This may be slightly off topic, but I was thinking about this. Are we nearing the end of technological advances in keyboarding?

The only thing I can think of that will continue to rise is wave rom, polyphony ect. Ive looked over the past couple years on boards and there have been no major advances that ive found. Am I totally missing something? I cant imagine anything huge coming out in the near future.

Phil

Dear pennywizz;

I was pondering the same thing. I presume that the authenticity & realism of the sounds and styles would continue to improve. Also the styles could become more intelligent in anticipating what the KB player is going to do. Furhter, I suppose the goal is to reach a point where the OMB will sound like a true multi-piece live band. At this point in time manufacturers are still not close to those goals.

But I do agree that the advances with the releases of the new top model arrangers are not that great, and a little disappointing for me. I don't know if manufacturers are holding back , or are not trying hard enough?
I do know that when looking at the quality of sound fonts & vsti etc...that are available, arranger software is behind in current technology, let alone making great adavnces!

Regards;
BN

I have always thought that arrangers and workstations are behind music technology. The manufacturers have allowed computers and computer software to beat them at their own game and now they are playing catch up.

That said however, I think the manufacturers of both arrangers and workstations will incorporate more wave ROM and wave samples. They would allow the user to manipulate waves to use in styles and sequences. Also, I think they would and should try to improve on the style creation tools. One example is for them to give the user a way to define what types of chords the keyboard would recognize.

I just hope they don't put on keyboards technology that is not really needed like a Digital camera or a coffee maker.
Or maybe those things are needed on a keyboard?!LOL

Arrangers are just a small portion of each manufacturer's product line. When you see arranger functions on home digital pianos, organs and discount keyboards you must realize that manufacturers include them for the "fun" aspect of playing and hearing oneself sound like an entire orchestra. This has been around since the 60's and is always used as a selling point with customers. This, I believe is as big a share of their arranger business as pure arrangers - or arrangers for hire.

Arranger features will only advance as the DEMAND (from people like us) increases. The guy with the $12,000 home organ isn't going to make as many demands as we do. With the advent of boards such as the Pa1X Pro, G70 and possibly Tyros II and Kurzweil the power of the arranger is at its technological peak for now. There is no impetus or profit in advancing it further - for now.

Forums such as this need to advance ideas for the future. What about making the creating of styles more intuitive or more a focal point of a new arranger? What if styles were as simple to edit or create as a simple loop recording (ala Roland XP's, Motif and others)or if Korg Karma technology was adapted into the style creation process.

So many of you have been espousing softsynths and arrangers - not completely there yet. That's a possible future. Go back and read the forum archives and see some of the previous ideas thrown out here. We've talked about roll-up keyboards (they got 'em). We've influenced and pre-suggested features now taken for granted. This is a REAL and SERIOUS forum that holds a lot of weight in the music community. It's also a fun place to be.

So, toss out your wildest and best ideas and let's discuss them. Something could happen.

It's my perception that there are more arranger keyboards in the world than any other kind in sum total. They run the gammit from $100 to $16k. And if you compare say a $500 arranger from 1985, 1995 and 2005 you'd see a lot of technical advances.

But the answer to the question is no, we haven't come anywhere near what technology offers. Keyboard technology has not advanced nearly as quickly as computer technology, and it's maddening to see such tiny advances in year-to-year models. I think manufacturers are purposely witholding technology so they don't suddenly make their previous models completely obsolete. The prices haven't followed the computer model either... prices of keyboards have gone up steadily while computers tend to have more features for less cost annually.

That's why I think we'll reach a point where manufacturers will concentrate more on selling Wal-Mart arrangers and low-priced entry-level arranger/keyboard instruments rather than investing the R&D into pro-level models. Meanwhile we'll integrate laptops into our keyboard systems more and more, and I expect to see some more "generic" keyboard shells come out from independent manufacturers that house laptops and provide the audio/midi interface, control surface features, and a desktop program to assign softsynths to the keyboard and midi channels. I'd really like to see something like a 76-note weighted action keyboard built into a travel case with a locking lid and a place to dock a laptop.

I think design-your-own arrangers will never work or make it to market. What makes arrangers attractive is that they have all the controls and software needed to do the job - easily. Modules and software aren't as successful because the immediate, tactile interface is not there. Simplicity is essential. Look how we have moved back to more dials and controls because the multi-page menus were so cumbersome. Pianos and organs were/are popular because most of your time and effort is focused on playing. Drawbars are visual and tactile - virtual drawbars, duh!

Future arrangers will continue to be based on other synth/sound generating technology. The more you pay the more advanced the technology will be. Will an arranger ever be more advanced than a synth/keyboard? Why?

No.
[QUOTE]Orignally posted by The Pro:
Keyboard technology has not advanced nearly as quickly as computer technology, and it's maddening to see such tiny advances in year-to-year models. I think manufacturers are purposely witholding technology
I agree

Cassp said, "Will an arranger ever be more advanced than a synth/keyboard? Why?"
No. It's a marketing decision.
Starkeeper

[This message has been edited by Starkeeper (edited 03-24-2005).]

One trend I see is the migration of arranger concepts into non-arrangers. Last century, only arranger keyboards employed chord recognition (is this right?). Then the Karma and Motif ES keyboards incorporated chord recognition to trigger patterns. Virtual Guitarist and the soon to be released Kontakt 2 use chord recognition to generate patterns. So there may be some blurring between arrangers and other synths.

No!!....but...we are reaching the limit of people that know how, or are willing to learn how to play keyboards anymore......with so many other choices to make music it has literaly made upcoming baby boomers etc ...reluctant to take lessons and learn vs the easy way out and becoming a DJ, K artist, Electronic pc musician, etc. which in turn reduces and slows the progress of the other forms of instruments and that includes Arranger Kb's...less people play = less $$ = less progress..

[This message has been edited by Dnj (edited 03-24-2005).]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by cassp:
[B]I think design-your-own arrangers will never work or make it to market. What makes arrangers attractive is that they have all the controls and software needed to do the job - easily.


Dear Cassp;

Your too late Cassp, because companies are already making them. They exist. Its the way of the future. Who wants to invest in a 3-4K KB that obsolete in 3 years, and have to spenn 1.5X more on the next KB. Doesn't that make you angry?

With CPU based modular designs, KBs will have the abiltiy to keep up with current technology without have to replace the whole KB. Thus saving the user alot of money during their lives.

Regards;
BN

I never said they wouldn't exist. They won't be as popular simply because the physical interface will not be designed specifically for any particular software.

Look at the midi keyboard controllers. See all of those knobs, buttons and sliders. Which ones will control the simple ON,OFF, FILL A, FILL B, ETC. functions? Now how do you control chord recognition? By screen menu, button, switch?

A generic keyboard matched with multiple software programs give you just what we have now, an interfacing mess with little or no tactile satisfaction. Even arranger modules like the Ketron and Korg aren't as popular as their keyboard cousins simply because of the interfacing, distance, tactile problems.

BN,
You are right on the money. That is why I have started going down the soft arranger route.
I have the computer, the amplifier/speakers, the OMB software, some XG soundfonts, my MIDI Roland keyboard is acting as a controller (with full size keys and good key feel . All I need is some good quality lead voices. I don't need to upgrade my keyboard. It is all modular.
Starkeeper

Dear Cassp;

With respect to the knobs/sliders etc.. one would assign the functions to which buttons you choose. So it would function just like an arranger. secondly,dues to prgrams like OMB, live styler, the left hand function with chord recognition just like an arranger. I maybe wrong, but it looks like you are thinking that all the functions would be contrlled via a computer screen. This does not have to be the case. Its all their infront of you. The current situation of arrangers is limited by its software/hardware that the manufacturers place inside.

I suppose to each his own, but Cassp I don't want you to be close minded about it ( its not as complicated as it sounds). These configuration would be much more powerful to the user, and allows for limitless possibilities. By using the prefab KBs as we have been doing for years, precludes us to accept what ever the manufuactures want to give us.

PS--there are companies that have modular based softsynth arrangers in the typical familiar layout that you have described ( i.e. with pre-assigened buttons etc..)

Regards;
BN

The On,off, fill, etc. can be controlled by the lower notes on a 76 note keyboard or by a PC keyboard sitting close by.
Chord recognition is handled exactly like all other arrangers, through left hand chords. On a MIDI controller keyboard you can send midi messages to the software.
Starkeeper

I see an arranger software program combined with a special MIDI footpedal board as one possible solution. The arranger buttons would be replaced with foot-controlled buttons that are labeled like arranger buttons (verse, chorus, fill, etc.) sort of like the Yamaha MFC-10 foot conroller works now.

Even if you don't like that idea, I can foresee lots of ways to overcome this problem. How about a prgram to change Roland's D-Beam control into an arranger function - swipe hand upwards for start and downwards for ending, to the right for verse-to-chorus and vice versa. There's more ways to skin this cat I'm sure.

I see some innovative small company coming out with an arranger program and some small piece of dedicated MIDI control surface hardware.

I can think of hundreds of way to improve arrangers. I'm sure the guys who specialize in this will too. I look for them to keep getting better, but probably not on a timetable we would hope for.
DonM

How about some one making a midi controler specially made for controling arrangers and or arranger softwear.

There you go!! Good thinking Genesys. That would solve all the logistical problems, and make the older arranger players more comfortable with the new technology.


Regards;
BN

Lots of great ideas on this thread. Way to go Genesys. Those buttons should send midi messages out the midi port.
Starkeeper

If you're going to go thru all that trouble to design dedicated hardware, why not integrate the software. Do you really believe stand-alone software is or will be supperior to what can be achieved now. If this stuff was possible and PROFITABLE, it would be on the market now.

1) If a company integrates the software it will no longer be an open system (proprietary) and we will once again be at the mercy of the manufacturer to come up with updates.
2) Yes stand alone software can be superior to what can be achieved now. The developer will focus on software and not worry about the keyboard.
3) It is possible but, would not be as profitable as it is now. I don't need to upgrade my keybed every 2 years. The keybed on my 3 year old Roland does not need to be changed, but the styles do. The keyboard mfgs. are milking the system until they can no longer. You can be sure the keyboard makers are watching Mediastation and Neko to watch how they make out. If they, or a facsimile start grabbing market share, you can be sure they will be marketing that way as well.
Starkeeper

[This message has been edited by Starkeeper (edited 03-24-2005).]

[This message has been edited by Starkeeper (edited 03-24-2005).]

Sorry, but to me it sounds like a lot of rehashed ideas that have never been marketable and will remain so.

I've had a lot of keyboards where the hardware outlasted the software - that's called comsumerism.

Consumerism is not a good thing IMO.
Starkeeper

I'm sure Yamaha, Roland, Korg and a dozen other manufacturers are really shaken by that annoouncement.

Kevin, please don't take this the wrong way; it's not directed st you. It's just that reality sucks that way.

[This message has been edited by cassp (edited 03-24-2005).]

They should make a KB that reads your mind, and plays what your thinking!

Phil

Yeah, that would be great, at least until you reach my age. My wife says the mind was the second thing to go. Damned if I can remember what the first thing was.

Gary

First, it would be nice if the keyboard manufacturers implemented the technology that exists.

I would like to see a Yamaha with

1. a 7 footswitch controller. The MFC10 is unweildy and sucks for most keyboardists.

2. a START BEAT OVER button.

3. a great vocalizer.

We can expect to see

4. Vocal pitch control

5. Breath controller

6. Software to get into the nitty gritty of voice modulation - integrated with sequencing software.

7. Guitar strumming. Play chord with left hand. Instead of right hand keys activating notes, they activate different strums and picking.

What I want most is

1. More great styles with more variations.

2. More authentic sounds.

3. Ease of play. Easy to find the right registration. Easy to insert a 3/4 beat into a 4/4 arrangement. Easy to pick voices, styles, harmonies, etc. Without an arranger keyboard interface, you can't get ease of play.

Beakybird

I'm with you Starkeeper. Cassp, just because a merry-go-round is present, doesn't mean that we have to get on. If everyone followed the pack we would never have any new ideas. It has to stop sometime.

Regards;
BN

I don't know wether I've understood you or not, Phil. If you're talking about the controlling posibilities of synthesises, there could be more in the future. But if you're talking about sound abilities I have to refuse. So, why?

The sounds have reached its optimum. What do you want to make better on a flute or trumpet wave if it sounds absolute real? The sounds that I'm using are samples in a high performance quality (44.1kHz/16 bit/stereo).
They won't sound better in a rate of 96kHz as 24 bit/stereo surround sound waves.
In most cases they even sound worse than the established once. Sometimes I've thought the 24 bit wave sounds realer than real. That's the reason why it sounds unreal to me.

In my opinion the manufacturers try to invent the same wheel again and again. What's really new on soft synths? What's better on the sound abilities of soft synths? Do they really believe that we can run 20 real synths as one virtual synth using all the same converters as their audio output? There's no chance for them to do so with any non-adequate hardware.

I've heard the same sample on different samplers. I tried a guitar sample (taken from my Les Paul) on my Kurzweil's K2000RS and then on a Ensonic Mirage. My guitar on the K2k sounded slightly other than on the Mirage. The reason for those small differences are the AD/DA-converters which were manufactured by different chip factories.

Okay, one of you might think that these were failings in hardware developments that will be compensated by soft synth engineering.
The others are knowing that exactly these slightly differences were making the great distinctions.

------------------
Greetings from Frankfurt (Germany),
Sheriff ;-)

[This message has been edited by Sheriff (edited 03-28-2005).]

Ok let me say one thing real quick right off...screw the debate of software Vs hardware ( I see it all the time ). Reason I say screw it...lol have you ever tried to run software without hardware, doesn't work all that well does it.

"The sounds have reached its optimum. What do you want to make better on a flute or trumpet wave if it sounds absolute real?"

Well, there is a factor of diminishing returns for sure...but sounds from now will not be considered optimum ten year's from now. Not to say that I dont love keyboards now of the past and so on...its just reality.

"The sounds that I'm using are samples in a high performance quality (44.1kHz/16 bit/stereo)."

The basic consumer grade sample rate we are all stuck with.


"They won't sound better in a rate of 96kHz as 24 bit/stereo surround sound waves."

This just blasts logic one in the head...have you ever contrasted 16bit Vs 24bit? 24bit samples will and do crush 16bit. Hahaha sorry but 16bit stereo next to 24bit surround is just gonna get its ass handed to it.


"In most cases they even sound worse than the established once. Sometimes I've thought the 24 bit wave sounds realer than real. That's the reason why it sounds unreal to me."

Its the fault of the sound designer not sample rate. YET I do agree with you the more supposedly realistic something is the more the small elements that conflict with that stand out. Only I feel the problem could be fixed if the perspective was changed...a keyboard is a keyboard, its very much its own instrument I find it almost a complete waste that the sounds dumped into them are so literal minded. Think if higher sample rates were only utilized as a broader palette to approach sound creation...not just rehash the same old sound libraries with a sloppy conversion.

In the end I feel there are many sounds/instruments on romplers that are just chasing the dragon so to speak.

Anyhow...most everything thats been talked about here COULD be somewhat pointless, IF the new Alesis Fusion pans out well.

Beyond that the main thing I would love to see in future keyboards...BETTER effects and more that can be used at once no matter what mode your in. I mean look at Roland/Boss and their independent effects...think if something like the ME50 was a reality in a keyboard ( only speaking of that as its a multi unit hahaha and not in list mood ). Check out something like the Yamaha "MagicStop" multi effects unit ( 32bit ) and think if that was in the Yamaha keyboards...lord the effects on a sub 200$ box are more refined then whats in their 3000$ keyboards. Just doesn't seem right does it.

Plus when dealing with a rompler, effects are your most direct freedom to craft sounds you want. While Im not the largest fan of amp sims digital reverb and the like, Im not blind to the fact if things of that nature of are relative quality they can greatly enhance keyboard driven work. Sad thing is spend a few thousand bucks and get five effects to work with across perhaps 16 tracks Hell your going to have stuff sharing effects that isnt ideal at the very least if not that basic bread and butter reforcement ( EQs compression and the like ) are going to eat up effects you would perhaps wish to be more creative with.

Kinda silly to act like tech has reached its limits...when we still deal with voices that dont sound as good in sequencer mode as they do in program mode. Decade old gripes still haven't been fixed hahaha but tech has reached its limits

"'m with you Starkeeper. Cassp, just because a merry-go-round is present, doesn't mean that we have to get on. If everyone followed the pack we would never have any new ideas. It has to stop sometime."

LOL well given many people here "upgrade" their board soon as something with a new number behind it or some random "cool" or "mega" 16bit sample is marketed...the wait could be a LONG one.

"They should make a KB that reads your mind, and plays what your thinking! "

Best idea in the topic

Dear Alone&Forsaken;

I agree with your statements, but I think some of your answer span various KB groups. The original question was have "arranger Kbs" reached their technological limits. The current software that you mentioned 24 bit sampled, waves etc.. are not available on majority of arrangers. ( I can only think of one that uses wave samples). They are used in studio with a computer, or in soft sythn set-ups and I suppose that is why this thread changed into the software vs. hardware( meaning non-upgradeble arrangers) debate. My view is that independant software companies ( Kontak, giga samples,ampli-tube etc..) who produces sound samples are far superior then what is available on arrangers. SO, the next natural progression is, why can't a keyboard company come up with a modular arrangers, or come up with a midi-controlable KB with arranger template set-up, that can be loaded with whatever sound tables & software one chooses?

Regards;
BN

PS--I agree 100% we companies rehashing old wavetables!!!

"The original question was have "arranger Kbs" reached their technological limits."

Everything stated can be applied to arranger keyboards...and would greatly enhance them. The very fact there is some mystical separation of what people feel is an arranger/worksation/synth is the first thing that has to go for any true progression to take place. Literal minds screw it all up on the keyboard makers end as well as the consumer end.

"The current software that you mentioned 24 bit sampled, waves etc.. are not available on majority of arrangers."

Am I talking to a brick wall...hahaha DUH I think expressing there is something arranger keyboards DONT do on the whole now constitutes a limit that hasn't been reached yet that could be exploited Same thing goes for effects and other things...geeee boggles the freaking mind. Not to start a fight or anything but you just backed up my point while trying to say I was wrong on some level :P Thanks!

What the Fusion from Alesis COULD be should be a template of sorts to build from...sample playback, virtual analog, sequencer, harddisk recording ( at 24bit ), unlimited sample space and so on...for what 1600$. HAH I dont think a few drum fills a few intros and some auto chords on something like a 3000$ Tyros is justified in the least. Just take away the artificial limits on a combo of current gear hahaha and the future would almost be here now.

Hell a 200$ drum machine can replace what most people feel arranger features are.

"why can't a keyboard company come up with a modular arrangers, or come up with a midi-controlable KB with arranger template set-up, that can be loaded with whatever sound tables & software one chooses?"

lol why are people so stuck on a tunnel vision perspective of what constitutes an arranger who knows :P

They CAN do these things and far more...but that would kill the market of upgrading every few years in the vain hope of finally breaking out of the muzack box. Not to be insulting but its the sound as much as the interface and random features that cause people to lap up the same vomit thinking the results are gonna be different this year for some reason.

At this point I have to except because there are musicians who won't change their sounds. I'm not a keyborder but a guitarist. I'm playing the same accoustic guitar which I bought 15 years ago. I don't wanna give 'her' away because 'she' sounds sweeter and sweeter from year to year - believe it or not...
In studio surrounding I'm using a K2000RS (remember the Kurzweil's flagship ten years ago). It gives me all the classical instruments that I need for orchestral arrangements.
BTW: There are some secrets in composing and arranging that let the old tunes sound as new once...

I'm longing for a new sound?...hey, no matter, there are nearly endless posibilities in this 'little black rack' because of its sampling, synthesizing and filtering options. Gimme just one night with my friend and we'd have create the next 20 million dollar sound. No use for other synths - be it hardware or software.

At the other points I've said what I wanted to say...for it is only my opinion...

------------------
Greetings from Frankfurt (Germany),
Sheriff ;-)

Hi there,

I was doing research and came upon your posted message. I am wondering if you still remember where you bought the "Little Black Rack" put out by PSG in 1998. Are you willing to sell me yours? Any photo? Your reply is appreciated. You may contact me at the email address at kkin@mofo.com

Thanks.

KK in LA

Phil: Arranger Keyboards (and synthesizer cousins) are probably going to follow the curve to which most other hi-tech gizmos seem attached. Truth is, we probably have no idea what will spark the next spiral of change. My guess is that in five years, maybe more, maybe less, we will see equipment that will absolutely dazzle us.
No matter what, the spiral will not be fast enough for any of us tech-addicts. It is amazing to see the different frequencies to which each of us are tuned on this forum. Despite this, we each contribute in some way and we all benefit from the exchange and camaraderie. RICE

It's only just begun. http://www.synthzone.com/ubbs/Forum37/HTML/010433.html
Starkeeper

What innovations are yet to come?

Certainly the sounds will be improved through the constant lowering of memory prices. More memory should mean more sounds and more importantly more variations of those sounds – more detailed pianos, more mega-type voices, etc. Technology already exists that will play subtle variations of sounds on playing the same note on the keyboard both, through playing at different velocities ala mega voices, but also randomly giving each key press a bit of spice.

The above is not specific to arrangers but will migrate from other (regular) keyboards and frankly anything that helps arrangers sound less cheesy is to be welcomed.

On the styles front, KARMA like ideas will affect the playing styles and as more progress is made on the softsynth front these will also be incorporated in arrangers. We may see the almost AI-like interfaces used to make style programming and editing easier.

Of course the other aspect is the unknown. Years ago we had the same debate over analogue synths and then out of the blue came FM. At the time I was bowled over; I hope to be again one day by the next generation of thinking.

On a final note, it’s possible economic or market forces may keep these innovations out of music shops but I tend to think people will always innovate (some of the best innovations happen by accident) and when it comes to technology the rules seems to be if it can be done it will be done and someone will sell it!

Hey guys, we live in good times!! Here is why:

Currently there are several revolutionary trends going on. The world is becoming connected, in the world of music and keyboards/synths/samplers this is totally amazing! It means we are soon able to play together with each other no matter where we are, it means we can share sound samples with each other in real-time, it means we can receive OS upgrades in realtime, buy sound sample banks online without postage delay and so on. This is only one thing. Then we have the sampling revolution that is currently reaching new dimensions. 192 KHz sampling rate on a 24-bit resolution is only the beginning. This will increase which will give us completely new sound experiences since our body is able to adapt the rest of the vibrations that our ears cannot take. This means more realistic sounding instruments playable on keyboards, more possibilities, beautiful sounds and nice experiences! Then we have the surround sound revolution with dvd audio, which will gradually overtake the stereo format completely and give the music new dimensions. Then we have the new trends with AI based music tools, for instance things like the S.A.G.E and chaos engine technologies from Spectrasonics and OASYS from Korg giving us totally new experiences with grooves and sounds. Then we have a bunch of new virtual instruments and effect engines sampled at 192Khz/24 bit coming out. All analog cables and equipment will be wiped out with digital connections and speakers. Keyboards will be equipped with great vocal harmony features and great choirs. Then we will soon have extractable media tracks that are totally portable and give us new sampling possibilities. Keyboards will soon start talking the same language (like XML), which will lead to new editing possibilities. It seems like the list goes on and on...!

Yes! In listings they are strong!!!
If the amplitude in their labors goes one pikometer to the left then the engineers cry out loud "HEUREKA"!!! But I doubt you will take any notice of it...

On the other hand I have to agree that the technical abilities are really amazing nowadays (from the view of a technician like me). Unfortunality I'll furthermore have to buy my guitar strings on foot...ouch...

Sometimes I'm asking myself: "Hey, Sheriff! Where do you think will all this technical evolution lead to?"
And then I ordinarily hear my own voice wispering: "I don't know, man! I don't know! But before my computer will get its blues and start to compose and to improvise it will be the time for me to leave this world...!"

------------------
Greetings from Frankfurt (Germany),
Sheriff ;-)