I had some comments about what James is doing with the MS but didn't want to hijack his very informative and mostly educational thread. In fact, some of my thoughts have as much to do with James' thread as with the MS itself. Here are some thoughts and conclusions (opinions, really) based solely on James' MS thread. Let's start with the premise that I had/was seriously considering buying one.

James undertaking, presumably on our behalf and for our benefit (admirable, BTW), could only be done by someone who thoroughly enjoys this type of thing, has the computer expertise, sound design background, synth background, and teaching/presentation skills to pull it off. Luckily for us, James has all of these attributes. That's the good news.

The bad news is that he has made it clear to me that I, at this age and stage of my life, will never, ever purchase a Mediastation or any similar 'open architecture' type keyboard. That is not to say that this is not a great machine, but more a statement of who should and who should not, buy it. Old codgers with limited patience, diminished technical skills, and an increasing demand for instant gratification, are definitely NOT the target market for this type of instrument. Even with the best GUI in the world, just the staggering number of options in itself would be more of an impediment than a help. Ol' folks don't like too many choices . I'm guessing a fair number of SZ'ers don't even understand the nature of the 'bugs' James is trying to point out, much less the workarounds.

I buy a lot of things that I KNOW are complex, overkill for my needs, and costing lots more than the scaled down version that WOULD fit my needs better. We just have a tendency to want TOTL. We always think that we'll delve into it's advanced capabilities at some future time, but that time, of course, never comes. I doubt if I'm alone in this pattern of behavior. I think one of the reasons I walk right pass a bunch of gear in my studio (including two TOTL arrangers and several pretty sophisticated workstations - Motif/Fantom G) and straight to my organ (Nord C1) is that I can just hit the power button and start playing. It's the only thing that seems to have any staying power in terms of interest. I think that is because the emphasis is on music and playing rather than on the technology. I think Vagro said pretty much the same thing.

Does this mean that I don't think that KB's such as the MS are the future? Absolutely not. Just not MY future. As I've always said, I'm really lazy.

Ok, those were just some of MY thoughts. In the words of Semi-live, "carry on".

chas

MS / Groove has options that are very easy to learn and use. but also things that you need more time to learn. it is not true that MS / Groove may mean nothing to people who like to use simple things.

MS/Groove has made many things easier, especially for people who simply want to have everything under control on one box.

it depends where for and how use MS/Groove.

for some people, MS / Groove is best complement alongside their existing arranger.
these people have no extra need to learn. MS /Groove is very easy to learn.

those MS / Groove want as their main arranger. these people need more and more things to learn. but it is not that difficult to learn or impossible to learn.

MS / Groove looks difficult while it's not difficult. everything has easy and difficult aspects.

I guess what you're saying is that old people are not up to a new learning cycle and stick to what they know.

I am just saying young people will love it... And young people have the future

Just, apparently, not the ability to turn their facility with technology into any listenable music...

Guess us old farts still have the edge, eh?

Everything has a learning curve, some more so than others. Most people don't even know how to use all the features on their existing closed keyboards but yet they are still comfortable with them and what they know about them.

The same attitude can be applied to the Mediastation. You don't need to know everything, just learn how to use what you need to use and let the rest just sit there until your ready to explore it at a later date, or not at all.

Same as you do with any keyboard.

Even after that said, ideally if this sort of technology still sounds daunting then if you can afford to it would make a fantastic second keyboard and give you great comfort in taking the time to explore it and start using it as a Giga File machine alongside your arranger.

There is near next to no learning curve to use it as a Giga File machine at all actually and the benefits are simply mind blowing. In time then maybe then move onto VSTi's and eventually to using it as an Arranger maybe as I think that might be the hardest part for people to get their head around if they find the concept daunting at all.

All in all though there's not a lot to it when you get stuck in, but as I said you don't need to know it all either.

Technology like this is the future though no matter how much you try resist it. Younger people growing up now don't even give technology a second though to try learn. They simply adapt to it like a duck to water.

Regards
James.

[This message has been edited by Irishacts (edited 03-28-2010).]

I won't accept the fact that old people cannot learn new things. I am crowding seventy and learning everday. I do think that older people may get into set routines and have to drive themselves harder to accomplish new goals, however. Even if you set out to learn one new function a week, I think far greater sounds is worth it. It depends on whether or not you are willing to put in the work involved.

I will never be a James or Dominico, or a lot of you, but this is sure easier than a pure pc based system.

Bernie

Offcourse it is...

A PC system you start designing from scratch..

A system like mediastation you only need to learn and use it, no designing required.

I can't stress how important the custom OS is either in simplifying things.

Just look at the video I uploaded on Giga files. Makes using giga files childs play.

Regards
James

I have said for the longest time, probably since post #1 on the MS, back in the late Jurassic that the concept of the open arranger is a great one. But until someone makes one with the CONTENT as good sounding and as well integrated as a closed one OOTB, it's going to miss 95% of the arranger market.

You are right, James, many people don't use even 10% of what their closed arranger is capable of doing, but the fact is, THEY DON'T NEED TO. Turn it on, it sounds great, let's just make some MUSIC...

Now, 'potentially', there's nothing to stop an open arranger from being equally as friendly, equally as easy to use for the casual user (that 95% of the arranger market Dom ought to be drooling over getting his hands on), but until one of the manufacturers of this kind of product decides to go head to head with the rest of the industry in providing the CONTENT as well as the hardware, it's going to remain nothing more than a niche product.

It's pretty obvious that Dom isn't thinking along those lines, but it's a dangerous path to walk, IMO, because if someone DOES go this route, to be honest, they are going to KILL him dead, saleswise. I've long said, how well do you think a MotifXS or Oasys would have sold if it came with NO sounds, no loops, no arps, basically empty? I guarantee, probably at least 50% poorer than they do now. And these things are being sold to people that DO want to make their own content, eventually (maybe, OK, possibly ).

But honestly, James, given a choice between an open arranger that came like the MS, basically where you have to do quite some considerable work to make the whole thing (not just individual lead sounds) sound spectacular, and one that sounded that good when you hit the power button, and it STILL has all the expandability and customization of the MS, which would you choose?

Dom had better hope and pray that no-one EVER gives us that choice. Or he will be a distant memory.

No, but I AM saying that not many "old people" are willing to shell out 3-5 grand for a deferred-gratification ANYTHING; especially when there are other cheaper, easier-to-use, instant-gratification options. It's kind of like you need to get to another country in a hurry and are willing to shell out 4 or 5 million to get there. You are given a Learjet, a set of keys, and an operating manual. Good luck. You might get there eventually (maybe with the help of a do-it-yourself video by James ) but it won't be soon and I guarantee you won't be able to get any passengers to take that maiden flight with you.

I'm not against learning a new instrument. I just don't want it to be my primary focus. The greatest instrument in the world in the hands of a lousy musician is still going to produce lousy music, wherein a great musician is going to make just about anything sound good. Let's face it, there are way more capable keyboards out there than there are capable keyboard players. Maybe it's time to shift our emphasis and stop obsessing over the next 'latest, greatest'. JMO.

chas

A BIG +1 from me.

Now THAT opinion is something you and I agree on Chas.

Dennis

Most members here would be better off focusing on learn ing the other 90% capability of their existing arranger rather than drool over the 'potential ' of the MS. And surprsingly after all this time we are still talking about potential. No one to my knowedge has delivered a demo of this instrument to the sound quality,live playability of any of the top 3 arrangers. That says more than the huncreds of thousands of words that have been said about the MS.

BTW, I think the MS/Groove could/will have some success, maybe a lot of success, but not as an arranger. Why? Because with an arranger, IT'S THE CONTENT, STUPID. A gifted entrepreneur with the help of his geek buddy can whip up a pretty snazzy machine in his basement in a few weekends (anyone see the Brit with the $100 camera, helium balloon, and the resultant NASA-quality pics of Earth from outer space) . CONTENT, on the other hand, requires the kind of talented resources and DEEP pockets that are unavailable to such entrepreneurs unless his geek buddy happens to be Bill Gates . Diki and others have been saying this all along and it remains true AS APPLIES TO THE ARRANGER MARKET. Dom has already recognized this, so it is only those people that keep insisting on it being the ultimate ARRANGER that will continue to find it wanting. If you're only interested in the MS as an arranger, move on. Others fill that role much better (and cheaper). Those who continue to want to bring a tank to a fistfight will continue to be frustrated and disappointed. JMO.

chas

+1 again

Perhaps our views are not as disparate as I first thought Chas

Dennis

Yes that's exactly what I meant BUT it's only in my case, don't know if it'll be the same for others.
From the active members in this forum I may be the exception, not the rule. I'll tell you my profile: I'm 41 years old (not that old) and I'm a hobbist organ player that ended up playing arrangers because I couldn't buy/afford a modern organ. I don't know about computer programming, just sitting in front of my PC and using Windows, the Web explorer and some simple programs.I like to sit and play my instruments OOTB in the old fashion freely and live.

Why did I buy a MS? I could not refuse to buy an unique instrument usually unavailable in my country at less than half the price of a middle range arranger here (i.e.Psr s900). It was an used MS with older hardware that I still can upgrade.

Do I regret? Not at all, because I also needed the excellent Fatar keys to make my own instrument, I have everything set at the touch of my fingers and I can amuse myself with new sounds when I get bored.

Do I think it is for everyone? No, the target of this product should be younger people who like technology and computers, programers, sound engineers not the average home arranger player.

Will it succed? This is the future, you like it or not. All advanced keyboards will have the capabilities of an open keyboard. The young man of today will be the old man of tomorrow.

But it is true, as players, we should spend more time learning playing skills not reading the Owners Manual.

It hasn’t been marketed as an arranger for some time, but is now marketed as a workstation with the option to add the arranger features if the user requires them.

Bill

But it is still being heavily touted by its' proponents on a dedicated ARRANGER site, its' manufacturer still posts extensively here, despite already admitting that arranger development has ceased (before even 'bass inversion' abilities have been added), so, for all the 'open' nature of the MS, let's face it, the arranger section is 'closed', at least as far as continuing (and badly needed) development.

Arranger development has not ceased... Qranger is still being developed further, espescially with people like tastenpoint creating a full set of top styles for the mediastation.

Only the marketing strategy has changed, as the MEdiastation currently is the only workstation that can rival the sound of Oasys and Openlabs. SO its being presented as a TOTl workstation that can do it all, even being used as an arranger if you'd want to do this.

As i stated many times before, being inovative will save the arranger market for demise, and exactly that is what Lionstracs does. Soon young people all over the world might finally learn how much an arranger can do for them when they quickly want to play soemthing new on their topline workstation.

Dom is creating the arranger/workstation what ever you may call it, of the future. and all current versions of arranger keyboards closed versions as we know it, will be targeted at the entry level keyboardists.

I'd just stick to my G70 as that is the last old fashioned ToTl arranger Roland has ever made. The Instruments grow further from ToTl arranger to ToTl Keyboard workstations with arranger capabillities and Roland has decided not to be part of that buiseness yet.

I dare bet my money that Korg will soon jump ontoo this bandwagon as they allready have much experience with open systems from their Oasys and they must realise that this is the future..

Ketron has chosen to sticj to the old fashioned closed keyboards but added an innovative feature. No idea what they will come up with in 5 years.

Then all there is left is Yamaha and they might be the big loosers if they don't get some inovative stuff out very fast.. And be relegated to the Casio of the 21st century with only a strong market for the entry level keyboars, which is where they make most of their money.

Just accept it, the fact that the youth is not liking the old fashioned closed arrangers is reason enough to abandon this road in the near future. The Youth has the future and the will to spend cash on their bobbies.

So if the open workstation/arranger concept caters to the youth, then this is where the future of arrangers has a chance to survive.

The arranger of the future will be different from what you call anarranger Diki, it will be more like a Mix of Karma , ABleton live and Qranger but it will be an arranger... as the accompany will be based on your chords.. wherever you play them.


But then there is nothing wrong with a G70 Diki, the sound quallity is far beyound what you ever hneeded to make a great appearance on stage for your publicum, as long as you don't want to play in modern clubs i am sure you will do just fine, so its quite okay to stick to your G70.. Or PA2X, or Audya(when its done) they all have 76 keys, they have a professional level sound and great styles.

But in 10 years, the totl instruments will all be open based... and the oldfshioned closed keyboards will be viewed uppon the same way as we now look back to the first organs with auto accomp... as being old fashioned..

But then a B3 is also oldfashioned, but still top of the bill... but noboddy takes it out for gigging anymore.

Bachus.very interesting insight I tend to agree with you to a point about open workstations being the future of closed arranger keyboards. I personally embrace & am excited to see the development of whet is to be in the new wave of design.
The Mediastation is a fine example of what is to be in the future allowing musicians more creativity being young or old to create music in anyway they choose. Educating the user is of utmost importance also. Lets face it no matter how good these instruments sound you still have to operate them.....and more importantly you have to KNOW HOW to play to a certain standard that will pair well with the technology offered otherwise whats the sense, the unit cannot do that for you. I'm happy to be around to keep my mind open to what is ahead. Domenic is on the right track for sure imo.

I think the minute tastenpoint come here and read what a self-entitled bunch of thieves this instrument tends to appeal to, they are going to think twice about developing any styles for people that THINK that styles have no copyright, no protection, and should all be free as the air...

You see, you can't have it BOTH ways...

Diki do you perform all originals on stage?..just wondering?

lol.... Diki, in that case your just as much a thief as the people your accusing.

If not... then your a liar because you told me on this forum countless times you use styles from other keyboards. In fact you pretty much claimed to know everything about converting styles form one format to another and the amount of work it takes.

So... which is it. Are you a liar or a theif.

It's your call since your the one setting the standards we all must listen to you repeat over and over again.

James.

Just posted two backing tracks made on the Mediastation. http://www.synthzone.com/ubbs/Forum37/HTML/020958-7.html

Diki.... don't listen to these because I never contacted Elton John and the Mavericks for permission to sequence their songs.

I know how this copyright stuff bothers you so much and how you play nothing by all originals all night long.

James.

I think the last two posts from James have hit the nail squarely on the head

I don't think Diki has no idea (no offence Diki) on just how DIFFICULT, probably nigh on impossible, it would be for someone to copy an original MS style.

The parameter setups, sound databases, rhythm databases are SO different from anything he has done/seen in the past.

And you cannot get that info from anything on the web. You have to do it on the keyboard using the OS yourself.

Not to mention Linux is SO unlike the other operating systems out there.

I think specialist style makers for the Media station will make more than enough money.

But what I wish would stop is this incessant re-hashing of arranger capability..We are all way past that.

Jeez, Diki do we have to put you into the same basket as Tony and his myriad Audya issues??

Dennis