I listened (to the whole thing), I liked, I'm going down to GC tomorrow. Is there a clue in there why MOST pro's use sampling WORKSTATIONS. Just asking.

chas

Most pros don't work as OMB's, I guess...

They play in bands, or do studio work. Neither need the Auto accompaniment of the type that is current in arrangers, and what accompaniment they DO use is more loop and arpeggiator based, which is a LOT more current in flava...

For whatever marketing reason they have managed to self-manufacture, all of the arranger manufacturers have drawn a line in the sand, and adamantly REFUSED to voice an arranger as contemporarily as their WS line. This is slowly sounding the death knell for the arranger divisions, as few younger players or professionals with contemporary tastes are able to use them, despite their many advantages in live operation from WS's.

Sad, really...

Whats sad Diki is that LIVE Playing will be a thing of the past....in the future there will be no need to manually play anything....music will all be computerized worse then it is now & you will only make music with your mouse & software.

Great Roland demo....


WOW!!!

Yep, that Fantom G demo rocks! I've only recently purchased (and began experimenting with) a G70. I still primarily play on workstations. One of these days, I will bring the G70 out to a show. I fully agree, however, that if manufacturers really want to sell their arrangers, they need to make them more adaptable to rock/modern/alternative music.

First of all I do not believe technical prowess means anything when answering questions about the sound of a keyboard. Someone who doesn't play a note can hear the differences and decide which they like better. One does not have to be a professional Nascar driver to pick out a car they enjoy driving.


DIKI is right I do not PERFORM with the keyboard. I only use it for studio work. My wife does perform with the recordings she makes from it minus some parts she plays live and finds it more than adequate and a lot easier to use out of the box than the Korg was.

Yes I like the sliders for what they are intended for and consider this a major upgrade from the T2 Others mileage may vary here.

The only thing I don;t care to much for is it's MIDI implementation. It works differently when used as a workstation than the Korg. But the voices are worth the workaround I'm still trying to get a handle on for me. I USE styles. But I knew that going in. It's NOT a workstation. I originally bought the Korg PA2x because it did perform as a workstation, But I did not care for the voices as compared to the then T2.

AS far as the new pro boards are concerned. I do not want to string together a bunch of loops on a keyboard. I have the capability with Software and thousands of loops already on various hard drives.

I don;t need the recording or sampling features as again I already have those capabilities using software samplers and VST plug ins. I have much more processing power and open ended sampling with plug ins than any keyboard can deliver.Buying a Fantom or Motif would be redundant for me in may areas for Studio use. If you use instrument plugs ins you will understand the capabilities exceed many Pro Keyboards on many levels.

However The only SW capabilities for arrangements in software is Band in the Box. Been there done it. So I come back around to Yamaha because of the library and I do like the sound of the board. They compliment what I already have and when in the sequencer I can replace any voices I care to with Plug in synths and samplers. YMMV.

I want arrangements. Lots of them. Yamaha has the most complete library of Arrangements by far and they are immediately accessible without getting up directly from the Internet Direct Connect LAN. Yeah they cost a few dollars each BUT they are a lot less expensive and far less hassle than hiring musicians...ya think? I mean you can clearly see what a Pain in the arse highly opinionated "pro musicians" can be right here on these forums. Imagine having to work with some of them. YIKES!!




[This message has been edited by Kingfrog (edited 11-01-2008).]

Originally posted by Kingfrog:



Your first sentence is not quite accurate Kingfrog.

Here is a comparison between the Tyros3 and the Fantom G display:

Yamaha Tyros3 = 640 x 480 dots TFT VGA color 7.5 inch LCD

VERSUS..

Roland Fantom G = Graphic Type, 8.5inch, TFT Wide VGA(800 x 480 dots), backlit LCD (Color)

As you can see the Fantom G graphic display is both "larger" and has a "higher" resolution than the Tyros3 display. Also, even though the Fantom G doesn't have a contrast knob either, there is a setting within the Fantom G System/Menu that provides an adjustment of the displays background image(s).

It has also been stated that the Tyros3 display still can NOT be seen properly in full sunlight which was the same type of problem we had with the Tyros2/1. OTOH, I have played my Fantom G7 in direct sunlight and while it wasn't the most pleasant of experiences the LCD screen actually could be seen well enough to make my way around the GUI in an acceptable manner. It does take some getting use to though. One day I hope all manufacturers will opt for either super twist technology in their displays or something similar that would, once and for all, make viewing a keyboard's LCD in direct sunlight a non-issue. I think the Roland Fantom G LCD is a step in that direction but not a total solution, such as super twist technology, etc. - would be.

Best,
Mike

[This message has been edited by keybplayer (edited 11-01-2008).]

Oh.., one thing I wanted to mention to "chas" if and when you demo the Fantom G.

Realize chas, that you won't be able to replicate what the french demonstrator was able to achieve with the Fantom G, because you'll have neither the time nor the necessary equipment on hand to do so. What you WILL be able to determine and do with the Fantom G is be able to play the 'Preset' patches, investigate the Sequencer/Studio/Song/Live/Single Modes and delve into the OS User interface to determine if the Fantom G fits your needs. There is expansion on the Fantom G by way of ARX Expansion cards i.e. "Actual full 'Synth' capability on separate ARX Card with its own DSP, Processor(s), etc.", but more than likely the Fantom G you play will NOT have any ARX cards installed.

Make sure you bring a pair of good Cans with you so as to isolate some of the other noise you'll hear throughout the store - like blaring guitars for one.

>> Just wanted to mention that to you so you stay realistic in your expectations after having viewed the French Fantom G demonstrator - who had demonstrated Sampling and had also used some Custom patches during the demo. >> Custom patches can be done by anyone using a Fantom G of course, and patches edited entirely on the Fantom G itself if preferred, or done using the freely included Fantom G Editor software.

Creating Custom patches can sometimes be a rather time consuming task, especially if you haven't fully acquainted yourself with the Fantom G beforehand.

Best,
Mike

One thing further I'd like to say about the T3 is from what I HAVE heard of the sounds (minus Drum kits of course ) is that there are some extremely good Voices on the T3, among them the SA2 Clarinet, SA2 Breathy Sax, and the SingleCoil Guitar. I'm sure there are a multitude of other great sounding voices too. What I would have liked Yamaha to have done is to have included some SA2 Guitars, SA2 Strings, SA2 Brass, SA2 Organs, and some SA/2 Choir and Scat Voices on the Tyros3 as well. The SA2 offering currently on the T3, although in most cases delectable sounding, are few and far between and in some instances are just variations of the same PCM .wav form as we now all know. What I can say though is since SA2 was probably implemented at a later stage on the production of the T3, that most likely the next model e.g. T4 {or whatever they decide to call it } should have many, many more SA2 Voices to choose from (even if many of them use the same .wav form like on the T3 ). So I look forward to the next Yamaha totl arranger which will also hopefully include a 76 key version too. I won't hold my breath waiting for that to happen though.

Best,
Mike

What makes the T2 new voices sound so good is not that they are SA2 capable. It is that they are actually good sounds. I am sure that they had a different engineer recording them than they had recording the T2 sounds, because they sound completely different. Full of body and expression.

If the next Tyros uses old .wav samples, that would be a step backwards. What attracts me to the new sounds are not the gimmicks but the sounds themselves...