than the younger ones. Most of the younger set are accustomed to hearing highly processed music, complete with lots of synth sounds and tightly compressed drum samples.
I'm technically old enough to be in a nursing home, and have excellent hearing in spite of so many years of performing. There may be a very slight loss of extreme highs, but if there is, I can't hear it.
DonM

My hearing is shot to Hell, but I have to agree with Don. The older audiences are not only appreciative of the sounds, but additionally, they're not just folks in a nursing home or retirement community. The resort area Tiki Bars are filled to capacity with older folks, individuals ranging 65 to 90 years of age. They're the ones with the money, they love to party, and a lot of them have the attitude "I worked for it, I'm gonna spend it! Let the kids fend for themselves." A good entertainer with a Tyros-2, G-1000, PSR-3000, G-70, etc..., someone who can read an audience and play what they want to hear, can have all the work they wish. There are a lot of incredible musicians out there, guys who can play circles around the best of us on the forum, but most are not entertainers. That's why DNJ, DonM, and many of us on this forum perform 300 to 500 times a year. That's why it's called Show Biz!

Cheers,

Gary

Ever since technology caught up with my own creativity, I make sure to do at least 2-3 "bare" arrangements with just my 2 hands and voice. I shut all the automation off and pound out a tune like "Desperado", or "New York State of Mind" on straight piano .... I want them to KNOW that I'm still at the helm!

You could be right Don. Today's younger generation has grown up on compressed MP3 but when I said "a younger crowd" I was basically referring to boomers in the age bracket of 45 to 65 since they remember vinyl records, which of course was an uncompressed format. Boomers have also experienced a lot of live music through the years and as a result are especially appreciative of sonic quality. But I also think people in their 20's and 30's appreciate realistic sound too because they have experienced many improvements in audio quality in recent years with the advent of the CD and DVD.

You're right also in that a lot of senior citizens i.e. those between the ages of 75 and 120 don't experience significant amounts of hearing loss. Unfortunately many of them do and that could be a hindrance to fully enjoying that brand new BK-9 or other high-end superb sounding arranger keyboard. Whereas, boomers would enjoy them to no end in most cases.

I guess my point is that people would rather hear the "real thing" regarding instrument sounds if they had their choice. A fifteen year old arranger wouldn't be able to offer the "realism" that today's high-end arrangers offer. Therefore, to people with discriminating tastes in music (sound), keyboard players might want to invest in a higher-end arranger in order to satisfy those that have discriminating tastes. Which is likely the majority of the world's population who actually do appreciate the finer things in music. A tinker toy arranger can't really provide such an experience in my humble opinion. Although a Roland E300 isn't necessarily in the category of tinker toy. Don't worry Fran I'm not talking about your beloved G1000 either.

All the best, Mike

I do exactly the same thing, Dave, with straight guitar (no sequences) and straight piano.

Works for me!

Russ

Mike you do know my G1000 is long gone?

The G70 out did it, and the G1000 went to a new home

I would like to do the same...but with the band..they need the sound like the record tracks..

Rarely will you see me playing arranger mode..band or solo..I will basically use a strip down style if I do, or just the drums..and sometimes bass with drums..

You won't catch me using factory one touch settings..ever

I mentioned often..I want the same band members for every tune..

Sometimes I wish we could roll back to the 80's and earlier...when we played what we wanted to hear..a few layers, bass drums and a pedal to add our colors...and the hot young lady out front..(singer)

I think the bottom line is, if you entertained them with those older arrangers when they were new, you can STILL entertain them now with exactly the same gear. Their expectation of realism hasn't changed.

The truth is, 99% of our 'need' for newer arrangers comes from impressing ourselves, not any particular audience.

Now, I know I play a bit better when I have a great, expressive piano rather than some one dimensional early Sound Canvas type piano sound, but the truth is, it's rarely enough that the audience can tell the difference. I am satisfying myself a lot more than any actual need.

I'm probably going to get a BK-9... but I'm not getting it to 'sound' better. I'm getting it because of the Chord Sequencer. If it wasn't for that, my G70 would still be my #1 choice. And yes, certain things in the BK-9 will sound a hair better. But I guarantee my audience will not care one iota.

Sometimes you have to step back and ask yourself... If you are already working how you want to, will the latest, greatest alter that at all? The truth is, probably not. So figure out WHO is benefiting from spending a bunch of money on something that is probably only an incremental improvement over what you already have, and is doing the job just fine!

It's probably only you...

Oh that's right. I've been out of the loop for quite a while here at the Synthzone and I now recall you did sell it a while back Fran.

The G70 is a very decent arranger although it's getting a little long in the tooth. I really think the BK-9 sounds a lot better than the G70 although what we've heard so far of the BK-9 is just the internet demos and they can sometimes be deceiving.

Again, the goal is perfecting sound realism so that keyboards sound identical (or as close as possible) to the real deal. People enjoy the sound of a Stradivarius more so than they would enjoy the sound of a generic violin. When sounds don't accurately represent real instruments people have a tendency to question their authenticity. What is that you're playing?? A guitar? You could have fooled me!

A trumpet sound needs to sound like a real trumpet in order for people to distinguish what instrument you are attempting to play. Low end arrangers (and many mid-range arrangers) miss the mark in many cases and people are smart enough to recognize a real sounding instrument from a vague representation. I want people to hear the best possible representation of any given instrument sound because it enhances the whole experience and the audience in my opinion is more appreciative of an excellent sounding performance than they are of a mediocre experience where the sounds don't accurately represent the real deal.

I admit even high-end keyboards still have quite a ways to go in many cases to capture exact representation of real instruments. But they are advancing in sound quality and in sound realism and that's encouraging.

The G70 is fine for Senior centers and other venues. You won't see a G70 in a professional setting though. By that I mean at a big name concert venue or on TV for that matter. Hopefully the stigma attached to arrangers will disappear soon and in the near future we may indeed see professional quality high-end arrangers in professional settings being played by big name bands. I'm really looking forward to that day.

All the best, Mike

I wanted to clarify my previous statement about arrangers being used in a professional setting. Some professional keyboard players actually use arrangers as sketching tools to quickly compose ideas for songs on the fly. In the event arrangers ever get used on stage in an actual live performance I realize they would need to turn "auto-accompaniment" off. A big name band might have to tape over the name on the keyboard as well. Tyros7 might cause an audience to riot. Covering the name would avert that potential scenario.

All the best, Mike

Mike.....I think keyboard emulation of real instruments has actually come a long way in instrument reproduction. What HASN'T come "a long way" is the player's technique.....learning to play the characteristics of each instrument that the keyboard so faithfully reproduces.

I've seen so many players, when playing wind instruments, fail to use their pitch bend, vibrato, portamento, and, most important, remember to take "breaths" between notes. i.e. they play all "instruments" like they're playing a piano.

The keyboard can only do so much in trying to "fool" the listener. The rest of it has to come from the player!

Ditto!

And so I went to a neighborhood Festival last week. There I saw the ultimate in musical con artists. An 8 piece band that said absolutely nothing. All I heard was the 2 lead vocalists and the drummer playing so loud that I'm not even sure I heard the bass player.

Having that thought in my mind about "all you need is a strong beat and good vocals," I stood there and analyzed what was going on.

The first thing I noticed was the two lady keyboardists were just "stabbing" staccato type at their keyboards, so they could have been playing "15 year old boards" and gotten away with it. The stringed instruments (rhythm, bass) could have been converted broomsticks and no one would have noticed, or even cared. The Latin percussionist was drowned out by the rest of the band. And, BTW, the kicker was they had a "sound man" doing what a "sound man" does. Unfortunately, he wasn't up to snuff....or maybe he was smoking snuff....or maybe, ironically, he was doing the sound correctly.....turned up the vocals and the drums 'cause that's all that was really needed.

So, I'm not saying a OMB shouldn't sound as good as he can make himself sound. I AM saying I never really thought about current requirements for musical presentation until Bill mentioned it.

Throw in the "law of diminishing returns" and I'm now wondering why I'm spending so much time working on progressing as a musician, when, the average "bear" listener these days just wants to hear "noise" (as Don said).

For all of the 1980's I played every Saturday in the shopping mall. I played three keyboards simultaneously. I could have played only two but, knowing my audience was "discriminating" I wanted as much "variety" in sounds as I could get. In addition, I spent months tweaking the DX7 until every sound in my keyboard orchestra was perfect!

"Discriminating audiences want to hear real instruments coming from the keyboard" has been mentioned a few times in this thread. At one time, this was true, but times have changed drastically and a whole new generation is out there now. "Discriminating audiences" is a thing of the past now. Musical integrity has gone the route of stagecoaches and snake oil salesman.

Now none of this is neither good nor bad. It's simply "awareness." Couple that with what Russ said about "going where the money is" makes you stop and think about what you're doing.

I spent all those early years being a OMB and not getting input from other musicians. It's really rewarding now, in Internet times, reading everyone's thoughts about just about everything musical here in the SynthZone. Great comments from everyone.It certainly has helped me in bringing to my attention a lot of what I wouldn't have gleaned on my own. And I have an IQ of 812!