I've gotten several emails lately from members asking about the arpeggiators on them, and how they differ in the way they are handled on arranger keyboards. I'm going to address it here so that if others are curious they can read this post.

There are some similiarities in the area of "arpeggiation" found on a synth, that is also "partly" common with arranger keyboards.

Take for example the acoustic guitar strumming that you'd find in the preset styles on a PSR-3000 or Tyros2 . You'll notice some realistic nuances such as pick noise, and string slides, and a few other things.

Well this feature on an arranger is essentially an "arpeggiated riff"-- programmed much in the same way as done for the synth/workstations.

Let's take the Yamaha MotifES, and MO series for example. On these synths you'll find preset arps for acoustic guitars that behave much in the same way as the preset riffs on the PSR's and Tyros, but these riffs (on a synth) can be triggered in real-time using the keys.

On the arranger those arpeggiated patterns don't have the flexability as you'd find on a full blown synth (or even budget synths for that matter)

On the synth you'll find these realistic acoustic guitar strums under the "apreggiator" feature. The synth lets you go further though. It allows you to literally go into the arpeggiator and tweek the livi'n sh#t out of it With the synth you'll have control over the arpeggiated phrase and the ability to customize it, or create one completey from scratch.

Maybe in the future Yamaha and other's will start placing these type of phrases found within the styles under a dedictaed apreggiator section, and allow the user to tweek them.

I hope this helps those who have emailed me directly, and others who may also be curious about it.

Regards,
Squeak

It would be nice to have an option like this, along with more real time editing flexibility in the T2, on par with what I have in the Motif ES. If however, I could only have it one way or the other, ( in other words either a true arpeggiator OR the multipads ), I'd actually prefer that Yamaha stick to the format that it is using now.

Why ? It's because of the way I use the multipads when playing in real time. I use them to add another continuous and looped phrase to my styles, and the way it is setup now, I can shut off parts of a style that I don't want and replace them with a continuous multipad phrase(s). Or I can add a one shot phrase or sound just to spice things up.

The arpeggiator as it is set up on the Motif ES is very useful, but when I use it I'm not trying to also control chords and fills in a style at the same time I'm trying to play the correct keys for an arp part. I'm simply working on what I am actually playing at that time.

I think a Motif type arpeggiator might not be all that beneficial to me when I'm playing a live set. I like the simplicity of just hitting oned button and continuing to comp or play leads / melodies with my right hand.

Of course, for composing parts of a tune, a real arpeggiator would be excellent. I just wouldn't want it at the expense of not having the multipads as they currently work.

AJ

[This message has been edited by Bluezplayer (edited 08-27-2006).]

I think that AJ is right on regarding the matter of Arps in an arranger format. Simplicity and ease of use during live play makes the difference here. If I had to choose one or the other, it would be Multi-Pads over the Arpeggiator at this point.

Regards,

Dennis L. Almond
aka...TwoNuts

To each his own I guess Some of us are tweekers and some are not, but we all are in it for the same reasons.

I've always felt there was a definitive line between the arranger player, and synth player (although several of us have seen and experienced the benefits in owning both).

Still I often get emails from members asking questions about synths. It seems there's a growing interest in them here with arranger owners.

Squeak

Squeak,

I think you make valid points about the arps, but my point is that I would only be interested if they were an add on feature and not a replacement for the multipads.

I don't know anyone who likes to tweak or experiment any more than I do. It's just that playing in solo a live setting is not always the most opportune time to do it. There is simply too much other stuff to focus on when I use my arranger in that way.

Perhaps there IS a different mentality and approach between using an arranger and a synth. As much as I like playing the arrangers I have, they still aren't going to be my only ( or even first ) choice when I'm laying down tracks in the studio. There are other tools that are better suited for at least some aspects of it. If I can't get a real drummer in here, for example, I use Jamstix and BFD as opposed to an arranger ( or my Motif ES ) to try and get as close as possible.

That said, I think the arrangers I have make for a great starting point and at times will produce some very useable stuff in the studio as well. Aside from that, and probably most important at this stage of my life, they are fun to play, whether I'm playing for other folks or not.

AJ



[This message has been edited by Bluezplayer (edited 08-27-2006).]

Hi,

I am one of these members. My interest in synths is growing because the arranger makers cannot offer a keyboard that will fit my needs best - 88 hammer keys and good quality acoustic guitars.

I get more and more intrigued by the MO8 which appears to be only twice the dough of YPG-625 but light years ahead in terms of quality of voices and features. Actually, pricewise the Mo8 is comparable to PSR-3000 but since the former has 88 hammer keys I wouldn't hesitate for too long.

As far as styles are concerned, I can always use Jos Maas' One Man Band.

And, yes, the arpegiattor gadget appeals to me.

Regards,
George

This is an interesting topic. Possibly Arranger & Synths are getting closer together and certain differences are becoming less defined.
Why are Sythns so much better value price wise that the arrangers....anything to do with a different dealer % on both ?.

My thoughts are that one compensates for the other.
Most musicians are not rich and so the manufactures make a loss on their synths, to get musicians to buy them, which means as most play live the manufacture gets free advertising.
Arrangers are mainly bought by the General Public who usually have more disposable income, and so manufactures inflate the prices.
When the 2 come together the profits on the arranger compensates for the loss on the synth.
As I mentioned at the beginning these are just my thoughts, and are not based on anything specific.

Bill

Graham,
You and I are on the same page my friend. I have always been asking why do the prices differ so much?

What makes the tools on an arranger (be it pro or semi-pro), more important to the user, than the tools on a synth to the synth junkie? We have functions on our synths that clearly stand out, yet the makers don't squeeze our pockets as much as they do in the arranger market.

The Roland Juno-G is probably the best current example of this. The spec list is unheard of if you really think about it. Not only is it a Fantom based sound engine with 4 element voice structure, 128 note poly, able to run multiple inserts--these are just a few of the features, but the beast has a 16 track midi squencer that is synced with an onboard 4 track audio recorder, and Roland didn't stop there. The Juno-G will let you "mixdown" internally. You can mixdown the midi and audio all within the unit--and use a list of available mixdown effects as well as insert effects on the audio tracks.

All those features in this little synth and it goes for the same price as a PSR-1500, and Korg PA-50--yet it rivals many of their features. Roland put a tag of $999.00 on this synth.

I think the makers have been squeezing the arranger market for many years. It's no disrepect to T2,G-70, and other semi-and pro arranger owners, but I think the price of $3,000 and up is an outrage! A Roland Fantom X6 is a great synth, with features that will rival the T2, but it's over $1,000 less.

Squeak

George.., come over to the dark side my friend Feel the want flowing within you... Never underestimate the power of the synth

Joking!, but seriously though..., the MO8 would be a great 88 key unit for you. You'll get mega voices, guitar arps that will--to put it nicely--greatly surpass those found on the PSR's.

You'll find that action on it far more enjoyable than the DGX, and YPG's. Plus it's still a Yamaha

I've always felt it was wise to have both. A decent arranger, and a good synth. Together they compliment eachother quite well.

Squeak

Squeak

Maybe it's me or I'm not working right with the guitar arps, but I don't find them to be all that realistic, vs my own playing. Too stiff and quantized, just like a style. Maybe hidden in a mix, or over a few bars in a song, they would sound convincing, but I'm not overly impressed. I think the pale in comparison to the phrases in Virtual Guitarist ( I've played both ), and even those aren't quite like a real guitar, but much closer in a mix.

The problem with playing the sounds myself is that it's hard to replicate in real time what the arps can do with the mega technology, so yes the notes sound like the are played live but the scrapes and slides and other articulations aren't there. I'd love to hear something that makes me feel different about this. Maybe someone could demonstrate it for me ?

AJ

[This message has been edited by Bluezplayer (edited 08-28-2006).]

AJ,
I'm with you on that. Nothing to me will replace my live guitar playing, but the arps are nice to have at times. Yes (like the styles) they can at times seem over quantized too.

I like using them every so often when I don't feel like creating my songs, then dropping the tracks down to my Fostex to then add live guitar. The arps aren't the most realistic, but are very passable in my opinion, and if used for backing can fill the void.

Squeak

Agreed. Now the synth arps .. that's another whole story. I think they are outstanding, and very useable, especially when I use them with the AN150 plug in board.

The T2 is sorely lacking on electronica and modern synth type loops and sounds, but I kinda knew this going in. I'll probably make some electronica pads and sounds for it, but I'm not going to waste a ton of time on this, because I won't use that much of it during live play. Here ( and a few other places ) is where softsynths still rule my musical world.

My PA80, OTOH, has synth sounds that even my ES ( minus the AN plug in ) doesn't compare to. Not in soundscape or combo type stuff.. the ES is clearly superior there, but in the more "meat and potatoes" analog simulation sounds. It just has "fatter" sounds I guess. The bummer is that the multipads are very limited and are not user programmable.

AJ


[This message has been edited by Bluezplayer (edited 08-28-2006).]

Hello AJ and Squeak
Have you tried Real Guitar at all, http://www.musiclab.com/products/realgtr_info.htm as to me it sounds really good. (Although I am not a Guitar Player)

Bill

Hi Bill,

Yes, I have Real Guitar. In part it works in a way similar to the articulation voices on the Tyros2. The differences are..

Real Guitar offers a lot of controls to adjust the articulations, and it also has different modes including using premade patterns ( ala Rythym n Chords, another Musiclab offering ) and one where you make a chord, like on an arranger but with your right hand instead, and then play different articulations by pressing different notes to the left of the the split. Articulation include strum up / down ( strum times are adjustable ) slurs, etc.

Real Guitar definitely can sound closer to a real acoustic guitar than anything else I've heard. On the down side, there are no elctric guitar sounds ( yet ). Although the T2 doesn't "articulate" as well as RG does, there is more variety available in patch sounds. I like both. T2 isn't as realistic, but on some of the AC guitars the tones are more pleasing to me.

AJ

Yeah I've checked it out, and looked at the video demos, and man that software is impressive. I especially liked the blues video and the video doing Claptons song.

I've got a B-Day coming up very soon, and I've hinted to the wife my want for this software

Squeak

It's worth the money spent Squeak. I'm looking forward to an electric edition. Other software modules that I have which include similiar type of articulations are Edirol's Super Quartet and Plugsound's Fretted edition. These work more like the T2, in that the articulations are not editable.

There are supposed to be some better sample sets ( ones that you would use in kontakt for instance ) that are even better. They aren't cheap, but my main reason for not trying them to this point is my worry about the amount of HD space and Ram needed to work them.

Im coming. I've always belived synths are poweful, my master I'm halfway there. Tomorrow I am speaking with the local dealer about the possibilities to import the keyboard.


My sister didnt eveн know that the keys of the acoustic piano are graded. I don't really care for graded keys as long as I am able to play expressively.

I'd like to ask you few more questions re the Mo8. I'll send you a private email.

Thanks for your support.

George

what about yamaha PSR's PADs, those are apegiators(they're even stay in sync with the tempo all the time) Now even psr-E403 has an arpegiator, and its really named "Arpegiator" except that its not as flexible as Synth's(doesn't have latch, gate, etc ...)

Vadim,
Yes those are bascially arpeggiated phrases as well. They however lack the features one would find within a true "arpeggiator feature" found on the synths.

The E403 is now the exception in my opinion. It's the only PSR that I know of that at least has some basic ones. The only other (Yamaha) arranger I can remember having these were the Yamaha DJX series, and they too were very limited.

Hell the Casio MZ-2000 even had a few--although they too were limited, but Casio did it with their flagship arranger years ago.

Squeak

For multipads, anyone can adjust latch, gate, and a whole host of other parameters in an external sequencer. A very simple but cool way to make sweeps for example is to adjust simple synth parameters such as ASDR across a measure by sending a series of controller messages. Easy to do in any modern sequencer.

You just can't do it "on the fly" like you can in a synth. As IO said before, I don't want to do a lot of adjusting to my arps when I'm playing live, but it does bring me to one wish. I'd like to be able to assign a set of multipads to the same channel as my panel voices. That would be cool for playing live synth voices, in that I could record a series of controllers with no actual notes, for each of the pads and use them to affect my synth voice in real time playing.

AJ