"Computer Driven" KBs & products vs NON...= Constant change & its just in it's infancy you aint seen nothing yet.....nuff said!

My Bose L1 probably preceded 2007...can't remember. But it is, without a doubt, a KEEPER.

Another great investment was a Mueller back brace. Not only does it keep me honest when loading, unloading and carrying equipment, it can double as a cumberbun on a tux job. And, it didn't cost anywhere near as much as the Bose.


Eddie

Have you seen how many new guitars and basses and drumkits hit the market every year, Donny..? Constant change and innovation isn't exclusively a keyboard thing. But what you DO see is, once one of these 'real instrument' players get them, they tend to hang on to them longer, at least once they find something they like.

And curiously, it seems the better the guitarist or bassist, the older their instrument is. Funny how that works out...

....'Nuff said?

Diki, I think you went too far with your "it's a laziness thing" remark. Looking back on most of the equipment I've owned, I think I could happily still be playing with/on most of them today, but I have always felt the need to keep my equipment current and saleable. Admittedly, my long gone Deluxe Reverb would be worth a good chunck today, but I good chunk for it when I sold it 20 yrs. ago. Laziness in learning my trade is far from the truth. If I were the same player I was 25 years ago, I wouldn't hire me today. I am much better and more experienced as a keyboard player of all types. I understand the music better and translate it to my audiences much better. New equipment is a personal choice. I've always felt that being a keyboardist involved some sort of addiction to new technology. On the other hand, my 20 yr old Kurzweil Mark 5 sounds as good today as any piano clone I've played.

So what am I saying? I don't know, but it seemed like a good idea at the time. Any way, I was offended by your remark.

Thanks for the reality check Diki (sincerely!) It has given me pause for thought, as to the real reasons I am trying to trade-away from the SD, and in fact the original PA1x..Perhaps I should be looking to developing more as an artist rather than a song machine.

Changing equipment because I feel it is THAT process that makes me a better performer, rather than simply just being more creative and trying to hone the craft through experience and emotion and being as good as my ability allows without trying to dress it up with more bells and whistles.

"[Put a Strat and a Twin Reverb in the hands of any good guitarist, and he's probably content for decades.]" This is true of EVERY guitarist and acoustic instrument player I have met!!

Your thoughts on this thread are well noted, and appreciated.
Dennis

I can't believe I'm saying this, but I actually agree with Donny . I believe pianist and other strictly acoustical players, possess a totally different mindset than those who play instruments driven by technology. Even if one upgrades the quality of the acoustic (or near-acoustic) instrument, there is still no new OS to learn, navigation systems to master, MANUALS TO READ (excluding us 'Osmosis' guys). As long as technology continues to grow stronger, faster, and cheaper, major advances in synth and arranger technology will continue to produce amazing new products at ever-shortening intervals. This will continue until we produce the ultimate instrument.....the one-touch MP3 player. So keep that index finger warmed up, guys and girls, it's coming.

chas

Why do you think that Hammond and its clones have returned, it is simply because no mater how good styles become, you are still listening to somebody else interpretation, whereas with a Hammond you are the somebody.
Whether you like it or not, the most advanced arranger style will always play second fiddle to a live player.
Another point of view

Bill

Well, I'm glad I'm getting comments from BOTH sides of this discussion...

First of all, let me point out my comments were addressed at NO specific person. And I hope we all realize that they are generalizations, and OF COURSE, cassp, there are some that upgrade constantly that still work hard on their craft, just as there are some that NEVER upgrade, and STILL don't work on their craft either!

But as a generalization, I think it hits home. Sure, if you want the arranger to be an all singing, all dancing do-it-all-for-you piece of kit, staying up on the leading edge of technology will give your act an edge over others at the same skill level that don't. But if your emphasis is on PLAYING music (rather than triggering a machine that plays music), spending more of your time on playing skills, rather than poring over the latest manual seems, at least to me, to be a better use of your limited time.

And 'osmosis'.... Please!!

I never heard a more facile excuse for not cracking the manual in my life. You don't learn an arranger (or any other complex piece of kit) by 'osmosis'. You are perhaps learning to OPERATE an arranger that way (hit a button, see what it does, rinse and repeat), but you'll never learn about sound programming, style editing or creation or more complex uses of the arranger (combining SMFs with arranger play, syncing audio to arranger tracks, etc.) by osmosis.

If this is the depth of your delving into an arranger, this is probably WHY some of you need new equipment to progress. Considerable progress can be made simply by working the styles, working the sounds, utilizing the often hidden power parameters of the arranger you have. But ignore them, and you HAVE to purchase new arrangers to progress. An expensive solution to a simple problem.

Now, before anyone goes off in a huff.... ONCE AGAIN, I am talking generalities here. No-one is being singled out. But as Miden has noted, PERHAPS it is time to take a look at these attitudes, and see if maybe, just possibly, we are using constant upgrading as a replacement for constant improvement of OURSELVES, and our approach to music.

Arranger players are often solitary players, seldom making music WITH others. Often this leads to a lack of peer feedback and reinforcing, and we end up looking to the technology, which is far easier to quantify what is 'best', for signs of visible progress. 'I have the best arranger, so I must be the best arranger player'. Without regular peer review (or what I call 'jamming'! ), who else is going to tell us how well we are playing (or if they like our 'sounds')?

You will rarely ever have another player, after jamming with you, come up and say 'you need to upgrade your keyboard'! They'll talk about grooving, soloing, volume levels (11,11,11...!), comping, all that good stuff. Unless you ARE playing a twenty year old dog, they'll usually go 'great sounds!' no matter WHAT you keyboard play! AS LONG AS YOU ROCK!

But, left to ourselves and our own impressions of our gig, how do we drive ourselves on...? 'I need a new keyboard' is an itch FAR easier to scratch than 'I need to stop rushing' (if I even acknowledge I am doing that!), or 'I need to play less busy solos' or 'I need to learn some newer songs'....

I think the truth is, getting out and playing with the best musicians you can hang with will improve you FAR more than any new arranger. Just play with them ON your arranger (but use NO auto stuff!), and you will quickly find yourself learning sound editing and patch setup that works with real live playing. Then when you return to your arranger, you will have a new set of ears to compare your arranger, and it's capabilities to.

But expecting this kind of stuff to magically transfer itself by osmosis... That only works in fairy tales. The REAL magicians read the manuals....!

BTW, for those that think this last post was a bit schizophrenic (Don't spend your time reading manuals... No, spend your time reading manuals because osmosis doesn't work!), let me just say that reading the manual for ONE arranger every eight or ten years is a LOT easier than having to do it every year for a different one!

Intimate knowledge of ONE older arranger trumps a cursory knowledge of 'this year's model' any day, IMO.

To add to the point Diki made, make sure you regularly go to live concert, band performances etc, as if you compare boards your missing the point of how real does it sound, (I regularly listen to live music of all types) in truth if it sounds impressive straight off, then it has probably been overblown by the manufacture, (Engineered to impress on first hearing, so as to outdo the competition) a good demonstration of this was at the launch of the T2 at the Caister Keyboard Festival, (The first few days it was viewed by the vast majority as total crap, Even the concert performance got very little applause from the 1000 or so attendees) which had a Luke warm reception, but by the end of the week when it was played (The same Big Band Intros and Endings soon become obnoxious) rather then demonstrated, its qualities shone through (One of the advantages of a week long Festival) with the SA voices really shining. (Cant wait for the sound engineers to program the OAS 7 sound engine to do the same. (Difficult to program, but easily within the OAS 7 sound engine capabilities)
Golden Rule, Don’t compare boards, but compare the sounds to Real Instruments, and I personally find most of the Wersi sounds excellent. (Not Impressive, but Real)
Have to get some shut eye; (The Real Ales kicking in) look forward to see the rest of the posts tomorrow.
BFN

Bill