Don M was perfect.
I just can add the easy navigation of Yamaha.

Chico

So ----

The "bottom line" answer should be "try it yourself and see which one YOU like: !!

The real picture is that each person likes something different - therefore, when someone asks for opinions on the "best", there will be a multitude of answers - I don't see how that will help anyone (except to narrow the field to some degree). Yes, we've been through the "which has the best keys" thing several times (at least since I've been on board) and it's always the same answers by the same people - nothing changes. Just like AJ said, it doesn't make him "right or wrong" that he likes a particular keyboard's keys - it's just what fits him best.

So check them out and see what "fits" you best. Maybe you'll like "mushy" keys as I do - or, maybe not !!

vc

------------------
Vern

THANKS TO ONE AND ALL....

I respect everybodys opinion; what I feel is :

2100-Easy menu and direct access / PAxx-??2100-good voices and well preset EQs', and other OTS / PAxx ?
2100-very good styles with auto fill-ins and multipad stabs etc / PAxx ??
2100-comparitivly bad key feel, smaller keys, / PAxx ??
Also:
2100/PAxx
what is the reliability factor, support, freebies, paid extras ,cost Vs. gain, re-sale value.

Also IMO people who use arrangers are probabally those who have moved on to keyboards but have been other instrumentalists earlier, like guitarists perhaps. Not the kind to have grown as a pianist or played weighted keys all along.I believe that an arranger should do what it is supposed to do ..ie. ARRANGE well. Since MIDI is available it wouldnt be so hard or costly if a weighted keys keyboard(basic piece) is hooked up to the arranger so that the purpose of the arranger is served to the fullest and the player is happy !!
Just a thought coz key feel is a personal preferance that I respect....(i would not want to play a guitar that has a gap of 1/2 inch between the strings and fretboard !!).

Like I said ...arrangers are ment to arrange and lets compare arrangers for what they are supposed to do..

Thanks again to all... I appreciate your replies and respect your opinions...


Best regards everybody
Michael

I have no problems with either the Yamaha Key Feel nor the Yamaha Key Size.

I can appreciate that the key feel could be a big stopper, especially for pianists.

However I find the key size debate much more amazing - its not that much different; in fact I only noticed once I started using a PSR630 as my "Top" keyboard and even then only because I lined up the left hand edges of my two keyboards and then noticed the difference at the other end.

I agree on this, as 25 yr guitar/drummer, who dabbled on kb's in the mid 80's IMO I just couldnt get into the heavy keys, not too mention some confusing navagating, even with the manual,some of which to this day I still havent found out

Guess like anything you have to spend alot of time on it, and to me the most important reason is personal preference,If we were all the same this planet would really be a dull place. play what u like, its the person behind the instrument, that makes the music.

also since Im in the market for an arranger kb, I have tried out almost all of them, and gotta agree with the others Yamaha's although the keys are smaller,(not a prob for myself),are by far very easy to use. and the prices arent too high either.

so for those reasons and from reading discussions like this and other sites a yamaha tyros seems to be the one that fits my taste and budget.

Glad I found this site very informative

Peace




[This message has been edited by zipgun (edited 03-02-2004).]

In my particular case, nothing could be further from the truth. I started out on organs back in the mid 60's and moved over to synths as they became affordable enough and widely available, somewhere around the very early 1980s. I never played anything close to weighted until I got my Hohner Clavinet and soon after it my Yamaha CP25, which had very heavy action but sounded magnificent.

After giving up playing in live bands somewhere in the late 80's, the early arrangers became a curiosity to me as well as potential tools so that I could continue to practice with something other than a metronome or drum machine in order to keep my timing sharp. I wound up getting an early Technics model in around 1989.

I didn't look at any others again until the late 90's, and I was surprised at how far they had come. I thought the arranger of today might be an excellent tool for composing, and in some ways it has been, giving me a groundwork to start from. I've also used one for doing solo or duet live work. Trying to use one in composing has given me additioanl insight in several areas, that I may not otherwise have had.


Today, I am looking at playing in a real band again, and it appears that a good opportunity has come my way. The guitarist is a life long friend, and also one of the original members of my first band, from way back in the mid 70s. We always played well off one another.

Arrangers did not progress quite in the direction that I had hoped that they might, ( with more emphasis on having real time varied rythyms based somewhat on algorithims like a karma might do, but with more control like an arranger does ). While they are very good tools for some players, in general they do not always fit very well into my style of writing or playing music. I think that maybe I am a little too toward the "avant - garde " in what I do, but that is part of the style I'm most happy playing in. That said, my PA80 will remain here mainly for it's sounds and also if I ever wanted to do something solo again, but after that, I am pretty much done with arangers at this point.

I've learned a good bit from this forum and have come to know a few of the musicians pretty well because of it. In particular, reading about FLR and his computer based system really opened some new doors for me that I otherwise may have never even found. The analog softsynths in particular, along with some other computer based synths and modules, have virtually and even literally in some ways put me back where I wanted to be 20+ years ago when I couldn't afford most of the stuff it emulates.

I've enjoyed some of the stories and things I've read here as well. That said, I don't have a whole lot left to contribute to the arranger realm of keyboards, unless some new technologies and features appear somewhere down the road that might bring me back to the fold, so I'll stop by and read when I can, but at this point, in my life, time has become a rather precious commodity, and with what little that I do seem to have of it, I am going to try to use it as best I can to concentrate on making the music that suits me and the tools that can best help get me there.

I wish all of you and your families well, and I will stop to read here when I can. I hope that music will always be one of the great joys of your lives.


AJ

[This message has been edited by Bluezplayer (edited 03-02-2004).]

I am, and always have been, a Yamaha devotee (currently PSR 2000 -- excellent board). I was recently in Sam Ash and I gave the PA80 a brief test-drive. It was *frustratingly* difficult to use, but I must admit that some of the sounds (including the piano) were simply outstanding -- superior to the PSR 2000 hand-down. The styles as well had a particular "real" sound which I found pleasing. It's hardly surprising, given that the price of the PA80 is nearly twice that of the PSR 2000, but I was impressed nonetheless. I'm still in the Yamaha camp though. After producing music for a CD and performing dozens of gigs with it, I can confirm that the 2000 is an excellent machine.

It's strange that you picked out the piano sound on the PA80 as outstanding. That's the one sound that most everyone else thinks is very weak, and that is very good on the PSR 2000.
I suppose it all depends on what we like to hear.
DonM

I actually liked the PA80 piano better than the Yamaha too, and I'm not a Korg piano fan usually. It's more "playable". The dynamics or some other "something" is there that's missing from the Yamaha.

As far as I can tell, the grand piano on the Tyros is the same as on the 9kpro .... I DO like that one.

I find that reaction really interesting. I have a two keyboard stand with a Pa80 on top and a Tyros on bottom. With about three pieces of information, ie, 1)what button to push to get into style play mode, 2) that the light on the style select category button tells you whether you are selecting the style listed on the top or bottom of the style select button (or if both are lit at the same time what is on the hard drive it there is one) 3) that the four buttons at the bottom of the screen are the equivalent of the Yamaha OTS buttons (Korg calls them the STS ie, Single Touch Settings)where the sync start button is (it's plainly labled). With that much info you can play through all the styles in the machine using the factory settings for OTS.

I also prefer the Tenor Sax, the trumpet and in particular the Sweet Harmonica on the Pa80 over the equivalent voices on the Tyros. However, there is nothing even close to the Tyros Sweet Oboe anywhere on the Pa80. I prefer the B3 simulation on the Tyros to the equivalent on the Pa80.

However, I REALLY like having 658 styles at my finger tips without having to do anything other than push a few buttons to get to them. I don't play "out" except at church where they supply the organ, but if I did, I would probably use the Tyros. It has better intros and endings more suited to the styles and more of them than the Pa80.

I really like being able to have both of them, but, if I absolutely could have only one, at this point it would be the Tyros (and yes, that big beautiful screen has a lot to do with it).

Tom

------------------
Bigger is not always better