Every arranger I have played, it doesn't matter one little bit WHEN you hit the button for a fill (other than too close to the end of the bar, when the fill will play in it's entirety on the NEXT bar), and it will ALWAYS be in perfect sync with the Variation. Korg's don't do that?

But it seems to me that the problem with what is reported with the fills seems to be far more a problem with how the styles are written, than how the OS triggers them (unless Donny's contention that you actually HAVE to hit them spot on rhythmically IS true). If you DO have two completely different fills for EACH variation (although those quotes seem to contradict this assumption - is there a difference in the number of fills between the PA1X and the PA2X and PA800?) this is wonderful news. BUT... if the style makers are not utilizing it, and staying with tried and tested workflow from earlier, two-fill arrangers, it won't be apparent.

But, after research from Korg's website, and the tech specs on the PA800 comes this:
Style controls: 4 Variations, 3 Fills, 3 Intros, 3 Endings, Synchro Start/Stop, Tap Tempo/Reset, Fade In/Out, Bass Inversion, Manual Bass, Tempo Lock, Memory, Accompaniment/Real Time Track Balance Volume, Accompaniment Mute, Drum Mapping, Snare & Kick Designation, Single Touch


SO... only two fills (if one is the Break/Fill) for four variations. This strikes me as VERY poor, compared to most other manufacturers (Yamaha 4 fills and a Break/Fill, Roland 6 fills, no Break/Fill but an assignable Break/Mute) and may go a VERY long way to explaining the 'jumpy' fills complaint from many users.

Two fills can't POSSIBLY get each transition to be smooth on any style that goes from a simple Var1 to a very busy Var4... That's basically ONE fill-up and ONE fill-down for the entire machine.

Me, I want even MORE than even Roland provide..! A dedicated fill for EVERY transition possible (that's 16 for a four Variation style including fill-to-same), but the thought of just two for an entire style just doesn't cut it, IMO...