Last night since I had to be in the area of the Crab Trap in Somers Point NJ. Fran Carango was gracious enough to come to his gig there early so I could take a look at his new BK5. I was on my way to a band rehersal so I could only spend about 25 minutes with him and even made a list of questions beforehand so as not to forget anything. I am not a techno master like Fran or others here but here's my thoughts.
PROS:
* Very portable and professional looking
* On board speakers sounded fine. I wouldn't gig with them but fine for practice. Bass and Drums were clear and full from the small speakers.
* Very nice clean button layout and nice sized screen. Easy to see even standing up.
* Jacks on back for Hold AND a Control pedal. Important feature to me.
* Seems to be very easy to get around and do edits, choose styles, etc. and being able to save them to as Preformances on a single Thumb Drive. Fran blew me away when he told me how much you could fit on a single drive. I think Roland really did hit the mark in aiming this at "working" musicians.
* As you all know it can play back Mp3s, SMFs UFOs (only kidding) but really everything you would need. Also has center voice cancel and you can change keys of MP3's.
* The sounds, especially the Rhoades that Fran pulled up seemed to respond very well to velocity of the keyboard with a very noticable change in timbre.
* The few styles I heard were very good and sounded very "sharp and tight" if that makes any sense to you, but its the best way I can describe them. Fills and intros are very interesting. Didn't get to really go thruogh all four variations but its nice to have that much choice for a song.
* Keyboard has a nice firm resistance. Not mushy. but see CON below.
CON;
* This is personal opinion but for me I didn't like the keyboard. I'm a big guy and I have big hands. It wasn't the slight narrowness of the keys so much as the shortness. I could probably get used to it in time but that was the only dissapointment in the unit I found. For most players it would probably be fine. Heres MY bottom line. For the money I think its a great unit and would work well for most professionals. I don't think anyone except yourself would know if you were playing a 1K or 4K arranger. I can't wait for Don's apprasial.
Big thanks again to Fran.

I felt the same way about the styles, finding them as good or better than G-70 (more "detailed", if that makes any sense) and nearly every one I tried seemed to be balanced well against the others.

The key size was also a bit disappointing to me, as I have large hands as well...this was also one of the reasons I had issues with the Korg MicroArranger, but at least the BK-5's are relatively full sized.

Overall, I think the BK-5 is one of Roland's better efforts to date, but, I really would like them to re-enter the Top Of The Line arena again...as always, competition between manufacturers benefits the user/player more than it does the companies, and Roland certainly has the resources (and also the available content with those great SuperNatural voices) to compete very well.

Ian

I think that, unless Roland innovate some NEW features, and embrace the many concepts from other manufacturers that have become standard on even MOTL arrangers (multi-pads, break/fills, etc.) they are best served by staying out of the TOTL market.

For starters, it is a MUCH smaller overall market than it used to be (as the economy shrinks, and the BOTL and MOTL models get better and better), and without these 'standard' features, people will jump on these shortcomings probably a lot more than celebrating the new features.

The thing I am starting to see is that, for probably 85% of the total arranger market, the features on even the BOTL arrangers exceed what these players will EVER use. And, let us not fool ourselves... Just what percentage of those of us with TOTL arrangers are actually USING the TOTL features? How many of us have never loaded up our arranger's sampler, other than maybe once when we first got it? How many of us with TOTL arrangers has ever actually taken an SMF and created a usable, good sounding style with it? How many of us seldom end up using the UPR3 sound, or the Dynamic Arranger features, or the D-Beam, multi-switch inputs, or even the harmonizer often?!

More and more, the BOTL arranger models offer all the stuff we USE, and none of the features we don't, but they are SOUNDING more and more spectacular compared to arranger even from the TOTL from just one generation ago (which didn't used to be the case).

Now, don't get me wrong... for those of us that are 'power users', all the bells and whistles are fantastic, and great performances can be squeezed out of them. But we are an ever dwindling pool of potential buyers. As much as I would love to see Roland return to production of a TOTL arranger with all the stuff I can use, I can see the sense in staying firmly in the BOTL to MOTL markets. Even the lowly BK-5, so much from the TOTL that we would use is included, and so much from the TOTL that we wouldn't is left off, I think they are doing the right thing.

Roland need to firstly, introduce AND perfect the 'me too' features missing at the moment, and can quite easily do this without going upmarket, IMO.

Their 'SuperNatural' technology is still in its infancy compared to SA2, again. Bringing this into a new TOTL arranger will only again produce unfavorable comparison. I'd say, leave it in the Jupiter's until it is more mature (and can be ported to the MOTL, like Yamaha's trickle down model).

In the meantime, even though I still haven't heard the BK-5 (but have a BK-7m), I agree that the factory styles sound quite a bit better than some of the G70's, although much of this can be removed by applying the EQ and sound settings from the BK style to the G70 style... only the drumkits can't really be replicated. Most of the difference simply shows that Roland's style programmers are getting better at optimizing the styles BEFORE they release them (probably the best thing they could copy from Yamaha!) rather than the unit itself going leaps and bounds over the previous generation.

I am really starting to think that TOTL arrangers are becoming more and more irrelevant. TBH, until the manufacturers finally manage the mind-meld of the arranger and the WS/loop player, and we can have arranger ease along with Motif/Kronos contemporary relevance, what the MOTL does is probably perfect for 99% of us.

Since folks are reading this post about the BK5...I thought I would mention a feature on the BK5, that actually answers the disappointment of no onboard sequencer..

In reality, the BK5 does have a sequencer, and you can almost say it is elaborate..

You can use the Rhythm composer..which is an 8 track sequencer..but it is not just an 8 track seq...when you use it a certain way..

Here is an example: You have the standard 8 tracks set up as Drums, Bass , etc....If you select a variation as an example, although you could use intro , endings etc...but I will explain why the variations will work better..

Select variation 1...and sequence by selecting a track...if you are using drums..you can actually use a style pattern...You can record the sequence without setting lenght...in fact the seq record is a piece of cake..

After you select the track and set up the sound...select the "audio" record button (it doubles as a midi record)...now when you push the start button, a count in starts and you can record...when you follow the same procedure for the next track, it automatically plays back previous tracks as you record...etc..

Now the option trick..we are recording as it would be a style...so if you select variation 2, you have 8 more tracks, keep in mind you may want to copy the same drum tracks... Now you can do the same with variation 3 and 4....that is up to 32 tracks..and you still could use the intro, endings too...

Now the way to come away with the finished product...Record as a wav file...by playing back each variation it will record as a single song..the variations can give you different sounds , bass lines etc...When completed you have a wav file of your song that you can save to a USB media..

See, I told you Fran was a Techno Master HA! He can make the BK5 detail your car and get you a cup of coffee if you want !

Diki
You are correct, most players never use all they paid for. I myself am going backwards and simplifing my playing style. No matter all the tweaking I do on the styles people see me as a piano player so thats what I'll be. A piano player who sings and has some basic accompiament in the backround. For the ballroom stuff I will stay more elaborate in my sound but "simple is good"
Otherwise its "Kareoke Time with Bill Lewis"

Agree, but with a caveat. As with everything in the music business, it depends on the crowd, the venue, your own presentation skills, and the musical genre'. A great singer/pianist (ala the late Bobby Short) will probably always be in demand, have a small(er) but super dedicated (and well-heeled) group of followers, and generally play in higher-end venues. Because he is probably (ARGUABLY) better trained than the AVERAGE arranger-playing OMB, he probably has (or could have) a lucrative side business TEACHING (piano/maybe voice) and/or playing for a church/mosque/synagogue.

I have always 'kept it simple' out of necessity due to the limitations of my musical skill set. IN MY OPINION, the secret to being a good arranger player is KNOWING WHAT SOUNDS GOOD. In other words, TASTE. Having some basic arranging skills also helps. After that, having an arranger kb capable of faithfully producing your musical concepts in a LIVE environment without benefit of SMF's or MP3's (else why not just use a synth or WS) is essential. IMO, a TOTL board such as a T4 or PA3x would be the most desirable. If entertaining is more important to you than the quality of the MUSICAL product, then an entry or mid-level arranger such as a KMA or PA500 would work.

So as not to offend the anti-hijack contingent, I won't say more other than to say that this is mostly a lobby for the pianist/singer, guitarist/singer form of musical entertainment which, in my mind, is a more 'organic' way of reaching your audience. Even if you find it more lucrative and/or more attractive to go the arranger/OMB route, you should still try to maintain or develop the skills to pull off this type of gig (I know that some of you already do this). You may be surprised at how rewarding this can be.

chas

Nice review Bill. A friend of mine lent me his BK5 for a week and I was about to write a review but you said just about everything I would have said. Let me just throw in another "con": It takes several steps of going through the menu to make simple changes. I guess that's fine if you have all your performances saved the way you like them or your using the KB for studio projects or home entertainment. But trying to play live/on the fly is a bit of a PITA.

All in all some real nice styles. In fact there's some great Latin styles that I haven't been able to find anywhere else like the modern bachata style. If money was not an issue (eventhough this very is a very resonable priced keyboard) I'd buy one. However at this point I want to be 100% happy with a KB before buying a new one.

Hi everyone...although the BK5 has some interesting features on paper, ...two things I know about regarding the BK5 without ever playing one yet is NO Multipads, & a Two-step push for transpose vs onboard buttons? ...these things alone concern me for live play......but I cant make any other comments until I get my hands on one very soon...look forward to it..

Paul, Roland's last update 1.03, improved some navigation problems...and don't forget there are many shortcuts by holding down a button..
I had a problem navigating between SMF/MP3 selection and lyric windows...but Roland's update fixed this in the last update..making it easier to toggle between..

Any menu driven OS can cause concerns when navigating on stage...but I have found the BK5 relatively easy on stage for major edits and changes....But as we know the ideal preparation of the Performances..eliminates this concern..

Donny, the transpose on the BK5 is hardly a obstacle...You push the transpose button once, and the screen is active to use the dial wheel for the value...It is just as easy (easier)as the procedure on the Prelude....but surely not as great as the G70 transpose..(always active)..

As for Multi pads...Some of us..dislike them..I for one...The arranger auto play is already too busy...everytime you add another multipad..it screams "fake"..

I am in the camp.."less, is more"....I have not worked with a vocalist yet (with arranger keyboard) that didn't appreciate muting unnecessary parts...All the fluff stuff gets in the way...of what you want to play...

My preference would be to have only my drummer, rhythm guitar player, and bass player...I will take care of the piano/organ parts..and maybe a sax , once in a while..even the over played "real sax player" can drive me crazy..

Fran, I agree with you, if you're working with a drummer, guitar player and a bass player, but for OMB playing, pads are a nice addition, and for me they are just fun to use. No Multi pads is not a deal breaker, but it is definetly something I would miss. Also, good to know Roland updates the BK5

Paul can you, or someone give an example other than transpose (Fran claims a fix) of changes that takes several steps?

Thanks for the review Bill (and Fran)... both very helpful