Squeak that's a very sad musical playing scenario & someone has to pay almost $5000.00 for this New luxury

Arranger makers are really doing their best I think to make these keyboards sound as live as possible. However, one drawback to that is it doesn't in any way help the negative stereotype on arrangers and those who play them.

Arrangers today have amazing voices.., and the guitar and bass tracks within styles really stand out (not to forget the killer drums on some arrangers too). Using the original Tyros compared to the Tyros 3 for example.., shows this move forward on Yamaha's end just over a few years through ONE model. It just may get to the point of being "too real"... (if that makes any sense). Yamaha's SA voices really stand out.., Korg has brought this level to the PA series.., Roland introduced the guitar mode. With the increasing realism.., it may get harder to convince the crowd you're actually playing.



[This message has been edited by squeak_D (edited 12-06-2008).]

Donny, I can't believe you're now preaching my old message. That's why I have never used an arranger on a gig....EVER. I have played with a drum machine (80's, early 90's) but mostly with live musicians. Which brings me to my next point.

Do the drums sound great? Absolutely, but compared to what? Even the better loops, patterns and kit voices, those with great dynamics ("live feel"), pale in comparison to a (good) live drummer. The reason, I think, is the instant change in dynamics that a real drummer gives you in response to what you're playing, or what the song calls for in that particular spot; in other words, musicianship.

Yeah, I know all the arguments about late-for-rehearsal/gig, losing time, showing up loaded/stoned, having to get his drum set out of the pawn shop for the third time this month, stupid, unwashed, constantly hitting on the singer, etc., etc. BUT, the second he makes the first hit on his acoustic set, you instantly know it's a live drummer up there. Not only will YOU know it, so will the audience. SOOOO, the question is? How much am I willing to pay for a KB 'cause it's got 'great sounding drums'? Hard to say. If I were doing OMB, maybe a lot, otherwise, not so much. In the studio, I'd rather have an electronic kit (or controller kit) because of space limitations, noise control, midi editing, flexibility (different kits), etc.

Other than the drums, I like the usual suspects for solo voices (and comping, if in the studio, especially guitar); piano, guitar, El. Piano, brass. Sax is hard for me. Even with the good-sounding SA Sax (I have a T2), I have a really difficult time getting it to sound as good as the demo would have you believe. In fact, I have a SonicCell, Fantom G, Triton, Motif ES, PA1x, and some softsynths, and none of the saxes really works for me. It's probably me .

Okay, enough. Just trying to put the importance of drums on an arranger in perspective (I think I still prefer the Korgs).

chas

Chas.., I'm with you. Over the years here on the Zone.., I've brought up the drums issue quite a bit. I've always felt the base of any style sounding "real, or live" is it MUST have solid drums.., and well programed drum parts. Bass (both electric and acoustic) are also just as important. These two parts (IMO) are the glue that holds a style together.., so they MUST be done right. That's why I've always favored Roland's drums. IMO they're more expressive and take better advantage of velocity switching compared to other makers. Plus if there's one thing Roland nailed to the ground.., it's electronic drums (those V-Kit's are amazing).

As far as the Saxes..., for me, the first time I laid hands on a Tyros 2 and tested out that SA sax..., I nearly messed my pants. That sound just felt like it was a natural extension to my finger tips and I really connected with it. Now some of the SA guitars left me scratching my head a little..., as I had a few issues with the nuances (and at what point they came into the sound).

[This message has been edited by squeak_D (edited 12-06-2008).]

Dependent upon how Ketron has the files structured and the software used it is possible to tag sections of each audio file, have them repeat, change pitch, tempo, EQ, envelope, filter, etc. This means you could take a short audio file and have it play back in numerous ways making it not seem like one audio file. The Audya timestretch demo wasn't anywhere near the quality of my Fairlight but at least the capability is in the Ketron. If Ketron's software is top notch and they include lots of high quality grooves (audio files), the possibilities will abound. So far it sounds like they are definitely on the right path.

The Tyros 3's only expansion capabilities that I know of are loading Yamaha proprietary voice files (which I don't believe are available yet) and installing a larger hard drive. Loading third party samples into any Yamaha keyboard is a waste of time unless you don't mind waiting a long, long, long time.

The Korg is expandable and can load third party samples which is a big plus. The Audya can also load samples so in respect to expandability, the Audya and Korg win out over the Tyros 3.

Chas an arranger is a very useful tool for the OMB player who is making a living there's nothing wrong with that in any way shape or form.Your all alone & need to sound like a full band plain & simple all gigs are not, jazz piano or solo intimate cocktail dinner gigs, there's no way around pumping a full dance floor with dance music of any kind alone with having help with the likes of Styles, SMF, Riffs, loops, Mp3/CD backing tracks...times have changed, audience acceptance has really changed, musicians have changed, weather we accept it or not. You have to do what you have to do.....& guess what its gonna get much worse down the road just wait and see.No matter what happens, if your a player your a player, if your a faker so be it because in today's world sadly its ALL accepted right or wrong.

Thank You


[This message has been edited by Dnj (edited 12-06-2008).]

Donny, whoa. I agree with every word you're saying. I was just lamenting the direction musicians seem to be going, perhaps putting too much emphasis on the ease of getting a good performance (courtesy of arranger features) as opposed to being a good player. Of course, the advantage of being a good player is that you can sound good on just about anything. Wanna' be a hero? Let the electricity go or your synth go kaput in the middle of a gig, and you calmly walk over to the old (but tuned ) upright in the corner, and proceed to 'wow' them (well, for one tune anyway). After that, you could play SMF's or MP3's all night and it would be okay.

chas

Good points Chas. I've always said here before.., you want to see how well you can play.., turn off the auto accomp. every now and then.

Arrangers are great, but don't become too reliant on that auto accomp. Keep your chops in shape and turn it off from time to time

I don't get it, Audya is arranger just like many other arrangers that were designed for players to have the ability of having a full band at there finger tips without actually having the other 4-5 players. The audya, just like many other brands have developed a keyboard, which now sound like a real live band and I mean a real live band! What is the problem.... Not to long ago we were playing arrangers that had wind instruments or brass instruments that sounded like a moose humping a tree in the woods.

Arrangers will always have limitations compared to a live band, but I tell you what I would take the audya over a live band in a heart beat, also I sure that there isn't to many live bands out there that will sound as good as the audya.