I would really appreciate some input on this one. I have been thinking about this lately. Does anyone else feel that keyboard makers overprice their arranger keyboards, and arranger players get jacked with prices as compared to synth players? Here's why I ask. I posted the basic spec list for the PSR-3000, and the Yamaha Motif 6 to make a few points here. (I know apples and oranges, but I think these two are a good contasting comparison)

First off when comparing the spec list for the original Motif6 to the PSR-3000 and then looking at the price for both models I have to ask... what the hell's going on here?????

The Motif is built like a tank, and the PSR-3000 can't even hold a candle to the construction quality of the Motif. The Motif has good key feel, nice wheels, and is quite solid.

Then you have to consider sounds. Arrangers have in my opinion always excelled in acoustic instruments, but that's changed now since the Motif original has carried over sweet, cool, live voice, ect. Plus the acoustic voices in the Motif can easily compare to the PSR-3000 (in my opinion of course)

Then there's the synth sounds. Sorry but the PSR-3000 isn't even worthy of picking up the crumbs the Motif leaves behind when it comes to sonic quality of synth sounds.

Also there's the voice editing and real-time control issue. Again Motif takes this hands down.

Now look at the sequencers. The Motif has a capacity of 200,000 notes, and (the whammy) the ability to have individual loop settings on each track when pattern recording. Now the icing on this cake! The motif has an integrated sampling sequencer allowing the user to mix live audio with internal sequences

Then you have to look at EXPANSION. Well again Motif has this one.

Now I know the Motif is a synth, and the 3000 is an arranger, but look at these two boards. When you look at the spec list and then the prices I think it's worthy of questioning.

The PSR-3000 is selling for $1,499 at Music123.com and the Motif original is selling for $1,199...... Honestly I think the Motif is the better bang for the buck here. Why are these arrangers so darn much. What makes them so great and worth so much more than a synth, even though Yammies PSR-3000 isn't built (phisically) at the level a $1,400 keyboard should be. Also consider you can get a Korg Karma for the same price and it too (aside from a vocalizer) is miles ahead of the 3000 in sonic quality, sequencing, build quality, and real-time control. The spec lists for the 3000 and Motif are below.

I'm not trying to trash arrangers either. I've had a really hard time lately trying to justify the cost difference of an arranger compared to a full blown synth.

-------------------------------------------
Motif Specs
--------------------------------------------
Motif 6 61 Keys, Initial Touch/After Touch
Tone Generator AWM2
Multitimbres 16 + 1(A/D) + 18 (Max. with Plug-in boards installed)
Effects Reverb:12 Chorus:25 Insertion 1:25 Insertion 2:104 Variation:25 (in Performance mode/Song mode) Plug-in Insertion Master Equalizer:5 Band
Voices Preset Bank Normal: 384, Drum kits: 48 GM Bank Normal: 128, Drum kit: 1 User Bank Normal: 128, Drum kits: 16 Plug-in Preset Bank 64 (for AN, PF, DX), 192 (for VL) Plug-in User Bank 64 (for each Plug-in Slot)
Arpeggiator Preset 1: 128 Preset 2: 128 User: 128 (MIDI Sync, MIDI TX/RX, Velocity Limit, Note Limit)
Sampler Analog Sampling Freq.: 44.1 kHz (max.), 16 bit Linear, Stereo Digital Sampling Freq.: 44.1 kHz (max.) (only when AIEB I/O board is installed), 16 bit Linear, Stereo Memory:4 MB expandable to 64 MB (SIMM slot x 2) Max.Waveforms (Multi Samples): 256 Max.Ke
Sequencer 200,000 notes Resolution: 480 Clocks per Quarter Note Song: 64 songs, 16 tracks (each track can be used as a loop track), 5 Scenes Song Chain Play: 100 steps 1 Multi per Song 16 Multi Template Pattern: 16 tracks, 64 styles,16 sections, 256 phrases / 1 Sty
Expandability 3 Slots for Modular Synthesis Plug-in Boards 1 Slot for mLAN8E or AIEB 2 Slots for 72-pin SIMM
Weight, Dimensions 1,048(W) x 397(D) x 135(H), 15.8 kg 41 1 /4 x 15 5 /8 x 5 1 /4", 34 3 /4 lbs.

--------------------------------------------
PSR-3000 Specs
--------------------------------------------
Keyboard 61 Full-size w T Response
Display Color LCD 320 x 240
Lyric / Score Yes / Yes
Voices & Comp. 829 GM2 / XG / GS Compatible
Dual/Split Yes - L1, R1, R2
Polyphony 128 Notes
Wave ROM 64MB
One Touch / Reg. 4 per Style / 8 pads x Unlimited
Music Database Yes
Y.E.S. / Lessons No
Styles 240 + User Styles (SFF)
Style Sections 3 Intro/Endings + A-D + Fill x 4
Sequencer 16-Track/SmartMedia/35000 Notes
Broadband Yes
MIDI In/Out + USB Slave
Storage Device SmartMedia, Flash, USB Device
In/Out Jacks Phones,FS x 2,L/R Out+Fixed, MIC
Speakers 12cm x 2 / 4cm x 2 (Dome)
Amplifier 12W + 12W
Power Supply PA-300 (Included)
Included Accessories Manual, M. Rest, Data Disk
Dimensions 38.92" x 15.96" x 6.68" 24.2 lbs

Squeek,

It is an interesting comparison, but somewhat misdirected. First of all, the development Yamaha did for Motif it has leveraged over tens of thousands of Motifs sold (you have to count the 6, 7, and 8, as well as all the ESes, which share the bulk of features with one another). By comparison, there must have been 10 times fewer PSR 3000s (and 1500s) made, hence this development cost must be amortized.

Second, the Motif and any other "workstation" is essentially useless for playing music in real time, unless you are a budding Wendy (Walter?) Carlos. While most today's workstations have a complement of real, musically useful sounds (some of them quite good), the vast majority of their sounds are musically useless, and you have to wade through a lot of crap to find the good sounds. In fact, band usage notwithstanding, the only way to make music with a workstation is to record it track by track in the sequencer. Hence, having a large sequencer for a workstation is a necessity.

An arranger keyboard, on the other hand, can make real music right out of the box, thanks to having good quality, easily accessible sounds, and musically useful styles, even when played by a relatively mediocre player like myself. It is definitely worth a lot more in musical terms; besides, those styles must cost quite a bit to record, which also adds to the price of the instrument.

I am not defending the practice of overpricing the arranger keyboards, especially the high end ones. However, just because an old, nearly discontinued model for which I have no use is being sold for cheap, does not make me jump to the conclusions.

Regards,
Alex

I have always asked that question myself.

Well I think the prices for arrangers are so high because they are made generally for the home player wanting to amuse themselves and a few friends, and not a professional market. That is why for example they go half way on the features on a new arranger. The manufacturers know that it is not important to go all out on the features because the home user will buy the arranger even if the features only go half of the way. It is only with in recent times that arrangers are being used professionally, but manufactures to me do not want to acknowledge that and make their arrangers accordingly.

Also, arranger sales are not at the same amount as synth workstations so they must price arrangers high.

They know that the high price they are charging for arrangers is not a problem to whom they are marketing and selling arrangers i.e. the hone player and not the professional market.


That’s why some manufacturers are slow to have 76 key arrangers, arranger nodules, samplers and full sequencers.

I think the prices for arrangers are too high. Could you imagine the Triton extreme (61 keys with no add-ons) costing around $3500 u.s. Would a lot of people buy it at that price?


It is only we the buyers can get a change by not buying new and very expencive arrangers with very few add-ons.

Alex,
I have to disagree with this statement:
--------------------------------------------
Second, the Motif and any other "workstation" is essentially useless for playing music in real time, unless you are a budding Wendy (Walter?) Carlos. While most today's workstations have a complement of real, musically useful sounds (some of them quite good), the vast majority of their sounds are musically useless, and you have to wade through a lot of crap to find the good sounds. In fact, band usage notwithstanding, the only way to make music with a workstation is to record it track by track in the sequencer. Hence, having a large sequencer for a workstation is a necessity.
--------------------------------------------

That's not true. These workstations such as the Motif are recording POWERHOUSES compared to arrangers, and would work quite well for playing music in real-time. Just because they don't have styles and you record the music (yourself) doesn't mean they're not geared for live (solo) performance. There's one feature on synths that I can't believe people haven't caught on to yet that you can use in a way to trigger chord changes. It's acutally simple. I remember doing this on my EX-7. It just requires the user to record their own parts.

The comparison I did was soley based on specs for the price. Soundwise I still think the Motif is above the 3000, it also beats it in recording, build quality, ect. Even though this board is older than the PSR-3000 it still blows it away in many areas and sells for less.

Also you don't have to wade through a lot of sounds to find something good. Synths are now using "Category Search" for accessing sounds.

------------------------------------------
An arranger keyboard, on the other hand, can make real music right out of the box, thanks to having good quality, easily accessible sounds, and musically useful styles, even when played by a relatively mediocre player like myself. It is definitely worth a lot more in musical terms; besides, those styles must cost quite a bit to record, which also adds to the price of the instrument.
--------------------------------------------

So can a synth. Especially today's synths. They now come with preset patterns and phrases for the user to record with (essentially) making it easier to make music right out of the box. A synth is for not only creating sounds ect.,but also for making music as well.

So maybe the prices are jacked because of the "instant gratification" hype....

--------------------------------------------
It is only we the buyers can get a change by not buying new and very expencive arrangers with very few add-ons
--------------------------------------------

AMEN TO THAT! That's an excellent point genesys. Take a look at what Casio did with their new WK-3700/3200. They increased the number of sounds, and improved the sound quality, added more patterns, and cleaned up the drum kits a bit, and they added more sample memory (twice the previous models). They added these few things and DIDN'T charge a penny more. The new models are the same price as the old models.

I honestly think one (expensive) useless feature on the PSR-3000 is the color screen. Seriously has the ability to read a simple and intuitive screen such as the ones on the PSR-2000/2100 gotten so bad that we now need color?????? I know (3) of my friends who returned keyboards they bought that had color screens on them. One of my friends actually owned the PSR-3000. He didn't like the screen because he felt it was too busy and too many colors to look at. He said it was much easier on his eyes using the screen on his PSR-2100. The other 2 bought and returned Roland Fantoms.

Take that color screen off the PSR-3000, and you can shave off a HUGE portion on the price. It doesn't take a genius to figure out that Yammie uses that screen to jack the price.

I like arrangers and always have. It just that cost on them anymore is getting out of control. Excellent example: Look at the Roland G-70. Now a halfway decent arranger is going to set you back nearly $1,500. I just think that's outrageous considering many arrangers still don't have the voice editing power and sequencing power of a synth. It's like you're paying all that money just for a few decent (acoustic) sounds and some styles. Not everyone needs the vocalizer, and the color screen is just an expensive addition.

-------------------------------------------
even when played by a relatively mediocre player like myself.
-------------------------------------------

This is a good point here. It's understandable that one can say arrangers are also designed to help aid those who like yourself consider themselves to be a "mediocre" player, but what about those of us who are not mediocre players. I don't want to be charged a higher price. I'm not a mediocre player.

Squeak

[This message has been edited by squeak_D (edited 09-24-2005).]

No, the color screen isn't just "an expensive addition" anymore IMHO. Even large monochrome displays like my 9000 Pro's are infinitely better than the small 1980's style green display of the Motif, which are a significant limitation for such a complex instrument. If you follow the talk on several keyboard forums, you'll find that many Motif owners like myself that have spent years trying to work with the Motif are simply tired of squinting and being forced to remember the myriad of functions necessary to get basic operations to work on the Motif.

Here's an excellent quote from Keyboard Corner, from a user who got tired of the explanations of how to use the Motif:

"I used to belong to Motifator and posted several questions there. I read through the questions and answers daily. I even ordered the Motif ES Instructional DVD and watched it - twice.

I guess what happened is I got tired of reading Brad and Bad Mister's repetitive answers to simple questions. They are so helpful but at some point I obviously became bummed out. I mean somebody would say "I can't sequence" and the answer would invariably be "It's actually quite simple. Hit pattern mode, go two menus to the right, select the pattern select delimiter, exit out of pattern mode, enter song mode, one submenu to the left, hit arm twice, exit out of song mode, now enter performance mode and hit arm once more, exit out, back into pattern mode and three sub menus to the left hit record and then exit out and play notes."

I like the approach taken by the Muse Receptor: it has a green display like the Motif's but it also has the option to hookup a regular monitor/keyboard/mouse so you can do complex preparations at home and then use the green display to call up your setups on stage.

Anything that makes a synth or arranger enjoyable to use is well worth it's cost. Nothing worse than dropping big bucks on an instrument only to wind up loathing it.

Squeak, Genesys,

I am not disagreeing that the price of the arranger too high. However, as I said before, IMO they are much more musically useful than the "workstations".

Some years ago I was at a bar and there was a solo performer. He was signing along to the sequenced tracks (a Roland sequencer box), and you could only make a requet from a binder which listed all the sequenced songs that he had that could be used for his backing. To me that is not a One Man Band - that is karaoke. You can get a karaoke machine (or a computer) loaded with a ton of songs and perform this way - you do not need a keyboard, except to fool your audience.

I know a number of pros in this forum who are doing this, and I really have no quarrel with them. If that's the type of a performance you want to do, more power to you. I always feel cheated when the person in front of me sings to a recording while pretending to play, similar to realizing that the concert I went to see was a lip-syncing act; however, some audiences obviously don't care.

When I play, oftentimes I play whatever the mood of the party inspires me to play, and I adjust it according to the situation in front of me. If people are enjoying it, I will add repetitions, variations, other changes to make the music more fun, and transition to another song which may come to mind in a similar style. If they look tired, I will segway into something different quickly. People tell me that no two of my performances are the same, and to me this is a good thing. And the only way I can achieve this is by using an arranger backing, and not sequenced tracks.

Now, how many people do you know who do a solo gig with only the workstation? I know none. Because if you play to a sequenced track, you only need an iPOD to hook into the PA (and before that it was the minidisk players). But there is a large number of people who are earning money with an arranger. In fact, i'd venture to say that 80 % of people buying the high-end arrangers are the performers looking to use them in their acts. On the other hand, the number of workstation buyers who will be earning money by using them in any live acts is probably 20 % or so (though the numbers sold are significantly higher).

A piano is a musically diverse instrument - you can use it to play solo music in almost any style. There is no other instrument that is as diverse (a guitar may come close). If you try to play solo music with any other instrument (a trumpet, a violin, an organ) it will sound hollow, with components of what we expect in the sound missing - no bass line, no rhythm track... With the exception of some better quality piano samples, playing a synth workstation is like
playing any one (or perhaps two) instruments solo - it may be appropriate in a band or along with other instruments, but ty themselves it is lacking. The arranger keyboard is the electronic equivalent of a piano - with a press of a few buttons you can at will play a song of your choosing (not pre-recorded in the sequencer), complete with a variety of solo parts, accompaniments, drums, and vocal backing.

Most arrangers do not have much (if at all) sound editing, but for the majority of arranger players the objective is to duplicate the overall sound of a song, not the exact sounds found on the recording, so it is not a requirement - after having several synth eary on, the only thing I miss about tweaking the sounds is the time I wasted doing it. If your needs are different, e.g. you want to write original music, complete with the original sounds, then perhaps the workstation is what you need. Of course, with an instrument that allows loading external samples, as Tyros 2 is supposed to do, you can use your synth at home to create a sample, which you can then load into the T2, so that you go to your performances with only one box.

The manufacturers charge so much for the arranger keyboards because they can - they have features which are not easily duplicated by the non-arrangers, and by and large people who buy them do so to make money. This situation will continue until musicians have other options when it comes to playing with accompaniment. Until an item becomes a commodity, its price is not at all determined by how much it costs to produce, but for how much it can be sold. If someone is looking for an inexpensive and feature-laden home/studio solution, then the best way is to use a cheap workstation (e.g. Motif 6) and a PC-based accompaniment program, such as Jos Maas' OneManBand (OMB). This way you can have accompaniment, and a user-friendly sequencer in your PC, and a flexible and sturdy keyboard. On the other hand, if you are looking for an all-in-one portable solution of good sounds, ease of use, vocal processing, accompaniments, you have to shell out for an arranger keyboard (or shell out for a high-end PC-based system).

Regards,
Alex

Posted by: Alex K
--------------------------------------------
Now, how many people do you know who do a solo gig with only the workstation? I know none. Because if you play to a sequenced track, you only need an iPOD to hook into the PA (and before that it was the minidisk players). But there is a large number of people who are earning money with an arranger. In fact, i'd venture to say that 80 % of people buying the high-end arrangers are the performers looking to use them in their acts. On the other hand, the number of workstation buyers who will be earning money by using them in any live acts is probably 20 % or so (though the numbers sold are significantly higher).
---------------------------------------------

Maybe it's just your area, but I know a lot (actually most of my friends who do perform) do solo gigs with synth/workstations. I only know of two people that use arrangers. If you're doing sequenced tracks on a synth you don't need an ipod. You just do all the work yourself. You sequence all the tracks yourself. You then leave your solo track open and switch sounds within your performance on the fly. Or you can go into edit menus and insert control changes and have the synth automatically switch to another instrument without have to take your hands off the keys. It's actually quite simple. I used to perfrom on just a synth/workstation doing solo work. Boards such as Korg Trinity, Yamaha EX-7, and a few others.

With a synth the performer does all the work. You record all your own tracks, arranger them, set up the individual parts within a performance and just play.

Squeak



[This message has been edited by squeak_D (edited 09-24-2005).]

I hope this does not offend any one, but in a sense when we use and arranger to its fullest potential out of the box, we are actually giving the impression that there is a band playing when we know it is just one person. And unless you create your own styles, tweak your sounds and do other creative and pre performance techniques, every thing was done for us.

With a workstation, most persons that I know of sequence a song with their original twist to it. They leave one track open for playing on live.

Again, I am not knocking arranger players because I am one. And I love arrangers

Depending on how they are used, I think you can get the same amount of musical value from both workstations and arrangers.

[This message has been edited by to the genesys (edited 09-24-2005).]

The reason Arrangers cost more is simple economy of scale. If you make 100,000 Motifs, you are going to be able to sell them cheaper than the 10,000 PSRs.

And just to chime in on the 'sequencer acts aren't really playing' hijack........... Don't kid yourself, just holding down a chord and pressing a few buttons does not make you any different. We are all substituting, in one way or another, for the fact that we are too cheap/greedy/lazy to go out and form a REAL band with (gasp!) OTHER MUSICIANS!

Just kidding...... sorta.......

Well I like both makes. I think having both an arranger and synth make a great setup. It's just that when I look at boards like the Alesis Fusion synth selling for $1,600 (and it has 8 track audio hard disk recording on top of 32 track sequencing), and I can't help but think the arrangers are overpriced for what they do.

I also agree with Diki with the numbers produced too.

I just wish that Yamaha didn't leave such huge gaps in features between the arranger models. Such as the PSR-1500/3000. Take a look at the Motif series. All are essentially the same except the number of keys. Whey can't Yammie take this approach with arrangers. Imagine how nice it would be to have the choice of a 61/76/88 key PSR-3000

To tell you the truth though, I wouldn't be so hard on the PSR-3000 if Yamaha didn't build so cheaply. If I'm going to pay $1,500 for a PSR-3000 or ANY keyboard, that board better be built well, have decent keys, and good pitch/mod wheels. Yamaha is selling a board for $1,500 that's built like crap. I know some are going to disagree, but hey that's my opinion. Compare the build of the PSR-3000 to the original Motif6, and Korg Karma. There's no comparison. Even my Casio WK-3500 has a better set of pitch/mod wheels.

If Yammie is going to build a board of (poor) cosmetic quality, they shouldn't price them so damn high. So what if they only make 10,000 of a said board. They're still saving bundles by using crappy shells, key contacts, ect.

I'm still dreaming of a PSR-3000 module If I bought the PSR-3000 I wouldn't even use the keys or wheels. I'd midi it up to my Casio WK-3500, but I'm not going to spend $1,500 for a full keyboard that has to be midi'd up to another board for better playability. I honestly don't see how anyone can even do any serious pitchbend work on these models. The way they're designed they actaully (limit) what you can do. That's not right.

I don't know maybe it's just Yamaha in general I'm not happy with anymore. Yeah they're giving us all these nice mega-voices and new style voices on the Tyros, but they're still using their same old (DATED) preset voices they've been using for years. I'm quite bored with Yamaha's preset voices.

Maybe I just need a changed of brand. Something like a PA-80.

Squeak

[This message has been edited by squeak_D (edited 09-24-2005).]

If you think all there is to using an arranger is holding down a chord and push buttons you are really in the dark. Too much for me to explain if you really think that, which I'm sure you don't.

As far as the cheap/greedy/lazy thing, if you are a hobbiest that may be true, but if you're supporting a family as an entertainer, the odds are WAY against doing that with a "real band".
I tired years ago of teaching songs to three or four other people, then having to replace them, referee arguments among them, provide equipment for them, transport it, set it up, repair it when it breaks, etc., then hearing them gripe because they weren't making enough money.
Now I don't worry that the guitar player must tune up before every song, that the drummer might run off with the bass player's wife, that the one "singer" is jealous because the other got to sing an extra song--and that just scratches the surface of band problems.
Most all of the cheap/greedy/lazy pickers I've known are sidemen in bands.
For every decent band I've heard there must be 1,000 very bad ones. But that's o.k. if you are just having fun. I think that's why I've been working steady for 30 years while the only "real band" I can think of right away that has done that is the Rolling Stones. (Seriously I know there are others, but that doesn't support my argument.)
A couple of weeks ago I booked a job and they insisted that I have a four-piece group. I hired a wonderful sax player, a world-class guitar player and a truly professional piano player. All I did was set up the p.a., pick the songs, play the chords generating bass and drums and fill in on exotic sounds such as harmonica, pedal steel, vocal oohs and aahs, etc., and sing. Yes it was fun to work with these pros!
By the way, I paid them $100. each and I made $800. Bring on the new arranger keyboards!
Not much to do here but watch Rita dwindle down and rant and rave!
DonM

I own both an arranger and a workstation, along with many soft synths and sample sets. Perhaps I'm no budding Wendy Carlos, but I am a capable player.

I can assure you that the Motif ES is far from being useless for playing in real time. In fact, it's almost become a must have for me whether I play out solo, as half of a duet with a guitarist, or in a band. No arranger I've ever heard can give me close to the quality of sax voices I can get from the ES and the VL card, or allow me to warp a synth sound in real time like I can with the Es and the AN150 or a vsti plug in.

By far I get my best audience response when I sing and play "acoustic" numbers using just the ES or a quality vsti / sample set. The audience seems to recognize that it's just me and the instrument, no additonal backing, and it works. It's real, and I think it shows, probably just from my expressions alone.

I can also add a drum rythym in real time and even change it on the fly with relative ease on the ES, while playing left handed bass and comping or soloing with my right.

As far as a studio use is concerned, I could never rate any arranger as being as useful or important to a studio musician as a dedicated synth or workstation is, providing the user can play keys.

Although it isn't as simple as Diki puts it, I do agree with the idea. Whether we use a midi sequence or an arranger for backing ( I use both with no remorse ), it IS artificial, in that we are reproducing certain parts of a band that we aren't playing in real time. That doesn't mean it's easy to do with an arranger, or that it doesn't take a good deal of talent to pull it off and make it sound just right. On the contrary, trying to control the accompaniment while singing and playing with the right hand in real time( or both hands in full kb mode ), and being entertaining all at the same time can be busy work, and it ain't easy.

As far as your original q Squeak, I think many valid points were made here already. Volume of sales being a big one, along with specialized features .... styles and time spent programming, vocalizers, pattern sequencer that responds to chord changes, etc.

AJ

I pretty much agree with everything that DonM says, and might add the music business pays about the same today as it did 30 years ago. Consequently, when I had a 4-piece country band no one made enough money to buy gasoline and cigarettes, both of which were a lot cheaper 30 years ago.

As for the price of keyboards, in reality, they've actually come down quite a bit over the past decade. Keep in mind that a PSR-5700 sold for about $2,400 when it first came out, and that's from outfits that would offer pros a great discount. Back then the keyboard had 35 styles, most were OK at best, about the same number of voices, most other than the piano were awful, and they were heavy as hell. Today's keyboards are lightweight, have huge numbers of great style files, outstanding voices, lots of storage options, excellent interface systems, user friendly operating systems and much, much more. In retrospect, today's aranger keyboards are the best bargain in town, and for OMB performers, they're the best thing since sliced bread. For the first time in many years we can make enough money to support our families. We ain't gonna' get rich, but there's enough coming in on a regular basis to keep food on the table and put a few bucks aside for retirement at the ripe old age of 108.

As for using a Motif--I know lots of performers, probably a couple hundred, and none use anything other than an arranger for live performances--even the best guys around. I'll stick with the arrangers, and if the 3000 was double the price I would have still gladly paid it, and most likely still bought a pair of them. For what this machine does, especially in comparison to arrangers of just a decade ago, IMHO it's still the best deal in town.

Cheers,

Gary

------------------
Travlin' Easy

AJ (bluesplayer),

I was not denigrating the workstations in my post; however, with all its capabilities, even with the drum track running, I don't think you would use the Motif in a solo act as the only keyboard. I am sure that it is useful in playing high-quality solo voices over the accompaniments that your PA80 is playing, or for playing with a band, or a sequencer backup. In other words, if you had to bring a single keyboard to a solo gig, it would probably be the PA80.

I think Don has answered Diki's comments really well. Even if we are using a shortcut by employing a backing style, the reason it is possible is because much of the "original" music is not all that original, and can indeed be matched with the preset musical styles. Oftentimes I hear a song, and can't help but think that its parts sound a lot like a piece of another song (that's why many artists talk about their "influences"). Still, I will second (third) Don and Gary in saying that there is a lot more involved than playing single-finger chords when using an arranger.

Don, I recall you mentioning the drummer running off with the bass player's wife a few times before. Must be a true story, eh?

I too sometimes perform with other musicians, a trumpet player and a vocalist. Initially I tried to put together a band, but found that even some good players do not have what it takes to play in a band that must vary its repertoire, rather than play everything from the sheet music in front of them, so I stick with the few people that like me can do this, and replace the others with the arranger tracks. It's not even a question of money, but musical jelling together.

Regards

Well, that stirred up a (teeny) hornets nest, didn't it!

The fact that I'm here MIGHT clue you in to the fact that I have, and use, arranger keyboards in my profession. I play at least 7 or 8 gigs a week during my playing season (from March through October) and then do session and recording work through the off season. I have just recently moved from a G1000 (which I gigged with for 6 or 7 years) to a G70, which is sonically one of the best keyboards I have owned (my studio rig includes K2500S etc.)

What I DON'T do, is kid myself that things are better using machines rather than musicians. It is, and always will be, a purely financial decision, rather than an artistic one. If the only musicians you can get to play with you are hacks, well perhaps you should look inwards.

And shafting your sidemen by bringing an automatic accompaniment device with you and paying them a pittance, well, need I say that those sidemen are probably looking for an automatic partner, and they sure as s*it won't be calling you after they realize how easy it is to replace YOU!

I use my arranger in both arranger modes and SMF playback, and don't consider there is any difference. What works best for one situation works worse in another.

But if anyone thinks that the pre-canned rhythms and especially basslines, in any arranger keyboard are any kind of substitute for a live rhythm section, all I can say is you don't play with great players often, do you?

Just kidding......... Sorta.........

I think it's overkill with the arranger market in the past few years that some manufacturers release stuff that goes above the price of the "Pro" instruments.Are some of these boards really worth the price tag,or,are they just trying to overcompensate for the fact that the majority market for arrangers still belongs to that 'lil 'ol company that starts with a "C"?

Even in the midst of trying to impress the hell out of us,some of the sounds are still not up to snuff.Is it really too much to ask for accurate orchestral sounds, out of the box, without having to buy "expander boards" or lord knows what?I think the technology has come to that point and there really isn't any excuse for brass that *still* sounds like car horns in this day and age.

I agree Casiobot. Others however have mentioned that maybe it's the numbers produced. Personally I think they jack the prices because they aim at the home player rather than the pro market.

A person shouldn't pay more for an arranger than one would pay for a pro synth. Arrangers are good at the acoustic voices, but cant' really compete with the synth sounds. Also arrangers don't have the sequencing power of a synth (although some here would disagree).

On top of that arrangers seem to have a cheaper build quaility, but they still sell for higher prices.

I don't know if they'll ever really put a reasonable price on them. I think it's time they did though. We talk about the negative sterotype on arrangers from other musicians, but the makers themselves are just as guilty. They obviously want to keep a FINE line between the two models.

Squeak

And arrangers will continue to be priced high unless there is some regulation that would prevent arrangers from being priced high, or the market refuses to by arrangers at that high price-tag. I don’t see either of those scenarios happening any time soon. That is if we are to make anything of the seemingly blind rush for the unknown but popular Tyros II.

Very good point!!!!!! As long as there are people willing to buy the arrangers at such a high price they makers have no reason to drop the prices. Gary made a point about the arrangers in the past being expensive and coming down, but it's the same in the synth department. It just seems that the synth prices are more reasonable considering you weigh the features against the price.

Squeak

Hi I read some industry sales figures a few years ago, don'e remember how long, maybe 5-10 years ago, that said that 'home' keyboards sales were 100 times more than synth sales. I remember them using the term home keyboard but appreciate many of you use them at gigs! If the reverse has happened and synths now out sell 'home' keyboards then it does not say much for the arranger market. How sure are you of your sales figures? I am very surprised by the turn around if true.

Sorry, forgot to say that i think the cost of the highend arranger keyboards is a joke. £2500 in the UK ($4500) for a G70 or PA1X Pro really is a joke. The only reason why I am contemplating an arranger keyboard is because I do not like using samples and view an arranger keyboard as having sample loops that I can pitch shift without hassle and that they are easier to use to build a sequence than the Motif etc. For synth sounds the PA1X is good but I will use vintage and other synths for the *real* synth parts and my EX5R in VL mode for orchestral lead lines.