..... Arrangers or Workstations, what kind you prefer or use depends what kind of job you do( producing songs, or OMB performance, playing in the band..) (of coarse I know what arranger can do, and what workstation can do, i was doing stuff on arranger that wasn't possible on workstation, and i was doing stuff on workstation that wasn't possible on arranger)
that's why I have both an Arranger and a workstation (plus my guitars,bass, accordions, software..)because I play keyboard in a band, I produce songs, I play piano, and i play arranger keyboard...
arranger is a tool for one certain job, workstation is a tool for another job...

it's like saying what is better a flashlight, or a chandelier... depends an the situation and the job adn where you are... both flashlight and chandelier produce artificial light, like Arranger and Workstation produce artificial sounds...

[This message has been edited by Vadim (edited 12-12-2006).]

Vadim, what you are not getting here is that most top of the line arrangers are virtually as powerful as workstations as they are arrangers, whereas most workstations have NO arranger capability at all.

Both the T2 and the Korg line (not Roland, unfortunately) allow almost as much voice editing capabilities as their workstation cousins, have capable samplers, and extensive sequencing abilities (the Rolands have that, though!).

Your minivan/suv analogy only exists in the minds of users, not in actual capability. What we have in an arranger is a minivan that, if you press a button, morphs into an SUV! Something no workstation (even Oasys) can do......

As I said earlier, the only REAL difference is the sound-set, which can be remedied with the sampler section, and the availability of good urban styles. The first manufacturer to address this is going to make a fortune..!!

I do a lot of production work myself, and if at all possible, I will always start with recording a 'style sketch' into the arranger's sequencer. I can then work on it in traditional workstation workflow, but with the advantage that the whole basic tracks effort takes a fraction of the time it would with a workstation.

I can then add in recorded audio, more parts on external MIDI gear or soft synths to give it that extra sheen. But all in a fraction of the time a traditional production takes. THIS is why an arranger is at the heart of my production workflow. If workstation addicts want to take more time than necessary, that OK with me.....

So rejoice that, in one keyboard, you have an arranger, AND a workstation. Most soccer moms would LOVE a mini-van that morphs into a sporty SUV!

thanks for your post Dikki. That completely concurrs with the way i use my arranger. The arranger function for me is when i want to jam with myself or simply play grooves and experiment with songs . For example just the other night i was play "close to you" by the carpenters using a country style. Then i thought how would it sound in a reggae style ? Instantly i could switch the up with some horns and a sax solo played over the top. All done in about 45 minutes. And i could change the style again to an RnB version in minutes or reproduce the whole thing again in an accoustic guitar double base and jazz kit drum version in 30 minutes. This kind of creativity is impossible on a traditional workstation and yet if i switched of the arranger functions i could still use the instrument as a standalone workstation.

I look at the yamaha motif and see that they are importing similar "arranger functions " like pads that trigger guitar strums, loop drum patterns, that follow your chords etc into their Work station instruments. I have seen a similar thing on the Roland top of the range RD stage pianos . More consumers are reaping the benefits of arranger functions on "pro keyboards" . The Oasys uses the most advanced arranger function via the Karma technology but it still cant do what an arranger can. But its only a matter of time before there is no dividing line between arrangers and workstations.

It's beyond my comprehension why anyone like myself would need hundreds of sounds, styles, and effects. Why
I look forward to upgrading is to find among the newer models improved sounds, styles, vocalizer, navigation features, etc.
So am I so atypical, or is the workstation freak atypical?

------------------
Miami Mo

Keysvocalssax, Songs have different feelings, like strong, gentle and whatever you might feel when listening. Within that there are many variations, not using many different styles limits your performance. You run the risk of lacking in color – boring.
Because you have a duo and sometimes a trio you have the ability to add your own feelings to the song (Live is always beautiful) the many styles will just add to what you are doing.

Have you sold the KN5000 yet?

John C.

well, all this is interesting but not exactly what i was trying to get at. which was that the arranger suffers from an image problem just as a minivan does. a "sporty" suv is only really sporty if it goes off-road. otherwise, it's just the boxy body style that is considered more "cool " than the slope-nose sliding-door minivan, but the mini actually is a more practical vehicle that rides and handles better to boot. several of you have addressed that, and the analogy i drew seems even more valid if u are right and the arranger can do 95% of what a workstation can, except for
maybe a couple of things the workstation excels at just
as the "off-road' capability of suv(which only 5% use)

As far as creativity w/ many styles available, to me that's
just an unnecessary distraction. the greatest art is made within narrow limits, too much choice waters it down. if
i have a dozen great styles, that's more than enough for me to make really interesting music from, as a jazz player. In fact, if a great jazz player has only 5 or 6 of those styles, he would be more engaging and less boring than all of the rest using dozens of styles and sounds. As far as i'm concerned, the more styles and sounds any of you would use, the less i would be interested in what you had to say musically. Check out the Ray Charles-Jerry lee lewis-Fats Domino video on "no arranger"thread here
recently. Howe many sounds, styles are they using? I rest my case

------------------
Miami Mo

sometimes creativity needs inspiration thats why there are so many styles that many musicians might find interesting. I would never have started to like bosonova's until i heard "you are the sunshine of my life " by Stevie wonder in that style or loved slow piano jazz till i heard Kim Burrel sing "somewhere over the rainbow" using her Gospel tones and jazz chording. Personally i would be very board if there wasnt the variety of styles of music available for me to dip into and learn to appreciate. Its all about what things tickle your fancy . I know that the more i listen to other genres of music the more my tastes in music have changed. I love Ray charles and his friends but i would get bored very quickly if all they ever did was 3 chord banging piano songs....

getting bored with Ray Charles is like getting bored with great sex or homemade lasagne or hot fudge sundaes. and he does a whole lot more than 3-chord banging, but "only" uses piano and rhodes, and "only" sings in one voice. but his art is genius personified, he doesn't need to
range over hundreds of sounds and styles. learn from what you hear, sure--there's nothing wrong with having zillions of sounds/styles on hand to choose from, it's a
fantastic thing. But if you want to be great, you have to choose what you will concentrate on.

------------------
Miami Mo