The thing is, squeak, the majors already HAVE hired younger style writers. They use them exclusively for making hip arpeggio patterns for workstations. They just need to employ them to make styles, as well. I'm SURE they could use the extra work (Yamaha and Roland only update their workstation line every three or four years) and money!

But I disagree they won't pay for them if they WERE voiced better. They already pay close to TOTL arranger prices for TOTL workstations, and these are more expensive than great sounding mid-priced arrangers like S900, E60, etc.. We already know how much easier it is to produce improvised music on an arranger than a workstation. The minute that arrangers are re-voiced to be good at the same musics that workstations are, the ease of workflow (in comparison to a WS) will decimate WS sales, and arrangers will become the predominant keyboard.

The MotifXS is a step in the right direction, but it takes style control from a WS point of view rather than arranger. If the arps and styles had a more arranger-like control system, this would be the bomb. But cueing up your variations and fills a bar in advance is NOT 'improvising'.

Take the sounds and arps from a MotifXS, or M3, or FantomX, and put an arranger control front end, and you have the WS killer, right there. The only question is, are the the arranger divisions going to let the WS divisions steal the concepts, muddle through the first few generations, repeating all the mistakes the arranger divisions have already made, or are the arranger divisions going to do it, with their wealth of experience at this type of control, and wake up and take control of their own destiny?

It is time that one of the majors made a modern music arranger that ISN'T a toy, unlike the MM6 and DJXs.

So we know keyboard manufacturers like Yamaha,Korg & Roland hire people to record or create styles for their product (G70-PA-800_Tyros etc)..
But all the styles are created with midi...and as long as you use midi, you'll have limitations.Apegiations are midi based.

However,if your using audio tracks to create your styles, basically samples that respond to a midi map, in real time, than you could use samples from any sample library in the world. Copy the samples into the HD... call up that sample and play back in real-time.. You would have endless samples to choose from.
Ketron used audio with the SD1, the "live drums" are samples drum tracks of audio being streamlined with styles,all style parts are midi, except for drums. It's easy to do the drums, because they do not need to change key or respond to chord changes...

So I think Ketron's goal with the AUDYA,is the ability for audio to be incorporated with the styles, than have those audio tracks respond to midi changes (chord progressions) in real time.
http://www.synthzone.com/ubbs/Forum37/HTML/015227.html


Interesting to see donny's comment about navigation... Now what do you think of navigation my friend ?

Wasn't that a key selling point Dom was using with the MediaStation? Didn't he seek assistance from members here at one time for style writers to create audio/midi styles.., or has my memory just gone out completely?

Let's remember that most arrangers are Euope or Asia-based and only a slight nod goes to the American market. Notice the OR machines. Do you see any US machines?

I agree that styles are the major attraction and detraction of most arrangers. I would like more modern styles. Roland has done a pretty good job, but we still need more. I don't program unless I absolutely, positively have to. I hate it.

New arranger players will come from the same place we did. Most of us play or played in a group. As lives and egos go their separate ways, musicians who want to continue playing will find the aides they need to assist them.

------------------
Cass Pawlowski - Detroit
www.cassponline.com/

Diki, I would start brushing up on those polkas if I were you.
Jim

Wow, one of those rare threads where there are excellent points in nearly every post (and with no animosity). Obviously, there is no single answer (what was the question?) but the point is, nobody is completely wrong (or completely right.....sorry, Diki ). My own personal problem with arrangers is that I have a really difficult time accepting them as legitimate instruments. I have much less of a problem with synths, including "workstations". When you can create music, not notes, not chords, but MUSIC, by pushing a button, it's hard to elevate it much beyond a very sophisticated ipod. This is not to say that I don't enjoy mine immensely, but I have never taken one out on a gig (although I had G800's, G1000's, I5M's, etc. at the time). To those people that CLAIM to play (exclusively) IN A BAND using left hand bass 98% of the time, I say, HORSES**T. If that was how you viewed the role of the keyboard in a BAND, then why not use a much cheaper and much more powerful, synth (in split kb mode).

As much as I'd like to believe that the secret to greater acceptance of arr. kb's is in the creation and production of better, more modern, more sophisticated, styles; I really don't think so. This would do nothing to legitimize the instrument, in fact, it could have the opposite effect. Let's face it; the ultimate arranger is the DJ station. The Arranger keyboard exists somewhere in the gap between acoustic instruments and mp3 players, and more sophistication moves it closer to the mp3 player. Next up....practice your lip-syncing, boys.

chas

Whoops, did I accidently kill this thread? Sorry.

chas

Chas, one thing I haven't noticed anyone addressing is that arrangers do NOT have to be only used by performers doing covers.
They are imo the best scratchpad for composing original material whether using preset styles, adapting/changing preset styles, or creating new styles from scratch.
As a composing tool arrangers should live forever.
I hope BeachBum is not the only one working on original tunes here. Have been waiting for others to start adding new things. It is my intention to do some composing sometime soon.
Jim

Not just the Korg PA1X, the Genesys has a fully editable synth engine and has a ton of samples that are great for modern music. And if you feel the need to use custom samples/loops, it can load samples and store them on the internal hard drive. Those samples and loops can be played directly from the keyboard or played back via sequencer and even used within a style. To be fair the on-board sample editing is far from sophisticated. However no one who is serious about doing their own sampling does it on a keyboard (no matter what kind it is) and instead does the sampling or at the very least the editing within a wave editor program on their computer.



If you take 5 musicians of similar age and ask them each to sequence a 4 bar pattern in the style of a particular genre, you will end up with 5 totally different feels. It is just not feasible to include enough styles that will appease everyone. This is why professional arranger/workstations exist; so the user can customize the instrument to their specific needs. This whole argument should be limited to the entry level arrangers that have no real in-depth editing capability. If you are using one of those instruments, then you have to live with your purchase. But if having styles and sounds that are appealing to you are that important, then buy a truly professional product and learn how to operate it.

*ADDED*
Uh, I didn't mean that last bit to sound sarcastic. The point I was making is there are plenty of opportunities to get exactly what you want to get from many instruments; it just takes time to learn what functions there are and how to put them to personal use. I like arranger keyboards, obvious since I work for a company that manufactures them. But I also rarely using a stock style (unless I am doing a workshop/concert/promotion for a dealer at which point I think it is only fair to use what the instrument offers out of the box). Even if it is just dropping some of the auto tracks out or adding my own style track here or there, it just makes sense to want to give my sound some individuality.

I won't go as far as to say that an arranger player is nothing more than a DJ. It still takes more knowledge to play a keyboard than it does to spin a dial on an iPod even if the person is just triggering single finger chords with the appendage of his or her choice. At least they have to know the key names or at the very least the colors red, green and blue for those playing out if ‘easy play’ song book.


Dave

[This message has been edited by WDMcM (edited 08-11-2007).]

Well, it WAS going along without any animosity....