Sure you can fly with your organ if it isn't too big and fits in your luggage (talking about the instrument)

I also wish, more than anyone here, an arranger could easily become an organ. No way I would spend 20K (in my country) IF they existed here.

[This message has been edited by vagro (edited 09-28-2010).]

And another topic is drowned....

Brand bashing is one thing as long as its based on the orriginal question/post..

THIS my friend is named trolling....

Taadaaa http://www.orla.it/ita/default.asp?A07EDFAB53EC9646BBCB268EF21C08CE

Impuls

Aye i know those are around, but i am not that old that i'd like something like that... Lets say this looks ancient.

Actually for what its worth, I think if Yamaha ARE going to provide a simple 76 note keybed to sit directly under the T4(or 910 for that matter) it would certainly be back on the radar for me.

My only gripe with dual keyboard setups, is the height required to get to controls on the lower, which then of course raises the height of everything else including the laptop.

I remember, I think, seeing some sort of 76 note keybed under the T4, on one of the early promo vids from Yamaha, and now I cannot find it...But I may have been mistaken.

The other big advantage, is that when required to do gigs in really confined space, simply disconnect the lower.

Dennis

I just had a good talk with Steve Demming from Yamaha, and he pointed out to me that the extra keyboard input MIDI channel doesn't JUST mirror the upper, but can do ONE sound or/and Chord Triggering function independent of the Upper. Sort of what I knew but he clarified it and I thank him...

However, he seemed a bit puzzled why anyone would WANT splits and/or layers on that lower manual. I told him that, rather than thinking of the lower manual as an addition to the upper, for those of us wanting to use a 76 or 88 as the MAIN manual and having the 61 arranger itself as more of a 'solo' addition to the lower, being able to split and layer the lower manual JUST as extensively as the upper is quite important.

I'm not sure I made a convert, but MAYBE this idea might get kicked up to the engineers one day... who knows!

So, more importantly, did you ask Steve why Yamaha do/did not make a 76 note Tyros or PSR?

I would have thought that would be your first question.

Ian

We've had the conversation in the past... Same line as you, with the same gaps in logic, too. If Yamaha DO make 76's and 88 arrangers, why not GOOD ones? But if you buy into the marketing, and pretend a DGX or NP80v or CVP ISN'T an arranger, well, it all starts to make sense, doesn't it?!

After the discussion about the lower manual features, what I tried the hardest was to get him to talk to the engineers and see if there wasn't any way we could get all the arranger manufacturers to agree on ONE standard for what MIDI codes were used to trigger arranger operation (Var's, Fills, Intros, Endings, Breaks, etc.), as they all use something a little bit differently to each other.

He was of the opinion that the MMA (MIDI Manufacturers Association) would have to get involved, as the engineers weren't even ALLOWED to talk to each other! And, sadly, the MMA is a slow, unresponsive bureaucracy unlikely to be concerned with what arranger players want, or to move at anything other than a glacial pace. I tried to point out that the potential benefit to the arranger makers (sales will balloon if anyone can easily link up two different arrangers and they work as ONE!) might make it worthwhile to bypass the MMA and simply talk directly (after all, that's how MIDI got started... no MMA before MIDI came out, that's for sure!) about the issue. Most manufacturers use simple PC#'s and CC codes, so the MMA wouldn't need to reserve and specify a whole new set of commands, this could be done independently, if they wanted it to happen bad enough.

But Steve thought that inertia, unwillingness to change and company rivalry would probably prevent it from happening. Sad, and a bit pathetic, IMO... Here's something that could significantly increase arranger sales for everybody, and bureaucracy and petty backbiting will probably stop it from happening. As fragile and under threat as the arranger market is, these days, you'd think that ANYTHING that would create a spike in sales would be pursued relentlessly...

Once you assume that Yamaha have their own reasons for not bringing out a TOTL (or even MOTL, to be honest) 76, all you can do is try to work around it. So I'm concentrating on things that would make using a PSR or Tyros WITH a 76 as good as it can be. The idea of linking my G70 to a PSR910 (or S900 back in the day) has LONG appealed to me. But certain minor obstacles need to be removed from the MIDI implementation of it so the two would integrate and work as one...

Rather than argue and bicker about which ONE arranger is 'the best', finally we would get the opportunity to use each arranger for only its' strengths, and discard each weakness completely. G70 for the action, the ballsy drums and great piano sound, PSR910 for the SA sounds, Mega guitars and other good things. Best of BOTH worlds...

But it will only happen if we call our reps and ask for it, put it down on any survey we are invited to participate in, and post often about the need for it. Otherwise, it will get lost in the inevitable 'Just WHY would an arranger player NEED this 'advanced' function?'. From talking to Steve, I definitely get the impression he (or at least Yamaha) doesn't have a very high opinion of what arranger players might actually WANT. Even as simple a thing as a split on a lower manual seemed to be something he thought we wouldn't want or need...

I figured he'd give you the same answer...that's because it's fact.

If there are any gaps in logic, it is you who sees them...apparently Yamaha does not share your opinion.

It's nice to see you enthusiastically pursue something, Diki; we both share the same stubbornness, or diligence, depending on who's doing the describing , and believe it or not, I'm not against a 76'er as long as it's lightweight, but, at least for the present, and perhaps the near future, it does not appear to be a priority to those who make the decisions.


Ian

While it's true that I don't think these ideas will ever happen, I neither used any of these words, nor did I convey anything like this.



Steve Deming