Having played an XS extensively, let me tell you I wouldn't DREAM of using it as a substitute for an arranger. There are some VERY significant differences between running a WS loopstation and an arranger. First of all, the simple triggering of the divisions. I already posted about this, but somehow spalding seems to find making four or five button presses with great timing precision no more bother than pressing ONE... I guess actually PLAYING anything with your LH, even just chords, isn't really that important!

Add to that, let's just say... no Bass Inversions (what, don't use them, eh, spalding?) no complex mode changes, no accurate voicing of guitar chords for complex chords, no velocity switched changes to patterns, no automatic changes in patterns depending on what chord is played, the list goes on and on just in an operational level.

Then, forget all the live gigging conveniences of an arranger (lyric readout, songlists, with programmable transposition, sensible placing of controls to allow operation AND playing at the same time (WS's just have a more studio approach to where they place the knobs and sliders, etc. - for instance, the arp selection buttons are all in the MIDDLE, just under the screen, rather than close to your LH).

No, sorry, only a person that hasn't TRIED gigging on a WS would suggest one as an alternative to an arranger. Spalding LOVES to taunt us with how these things OUGHT to be possible, but it's pretty obvious he's never tried. Or he would already know this stuff.

Oh, and BTW... what possible reason would one try to create a STYLE, to compose original, creative music? I admit, as a simple scratchpad to sketch out an idea, the arranger is pretty good, but after that, if you are doing the job PROPERLY, you go ahead and replace almost everything with real playing. But if you have to create an original style in the first place, JUST to make the scratch track, and THEN chuck it all away, that's doubling the work you need to do. I LOVE using commercial styles as the scratchpad for a song, but if I haven't got a style that does what I want it to do, I'm not going to create one first, THEN chuck it all away!

I just do what everybody else does... Sequence up the song from scratch. If you want to BE creative, unless your goal IS to produce repetitive mindless music with instrumental parts no REAL player would ever play, that's what you end up having to do anyway. Sorry spalding, but you can't brow beat us on this. Many, many of us have worked extensively with the latest WS's as well as TOTL arrangers. We are all too well acquainted with what each of them does, and does best (and worst). And if choosing to use each of them at what they do best is being less creative, then sorry. I look forward to hearing your magnum opus done entirely on the arranger...

Ah, but what's this? You apparently seem to have a pretty good working knowledge of WS basics (but apparently come up a little short in the practical live application of them), but surely, if an arranger is ALL a creative person needs, why do you bother with WS's at all in the first place? I'm sorry, but it appears all too obvious you are as aware as the rest of us that the arranger isn't the be all and end all of keyboards.

I would suggest you take your own advice, and rather than start topics based on factory demos and plain flat out gear lust, actually go ahead and USE one for a while, then their shortcomings (and strengths) might be more easily ascertained... After all, it's just a bit bipolar to, on the one hand, say that ALL any creative musician needs is an arranger, then turn around and admit you really like this Motif, just because it has a few ten year old arranger capabilities on it. Because, simply following VERY basic chords around, VERY basically (compared to a TOTL arranger, for instance) is a nineties, maybe even an eighties arranger trick. They've come a long way, baby...