Answer 1 Question

Would you pay $1000 for the software Dongle or small module version of a Tyros, Kopg PA series, or high end Roland arrangers. Think how easy it would be to have your modules sent back to the manufacturers for new styles & sounds and other goodies. That my dear friends is the kind of business I think is king.
Residual income ??????????

Why did I say Dongle or attachement versus the Total software aproach. Protecting their investments and keep upgrading.

Keyboards are going to be around for a long time & so will some arrangers. For a lot of folks quality is very important. People will pay for the sounds & styles they want.

Just my 2 cents worth maybe someone from the big 3 might be thinking - Small up front cost got all the rest of the stuff all ready.

Styles & Sound

(Qoute)
Diki "Your primary problem with a TOTL arranger module is that the physical buttons themselves are a LARGE part of how we play the thing, and they need to be as close to the keyboard as is humanly possible. No remote keyboard offers enough buttons or flexibility of programming them, and no arranger has remote codes for ALL the functions you are going to need

Really good point!!!!

What are your thoughts of a touch screen Laptop. you could make it jump through hoops.

Have fun Every one.

Been a great topic

Jerry

Hi Jerry,
I think personally I'd be inclined to go for a mix of software arranger & hardware sound source. A T3 in a box the size of the SD2. That would be interesting.

Actually there was a guy on the ketron forum developing arranger software that plays sd styles & uses the sd2 as a soundsource. Not sure how he went. My SD2 crashed when I installed the latest update, & I haven't sent it off for repairs yet, so I've lost track on his progress.
best wishes
Rikki

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Mainer:
[B]

Hi Rikki
The full version of Livestyler http://www.live-styler.de/home/ has a patch setup specifically for the SD2, and also allows Ketron styles to be converted and use the module instead of/or in addition to other sounds.
Regards

Bill

You hit the nail squarely on the head there. It's why I've never been persuaded by the organ/keyboard + module route. The early promise of MIDI, that no organ or keyboard would ever be obsolete, and that we'd just be swapping one "expander" (remember when they were called that?) for another, fell over the first time anyone actually tried it.

I'm always harping on about the importance of UI to arrangers. The physical proximity of all controls necessary to enable live play is absolutely essential, IMO.

Even with the RA module on the flat top of my Clavinova CLP-300, the controls were not very ergonomically ideal...everything had to be, and was, controlled by my left hand (except start/stop)...I couldn't put the module in the center, because of my music stand...

And, even though the buttons on the RA module weren't that far away, they had nowhere near the accessibility afforded by the buttons being on the keyboard/controller itself, and spread out to allow use by both hands.

I think you would need a dedicated, and specially designed controller to work with a module....and, thereby basically defeating the purpose of having the latter in the first place.

May as well just buy the arranger itself.

Sure, you can assign some functions to a foot-switch, but that's only a band-aid solution, and some of us don't want more pedals to deal with.

Just thinking out loud.

Early arrangers really only had the two variations and a fill up/fill down, so a simple footswitch could toggle between the two. Nowadays, with four variations and six or so fills, a simple toggle is insufficient.

While some people eschew pedals, I think for the person that is actually PLAYING a lot, rather than 'operating' the arranger, having at least Variation selection (with AutoFill ON) at your feet removes most of the player having to take his hands off the keyboard (and consequently, stop playing) during the song, especially for songs with a lot of changes. I use the Roland seven switch pedal, and other than intros and endings, can go through many songs without needing to push the panel buttons at all except for tone or registration changes.

Timing always seems to suffer when you have to dash back and forth to the buttons. Fills and turnarounds especially always seem to have more changes than many verses or choruses, but that is precisely the time when you DO have to go hit buttons.

Organists seem to have no problem playing from between 13 to 27 'switches' at their feet well enough to actually play a melody (or bass line!), and yet some consider that even ONE pedal is too much... I just don't think they are trying hard enough

Probably the one operation you do more than any other while you play is trigger the variation changes (you ARE using them as much as possible, aren't you?!). Shifting this ONE thing to your feet allows you to concentrate on the playing, and less on stabbing at buttons and dashing madly back to the keyboard (where you usually make a clam in your haste)...

the finger is faster then the foot always!

Good points, Diki, but I'd rather stick to using the one pedal...sustain.

With the arranger accompaniment and voice buttons laid out properly, you, or at least, I, developed a sort of choreography with my hands and fingers, and each song had it own steps.

Sometimes I use a second pedal, but not often...I suppose it's as much as what you get used to, as well as what you prefer.

I got used to doing things with my hands because I was using my feet for bass pedals, although having a toe switch on the volume pedal was...er...swell.

I was never into multiple floor switches, and really have no desire to start using them.

Simplicity is my goal, these days, and what simplifies things for you, may not do quite the same for others.

You are unique, you know...just like everybody else.

Only if you are not using it to PLAY...

(or were you simply referring to the 'middle finger' )

Quick question. Let's say you HAVE to play a chord AND hit a fill button at the same time. Which one do you decide is going to be late (or early)..?

The foot is incredibly precise. Look at how accurately it is used for sustain (well, OK, in your case, not.. But in MOST people's case it is! ). What makes you think it can't be that accurate for a fill?