Please be objective. I'm aware there are a number of great arrangers available. I don't gig or haul the "board" around. I simply need a new machine to help me write new material and prepare demos to pitch to artists looking for new material. I never perform.

What is important to me now? 1. Capability to play styles from just about any source or media. 2. Great sounding voices/instruments. 3. USB connectivity including inputs and outputs. 4. A decent sized hard drive and a floppy drive. (if still available) 5. A large visual display interface. (my eyes are going south fast) 6. Compact size due to space constraints. (This is not a show stopper) 7. Cost is very important to me. 8. Speakers are not an issue. I use headphones to monitor recording sessions and then transport thru a digital recorder to a PC for edits. (With newer PCs and software available, the digital recorder will probably "go away" 'cause I don't do tracks.) I simply "re-cut" the song until I am satisfied.

Please don't start another P***ing contest. I'm only looking for rational input.

Thanks, Dave

Yamaha..... As a songwriter the most important thing will be finding the right styles to base from. The Yamaha style library is without peer. The IDC allows you to find a style you may not have on the Yamaha website RIGHT FROM THE KEYBOARD if you have a router using LAN technology ....you don't have to get up, or disrupt the creative process by suddenly having to create a style not being a pro drummer,bass player, horn/string arranger etc.

IF you want to create styles, buy a real workstation with phrases and a host of Arps and create all the parts or use loop based Software and assemble audio styles.

For me it was about the style availability first. I returned a perfectly good Korg PA2x in favor of a mega style library and web support from a variety of sources and Yamaha User groups.

The PSR900 is the least expensive and offers a lot in terms of sound quality and the same features you will find even on the $3000 Tyros 3. IF you can afford a Tyros, get one you won;t be sorry as a songwriter...As a live performer the Korg PA series is best as it offers a host of live features like a built in cross fading mixer allowing playback of MIDI sequences and/or MP3 from dual sources. XLR mike inputs and Harmonizer (although I would opt for an external Mixer and Harmonizer for live use)

No matter what you choose make sure the style support is what you want. A great sounding Arranger keyboard is like an uber fast computer without having to learn or mess with complicated software allowing you as a writer to concentrate fully on the song, the craft, melody and lyric.



[This message has been edited by Kingfrog (edited 11-30-2008).]

Mediastation with the qranger: http://www.lionstracs.com/store/information_pages.php?info_id=34
Add then one external 22" display and you are able to write the all songs/styles audio-midi and play it in realtime with the keyboard.

If you are able to use SEQ like Cubase, Logic, Reaper..then the Qranger is about the same stuff.
After recorded the session, the MS Qranger engine will play it with the all standard arranger features.

Budget?

You are expecting objectivity from this fanatic bunch of 'You MUST use what I use!" mixed bunch of amateurs, pros and some that can hardly play at all?

Unless they are asking you all kinds of questions ('what style of music do you intend to write in?' might be a good one ), all they are telling you is what THEY use. Are they any good? Do you like what they have posted? Do they answer EVERY inquiry with the same arranger? You need to ask YOURSELF these questions.

Asking for objectivity here is like asking for bipartisanship in Washington...

Just NOT going to happen

All due respect, but how exactly does a response like this really help Dave? For all your legitimate knowledge and talent, you are really becoming a broken record...

What arranger do you suggest and why?



------------------
Bill in Dayton

If you truly are an original score songwriter then the best arranger would be one where every single parameter is customizable, and in my opinion that may be Korgs. I don't know why a pure songwriter would even want an arranger. Whatever you get will be canned output. A better option would be a synth workstation with sampling options paired with a computer. Arrangers are best when you want simple, repetative compositions-scratchpad, not for vast, complex compositions. I find arrangers to actually hinder the creative process-for me.
-just my opinion

Dave,

I can only recommend the instruments I know well, and the first one would be the Yamaha Tyros3, which has a 80 gig HD as standard.

You are then privy to a vast 3rd party support system for styles, generally free of charge, as well as being able to purchase styles from Yamaha's IDC network.

If you want to spend less, as cost(#7) is important to you, then a second hand Yamaha Tyros2 with a HD would be my second recommendation.

Also, you could consider a Yamaha PSR-S900 which does not have a HD but instead uses a USB Flash-drive, which some find more convenient.

The latter two still allow you access to great 3rd party support.

Ian

How many times must it be said "GET OUT THERE AND TEST DRIVE AS MANY AS YOU CAN!!!"

t.

Interesting replies... so far. Please remember, my key description is that of a NON-PERFORMING songwriter. I make demos and send them to just about everywhere in order to attract artists to do covers of my work. I write in several genres. An arranger keyboard allows me to capture ideas quickly, get the song recorded and begin "whittling" on it until it sounds and feels like it will work.

Have a "peek" at some of my songs:
http://www.showcaseyourmusic.com/DaveRice

Thanks for your responses. Someone questioned the "validity" of using a keyboard and styles. Would you ask Frank Sinatra to direct the orchestra, write the score and play all the instruments or do all the arrangements when he performed?

To me, having an arranger is like having your own personal orchestra, band or just a single piano for backing. Of course, I tweak the styles and try to zero in on making the instruments "fit" the composition. Sometimes I get it right and sometimes I completely "bomb out." What counts to me, is that I am closing in on 700 completely original songs without having to go into a studio and pay $500 bucks a pop.

Best, Dave

Dave,

From your initial description of needs, particularly styles and voices, I would think you could not go wrong with the Yamaha PSR-S900, or better yet, the Tyros3, if it fits your budget. The operating system is very easy to use, the vast quantity of third party style files is second to none, and the voice quality and selection is superb. All of that, plus USB connection, USB storage, hard drive (T3), and a host of other neat features, IMO, points to Yamaha. However, as was pointed out above, try before you buy, and do some extensive research on each of the features you require.

Good luck on whatever you select,

Gary

I am in the same boat as you (except I don;\'t send my songs out) Even James Taylor, Neil Diamond and a whole host of other songwriters who perform hire producers and arrangers. Thats all you are doing using styles. Hiring specific producers who bring in their players, to flesh out your idea.

I cannot think of a better studio keyboard that you won't have to coax a great stock sound out of then the Yamaha Tyros. The availability of styles alone is worth the cost of admission.

I sell a ton of 900s to budding songwriters who did not know the technology existed to make productions out of their creations.

BTW I like your "Boz Scaggs" sound and songs. You need an Arranger bad though. those drums are drawing attention you don't want.
You would be fine with an S900 if not a Tyros. Try them. I think you will agree, Its easy not deep and allows you to stay in the song and not roped by the technology



[This message has been edited by Kingfrog (edited 11-30-2008).]

Dave,
If I were you I would find a place (Frankieve is one) that has both the Yamaha T3 or S900 AND a Korg PA800 in stock.

Go there, and try them both out. I would only go to a place that knows both of these and can demo them.

You will find more song specific styles on the Yamaha, if song specific is important ( since you do your own, probably not) but the Korg does have a lot of good general purpose styles.

You certainly would not go too far wrong with the Yamaha S900, T2 or T3...but you might like the sound and styles better on the Korg? Only you can decide this...it is a pretty big investment and I recommend spending some time to decide.

Depending on where you are located...we may be able to steer you to a place we know can help...not just sell you anything they have.

Location?

Lee



[This message has been edited by leeboy (edited 11-30-2008).]

Dave, knowing your style of writing and playing and knowing what your objectives are, I would recommend Yamaha PSR S900. You are already familiar with the OS, and it is quite inexpensive when you consider all it has to offer.
We'll have one, along with lots of others, at the Jam in January. If you wait until then, you can try lots of different keyboards.
DonM

All due respect, but how does answering Dave's question without a complete idea of what he is trying to do help him in any way?

At least MY broken record isn't 'Use what I use' unlike the vast majority of members here... Most here will answer exactly the same no matter WHAT question you ask. How is THAT of any help either?

A VERY brief look at a search thread for each arranger (just type in PA800, G70, T3 etc.) will quickly get anyone here all the information they are ever likely to need, but the first thing they are going to see is that the same few people recommend the same arranger, no matter WHAT the question. Does anyone really think there is just one perfect for everything arranger? Just the fact that there is ANY competition seems to point against that, doesn't it? Yet alone the unending lack of ANY consensus at all.

What would I recommend for Dave? Just play the same thing as Donny... that way, you will get to try them ALL!

To be more serious.... firstly, I would drop ANY need for an on-board audio recorder. Your computer will do a FAR better job than any built-in (24bit audio is pretty much the de facto standard for recording and mixing, and no arranger records it), far less expensively, and with far better quality and choice of plug-ins.

I would also drop any need for a full featured MIDI sequencer on any arranger, for the same reason. Do the initial capture in the arranger, and then offline it for further work in the computer.

I would also recommend he be objective about his skills recording and mixing music. If he's good at it, go for something that allows a lot of options in sound editing (probably Korg), or a very nice live sound with killer piano and drums and B3 (Roland) that he can polish up himself. If not, go for something with less control, but an already very CD-like sound (like Yamaha). Does he play guitar, or use another guitarist? If so, the Roland or Korg (though their Guitar Mode is pretty good), if not, Yamaha is tops, IMO in guitar emulation in styles, with Korg a slight second.

And if you use the styles for more than just a basic bed to put your own playing in, I'd shoot for the arranger with the most choice in styles, probably Yamaha. But pitching a full arranger styled song rather than a more stripped down 'songwriter demo' can work against you sometimes (don't overproduce a demo), but something that sounds live and punchy can make an energetic song work, whereas the more restrained, smooth, polite (the good words!) or wimpy, washed out and undynamic (the bad words!) Yamaha drums can be harder to make 'cook'.

Overall, I'd say get an S900, and with the balance of the money you'd save not buying a T3 (about 2 grand!) go get some decent VSTi's for the drumming like EZ Drummer, BFD, and DFH2. They will make FAR more difference to the realism of a demo.

So... OK. Is the record still stuck? It is? OK then...

BUY A G70, 'just like me'!

After all, I work on songwriter's demos (and final recordings) all the time...

I bothered to listen to all of his work and decided a Tyros would be his best choice, I don't have to ask him what he does he posted a link to exactly what he does. He needs drum help. For his music the Yamaha drums will be better then whatever he's using.

As far as 16bit vs 24 bit. I have always recored in the medium the final CD will be in. 16 bit. Mp3s even less, People cannot hear the difference after its dithered...Yeah yeah reverb tails and all that. Who cares. You are still going to truncate 8 bits. Why bother using more drive space and taxing the system for 24Bit? Espcially for home recordings and demos. The song will overcome the lack of 24 bit recording if it's good and if its not a 960GHZ/12900 MHZ recording in a $100,000 studio won't make it so...

.
The OP wants to understand WHY we chose what we use and why we love what we chose and the manner in which we use it. He is not asking us individually to describe all the keyboards. I am a Tyros user. I was a Korg user. Its the very best arranger for his purposes becasue I use it that way, studio only, not live...The next post may be by someone who loves the G70 and explains why, the next a PA800 on and on.. Thats the variation of opinion the OP is looking for.

I don;t care what kind of music he does there will be far more styles available for him in the Yamaha world in ALL GENRES. IF he is concentrating of the song He probably don't want to tinker with a bunch of settings and micro edit styles, settings, learn software, create new styles, He wants a keyboard that is TRANSPARENT to his needs and allows him to concentrate on SONGWRITING....not technology. Tyros wins,

Thats subjective and yes I use one and believe its the best for the purposes of writing....NOT performing.

We don't need to be objective, Its a forum of ideas. DIFFERENT ideas, DIFFERENT perceptions...DIFFERENT needs and expectations. Most of us have found what we need to meet them and can only tell him why.



[This message has been edited by Kingfrog (edited 11-30-2008).]

Without you mentioning your budget it's impossible to make any recommendations. Why waste time recommending an arranger that doesn't fall within your budget? Price point greatly limits your possibilities and finding a cost effective arranger with a hard disk drive, floppy drive, USB 2.0, ability to play styles from many media sources, and a "large" display will be virtually impossible. When you say large I assume you mean 8-10" or larger. There aren't many arrangers that have large LCD/TFT screens let alone the capability to utilize larger displays. Also, you say you have size constraints and that's going to make it impossible to find a large display on a compact arranger.

[This message has been edited by Ensnareyou (edited 11-30-2008).]

With all due respect, Kingfrog, the original poster laid down a bunch of criteria. Hence, he was not asking all comers for what works for THEM (unless it fit the criteria, which, as cost was 'very important' to him, a T3 is NOT what he wants!).

He was asking which would work for HIM under those criteria. I simply asked for more info, as it wasn't possible to help HIM without it, IMO.

'Rational' input isn't ALWAYS what we use... how many of us are that rational, anyway?

BTW, the reason most recording is done at 24bit these days is that it gives FAR more detail to the plug-ins, and digital processors especially compressors and EQ's to work with BEFORE the song is dithered (NOT truncated) down to 16bit. The differences are easily heard, and cumulative. If you process a track with several different things, then mix and master (more processing), working with 24bit files will give you a much better end result.

Working with much higher sample RATES, OTOH, 96kHz and especially super high ones like 192kHz, is definitely more taxing to the computer and harder to discern (unless you are using boutique stuff in your entire chain, probably unlikely). But a move to 24bit (and everything but really budget audio interfaces handle that easily) will make a BIG difference...

Trust me, I'm a doctor...

Just remember, somebody with a Tascam Portastudio could make exactly the same point about YOUR recording rig... i.e., why even bother with digital and 16 bit? It's all about the song, not some fancy recording gear

[This message has been edited by Diki (edited 12-01-2008).]

Personally, I would say the best recommendation one can make is a keyboard they have actually spent some time with.

I would not recommend a Korg because I have not played one, and although it may or may not have just what Dave is looking for, I feel that a person who has spent some quality time with one is better informed to suggest it's use than I.

I spent only a week on a Roland G70 (not enough time to really get to know it), and an afternoon on E-80/60/50 so these instruments I can't really recommend wholeheartedly, but they were very good.

If you have not had sufficient time on an S900 or Tyros2/3 then all you are recommending is specifications, and not real world experience.

I've used both the T2/3 and S900 extensively, so I feel qualified to recommend from lengthy experience, and not just quote hearsay or what I've read here on SZ or elsewhere.

I believe that's what Dave is looking for, an honest but educated opinion, and since cost seems to be a big factor, a second hand Tyros2 or S900 would be best, and although the screen on the latter is not huge, but it is a color screen and reasonably easy to read.

I can also say, from my own experience, that there is a wealth of 3rd party styles and also some cool and useful software available for Yamaha...all free of charge, so very important if cost is a factor.

There is no substitute for hands on experience when recommending any product.

Ian

[This message has been edited by ianmcnll (edited 12-01-2008).]

Mornin' Guys and Gals:

I appreciate all your responses. I plan to take Mason's advice and wait until the "Jam" in Shreveport coming up in January. Unfortunately, it seems that most of the real good "Keyboard Stores" are located on either the East or the West Coasts. George Kaye is a legend here and I scoop up every word he says as though it is the absolute gospel... LOL! He really is a marvelous resource.

Someone asked about my budget for a new (or used) board. Simple answer... as cheap as I can find one that meets my needs. Most of you may (or may not) know how difficult it is for a songwriter to crack the doors open in Nashville, LA or NYC. There are so many artists out there writing their own songs to cut out the middleman (me) and keep the income stream for themselves. Besides, I am located out in the "hinterlands" and in reality, just a nobody.

I could buy just about any arranger available but, as a businessman, it would be difficult to justify one of the high-end units financially because of the anticipated return at this stage of my songwriting career.

Diki... you are right on about "overproduced" demos. I try to achieve a balance depending upon my target artist or market. (They are gonna do the song the way they want it anyway!) Some artists have no musical imagination and others can hear a song played on a kazoo and recognize a potential hit.

Thanks to all of you who took the time to listen to my songs. Maybe someday you'll hear old George Strait belting one out over the airwaves... LOL!

Rice, this is somewhat O.T., but a comment on your demo tunes. Well recorded. Great vocals, a clarity and honesty that's easy to hear and believe. I'm an old jazzer but like to think that I'm open to 'good stuff', whatever the genre'.

My main comment is this; the unconventional intervals between (chord) changes make the songs less intuitive to follow (IMO) which could hurt their commercial appeal. Somewhat like some of the old (and authentic) Mississippi Delta blues tunes where the artist seemed to change chords whenever the mood hit him. Not saying this is bad, just not as familiar to the popular listening public. This is not a critisizm of the changes themselves, which, in general are very good, just where they occur. Again, this is just a matter of personal taste and could be completely off base. In all fairness, I only listened to the first three (and enjoyed them all).

chas

Charles:

I sincerely appreciate your input. Your points are well taken and I will pay more attention to that aspect in the future.

Thanks, ever so much, for listening.

Dave

Rice wrote a song and recorded it just for me. Na-na-na-na-nana!
Oh and I did the same for him. Don't get the wrong idea though, we like girls.
DonM

I based my comments on listening to his work more then anything. I made the assumptive he did not want to be a tweaker but wanted as transparent a keyboard as possible to the result.

24 bit vs 16. The increased file size is not worth it. Not even you really quantify how much better a song is going to sound recorded at 24/96. Yeah a 24/96 file has 200 Plus times the audio resolution. But dude that does not mean it will sound 2oo times better; it won't even sound twice the quality. Non-musically inclined friends most likely will not even notice the difference. You probably do, I did but it wasn;t all that dramatic. The theory is much more impressive then the result.


The you HAVE to make a decision. Dither or truncate. You have to chose one depending on the material. I would rather not deal with that decision. One does not ALWAYS use dithering for good reason. I have never been a fan of adding noise to a signal to smooth out the negative but subtle result of truncation. Either way you have to convert the signal from 24 to 16 bits. You have to listed to the quietest passages in making that choice with a critical ear. The question is not so much truncation vs. dither, but rather, doing nothing vs. adding dither. I have experimented with 24 bit and have found the increase in dynamic range is more a function of the digital noise floor and only comes into play on extremely quiet passages such as the end of reverb tails or fades. I don't believe the average Joe could tell the difference between a 16 bit recording or whether 24 bit recording was truncated or dithered without a little coaxing and teaching what to listen for.

A 16 bit bit recording that requires neither. You get what you hear and for the most part that is plenty good enough for most ears.

AS for a computer over cassette its all about the editing capabilities. That should be obvious, even to you. I actually prefer analog and use Magneto a lot. IF I could edit tape as easily as digital I would still be using it. Albeit 30ips.

ITs not all black and white. The wholw 24/96 argument reminds me of those twin blades. People still shave over the same spot a few tims like they did with one blade. Now they have FIVE blade razors...the same result you cannot cut a hair 5x lower.

Sometimes technology sold on paper. No where is this more prevalent then in the Audio world. Monster Cable has made Millions on a piece if wire on paper......

Hey Don:

Glad you clarified the exchanged songs deal... LOL! (No hugs from me!)

Has the location for the Shreveport Jam been cleared up? I've been involved in a "project" of sorts and missed a few days on the boards. I'm sure looking forward to the Jam. It was so disappointing to miss the previous ones. Good to hear from you.

Dave

I will know the location this week for sure and will post the information as soon as possible.
Don

Don,
Is this Louisiana Jam open to anyone or is it invitation only? What is the itinerary at one of these events? BTW where & when?
Sounds like a good time.

Thank You

John, of course it's open to all! Even DNJ is coming. If Ian comes we'll put them on separate sides of the room.
This is the third one we've had. It is in Shreveport, Louisiana. I'll have full details later this week.
You can see photos of the last one here: www.donmasonmusic.com
Link at the bottom.
DonM

Hey, I like my buddy Donny, even though I bug him mercilessly sometimes.

I really do wish I could meet with all the gang and have a laugh and share some music.

I envy you guys.

Ian

Maybe Russ will come pick you up in his plane and bring you down, Ian! In fact he could make a circuit around the continent and . . probably not, eh?
DonM

I do know that actually meeting the people you deal with on-line is always a good thing.

It has been that way for me and my Yamaha clients that I do on-line clinics with and finally get to meet when I do a road trip or a tour.

Adds a whole new dimension.

Perhaps some day.

Ian

Sorry Kingfrog, but I'm not sure you noticed the part of my post where I did question the need for higher sample rates. As a matter of course, I routinely track in 24/44.

As do the majority of amateurs, yet alone pros. Your views on this point are NOT in the majority and mine about higher sample rates are not universal, either... the studio I work at routinely uses 24/96, but that's because it's a PTHD system, so most of the work is done by cards.

I also offline a lot of processor work to a pair of UAD-1 cards (the best 'secret weapon' out there!) so even my puny underpowered 2001 Mac G4 733 is capable of 48+ tracks at 44.1. That's enough for just about anyone! (it's forty more than the Beatles needed )

The thing is, I respect your opinion to do things YOUR way, it's what you want to do. But as far as the benefits of 24bit go, you are in quite a small minority, even amongst amateurs, yet alone pros or semi-pros. The dithering issue (you should NEVER truncate!) is also a one time ONLY affair. You stay at 24 bit until the final step in the mastering process. And, once again, no offense, but the noise floor of your arranger, yet alone any other analog component in your recording chain, is higher than any noise added to dither to 16 bit. Once again, you are running contrary to the standard practices of just about everyone, amateur and pro alike.

I admit, the differences are slight. A bad mix, a bad mike placement, an overcooked master, all can ruin the sound far more than the difference between 24 and 16 bit. But just as you spend money to get a good mike, the minimal increase in horsepower needed to run at 24 bit (remember my lowly computer can easily handle it) is worth the difference it makes.

Feel free to continue doing things YOUR way... but others reading this thread MIGHT like to know whether your views are minority or not. This is not a 'pros vs. joes' issue. It's a 'Kingfrog vs. the world' issue, for the most part. Yes, a FEW still remain stubbornly at 16 bit. As a few cling stubbornly to their Portastudios. But the vast majority track, mix and master at 24 bit these days (THEN dither, not truncate, to 16 bit), have easily enough computer power to run it, and see no reason to do things the old fashioned way.

Of course, they are ALL wrong, aren't they?