I believe we will soon see the first arranger keyboard with "Intel inside". It would be a Windows PC in the shape of an arranger keyboard. You could load it with any Windows software you like and build in any soundcard you like. Above the keys there would be a row of buttons with programmable functions (labeled on the LCD buttons) for fill ins etc. Then in the area between the speakers there would be a PC keyboard on the left and a mouse on the right. At the back a laptop-type screen. Of course also a microphone for vocal harmoniser and a CD burner.

It wouldn't cost much to develop such an arranger because all the hardware components and software are already available. So mark my words, in a few years time it will be in the shop!

Jos


[This message has been edited by Jos Maas (edited 08-31-2003).]

http://www.openlabs.com/

with OMB!!!

The Open Lab's folks seem to be having some trouble getting their board sold. I haven't seen one sold or reviewed yet anywhere.

So I guess the promise of an open architecture with a windows O/S still is out of reach.

Al

Frank,

With OMB would be nice, but what I had in mind is about half the size of the Openlabs product. Just a PC keyboard a few fast acces buttons and a mouse. A screen that can be folded down. Sliders can be operated on screen with the mouse. It should be exactly the size of a conventional arranger keyboard. And cost about 50% more than a PC.

Jos

Note that the Wersi Abacus is a windows-based arranger that can run other Windows software. Of course, it is not small and light.

[This message has been edited by Clif Anderson (edited 08-31-2003).]

Another one : http://www.lionstracks.com

This one (Mediastation X-76) runs on Linux !
It worries me these guys did not succeed in building a 100% working internet-site.

Perhaps all stories about these 'machines' are just stories ?!

Roel


[This message has been edited by Roel (edited 08-31-2003).]

Just wait until one of the consumer electronics companies will jump into this. A complete musical home entertainment center for $1200 will be the result. Play piano, computer games, watch dvd's, produce your own CD's. Everyone will want to have want one!

Jos

Jos, having you been drinking too much "Jenever" today?

Best regards,
Mike

I can not believe anyone advocating having a Microsoft Windows OS based keyboard. The existing Wersi range has on a number of occasions locked up on stage whilst I have been there watching a concert or demonstration. It takes ages to reboot the board whilst the player sits there embarrassed.
I would never buy a board powered by Windows. I have had enough experience putting PC's right after various crashes.

Graham UK

Windows should stay in pc. There are countless of softsynths out there already. What we need is a true programmable keyboard controller with all the buttons, slider, drawbar, 640x480 tft lcd screen that will respond to all features of the software synth or arranger. For fault tolerance, we can use raid controller or another pc in the rack. I don't like the all-in-one entertainment center. I don't want anybody to play solitaire or pinball in my arranger workstation.

You all maybe forgeting the Vancouvering/Moog project that ended poorly it was a windows based arranger digital piano.

How very true Graham.
What REALLY frightens me is that Bill Gates knew that his MS-DOS had serious shortcomings before he first marketed it. He did it to get on the market before a contemporary competitor and that is why all MS software has inbuilt resident bugs.
The frightening thing is that his software is used in just about all modern technical ware including services and defence etc.
cheers
Eddie



------------------
Eddie from Rotherham
www.yamahakeyboards.info

my mail is virus-free thanks to Norton Antivirus2002

I agree that Windows should stay in a PC. So what I described IS as PC. A PC in the shape of an arranger keyboard. A musical home entertainment center that can be used as a PC and as a musical instrument.

I'm not a personal fan of Bill Gates but the reality is that Windows is the standard for PC's and thanks to the fact that there is a standard you get your moneys worth when you by a PC. You may not have noticed it but you have been paying way to much for keyboards. If you compare what you get in a keyboard with PC's it is 20 years behind. Take a keyboard between $1000 and $1500. Look at the display and compare it with a PC. Where is the hard drive? 64 Kb internal memory versus 512 MB in a cheaper PC.

All the projects described before seem to have been experiments by people who didn't have the budget to do it right. I expect a firm like Sony or Dell to launch this product. They have the marketing and production power to get the right product in all the shops for the right price.

Jos

PS: Mike where I live people drink Beerenburg in stead of Jenever




[This message has been edited by Jos Maas (edited 09-01-2003).]

Jos,

In my opinion you are comparing 'Appels met Peren' !!
I have no idea where you think the latest technology has arrived in the upper class keyboards.
Modern keyboards do have harddrives, several Mb's of memory, flash-able OS'ses, pretty good displays etc.

You are messing up the 'core businesses' of two totally different machines :

a. Arranger keyboards = creating top quality sounds/styles.

b. Media Stations = handling all kinds of media-tasks. (creating music is only one of the features)

For a musician it is the highest priority to have good soundquality. A hi-res screen has a very low priority for him/her.

I own the B4 (Native Instruments) and like it very much, but an arranger keyboard in a PC ?

"20 years behind " ? ....... you'd better visit a music-shop/guitar centre very soon.... and you'll have to correct your statement I guess

Proost !

Roel,

A lot of the guys posting messages here have keyboards costing $4000 or more. But that is not an avarage keyboard. I'm talking about keyboards in the range from $1000 thru $1500. If you look at the specifications of such a keyboard you really have the specifications of a 20 year old PC.

When I'm in a music-shops I'm always amazed that the revolution that has taken place in the PC world is not happening in the keyboard world.

What I described is a Media Station as you described it, but in the shape of an arranger keyboard (with 61 normal size keys). When there will be a machine in the shops for $1200, that you can use as an arranger keyboard with a 600*800 color display, a hard drive, unlimited memory, that can be loaded with any sequencing and arranging software and softsynths, and can also be used as a normal PC, then people will buy it! They could easily sell a million of those! And they can sell it for such a low price because it uses standard PC parts (except for the black and white keys).

And there will be heavier models for (semi)professionals too, equiped with high quality soundcard synths.

So I understand that you won't spend the night in a sleeping bag before the music-shop to get the first one when it arrives. But it will arrive!

De mazzel!

Jos

It isn't just average boards or arrangers. The Motif, Yamaha's "flagship" workstation / synth, which came out maybe at the end of 2001 (?) still employs "simms" as the memory storage for sampling. Two PC's ago I had "dimms" for internal ram. Two PC's ago was early 1998. Many other recent keyboard offerings were still using floppy discs instead of smart media / hard drives / etc for media storage.

It has had me wondering at times how long the "latest and greatest" boards are actually on the "drawing board" before they are released.

AJ

[This message has been edited by Bluezplayer (edited 09-01-2003).]

One thing I would like to see the new boards go back is this!
When you change a default setting, it would remain that way until changed. I could do this on my old PSR-510! (Example) On my 2000
when I set the Grand Piano to a duo setting.
next time I use it it's back on the trio default setting. You can program it in song setup in the reg.
Nobby

A.J.,

Another good example that they can't keep up with the development in the PC industry. New mainboards for PC's appear every year. But Yamaha and the others stick to there own mainboards. If they want to switch from simms to dimms they must redesign there mainboards them selves and they are obviously reluctant to spend the costs for that. So that's one of the reasons arranger keyboards come with stoneage technology.

Nobby,

If you had problems like that with a PC/Arranger as I described, you just would have to install another software arranger. Instead of buying a complete new keyboard.

Jos


[This message has been edited by Jos Maas (edited 09-01-2003).]

I agree with you in this point : A hardware upgrade-of mainboards or CPU would be nice.

For example :
I was told the SD1 (Ketron) uses a 64 voice DREAM/ALMATEL soundchip. DREAM already has a 256 voice-soundchip available including 256 Mb (!) flashrom inside.
The reason brands do not implement the very latest technology is 'costs' and not wanting to 'please' all customers so they have all they want.
It is a strategy to slow down the progress en launch a new model every 3 years, so they keep customers happy.

I myself am willing to put some extra money to upgrade or increase CPU power / memory / polyphony...... if available

Roel

Roel,

You would like to get the same flexibility and price versus quality in an arranger keyboard as you get in a PC. But there are a billion PC's in the world that all use the same hardware components and software. How do you expect the makers of the Ketron SD1 or any keyboard to compete with that. They will have to make the same costs for research and development for there hardware and software and devide that over the much smaller number of customers. They will never be able to compete unless they build an arranger keyboard that IS a PC.

You want a new Dream/Almatel soundchip? Just plug in a standard soundcard. That's how it goes in the PC world and that's how it soon will be in the arranger keyboard world too.

Jos

Well I hope something revolutionary is going to happen in keyboard cuz I don't want to spend $3000 on 10 year old hardware.
I mean come on, Korg PA1XPro has 62 voice polyphony, WHAT??? yes, and its 2003 for goodness sake, Yamaha Tyros has 96 MB Waverom, its ok (Although I think Yamaha should have installed a total new waveset instead of re-using the old sounds, they sound rather artificial ), but these days comparing to the pc industry I would say 512 MB is normal, You only pay about $80-90 for 512 MB SDRAM.
And they could have made these arrangers expandable with sample ram or expansion cards, but no, there arent any decent expansion cards for todays arrangers.
So I really see a bright future for the software (Arranger) synths.
Talking about softsynths, Why wont Roland or Yamaha create a virtual XV-5080, or Motif, that would be nice.
They probably wont else nobody wants to buy a real XV or Motif anymore LOL.
So many things are possible, but sigh, nothing happens.
C'mon Roland, Yamaha, Korg, Wakeup!!!
We live in 2003 and I don't want to see arrangers with 62-voice poly and 10 year old hardware showing up anymore.

Greetz ,
Marcel


[This message has been edited by Wazza (edited 09-01-2003).]

[This message has been edited by Wazza (edited 09-01-2003).]

[This message has been edited by Wazza (edited 09-01-2003).]

Wazza,

It probably won't be Roland, Yamaha or Korg that will launch the first PC arranger. Look what happened to IBM after they introduced there open MS-DOS PC. An open platform is not in their interest. It will probably be another consumer electronics firm that has no share of the keyboardmarket yet. And once sales go skyhigh many others will jump in too.

Jos

OK Jos, I see your point but :

Most musicians prefer 'hardware' to play on, instead of Windows-based stuff.

As stated before some brands try to develop PC-based keyboards/synths, but only very view people have one.

You talk about the low hardware-costs of PC-parts. The 'standard' PC hardware is not good enough for serious musicians. E.g. Hi-Q (DSP) soundcards cost > 500 Euros.

What about the so needed software ?
Imagine that the Native Instruments synths have an average price of 150 Euro's.
What would the price be of a Windows/Linux based 'arranger keyboard' software ? (300 - 600 Euro's ?)

A good quality keyboard (the masterkeyboard) is always needed (500 Euro's ?)

Add these prices to the PC-hardware....

Until now only a very few Virtual-synths on PC impressed me. Most of them sound toy-ish.

Don't forget the PC-concept is still based on IBM 8080 architecture (mid 80's)
Why not Motorola 68000 like Apple uses ?

You could be right in your predictions, but Wersi, Openlabs and Lionstracs did not realy succeed introducing.......

Let's wait and see and in the meantime I stay with my SD1 .... (My grandpa's wise words : "De tied zal't leern mienjong !"

Roel

Roel,

The attempts to develop a PC-based keyboard where not serious enough yet. Any hobbyist could build one. But it is something else to get it in the shops for the right price. You need a firm that already has there products in all PC and audio shops.

A Yamaha YMF754 XG chip would do nicely in an entry level model. I doubt manufacturers of soundcards and mainboards pay more than $5 for that chip. If you want better quality sound you will have to pay extra.

As for the software, I would sell a licence for OMB for one dollar for each sold machine. If they sell a million as I predicted, I'll still be a millionaire.

The keys would add about $100. Just 61 simple touch sensitive keys. Prices for masterkeyboards are extreme because of the low volumes that they are sold in. You can't compare the prices of those.

Your grandpa was a wise man. Indeed we just will have to wait for a few years.

Jos

It will be cool if they can make a keyboard that configured as a computer. No sounds. Just OS and global controller. And those different kinds of synths, arranger, and workstation even the classic one will be available in software form in a CDROM. Imagine you can have a a collection of synths in CDs. If you want Motif you can buy a Motif CD. Or if your tired of your Motif load your Triton CD...,XV5080....DX7...Korg MI, PSRs or even your favorite classic analog. No need to worry of buying another keyboard, just buy a your favorite keyboard in a CD and you'll have your dream come true, Owning thousands of different synths not worrying of where to put them or stacking them. I guess this idea will make major manufacturer to lower down the cost of their dedicated synth.

Hey Roel,
can you share your grandpa's wisdom in plain old english?
Thanks,
Andrea

Hi All!
The future is here:the Wersi OAS instruments are here for some years now and every year the whole range is updated to new standards.
I have been playing live my Abacus for more than 2000 hours as a professional musician enteraining a variety of audiences from around the world and yes! there have been some 'embarassing' minutes waiting my keyboard to restart BUT it was mainly power failure or user (me!) error. I have now an APC surge filter/UPS with me and I am more carefull not to try untested converted styles in front of an audience.
I carry only one device which includes the vocal harmoniser and the programmable mixer -so I have actually saved mixer settings for different venues I play during the week - and setup time from my car to 'ready to start playing' is 10'-15'.
Please note that the sound generation and manipulation in the Wersi OAS is done by 12 32bit SHARC DSPs and the output D/A is 24bit.The total sample pool is 100s of Mbytes stored on the Hard Disk and SoftSynths can be used also live.The operation is a breeze :color touch screen,200 Advanced Total Presets,programmable buttons & sliders which are controlled by special controllers and not by the Windows PC.So the system is much more than a PC with a keyboard and a sound card.
By the way:The latest specs are Pentium 4 2Ghz,512MB DDR,40-80GB Hard disk and OAS version 5.0. Take a look at http://www.organfax.co.uk/instruments/wersi/gigapiano-gp1000.html or http://www.organfax.co.uk/instruments/wersi/abacus.html

Cosel,

The specs are right but the price is to high.

Instead of converting a top model arranger keyboard into a PC and add 50% to the price, I'll rather have a PC turned in to an arranger keyboard and add 50 % to the price.

That would be a much better deal!

Jos

I think that it would be very interesting to have a pc based keyboard with a good key action, HD,cd burner, flexible device(Windows) which one could make function with any soft arranger, software synth, and sequencer.
But don't you think that this would mean the end of the keyboard's market?

Stam,

There would be a lot less arrangers and workstations produced by Yamaha, Roland and Korg. The total market including PC arrangers would be a lot bigger but mainly dominated by firms that don't produce keyboards now.

Yamaha and Roland are ready to get a new share of the market. They already make sound chips and software that can be used in PC based arrangers. They could sell that for use in PC arrangers made by other companies.

Jos

Jos,

I agree with in the fact that big companies will recycle their activities and concept more chips and softs.

But I think that the real question is: until where can one go in sound quality.

For example: which is the difference between an mp3 file and a wav file?
The wav is more complete than the mp3 in term of analysis of the sound (physical concept).
But, the human ear (human concept) is not enough powerful to hear the difference so that in general it is not possible to differentiate a mp3 from a wav.

The same thing can be applied to softwares.

I think that a certain moment technology will make it possible to have sounds of a realism such as it will be almost impossible to differentiate them from the original sounds (certain keyboard have already impressive sounds).

My fear is: which motivation will have then the companies to create new products (since in any event nobody would hear difference)?
And who will buy them if one has already exceptional sounds?

The future will say it to us

STAM

The writing is on the wall. The first keyboard manufacture (Roland, Yamaha, Korg, etc.) or Dell to come out with an open architecture will be the dominant player from that point on. The keyboard makers are doomed if they do and doomed if they don't. If they bring out an open system keyboard, then it isn't necessary to buy a new keyboard to get new styles, new sounds, etc. If they don't then I, for one, will build it myself, and they still lose.
Starkeeper

Stam,

It's true that if we all have perfect keyboards with anything we like in it, that we won't buy new ones anymore. Until it goes broken. I don't see that as a problem. It's a problem for the manufacturers. Let them make other products that are needed.

Starkeeper,

Building one yourself is an interesting idea. I know there are people that rebuild old home-organs to midi keyboards. There should be plenty of space in such an old instrument for a PC mainboard. And a lot of buttons to trigger fill in's!

Jos

I know almost everything has been said, but I might as well add my two cents. There is something to be said for user-friendlyness. People bitch about having the open-endedness that a PC OS would allow, but honestly, in many respects that would be a bottleneck. I want something that I can set up and perform on as quickly as possible. Windows requires booting, is prone to viruses, glitches, lock-ups, and many other flaws. Meh, user friendlyness always ranks highly in my book.

- ses

Everything is possible. It's just a matter of redesigning the concept. The major difference between the PC and the hardware device like synths, keyboard arranger, etc. is the boot process. Synth OS is stored in ROM/NVRAM and you know that PC is using HDD. No matter what OS we use as long as we keep using hard drive to boot the system we cannot get away from, crashes, bugs, viruses and many other catastropic events in our system. The PC industry is still giving us this old technology. They keep making bigger and bigger HDD which is good for storage. But if we keep using it to boot our systems and place all system files together with all programs and application, the system's tendency is to slow down the process.

If synth industry will produce this so called open architecture PC style keyboard arranger, they have to put the OS in the ROM which is possible because it's not as big as PC OS like Windows. Synths OS only detect probably just 1 or 2 devices which is the sound chip and controller. Unlike PC there's so many device drivers to be recognized to complete the boot process. Notice that if you boot your PC in safe mode it's faster than normal mode because it bypass many of the devices.

So making this type of arranger, or synth is not impossible. The pieces of technology is just scattered around. Somebody who has more time in his hand should start to put those pieces together and make us all happy. Have you guys check out or heard about LINDOWS? Another OS alternative which is produced by the man who love music, the MP3.COM founder Michael Robertson. Maybe we can ask him to think about this arranger synth open-system concept.

Dan

Dan & Ses,

There must be millions already that have a keyboard controller hooked up to a PC. They have to deal with the boot time, installation problems and viruses anyway. For them it would be a great improvement to have an all-in-one device.

I remember back in 1986 there was the introduction of a user-friendly computer called the Atari ST. It had a Macintosh/Windows type operating system when all the PC's where still running MS-DOS. The operating system was in ROM so it booted in seconds. But when new technology arrived like CD-ROM, better soundcards and faster modems, you couldn't upgrade it. And when a certain program was recommended to you, you couldn't run it because it would only run on MS-DOS.

So in the end people didn't choose for user-friendlyness, but for upgradebility, compatibily and price/quality. If you don't want to deal with the typical PC problems, you can keep on using the traditional arrangers and workstations. They will surely keep on producing a few models of those for the next decades.

Jos

PC Arranger ... Sounds a lot like http://www.openlabs.com/ and http://www.wersi.uk.com/abacus.htm to me.

Jos,
I'm sorry but I feel the need to correct you
The Atari machines were easy to upgrade : Just replace the OS Eproms !

Still it is soo hard to believe Atari lost the competition with ólder IBM technology. They were fast, stable, easy to use, Motorola 68000 inside.... and with the MROS realy multitasking ! It took PC's (developers/hardware) another 10 to 15 years to reach the same level the ST's had in 1985
Only since 5 or 6 years PC's can compete with the mid-80'Atari's (music/midi) Realize the ST's run on 8 or 16 MHz while PC's need at least 600 (!!) MHz to run smoothly without timing problems........ Just to illustrate how inefficient PC's and Windows work

Roel

[This message has been edited by Roel (edited 09-03-2003).]

Nigel,

We've seen those. But I'm looking for something that I can buy in a shop nearby for a reasonable price. If a PC costs $800 then $1200 would be fair for a PC with black and white keys. Because that's all I'm asking for.

Roel,

I meant that you couldn't upgrade it with all the internal CD-ROM's, soundcards and modems that appeared at that time. And the fact that it was not MS-DOS compatible was fatal for many. Software developers that would make just one version of there product would always choose MS-DOS. But I agree, unlike todays arranger keyboards, the Atari had modern technology on board at the time it appeared.

Jos

Your idea of a Windows based keyboard is to be honest, both bad business, and for musicians' needs, bad practice.

To put a PC in a keyboard what you're effectively doing is restricting the lifetime of the PC in the form of expansion, and the likelihood of being able to upgrade and keep up with the demands of popular software and other requirements. Technically, it's possible however, but not in a business sense due to economies of scale, and of course, companies have to pay royalties to the likes of Microsoft for putting their software on their hardware, and the 'other' restrictions MS puts on.

You can of course purchase rack-mount PC's and hook up a master keyboard of any size, which really does away with the need for what you're asking for anyway.

Moreover, I think like Apple did with the computer OS, organisations in the music industry, such as Yamaha and Roland should get together and develop a scalable/universal MUSIC operating system, and one that unlike Windows (which is a nightmare in all its guises) caters for musicians' needs.

IT support groups and companies around the world exist because of Microsoft operating systems. Not a good thing for music.

The best operating system for music due to its technical nature is unix. The ideal scenario would be for music gear companies to work with the likes of Apple and develop a unique OS for the future. I think the very nature of Microsoft would put off any music company thinking of doing this with them - MS would just buy them out if it became a success.

Frankie,
Awareness Engine.


[This message has been edited by arrangersrus (edited 09-03-2003).]

[This message has been edited by arrangersrus (edited 09-03-2003).]

Frankie,

There wouldn't be any restrictions in the lifetime at all. In the PC arranger you would be able to install new cards and drives and even switch the complete PC mainboard. Just like any other PC.

Hooking up a keyboard to a PC is what I've been doing for decades now. And I'm fat up with the inconveniounce of it.

I'm not getting into all the objections you have against Microsoft. That didn't stop me and a billion others from buying Windows based computers. And it won't stop us from buying a Windows based arranger keyboard if that means getting a lot more for less.

It is true that Windows/Intel is not specially made for musicians. But it wasn't made for home computers either and still they are in the homes. Being the standard is what counts.

Jos

As far as boot time is concerned. Ekco has developed a method of taking an electronic snapshot of the system so it boots up with the previous snapshot. According to them their is no wait time for re-booting and like someone mentioned the o/s could be in ROM.
Starkeeper

Jos,

Okay, really what you're asking for is something like: a 76 key arranger with 9 inch+ laptop-type screen, a QWERTY keyboard and pad, a chassis that supports expansion, possible removal of the motherboard/cards/memory, Windows OS, and arranger software, and a keyboard that caters for the software, meaning all the transport controls, and buttons you would normally find on an arranger/synth.

From a technical standpoint, yes it is possible and has been shown on prototypes as mentioned already in this thread.

So, you've got to ask yourself why the likes of Yamaha/Roland hasn't created such a beast, and it really goes hand-in-hand with companies like them producing 'musical' products that are geared for musicians.

Here's a scenario: say Yamaha for instance created the music PC with Windows and an open architecture as you say. Where's the product focus? Where do products like the Tyros come from in the future? Where do gems like the Trinity's, i30's and Motif's come from?

The whole thing really boils down to we're a generation of product-buyers that find character in products that are either good or bad. Having an open architecture and PC as you suggest would do away with the character we find in products. You're essentially buying into Microsoft's character, which to be blunt, doesn't have one except for money.

Personally, I think arrangers of the future will have a lot more sophisticated operating systems, and indeed there will not be an arranger keyboard as such - just musical keyboards that reflect good product design and the character of the company that makes them.

Again, putting music production in the hands of Microsoft would be an enormous mistake. Your point about MS being THE standard is entirely true, yet what most people don't seem to not know is that there's other companies out that making better products.

However, if you're like the billions of others as you say who prefer a box at a cheap price, then you're likely not interested in the ideal music PC that you're looking for, which made by any company would cost in excess of $2500 (if it is to be any good).

So, the whole point boils down to the following:

1. Musicians like products with character, an open-standard music PC wouldn't provide this.
2. Microsoft and their Windows OS are totally wrong for music.
3. You can already get what you're asking for by having a lightweight master keyboard and a system of racks. All could be as easily transportable as a single keyboard is.

Frankie.

[This message has been edited by awarenessengine (edited 09-03-2003).]

Joe,
I thimk your program, is the only one in my opinion that has a true future. I tried all the other ones and theyre just not too user friendly.. Dont get me wrong, the other programs are good, but just not as user friendly as yours.

the only thing I dont like about your OMB program, is the fact that you only have one fill in.

Please correct me if im wrong. But I only see one fill in, and in creating songs that are going to be burned on cds, and people will hear, they need to sound realistic. with just one fill in I cant make that happen.
Right now, I own the Korg i30 and the Trinity.
I was thinking about selling my Fully loaded trinity V3 and buying a laptop or one of the new ultra mini cases and turning it into a full fledged recording studio with the arranger capabilities, that your program offers.. But Im still undecided as the Korg I30 offers me at least two fill ins.

Please Joe, if you can do another update where you can give the option for people to put as many fill ins as they want, that would rock big time. You know, where one is default, if people wanna use Yamaha styles or what ever, but optional to put more or assign more to dedicated keys..That would rock big time..

Is this a possibility?

Regarding your idea about dell etc,,
If I was you, since you have a goldmine in your hands, I would definitely create a Proposal to Dell, IBM, Compaq, gateway, or what ever company you think will be more successfull, and sell your product and idea to them.. I think it will work if you approach them with the right stuff...

Do it man, you are going to be rich, seriously, you can be rich.....

Take care,

Musikman

Frankie,

Yes I prefer a compact box with everything in it for a cheap price. I don't need the "magic" or "character" from Yamaha. Being a software developer I can put that in their myself. BTW I haven't seen much magic happening the last decades. Instead of designing new sounds they are mainly packing wave ROM with sounds of instruments that were designed by talented craftsman in passed centuries, I mean the ones that developed the piano, trumpet and saxophone.

Musikman

You should at least see the different fill in's at level A, B, C and D if they are included in the style. Other fill in's like fill in AB and fill in BA are used too if you combine a fill in trigger with a higher/lower level trigger at the same time. But again they must be present in the style.

I don't see OMB 5.0 as an appropiate tool to produce CD's. Version 6.0 will be that. It will include a new multi style sequencer like XG Works. You can select the parts of up to 10 styles in one sequence. And it won't have any presumption wether a part is a main or fill in, so you can play a complete song with merely fill in's if you like.

About the "goldmine", I have no illusions of getting rich. OMB is completely unknown among the broad public. I'm sure that if Yamaha released it, they would sell a 1000 times the numbers I'm selling. I don't have the marketing instruments they have.

Jos

Jos,

Okay, you're looking for an 'arranger PC' that offers expansion. Why not just build one yourself?

Get a master keyboard, build up a PC chassis for the bottom of it, stick the PC inside, get a flat panel display, mouse and trackpad and you're sorted.

Don't see any problem. Basically, it's 'doable' by yourself.

Frankie.

Yeah, thanks for the reply Joe,
I think your in the right track. I seriously would love to have version 6.0, that would rock big time..

Any ideas how soon that may be in the works?

In the mean time, im going to try to learn as much as I can with what you have provided.

Currently im using the Roland VS1680 with my i30 and Trinity and its working just fine, but im considering going full PC recording, with everything, and just keeping either my i30 or Trinity. What would you recommend?

Thanks for your advice and tips...

best,

Musikman

Frankie,

Sure it's doable, and probably already done. But putting a new soundcard or CD burner in my PC is about the limit that I'll explore on the hardware front. I just wait until it is in the shops.

Musikman,

The new sequencer is already in the works. I'll spend another month testing it and making help functions. This must be the final version, there will not be a major release every 3 months after that.

If you want to use Yamaha styles I would advice to add an XG device. You get reasonable results in GM mode in OMB, but it will be better with an XG device even a very cheap one. I did some research on available soundcards that have an XG chip in it. Read it at http://www.1manband.nl/which.htm . You can use your other gear to record the melody. Use the MIDI-Mapper to define different MIDI-ports as decribed in the helpfile.

Jos



[This message has been edited by Jos Maas (edited 09-04-2003).]

Jos,
I do not know if it is possible or if that already exists but a quarter tone function would be a dream for those which are interested in the Eastern music

STAM

Jos,
On your website, you don't mention the
Yamaha QY-22, QY-70, or QY-100. Is there
a problem with their XG implementation for
OMB?

Stam,

Is there some literature about the mathematics of Arabic music? Because I'm completely clueless in this area. I understand that in Arabic scales some tones are detuned half a semitone. What I don't understand is how you can play chords after that. A C-chord would sound as a different chord type as a D-chord because the intervals between the notes would be different from each other.

Vquestor,

Thanks for reminding me. The QY22 is not XG but the QY70 and QY100 are added to the list.

Jos

Awarenessengine,
You asked,"Where's the product focus?" The focus comes from the consumer/musician (not the manufacture). The musician decides what sounds, styles, drum kits, etc. are on the board not Yamaha marketing. I will never play pokas, so why is it on my board?
You asked,"Where do products like the Tyros come from in the future? Where do gems like the Trinity's, i30's and Motif's come from?". Software updates.. Not a whole new board.
Why should I have to buy a new keybed, new amplifier, new speakers, new case, new box, new manual, to get a couple of new styles and a couple new sounds, and a minor tweak of the o/s? These should be software updates, not hardware equipment updates.
Star

Jos,

I am not a specialist in the Eastern music but I use sometimes the 1/4 of tones.
What I can say is that the interval is not modified between 2 notes even if one detune a note inside this interval.

For example: the interval between A and C:

A to Bbemol: 1/2 tone
Bbemol to B: 1/2 tone
B to C: 1/2 tone

The total is 1,5 tone


If you detune the B to B-1/4, then:

A to Bbemol: 1/2 tone
Bbemol to B-1/4: 1/4 tone
B-1/4 to C: 3/4 tone

The total is still 1,5 tone


In oriental keyboards, this feature is used to play solos with the upper part.
This feature is not applied to the accompagnement tracks. Thus in the example referred to above, if you plays a G with your left hand, the sound will be G, B, D in the accompagnement even if the B is detuned for the right hand.
This discord is typical in the eastern music and is indispensable for those who play this kind of music.

STAM

I agree.
Thats the same way I feel. Thats how I felt after buying my Trinity..
I got virtually the same case on my Korg i30, with the same sequencer as my Trinity, same touch screen, and yet, I had to for out an extra 2400 bucks, after spending like 4500 for my fully loaded trinity...
Imagine if I would have spent that money on a really good pc and used an arranger program like OMB?
I would have saved so much money..
Thats why im considering the PC and software arranger now, more than ever.
The only thing is that its the configuring that makes it a bit difficult.
Like midi ports and all that stuff. Thats what throws me off...
But I know that once thats in the bucket, then, its all downhill after that.

Im finishing a cd project for my sister and brother in law. Im using my trinity, i30 and VS1680, as soon as im done with it, im going to sell my stuff.... and go pc all the way..
I dont do any gigs, so Im perfectly confortable doing all my recording at home, with out worrying about carrying my stuff to gigs.

Peace,
Musikman

Musikman and Star,

Talking about saving money, not counting the PC (everybody already has one) an entry level do-it-yourself PC arranger costs $120:

XG soundcard $49
software arranger $30
keyboard controller $40

Ok 37 keys is not much but if you play inverted chords in one octave, you would still have 2 octaves what would be enough to play any melody.

Stam,

I still think there would be inconsistent intervals in chords, but that doesn't really matter because you say the detuning is not applyed to the accompaniment. So I don't have to make any adjustments to OMB. You can detune the melody channels (1-8) on you synth and go nuts!

Salem Aleikem,

Jos



[This message has been edited by Jos Maas (edited 09-04-2003).]

Jos,
What about the lead instruments? Would I need two soundcards. I have been going through this with Frank Rosenthall.
Star

Star,

You can use one soundcard for both accompaniment and melody. Unless you already have a non-XG soundcard that you absolutely want to keep. You could try to get a second hand Yamaha SW60XG (you need an ISA slot!). I have one in my PC together with a Sounblaster. They don't interfere because the SW60XG is not a complete soundcard, just a synthesizer card.

If you listen to the individual sounds of such an XG device they don't sound that fantastic. But all together in an accompaniment they do sound great because the many styles that are available on the net where made for this synth.

What I specially like about the XG soundcards is that they respond to a lot of controllers like resonance (71) and cut off frequency (74). Avarage soundcards including the Soundblasters don't do that. There are a lot of XG MIDI files available that use those controllers to create real spectacular wah-wah effects and synth sweeps. I have made some styles from XG MIDI's in a quick and dirty way that were highly appreciated by users of PSR2000's and PSR9000's. Most existing styles don't use much of those effects, I don't know why. Maybe I'll switch from selling arranger software to selling XG styles!

Jos

1-what about latency?

2- can anyone post some mp3/midi songs demos using OMB?

thanx

[This message has been edited by Dnj (edited 09-04-2003).]

DNJ,

1. If you don't use a softsynth then you won't have latency.
2. Download a demo and play your own songs.

Jos
http://www.1manband.nl

Hi Jos,
I think some of your ideas are great, but I don't think they'll happen. The keyboard manufacturers have to make money to stay in business.

I had 3 keyboards KN7 , 9000pro & va7. Guess which was was totally replaceable for doing the things I wanted ie use styles for creating backing track midifiles, and converting styles to my kn7. I didn't really require arranger functions on all 3.

You guessed it, I was able to sell my pro, I'll either purchase an xg sound module or use an xg soft synth. I have xg works to create the backing sequences I want from my 9000 pro styles ( plus all the other psr styles I've downloaded). I'll look at your program if I decide I want to use psr arranger functions again, in short, I don't really need a psr keyboard. Problem is, where does that leave Yamaha if everyone starts to go the same way?
I'll definetely keep my kn7, I like the styles& it's onboard features. They're about the only styles that can't be converted to some other manufactures keyboard, so if I want them, I need the kn7. My VA7 I'm not sure about ( whether to keep or sell), because if I really want the styles, I can convert them to the kn7 format. Won't be as good as the original, but with tweaking , they'll work.

I've actually found it a bit strange that the xg works manual never mentioned that it could use psr styles in the same manner as it does it's onboard styles.

Maybe software isn't profitable enough.

best wishes
Rikki

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Jos Maas:

About the "goldmine", I have no illusions of getting rich. OMB is completely unknown among the broad public. I'm sure that if Yamaha released it, they would sell a 1000 times the numbers I'm selling. I don't have the marketing instruments they have.

I think this needs some clarification.
Old "oriental"(middle eastern, meditteranean)
music didn't even use chords since they
didn't have chordal instruments. A typical
ensemble would have percussion, oud(grand daddy of lute), violin, and ney(flute). Later on, guitar and keyboards were
added and these, of course, could not play
quarter tones, so standard chords were used.
Interestingly, when bass was added, fretless
types were used, so that quarter tone scales
could be played, and the bass followed the
melody line.
This brings us to modern arranger keyboards.
A high end model like the Roland G1000,
could have ALL STYLE PARTS play using the
quarter tone scale selected(a friend of mine owns one and has tried this); while a lower
model, like the Roland E-40 ORIENTAL, would
only have the lead or split keyboard play
the selected quarter tone scale, and have
the Style play all parts in a standard scale(as mentioned by STAM).
Therefore having the option to do it both ways, as well as having the option of having the style bass part, and non-chordal style parts play quarter tone scales would
be the ideal choice.
Jos, as I have discussed with you before,
linking OMB with a sample player that has
MTS and SCALA compatibility would make the
most sense. In addition, all the microtonal
composers(including those who are not
playing oriental music) could benefit greatly from such a configuration.

[This message has been edited by Vquestor (edited 09-04-2003).]

Rikki,

The keyboard manufacturers might think the same way as you. But as I said before I don't expect them to be the first ones to come with an affordable PC arranger. It wil be another company that has a strong place in the consumer electronics market. Sony, Dell you name it.

About not being able to convert the KN7 to PSR, you're definetely wrong. Any style that can be recorded in a MIDI file can be converted. I used this method with BIAB styles and the styles from a Roland E-66. It is explained at http://www.1manband.nl/convert.htm .

Vquestor,

I suggested before to detune the melody channels (1-8). In addition you could detune the bass channel (11). Or go all the way and detune the chordal channels(12-16) as well.

Jos

Ricci,
I don't think the keyboard manufacturers have a choice. If one of them does it, the rest will follow, and they lose.
If they don't and, as Jos mentioned, the Dell, IBM, Compact, etc. do it then they have to follow suit, and they lose.
If neither do it, then we'll do it ourselves, and they lose.
IMO the big three need to make good quality keyboards in various configurations, 88 key, 76, 61, and sell styles and sound fonts. Another possibility, is for them to come out with their own open system, with replaceable styles, fonts, and o/s which they will upgrade (for a fee). The hardware needs to be upgradeable as well. The first one do this, may well win the market share of business and become the standard.
IMO this will happen, because the technology is already there to do this. If it can be done it will.
Star

Is it possible for Yamaha, Korg, Roland to conglomerate themselves just for this PC arranger product as an experimental? I don't think they will loose a lot of money if this project is not succesful? Then if they don't do it, another group of companies with common goal might do it.

Yes, I totally agree with you..
But then again, you know what guys,, its really suspicious that suddenly after stealing the show at NAMM the Open labs company suddenly died down...Im talking about THe ECKO System.
I think someone in the Big three might have bought the guys out..

Dont know, but I wonder what happened.. I think people at the big three, noticed it, and took drastic measures...

Its only my theory, but it usually happens when stuff like that comes up and threatens the life of other companies that keep sucking our blood(cash) year after year, by just giving us the same product with a new look..

Mmmmm , I wonder..

best,
Musikman

I was staying on the sidelines of this discussion, but I think Jos has the right idea. Eventually the keyboard-shaped PCs with black and white keys will replace dedicated keyboards. I have often considered putting one together myself. That is why I was so keenly following Frank Rosenthal's work.

The music companies are in the business of making music. That is why many of the great-sounding keyboards have underpowered processors, which don't allow proper multi-tasking, crappy user interfaces, and under-specified sample memories. These companies may have several engineers who are specialists in DSP and sound generation, and perhaps one guy who designs the user interface and the operating system. There is little wonder that the hardware (not talking about sound generation circuitry) of a typical keyboard is generations behind the PCs (or Mac's) bottom of the line machines.

It is indeed possible that some manufacturer (e.g. Creative Labs) will come out with the keyboard/PC piece, which will allow us to run music software, as well as most other applications.

Having said that, there are some caveats.
1. The keyboard/pc should use low power design, to avoid having cooling fans. These create noise, and as mechanical components are prone to failure. At present, even the laptops are designed to contain small fans. I understand that there are some case designs which allow fanless operation, but these are rare, and so far expensive.

2. Windows XP is quite stable (I would probably take it on stage), with most of the problems being caused by the crap we end up downloading from the Internet (moral - do not use your keyboard for surfing). However, a keyboard/PC instrument would greatly benefit from the ROMable operating system, which does not require disk for basic operation. Hard disks, which are once again mechanical devices, are much more prone to failure than solid state memory is. Hard disks are great for storing large amounts of information, such as midi files, sample data, off-line styles, etc; however, or rare occations that the HD might fail, your instrument will be toast if you are relying on it for core operation. All of todays keyboards which contain HDs use them as a backup/off-line storage tool (e.g. if the Tyros HD fails, you can still play built-in styles and sounds and the rest of the keyboard for the most part will work)
I don't believe, that WinXP is capable of diskless operation. Windows XP embedded allows for such operation, but additional programming may be required to move the applications to that platform (added expense).

3. As keyboard users, we have different user interface requirements than the general users of the computers. We need a lot of buttons, which we can use to quickly (1 or 2 button pushes) navigate to the desired selections. The buttons have to be properly spaced and logically laid out. It just won't do to hunt and peck for the right keyboard buttons or take our hands off the keys to use a mouse or a touch pad. Solution - custom-designed keyboard with keys laid out in a logical fashion, which can be expensive, unless this same design can be used for a million units sold (which is highly unlikely).

We also do not need a full-size LCD, which takes up room and adds heft to the keyboard frame. I believe that the keyboard/PC would do nicely with a half-height screen (still regular width). While such screens do exist, they are more expensive than regular commonly-available 14-15" 4:3 displays

4. While the XG-soundcard would work well, as Jos is suggesting, it would relegate us to PSR620(?) sound quality with its 4MB wavetable. As Frank is finding out, to get good, professional sound quality out of a PC-based instrument, you need to go to high end sound cards and high-end, expensive software.

5. There is also style copyright issue - I bet the moment the PC-based arranger hits the streets, Yamahas, Rolands, and everybody else will hit the manufacturers with the law suits - according to DMCA, the US copyright law, even if you do not ship actual copyrighted styles with the instrument, you are producing/posessing a tool for violating the copyright (of the copyrighted styles), which is a crime in itself. While IMHO this law is stupid, it is nonetheless there. The solution - the manufacturer would have to either purchase licenses from the major arranger manufacturers for use of their styles (more likely, more expensive), or pay royalties to them for the use of these styles (less likely).

If the user wants to settle for a fairly low-end instrument (with the specs like Casio) which is upgradeable to a degree, and can run other applications, then as Jos is suggesting, you can beuild a $1200 instrument with a PC inside.

While all of the above problems can be overcome to build a truly professional-grade instrument, we would be looking to spend Eko /Wersi-type dough - $4-5K or more. It is far from certain that at this price one can sell many copies of it. I, for one, would opt for a dedicated keyboard, if it can be had significantly cheaper.

I think this is the reason Eko did not fly; as well, at a Musicmesse a few years back one of the German synthesizer makers (was it Waldorf?) had announced a keyboard with a PC inside - the picture looked very snazzy, but it must have been scrapped as well.

On the long run, however, I am sure that keyboard/PC instrument is the way of the future. I am constantly keeping my eye out for the advances in technology to overcome most of the issues I listed above. Hopefully soon we will be able to do it.

Regards,
Alex

if the wersi has the pc.technology by buying a second hand model surely you would be getting all the advantages of a same price new board, ie,tyros, korg ,etc plus its upgradable,wouln,t this be a better way to go, what do you think,mike

Alex,

You must have been thinking about this a lot longer than me!

Most of your points are about getting the quality right for professional performing artsists. The product that I had in mind would be sold mainly to home-users. Most $1200 keyboards are used by home-users and they wouldn't have to much problems with the things you described.

About the style copyrights, the styles on the net are not all owned by Yamaha. A lot are user-made. Above that Yamaha has openly declared that styles that are no longer sold by them (in keyboards or on diskettes) can be used freely for non-commercial use.

Jos

[This message has been edited by Jos Maas (edited 09-05-2003).]

Jos,

Is it possible to design an arranger softsynth for Windows CE platform? I'll check out the posibilities of this pocket pc devices. I guess some of them have General Midi sound chip inside.

Dan

I for one, dont do any gigs. Im a bedroom producer. So far with my Korg i30 and Roland VS, produced a cd for my brother in law that he sells when he goes out to churches and sings.
Its not perfect, but people do feel that its a band thats playing there. That makes me feel good, cause it was all done in my Korg i30. Except for the Lead guitars that I personally did.

If I can get that type of quality from a PC arranger, then im sold.
So far, I feel that OMB is really good. I just have to learn the ins and out of it.

I havent even figured out how to make it work with Cubase VST32. I have this program just sitting there. I wish I can learn it really good, cause once I do, then im going full pC.

Little by little, these big companies are going to feel the pain we consumers are feeling.
Why? because, technology is moving foward, and yet, they are giving us products with parts that arent even made anymore.

We are their lifeline. No customers=less jobs for them.
I for one, hope this doesnt happen, but its getting there little by little.
In the current world economy, if a company does not take care of its lifeline, then it will have to settle with the consequences.

best,

MusiKman

Joe,
I just went to the OpenLabs website and there in this link:
http://openlabs.com/developers.php

are giving you the opportunity to work with them in the design and integration of software with their product.
I think this would be awsome for you since OMB can be designed to work with the ecko system just fine. Then imagine, it would be an arranger with built in recording studio and the whole works !!!!

Man, check it out, give it a try..Im telling you, you can be rich with your knowledge. I really hope so, cause you are really trying hard to help us out in designing a prgram that will save us all money.
I for one, would sell all my stuff just to get my hands on one of this babys. If your program is tweaked just right, and it works great with this keyboard, then I would go for it all the way...

best,

musikman

Danb,

It would be more practicle to stick with PC/Windows.

MusikMan,

I signed up at that page. But I don't expect too much from that. Getting such a machine on a website is one thing. Getting it in the shops for an acceptable price is something else. I didn't see a pricetag yet.

Jos

Do some of these software synth manufacturers have a hardware version of their synth? It will be cool if I can have B4 in hardware platform which probably cost a little higher than the software version.

Jos,
I'm in computer industry and thinking about designing my own most portable pc using the Flex Microatx board. If we can make it work in a small unit like those pocket pc which is using a baby version of MS Windows OS which is designed for communication and entertainment, then it not be hard to incorporate this to the hardware keyboard. Maybe you and some other users here will try to go to the drawing board and start designing this pc entertainment center. - Dan

There was a thread long ago about a company in Germany that makes a keyboard with a PC built in that basically fits what we are talking about

Anybody remember ?

Hi Jos,
I do realize a style recorded as a midifile can be converted ( I've been fiddling round, doing it for years,) the problem is, it needs someone with a access to a kn7 in the first,and someone with the knowledge & patience to do it. It takes ages and that's one of the reasond why you haven't seen kn7 styles converted.
Even then, just say, you recorded the midifile based on the chord of cmaj, the 5 accompaniment style parts ( kn7)can may contain notes other other than what you'd expect to find in a c chord ie a's d's b's. The kn7 can handle these notes.
On a BIAB midifile if you record the midifile based on the cmaj chord , I'm fairly certain you only find c's e's g's ( correct me if I'm wrong).

Psr styles are based on CMaj7 chords. Therefor the notes you find in the 2 chord & the pad part are ususually cegb. It also has the 2 phrase parts which I think can handle notes other than ( cegb) That being the case I don't think a psr could probably handle a kn7 style (because of those additional notes )I doubt it would play the styles back correctly. I doubt my Va7 could either.

best wishes
Rikki

-----------------------------------------
About not being able to convert the KN7 to PSR, you're definetely wrong. Any style that can be recorded in a MIDI file can be converted. I used this method with BIAB styles and the styles from a Roland E-66. It

lukitoh,
Wersi was the name.

Jos, that sounds very good, but I am just
curious how this is done?(for example, are you putting the detuned notes on separate channels from the non-detuned notes for a particular part?)

Lukitoh,

The Wersi comes close but is much too expensive. A plain PC arranger with standard PC parts should cost no more than $1200.

Rikki,

It is true that you need the keyboard to produce the midifiles (you said that you own a kn7). But it surely wouldn't take ages to convert the midifiles into styles. You didn't use this feature in OMB yet. If you paste a part of a midifile into a style part using the "Chord" option, then OMB will automatically transpose the notes to cegb. In intro's and ending you would use the "Melody" option. The melody option is tricky when used with normal midifiles because you need to specify the key it is played in. But that is no problem with midifiles that you made yourself for style conversion. Just record all the intro/endings in C and the rest in Cmaj7. It will never sound off. Do the turorial http://www.1manband.nl/convert.htm

Vquestor,

In most synths this can be done with NRPN or SYSEX. Check your synths manual about this.

Jos

jos,i was saying that if you bought a second hand wersi it could be the way to go being a lot cheaper,but then again if they are that good and don,t need to be replaced ,only updated then nobody is going to sell one,oh well just athought,mike

not for the road, but working in the direction of a PC keyboard: http://www.prodikeys.com/

Mike,

There ain't one at Ebay, I found one at a German flohmarkt The price is EUR 4500 ($5000), yes that is second hand. What bothers me is that nothing is mentioned about the ability to install soundcards. Mayby Cosel can tell us if that is possible.

Cassp,

What where these guys thinking when they designed an F thru F keyboard! When you are used to playing inverted chords in one octave you could use a 3 octave keyboard for both chords and melody. But with the Prodikeys you should either teach yourself to play all your chords in a different way or have less (not enough) keys to play melody. The software that comes with it uses function keys for chords. I actually built in that feature in OMB to be compatible with the Prodikeys. But then also made it possible to use the other PC keys for melody so you don't really need a Prodikeys anymore. Lately I made some adjustments in OMB for accordion players. Maybe it would be able to design a small accordion like instrument where you play melody on keys on one side and chords with buttons on the other side.

Jos

[This message has been edited by Jos Maas (edited 09-06-2003).]

jos u r right, at that price we have to go a different route,mike

Hi Jos,
sorry , I meant recording the styles into the kn sequencer, then converting them & saving to midifile would take at least 5 to 15 minutes per style. Then you'd still have to convert them via OMB ( not sure how long that would take) If you're looking at a couple of hundred styles, that's a lot of time spent. I tend to think most of the converted styles for psr's ,would have been converted via the EMC software program, which only takes a couple of minutes to do. The hard part is then tweaking them to make them sound good.
I have to admit I haven't had a chance to try midifile to style with your omb program as yet.
I'm still don't think it will convert accurately, because these a's d's b's are actually "tensions" used within the style by the kn7. Actually having these notes automatically transposed to cegb may not give the correct result ie the midi file part recorded in the c chord already contains the notes ceg as well as a's d's b's.

When I get a chance, I'll give one a try & let you know how I go.

Intro's & endings I don't think would be a problem.

Having fooled round with style creating on at least 4 different brands of keyboards over the years( roland korg technics yamaha ) the one thing I did discover is that they all handle the styles differently. Each machine has it's own unique requirements.

best wishes
Rikki

best wishes
Rikki

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Jos Maas:

Rikki,

It is true that you need the keyboard to produce the midifiles (you said that you own a kn7). But it surely wouldn't take ages to convert the midifiles into styles. You didn't use this feature in OMB yet. If you paste a part of a midifile into a style part using the "Chord" option, then OMB will automatically transpose the notes to cegb. In intro's and ending you would use the "Melody" option. The melody option is tricky when used with normal midifiles because you need to specify the key it is played in. But that is no problem with midifiles that you made yourself for style conversion. Just record all the intro/endings in C and the rest in Cmaj7. It will never sound off. Do the turorial http://www.1manband.nl/convert.htm

Hi Starkeeper,
I hope you guys are right. I think it would be great to have a p.c. arranger.

Big problem is, who's going to write the styles. Third party styles for our keyboards appear to be pretty scarce as is , and the ones that I have come across for sale are pretty expensive. You can't have converted styles as your source of styles for your p.c arranger. I think the manufacturers a tending to turn a blind eye as far as style conversions go when it's done by music enthusiasts, but I tend to think they'd go after a software company that was trying to do the same thing.

One thing that I have noticed is the lack of new styles around for sale. Back in the 90's before the net was so popular, I could pick up a new style disk for my kn every month or two. Haven't seen a new one yet for a kn7.
Maybe the money's not in it for the professionals to make it worth their while creating them, or maybe they worry about us sharing styles which we rightfully should be paying for. Lets face it, computer software, styles etc are pretty much open to exploitation.

best wishes
Rikki
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Starkeeper:
[B]Ricci,
I don't think the keyboard manufacturers have a choice. If one of them does it, the rest will follow, and they lose.
If they don't and, as Jos mentioned, the Dell, IBM, Compact, etc. do it then they have to follow suit, and they lose.
If neither do it, then we'll do it ourselves, and they lose.

Rikki,

15 minutes for the whole conversion process for each style would be my estimate. Doing hundreds of styles would still be very time consuming and boring. But you can select the 40 or 50 that you really like and do a few whenever you have some spare time. You do loose a little of the character of the original arranger. E.g. BIAB claims that, because it can predict the chords and variations that are coming (it's non-real-time), it adjusts the accompaniment to that. But to me it sounds just as fine as I play it in real time with OMB. That's because the styles aren't designed for a particular synth but are full GM compatible. They have just a few basic instruments, mainly drums, bass piano. The biggest problem with style conversions is that you mostly don't have the original synth they where designed for. And the more sophisticated that synth is the worse it will sound on a not compatible synth. Styles from old GM keyboards often sound best after conversion.

About the inavailabillity of good and affordable commercial styles. A lot of the commercial styles are not designed for a particular synth but are plain vanilla GM styles. That way they can be converted and sold for any arranger. Making styles for a particular synth would mean a smaller market an therefor higher prices. Keyboard manufacturers aren't that interested in selling styles as software. Selling styles and new sounds in the form of a new arranger keyboard is in fact a very extreme but succesfull way to protect their software from illegal use.

So where are the styles going to come from? First of all everybody could make some themselves. You don't need to start from scratch. Take an extisting style or midifile and add some personal magic. It doesn't take a skilled musician to make styles. You just need an ear for it. And if you can't hear if a change you made is better or worse, then you shouldn't be playing keyboard anyway. Secondly they may come from one-man-companies in stead of big companies. You don't need big companies to produce styles, but at the moment you would need them to reach the public. It would just take time before the public realised that if they need new software and styles they should't go to the music-store but surf the net. The main reason that they don't do that at the moment is the general opinion that the shareware and freeware that you can download is crap (it often is). Anyway I intend to produce some commercial styles for XG keyboards this winter. Others are already doing so and I'm sure there will eventually be some among it that can compete with the built in styles. Mainly because I find these built in styles high quality but very middle-of-the-road. There should be place for styles that are targeted at different musical tastes.

Jos

Style conversion is possible, and you can get pretty good to excellent results. In many cases it just takes a good bit of tweaking. With programs like Joe's OMB or the freeware conversion software made by Michael P Bedesem, the actual conversion has become relatively easy to do and can be done in a matter of minutes. It's how you tweak them and the making the effort to optimize the conversions for your particular board / module that makes all the difference. This does take some time to do, but if the style is worth the trouble of converting, I think for me that the conversion is very incomplete if I don't spend the time needed to make it sound better. This is never an exact science either. One needs to find the right patches ( panel voices ), eq settings, dsp / effects, panning, vol levels ..etc.

Some of the styles I converted for the 2000 from my PA80 sound pretty good. There are some voices and parameters that are hard to dupicte exactly, and sometimes drum parts have to be remapped, but all in all conversion is possible. The PSR to PA80 conversions seemed to work out better, as the PA80 itself is has very good editing / capabilites and allows for adjustment of a lot of parameters. It has many useful patches ( voices ) to boot. Of course If I made XG voice based styles I could use XG edit to tweak further for the 2k..

There are other ways to make style too. The PA80's style sequencer is user friendly enough that I do a lot of work in it when I want to add some parts that I play in real time to a style. Otherwise, for me often it's Sonar to record or slice up pieces of midi files, or use the R&C chords guitar program or slicy drummer, then add some of my own playing. Or I might make some sophisticated drum patterns in jammer pro.. There are enough programs to assist.. The key is having the time ( and / or be willing to spend the time ) to make styles that sound good. Sometinmes, it's easier if I'm writing a tune to just do most of it in real time, but I have made a few song specific styles for tunes that I want to play live on an arranger ( particularly a couple of my originals ).

AJ

[This message has been edited by Bluezplayer (edited 09-07-2003).]

Jos, do you know if "LiveSynth Pro" can do this?
(I cannot seem to find any information if it
does). Thanks for any help.



[This message has been edited by Vquestor (edited 09-07-2003).]

royandreno & Jos,

It was not Wersi ! It was not a US mfr either. But I remember there was a thread here about it since I was the one who brought it up. I just could not locate it. BUT, it did not have the assignable buttons that Jos was talking about. The concept in my head that I was thinking I believe matches Jos'.

That particular keyboard had the keybed and the computer (probably a laptop) built in that can be closed like a notebook computer. I am quite certain that it was discussed here.

Vquestor,

I have no knowledge about LiveSynth Pro, but if it hasn't any info in the documentation about this then it probably won't do the trick.

Lukitoh,

It it had a built in laptop then you wouldn't be able to install the soundcard of your choice. That's not good enough.

Jos

Jos,
"If it had a built in laptop then you wouldn't be able to install the soundcard of your choice" . I need a work around solution. I don't want to carry a PC with a monitor/mouse,keyboard etc when i perform.
Star

---------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Jos;
"It it had a built in laptop then you wouldn't be able to install the soundcard of your choice. That's not good enough."
---------------------------------------------

It's probably using a pc keyboard, touchpad, lcd combo same as the one manufactured by KVM. It looks like a laptop but there's no cpu, hdd, memory. etc inside. And if you can put the microatx board inside the keyboard or synth and use this mouse-lcd-keyboard combo then it's posible to use any pci cards because it has a full motherboard inside.

Danb,

Can you identify the product that you are talking about? An URL or the name of the manufacturer?

Jos



[This message has been edited by Jos Maas (edited 09-08-2003).]

Hi Jos,
had a bit of time yesterday , to spend on your program. The actual arranger features don't particularly interest me, as I prefer to play an actual arranger keyboard, so I must admit , I haven't actually spent time on that part of the program.
The stylemaker part of your program is really impressive. Especially the feature that allows you to import and save individual phrases ( I think you call it morphing). It's a feature I really liked on my 9000pro ( called style assembly) and my kn7 has a similar features also.

I did try converting one of my kn7 styles( in midifile format) to psr. The particular style had additional "a" notes in a c chord guitar strum. Your program must have deleted them, as originally it was a 5 note strum , but after converting, there were only 4 notes left. Even so, in this instance, it was still quite useable.

My aim isn't actually to convert kn7 styles to psr format, but vice versa. Kn's actually have the ability to create styles from midifiles, within the keyboard itself. Your program may give me back the one feature that I miss ( after selling my pro) and that is the " morphing " feature.

I started on a project years ago, of collecting style phrases ( from my keyboards) that could be made into styles. Problem I had was finding a way to catalogue them , find a suitable playing medium that would allow me to scroll through and audition them, and to actually find duplicate phrases. I ended up putting it into the too hard basket, as the software to do it in those days, didn't exist. Unfortunately I lost most of it when my Atari hard drive died a few years back.

I'm not sure I've understood your statement below correctly. But as far as I know, commercial styles have to be made for each individual brand of keyboards I certainly can't play my roland styles on my kn. Technote created style disks for technics keyboards for years. I would have bought at least 50 plus over a period of 6 to 8 years. I used to buy the occasional roland & korg style too, when I could find one, a few years back.

I beleive there are some style disks around for sale that contain converted styles, but I don't think you can really compare the quality of a converted style to an onboard style in an arranger or to a style that has been professionaly produced for a particular arranger. Converted styles acome from someone else's hard work, the original composer of the style .

It would be great if you could get a midifile that was created to be turned into a style, but I haven't come across them ( maybe I've just been looking in the wrong places haa haa)

best wishes
Rikki

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Jos Maas:
[B]Rikki,
About the inavailabillity of good and affordable commercial styles. A lot of the commercial styles are not designed for a particular synth but are plain vanilla GM styles. That way they can be converted and sold for any arranger. Making styles for a particular synth would mean a smaller market an therefor higher prices.

Honestly, theres a surge of creativity that I feel when I sit down at a keyboard that I really dont feel running shareware on Windows XP. I realize that there are certain issues that need to be adressed as far as upgradeabiliy on arrangers and synths, but I dont want to see Yamaha and Roland making the choice to stop producing new arrangers and instead create an ivory computer. It just doesnt work fore me.