I simply feel that, if you are playing well, BOTH hands ought to be tied up! Yes, there are a lot of songs you can maybe get away from the chord input, but OTOH, there are a LOT of songs where there are often quite a few passing chords leading up to a break... after all, it is a strong point of the song, and usually has a build up to it.
Hence, I prefer to do all this control stuff with my feet. To be honest, I wish I could do EVERYTHING with footswitches, and simply PLAY with my hands 100%, but no OS (that I know of) really allows you to do this - Roland have a LOT of F/S choices (and a 7 pedal and two switch pedal inputs) but it still doesn't cover ALL your possible needs.
What really gets my goat is that, when it comes to possible footswitch needs and choices, it all seems so arbitrary what is offered as part of the OS. Some things get included, some things don't. It just seems so utterly LAZY... after all, it's just a list of sources and destinations, not exactly rocket science for a programmer, but it seems as if, for no apparent reason, the engineers go 'Why BOTHER making it comprehensive - maybe we can hit the pub earlier if we just give them a smaller selection?!'
As just about every arranger is completely software driven these days, I see no reason why ANY input (switch, footswitch, button, slider, D-beam, knob, Data Wheel, whatever) on the arranger ought not to be possibly connected to ANY destination the OS offers. How many of us have looked at another arranger and gone 'Why, oh why did they put THAT there?
I would MUCH prefer it HERE'
A simple Global re-map of the arranger's knobs (or even better, per registration) would allow us MUCH greater customization, at the cost of only a few more lines of code. It could even be hidden under an 'Expert Mode' page, so that it doesn't frighten or confuse the newbies and casual players. But it seems SUCH a useful option at the cost of little coding.
Shame they are too anxious to get to the pub...