Andy,

In my opinion the old SSL's sound was horrid but the J and K series and AWS900 are considerably better. As you are aware many labels request that an album be mixed on SSL and that always makes me cringe. I'd rather mix on an old school Neve or API any day. At home I mixed on a custom Amek desk which I really loved. I modified the hell out of it so it bore no resemblance to a stock Amek desk but does that matter?

As to you getting into the music business... I'm going to say that it was stupidity rather than fate. :-) I entered the business much like you did and have stuck with it through thick and thin.

Sorry to hear of your woes with Higher Octave. I almost got involved with them but ended up at BMG where I faired about the same as you did with Higher Octave. Same concept, different label. Let's not go there!

Lee - No Problem.

I can't comment on other product lines as I am not involved - the only thing I have done outside PK work is the arrangement for DTX Extreme
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SjXgblyNHRk&feature=related

which was composed by Akira Jimbo-san of Casiopea and the aforementioned Motif Rack and XS Demos, and the Steinberg Sequel Demos previously linked.

Anyway I must return to my sweaty palmed keyboard and get back to my 12 hour working day . . .

As my good friend pointed out once

"I'd rather have a bottle in front of me than a frontal lobotomy. . . . "

Just to clarify (and avoid legal disputes of course :-) ) HO were great and offered to fly us out to Catalina and all, it was the jerk in London and my former partmer who screwed it all up.

Too funny Andy. Yes, so as to avoid legal disputes. Wasn't the Higher Octave complex in Malibu breathtaking? The first time I went there I thought I had died an gone to heaven. The view from the living room was awesome and that house/office was huge!

Hi Lee - never got the chance, I'm afraid. All the dealings were done through Timewarp/Baseline in London and let's just say that I discover my tracks are for sale in the States via the Japanese deal and on Weather Channel Compilations, but I see no money, 6 years later. . . . 25% of original run seconded for publicity purposes but only 50 given out, and on it goes.

I got the email when they (HO) closed and was sad about that as they gave us a shot at breaking the States, but we were scared of being $20-30k in debt for one album and the London label did not let us know how desperate they were for the follow-up which I could have made 2 years earlier.

It's quite funny (not in a good way) how unbusinesslike the music business is., really - iTunes and the like are definitely a step forward for the independent musician who would like to keep 80% of the revenue rather than give it away . . .

There are two sides to this issue. The first is,what is this keyboard capable of doing? That's where demo programmers come in. Together with good sequencing onboard there are wonderful things available. I had a DGX 300, and the sequencer stunk on it. I have a YPG 525 now, and the sequencer is incredibly easy to use. It's easy to program almost any instrumentation you want with it. The only problem I have with this keyboard is with the registrations. It will store 16 different registrations available internally in the keyboard, but only one downloaded one.

On the other hand, some of us play well, similar to a Baartmanns, or a Vonken. Then others play "Chopsticks" poorly. One thing that Yamaha has done right is to put teaching software into the newer keyboards so that anyone can learn to play better.

Perhaps the demos built into the keyboards should include something from each area for every person who would be interested. I'm not sure if this is possible.

Rob

Sorry, but I am not sure exactly where you are getting this impression. Do you actually READ my posts?

Far from bitching about using software, I have always been upfront about the fact that I already use the damn stuff, computer based, and have been using VSTi's since they came out. I've been a Cubase user since the Atari days, and before that, Dr.T's on a Commodore SX

What I HAVE been vocal about is the way so many tout all this as 'the future', and it's undisputed superiority over hardware 'closed' systems, and yet (and this brings us back to the initial post from Andy) mysteriously, no-one can translate this into a demo that is anything but plain horrible to listen to.

While VSTi's are great in a studio context, and can even be good as part of a live rig using a Receptor, etc., the whole thing about arranger use is integration... How well does it work with the other sounds already provided, how practical is it for general day-to-day usage, how quickly does it load up and play in live conditions, etc.?

So far, I have heard next to nothing posted on either of the VSTi host arrangers that wasn't just plain embarrassing. Latency issues with chord loop guitar libraries, drums that sit in the mix horribly, sonic mismatches in level, EQ and effects, and just a general audio impression that these sounds are merely tacked on, not part of an integrated whole.

All of which are supposed to be perfect in a live product. That's what an arranger is, on the whole. Yes, you COULD use one in the studio as a VSTi hub, but on the whole, it's a VERY expensive solution compared to a master keyboard and a computer. No, you are using a Wersi or MS for LIVE use, and questioning it's ability (or yours, that's the rub - once you start to add VSTi's to an arranger, how well they integrate is up to YOU... so far, no-one has impressed me in the slightest) to show good integration is part of the 'reality check' I like to apply to the hype I so often read here.

So, if that is 'waffling', I guess I must be! It's not that it CAN'T be done, it's just that it apparently seems beyond the abilities of anyone to do, including the factory demos... And, given that fact, it seems irresponsible to go ahead and promote the technology to, let's face it, a bunch of players that have enough trouble getting the best out of finely honed 'closed' system arrangers..

The whole point of an arranger is the 'instant play' factor. Sure, you CAN use them as WS's, but that's not it's primary job. So, tack on your VSTi's of choice, and all of a sudden, the USER has to do all the work that normally, VERY talented factory guys do, tweaking voices, tweaking keyboard response, tweaking EQ's (and sometimes the actual sampling) to make each and every new sound integrate into the whole. This is simply beyond the scope of the vast majority of 'home' players, and most pros from what I hear.

If you have recordings that prove otherwise, I, and everyone else here would be fascinated to hear them.

As to Andy using computers and outboard gear, let me get this straight... the demos in the T2 are files played by the T2 itself, aren't they? They are not audio demos, correct? So what outboard gear is he using? The sound engine of the T2 is ALL that is being used to produce the demo. And the performances have been edited (in part) on a computer. Well, we've ALL got one of those.

So accusing him (or his employers) of some kind of musical dishonesty for daring to touch the raw output of the arranger is kind of quaint I hate to burst your bubble, but basically, 99% of everything you hear today has been touched up with a computer, whether MIDI or audio. Beat Detective, Auto-Tune, Melodyne, all of these are basic go-to tools in the studio, and, as you point out, when your clients need them, you use them. How is Andy any different?

The factory demos show what CAN be done on the arranger, by itself (it has a sequencer built in, doesn't it? - no need to use Cubase if you don't want to) in the hands of the incredibly talented. Now, I don't know about you, but if I want to hear demos by the incredibly UNTALENTED, I can come here or a half-dozen other web sites and hear that

Theoretical capabilities are one thing, but I'm a 'show-me' kind of guy. If you can't back up your proclamations of superiority with something that reflects your opinions, I am going to be skeptical... Just as, if the demos for the T2 were simple 'live play' capture, at the sort of level that many here feel comfortable showing in public, I would be as skeptical if they started touting the T2 as 'the future' and all the other hype the VSTi's get.

But Andy, and the other T2 demo-ers have quite clearly demonstrated what you CAN achieve with nothing more than a T2 and talent (sequencer is on board if you don't want to use a computer).

That, for me, is what a demo is supposed to do.

And hey, Andy...

If you are tight with Domenik, why don't you talk him into hiring YOU to make demos on the MS? Lord knows, he needs SOMEBODY that has a clue to rescue him!

I have always said that I think he has a product with great promise, but until he gets someone to make demos for it that PROVE it's capabilities, he has an uphill task promoting the product, given how universally appalling the factory demos are

It's all well and good to sink 100% of your budget into constantly improving the OS, but at some point or another, you are going to have to try to SELL them. As Yamaha, and just about all the others have figured out, some decent (no, brilliant!) demos are one of the primary ways of doing that...

Give him a call, please

Hi Diki

I had a very pleasant chat with Lee and it's been great to be conversing with you too as well as all the other guys and gals (if any are watching).

Domenico is a lovely guy and has a product that is in a way (my opinion only so please don't shoot me) a similar concept to the OASYS. It offers flexibility and true workstation/ Open Source Architecture with some clever guys providing unique solutions.
I particularly like the internal patching ( I have not looked at it since I played it so I am sure many things may have changed).

Being a "button head" myself his product is definitely up there too :-). . . . .

I spent a lovely day with him, his family and his smokin' Corvette (yes all Italians drive FAST). I played his product, I liked it and thought that I could help him, but as always there are budgetary considerations on both sides.

Style Data and Demosongs versus OS are prioritised differently with every manufacturer. This is a major financial commitment for every system, I am sure,so all I have to say is that he is a good guy and deserves your support. He has mine. I enjoy his humour in his posts, as always.

I should also like to make the point that I understand entirely where Lee is coming from. I would say that for my own materiel I am less "focused" on the accuracy as a personal taste. However as in Lee's scenario where he employs all options to make things work for his clients, so do I in this case. I suspect (although don't know) that it may be the same for other programmers and manufacturers. I can only speak for myself.

I mentioned the OASYS in the previous post - I had the chance to play with it for a couple of days and there are some outstanding factory demos in there - however the likelihood that they were created in the product (mixed, definitely) are slim, as I don't think they have 16/32 inputs to record the country band and the R&B ballad, the latter of which sent shivers down my spine when I heard it! I will be more than happy tp be corrected if that impression is misinformed. . . . :-)