The BK-7m appears to be across between the Roland Prelude and a E-50/60..of course without the keys..

What I found to interest me, if what I read is accurate..

First the realtime sounds are set up as the E series..2 right hand tones and a lefthand tone besides a manual bass tone..a advantage over the Prelude and GW-7..

The specs also state that the songs are not limited to 999 total , but 999 for each list (playlist?)...and unlimited to the point of the capacity of the USB drive..The Prelude and GW-7 are limited to 999 total files on a USB device..

This next part is not very clear but appears that the BK-7m will read lyrics from SMF files stored on the USB device..a big plus over the Prelude needing storage of the internal ram to read lyrics (max of 200 files)..and non exsisting on the GW-8..

And a big plus for me ..the BK-7m extracts the chords from the SMF...like the E series and G series..

The last two items are reason enough for me to purchase a BK-7m..

There is another major improvement stated on the spec sheet..The BK-7m will transpose, not only SMF.s, but also the audio files..as well as a separate tempo change control..This is a biggie for me also..

I am more than willing to buy this unit sight unseen, as I did with the Prelude.
I am confident it will be a great asset..especially if I understand the specs correctly....:)

My intention, would be to use the BK-7m with the Roland A-33 controller (76 keys, that I miss with the Prelude)..and the Roland BA330 for mic inputs and monitoring...Perfect for my small gigs and my "Band" use....

It would also be a great asset to use with my still favorite Roland G70...

Look close at the specs and don't rule out the Roland BK-7m..too quickly...:)

Fran do you know if you can use user styles with the BK 7m?
I am also interested in buying this module.

No Chord Sequencer!

Odd, especially because Roland came up with it first.

Frankie just posted a photo of the module on Facebook, which means he is most likely trying it out as we speak. I'm sure he'll have some valuable insight tonight.
It does look interesting. Another feature over the E50 is that it accepts the FC5 pedal board. Wish it had mic processing and harmonizer.
DonM

I imagine the BK-7m has internal ram to store user data, including user styles..this is how the Prelude works..

Don, I was told no one had any modules yet, are you sure Frank had one or just a Roland photo?

He is actually at NAMM now and photoed and posted it at the time he saw it today.
DonM

Now I got you..:)

I find it odd just how much interest is starting to be shown in the chord sequencer after being almost the lone voice for it's re-implementation for so long.

I haven't seen the panel layout for the PA3 yet, but I hope they put the controls for it front and center, rather than tucked away far from the keys like Roland used to do. Maybe if it's there, easy to get to, more people will use it and see how radically it changes the whole arranger paradigm.

I look forward to the day when this feature is as common as One Touch, or PianoStyle mode, or On Bass, which I think Roland were one of the first to bring out.

Fran, are you going to be running the BK-7m with an FC-7? The only thing about running it from an A-33 is that the Roland master keyboard has few assignable buttons (in fact, none at all, if I remember correctly), so arranger operation (rather than SMF and mp3 playback) is going to be a lot tougher to pull off without having to move your hands a lot further than normal to get to the operation buttons on the module. Perhaps something along the lines of a (and at this point, goes to the internet looking for good 76 controllers and finds very little!), OK carry on...!

The thing about this thing, to be honest, for me it seems the perfect product to add to a good WS (MotifXF, Kurzweil, even the Mediastation) and FINALLY have the best of both worlds. Using it all by itself, it's only marginally different to a Prelude or GW-8L, although those ARE some useful additions, but in combination with a WS, especially if the style section has flexible enough MIDI operation to route certain Parts away from built in sounds and off to the WS (which modules often are) this could be a real game-changer.

I look forward to getting the manual...

Diki, Yes I would use the A-33 for key on/off..and all the control would come from the BK-7m..

As an audio playback this unit will be great to use with the G70 also..small enough to sit on the left side of the G70...flat and pretty much out of sight..unlike the laptop..

Yes it could also be a great addition to the Mediastation too, but I am convinced that the MS Qranger can stand on it's own..

I would love to see Roland release a version 3 (soft update)for the Prelude with the mod changes found on the BK-7m..Then all I would be missing are the extra keys..

I wouldn't be surprised to see that (or a new Prelude) inside a year. Roland are pretty good at updating software for older (but still in production) arrangers as they come out with new stuff. OS2 for the Prelude and GW-8 upped the stakes quite well.

What's weird is that Roland seem to have abandoned the MOTL and TOTL market segment, but now seem to be working hard at putting MOTL and TOTL features in their BOTL arrangers... Not sure how that's going to work for them, but it's good for us!

I can't find it in my heart to agree with you about the QRanger, though. Sure, it might have the POTENTIAL to be a good arranger, but I GUARANTEE that the day you get your BK7-m, it will be a MUCH better arranger in practical, 'go out and do the gig tonight' form than the Mediastation, which you have had for YEARS. Let's face it, if the Mediastation actually DID live up to its potential, you would never use anything else!

Hi Diki
Perhaps you missed this link posted in another thread about a week ago

http://www.korgforums.com/forum/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=57931

Bill

It's still about content and integration, as far as I am concerned. An arranger, even MORE than a workstation, stresses things to the absolute limit by needing total integration right from the start. Arranger players are basically 'I need everything, and I need it NOW!' just to get the basic operation that an OOTB closed arranger provides. Today I might be playing oldies, tomorrow funk, the day after, jazz.

You buy an off the shelf arranger, you are going to be able to do that, at least competently, the day you buy it. Until the software arrangers start to come with the quality of INTEGRATION of sounds that hardware ones do (I know that, individually, software sounds completely destroy a closed keyboard's sounds, but try to find an entire sound SET that is as well balanced and as comprehensive as a closed one, well, I'm still looking!) and a style selection as varied and as well suited to the samples they play as a hardware ones are, these things still don't address the needs of the majority (the VAST majority) of the market.

When one of these things comes out where you can buy one, turn it on, sit down and play style after style (of whatever genre you feel like) that utterly annihilates any closed arranger, then the world will change.

Until then...

Hi Diki
From the way I read the article, what you have said that you want, the module is designed to provide, however as Musikmesse 2011 isn’t until April, we will have to wait a while longer to see if it delivers.
Tastenpoint customers will also be getting their own style/preset combinations for the Groove, which will be specifically tailored for the European market.

Bill

Well, that's PART of it... being tailored for the European market. There's a lot of us with money over here in the US. And we don't play schlager!

But I saw nothing in the specs about having a fully integrated soundset. Looked like a laundry list of different, mostly not TOTL sample sets to me. I am just not sure how many people realize just HOW complex a task making a comprehensive, COHERENT soundset actually is. It's not just a case of finding good sounds, it's having them so the ALL work the same way, blend together sonically and EQ-wise, all respond to velocity and controllers identically, and all the other things that makes a soundset. Arrangers essentially set out to have sounds set up that, you replace ANY sound with any other sound, it's essentially going to WORK (or at least not stick out like a sore thumb). I've never worked with a software product yet that fit THAT bill...

You can stretch a lot of mileage out of a good style by re-voicing it. Change out jazz guitars for acoustics, change pianos into Rhode's, change stick kits to brushes, or rods, or hands, change electric basses to synth basses, you name it. String lines changed to woodwinds, saxes, whatever.

Without a soundset that makes experimenting with doing this a painless operation, you are less likely to try. Or succeed. I wish more people were appreciative about what an amazing job most closed arrangers do at a task that seems to have eluded most software sampler makers.

Nah, you folks "over there" play 90% Sinatra, Big Band Brass and Jazz, the 10% left are Country, or as we call it, "Horse Jazz"!

The European or other markets is just as different and have a lot of variations just as the USA market. Different need for different taste and goals.
To me the arranger keyboard (Autocomp) are about the option to play with styles. If no styles, I would never buy any arranger, but keep on pump air with the Accordeon midied up to OMB5 or Elka .... nah, today it most truly would be a Ketron unit.
So, the bottom line are: The more quality styles who fit MY ears and MY taste, the better!

Btw,
the word Schlager means something who is popular or a HIT. In Scandinavia we have something common, Scandinavian Country. But if you're not a famous group or person with your own special musicstyle that public demands, you have to play all kinds of music styles if you want to make the audience happy. I guess it all depends of what type of occation you're performing.
So you see, Sinatra and a lot of others was/is Schlagers as well, depending of what time they was on Top Of The Pops. The average age of your audience will quickly show you what's Schlager when respond to your playlist.

If it does include lyric read ...why such a small display screen?

I've never understood that myself, Donny. Tiny screen, tiny letters and words that you can barely see. With a display that small it's nearly impossible to read lyrics--even with 20/20 vision.

Gary

Exactly Gary.....even with all it's greatness in Sound & Styles the new Tyros 4 has so much "wasted display space" which they haven't addressed since Tyros's inception..........
I hope in future models they increase the display size at least a few inches more a full bright 8" x 8" would suffice.

Hi Fran

Looking forward to reading you review on the Roland BK-7m. It is a most welcome developement, arranger modules are very

thin on the ground. I'm like a kid looking forward to Christmas.

Frank

Diki, be prepared...That day is fast approaching

I will be happy to be the first to suggest you eat your words!! (I mean that in a light-hearted way btw )

Dennis

I have had my knife and fork and plate ready since the very first day...!

Still hungry! And I mean that sincerely. NOTHING would make me happier than to have the open arranger's potential FINALLY realized. I have NEVER posted against the 'concept' of the idea. Merely it's amazingly poor execution, so far.

The trouble is, open arrangers and soundsets are made, generally, by people and companies with only a TINY fraction of the capital that the majors have. And, although it's no problem to make ONE sound sound great by itself, it's another level of complexity and cost entirely to make an entire, pretty comprehensive soundset all work together. Only those with the deepest of pockets can afford to do this, and hardware sales is what is underwriting it. It is completely unrealistic, IMO, to expect quality at a tiny fraction of the cost that it now takes.

While playing BACK the samples has gotten radically cheaper, any laptop can do the job fairly easily, what HASN'T got easier is recording those samples in the first place. They still take formidable equipment, experience and time to do just ONE well, and you KNOW how I feel about turning a bunch of separately recorded sounds into a whole that all work well with each other!

And sorry, but for proof of this, I offer up how there really isn't ONE software soundset available right now (after having been made for 10-15 years or more) that even PRETENDS to be as well integrated as a hardware arranger. The individual sounds may be far superior, but they don't 'play nice' with each other the way a Tyros's or Roland's do...

For what arranger players do on a daily basis, the way that different sounds all interact is FAR more important that how good each individual sound is.

I can't WAIT to eat my words, trust me. But I have a feeling I am going to be hungry for a long time to come.

Diki, if you ate all your words, you'd be bigger than an elephant . How are you, my friend? We haven't communicated in awhile. I was hoping you'd resurface 'cause I'd been getting kind of bored lately.

I'm a little confused though. You say "For what arranger players do on a daily basis, the way that different sounds all interact is FAR more important that how good each individual sound is". That may be true but I don't really understand how. For instance, how does the way an arranger handles a sound set differ from the way a SMF handle a sound set? If I remember correctly, the G1000 had the same sound set as that upgraded Sound Canvass (SC88 or something). The voices in arranger style playing sound good because each voice has been tweaked in each individual style to sound optimal. But most people do the same to SMF's to prepare them for performance. I use sound sources from everything in my studio when making a baking track, Triton, Motif ES, SonicCell, Fantom G7, DM10 drums, VP-770, PA1x pro, Tyros 2 (love their guitars), and even some really old stuff like the Korg 01W module midied to an original SC55 (really phat).

I truly believe that if the basic arranger-specific functionality were there in the basic unit, such as the Mediastation, that a talented style-production team could produce a superior sounding arranger using a superior (as in, superior to what is found in hardware units) sound/sample set tweaked for each individual style. Of course, at that point, we're essentially back to a hardware arranger, since this is their 'formula'. The advantage, of course, would be the greater potential for 'cheap' upgradability. Interesting discussion, as always.

chas

I suppose they expect you to use an external monitor.

That or headphones!
DonM

Dennis... What I'm referring to isn't how each sound individually is good, but how they all work together. Probably the biggest difference between WS users and arranger users is, each composition in SMF form tends to be a work unto itself. It isn't expected to work for other songs, it isn't expected that SOME parts or sounds may stay the same while others get changed out, it isn't expected that we can completely change the overall sound of the song at a whim.

But arrangers DO...

It's this interactivity between the style, and the sounds used by the style, and then the RH sounds that distinguishes the arranger from the WS. It is rare, in most WS's, that you can substitute ANY sound for any other sound, and not have to do some tweaking. It is VERY rare, to be able to take a drum performance that sounds great on one drum kit, and it still sound great on another. It is unusual to be able to substitute one bass sound for another, and it still WORK.

But arranger players do this all the time.

Now, let's just take RH sounds. I've yet to play a WS where, if you decide 'today, I want to play lead on this harmonica sound, rather than the french horn sound I used yesterday', you can do it without having to tweak levels, at the very least. Often, even similar sounds (say a choice of a dozen Rhodes patches) can be radically different in volume, not to mention 'presence' and EQ. On a WS, no biggie. Things tend to be far more worked out in advance, it is seldom, after crafting a Performance to go with a particular SMF backing, that you go 'I want to substitute string lines for horn lines, today'...

But you do on an arranger.

It's the interchangeability of sounds that marks the arranger. This is the thing that differentiates it from the WS.

Add to that that, it is VERY rare to be able to substitute one sound from one keyboard and have it work well with the style data from another (how BAD most style translations are before some major tweaking demonstrates that) and you start to see the problem once you try to cobble a cohesive soundset out of a myriad of different VSTi's that can still play a myriad of different manufacturer's styles.

We ask SO MUCH of our arrangers, and often have so little appreciation for what is going on under the hood. But the failure of any software soundset to address this degree of balancing (while still remaining as comprehensive as most TOTL arrangers' soundsets are) just MIGHT go to indicate what a huge task this really is.

I really CAN'T wait for this to actually happen, but I have a feeling that, until the majors start to get involved, nobody has any real budget to ensure success. And, even if a major DID, it would still have to be a pretty expensive product to offset the cost of doing it. If you look at one of the areas where the sample companies HAVE tried to make comprehensive, balanced soundsets even for a more limited sound selection, that of orchestral emulation, you are looking at software that costs THOUSANDS of dollars, more than any arranger, even. And that is JUST the orchestral sounds. Imagine the cost when an entire set as comprehensive as a T4's is brought to that level...

Diki, yes this is what I am referring to. This is what my goal is in using this new Groove XR. The marriage between it and the PA2X will be so sweet!!

Imagine the PA2X style engine driving VST instruments, thats one option. Then to have full audio styles available as well. To be able to have access to as many right hand sounds as you put it, and in such high quality and definition, and yes all at the push of a button.

No tweaking. ALL in real time, no dropouts, no glitching.

And really let's face it pretty much ALL of us here at SZ tweak all the styles we use on our arranger keyboards.

From what I read about what folks say that they do with their keyboards, I don't think there is one "standard from the factory" 'board here!!

So I don't see what the difference is in tweaking styles using the Groove XR to be honest, and to make "oh the end user will have to tweak a style" as an argument against using/buying an open arranger doesn't make a lot of sense to me.

The way this new OS 5 and more importantly the new Qranger engine will really allow audio styles to shine. The seamless integration of a super-smooth and speedy Linux OS underneath (almost as good as OSX ) will see this rack zoom.

Particularly for those of us who already have arrangers with a decent MIDI spec, Yamaha, Korg, Roland but not as strong....Imagine the possibilities of mixing the Groove and ALL it's VST-Giga capability with a Tyros 4? Or a PA2x...Man what a white-hot combo!!!!

So I do hear what you are saying and I do empathise (remember I HAVE been through the mill as far as Lionstracs keyboards go), but please, PLEASE keep an open mind until after MusikMesse, and don't let any pre-judgement spoil your appreciation of what will be a truly remarkable instrument!!

Dennis

I am FAR from pre-judging things, Dennis. I have always commented on how things are NOW. This got me into a lot of trouble with those that are always looking ahead to how things MIGHT be! Usually, in their heads, MIGHT is usually substituted with WILL...

As always, I look forward to the day when our expectations are actually MET.

But even you, still, after all your go-round with the MS, are telling me how things WILL be. Not how they ARE. I would have thought you might be a little more wary after what was supposed to work turned out not to (as well as you wanted).

Me, I am going to wait until it is a reality before I rejoice!

Diki I am not saying how thing will be...No not at all... I am saying it is how I am anticipating them to be. Of course no-one can say exactly how something in the future will actually turn out.

And of COURSE I am wary...But I am keeping the faith my man!!

Then - after MusikMesse - I will able to tell you how things are maybe even to also show you, how things are.

Dennis

Looking forward to it, Dennis...

Hi Dennis,
sounds like there's still a couple of issues with QRanger?? or isn't it really a problem. You being a former MS owner would probably know what AFG Music is refferring to.

Is the Groove Synth Rack, something along the lines of the MS? but in rack form.

Sure hope the guys do well. Rob used to be such an asset on the Korg Forums.


http://www.korgforums.com/forum/phpBB2/v...sc&start=60


Diki, be prepared...That day is fast approaching

I will be happy to be the first to suggest you eat your words!! (I mean that in a light-hearted way btw )

Dennis [/quote]

Hi Rikki. most of AFG's issues are to do with TPQN, or Ticks Per Quarter Note...Midi timing...

When you consider all the styles on your PA800 are at 96 to 128 TPQN resolution, and AFG is saying 192 is not a fine enough timing resolution for him, you may get an idea that this level of timing resolution is, well to put it bluntly, way over the top!

Sort of like the comparisons between audio recording at 44.1khz and 48 or even 96khz..Yeah there IS a difference, but in the real world and even with the BEST ears, no-one can actually tell the difference.

It's a "paper" figure. For the extremely "fussy"! I mean 96tpqn is roughly equivalent to demi-semi quavers so you get what I mean...

There were some issues with the other points he raised, but these are being addressed in OS 5 and the new version of Qranger which I believe is coming with that release... which even AFG has not seen yet!!

Dennis

Hi Dennis,

I was moreso interested in inversion of chords and the generation of certain chord types comment.

Anyway, good to see that there are updates to the OS and that issues do get addressed.

Sounds like you can't wait. haahaa

Rikki, unless AFG can specify what chord types he is talking about I really cannot give an answer. All I can tell you is I had no problems with chord types, only that there did not seem to be a provision for creating slash chords (or on-bass if you like)..

I am told this was possible but I never got that far into the arranger section (as in native arranger engine) because I frigged around for months trying to get that piece of crap software Live Arranger working properly in Linux...I really do not think the creator of it ever got his head around Linux. That was where the problem lay. NOT with the Lionstracs OS.

The same comment also applies to the Live Styler software too. They all worked fine on Windows machines, but hopeless with Linux.

Again, if AFG wants to share the actual chord type he is having issues with, eg a flat 13 or altered ninth, or whatever, we may be able to answer his concerns. But as far as I could see the actual chord types were all about the same as what was available on the "main arrangers"

Dennis

I have an M Audio 61 note controller keyboard that I used one time. If anyone needs it let me know. Will sell, swap, barter, or accept sexual favors (certain criteria to be observed.)
DonM

Hi Dennis,
thanks for clarifying. Didn't realize that it was Live Arranger that you'd had hassles with.
I'm not a big fan of Live Styler. The couple of times I tried the demo versions, maybe I had something wrong with my settings, but, I could never get it to play back my piano arpeggio's correctly, wheras One Man Band did.

I'm looking forward to Musikmesse. haahaa Sounds very interesting.

No probs Rikki

I agree with you re OMB (yeah I own that one too!!) it was by far the easiest and most reliable of any of the software arrangers on the PC.

It would have been interesting to see if he could have ported it to Linux??!!

MM is going to be huge I think..the FULL release of the PA3, the full release of the new (from the ground up) Groove rack, plus more from Korg and Yamaha, and I am also reading there will be a fair bit of iPad and tablet music software/hardware released too!!

Dennis

Hi Dennis,

yep, it would have been interesting if it could have been adapted to Linux. The newer of the 2 OMB programs, One Man Band Essentials is less complex than the original version. Be handy having a style player that loads psr styles directly, instead of just the Qranger option, or, will Live Arranger be an option?

Probably should be asking over at the other forum.

Rikki, Live Arranger is NOT an option, believe me!!!.....And to be honest, the arranger is but one part of the whole that will be the new Groove XR Rack. I think folks will be pleasantly surprised by the improvements.

But for now, I think it best we wait until MM so we can all get the full details at the official launch

Dennis

I have been curious about the Bk-7m for quite a few months now. I'm surprised that there is relatively little information with regards to reviews on it. There are only a few people with youtube videos demonstrating it. Can anyone steer me to the latest reviews on this? Is there anyplace to hear samples of what the styles sound like? What are your opinions so far? I'm looking for a good rhythm machine (not just drum machine) to go with my keyboard.

Hal, you might want to pop over to http://www.roland-arranger.com/smf/index.php and read about the BK-7m.

Ian

Thanks. I saw some stuff there. Not much yet. I guess there has not been much distribution yet. I hope you and other bK7m users will be posting performances on youtube, especially keyboardists as that is how I would be using it. At the price of the BK-7 I'm wondering if you can get better results connecting to an older Tyros or Roland arranger instead for a larger set of styles and perhaps easier variation button controls. That's what' I'm trying to figure out now. I'm basically looking for just a rhythm machine with lots of styles and do not care about the other frills that come with te BK7. I currently have a Yamaha QY100, which is an older sequencer/ rhythm box that sounds great but does not have an illuminated LCD and is IMO very non-user friendly but it sounds quite good. I'm ready for the next step, either BK or something with the most styles and easiest to use variation controller.

Email me or give me a call. I'm using it every night with a controller. I've found a dedicated controller gives me more options than using an arranger for a controller.
DonM