... but can he emulate a keyboard? ...

We certainly couldn't emulate HIM!

Tell you one thing... he certainly isn't as afraid of thinking outside the box, searching for a solution to a musical problem no matter how silly looking, as many here!

Got people here afraid of even using pedals, no matter how easier they make your playing!

Only one that I know of, Diki.

Gary

Awesome, thanks Eric!

Not that many people using multi-footswitch pedals for hands free arranger control, though. Even if you have a PSR, with no multi-switch input, a MIDI set of pedals can easily be programmed to do all that.

It's hard to explain the musical freedom you get if you remove the need to periodically stop playing just to have to press buttons. Not to mention, a lot of the time you need to press them the is often the time that you need to be playing the most (turnarounds, breaks, etc.).

I wold be lost trying to play and do all the necessary button pushing. Playing has always been my #1 focus, and anything that gets in the way is removed, if at all possible!

Music to 'spoon' with your honey to? LOL

"Even if you have a PSR, with no multi-switch input, a MIDI set of pedals can easily be programmed to do all that.

Not really. I would like to know how. You can use Yamaha's MFC10, and that's all I can find to do it. The commands such as fill, variation, break, etc., are system exclusive commands. Yamaha's pedal uses note on commands, and the keyboard converts them into useable commands somehow. I'm not really that knowledgeable about midi, but had no problem getting keyboard controllers to speak to modules. Yamahas are a mystery. It's not a problem to play notes, but after that I'm lost.
If there is a small 4 to 6 button foot controller that will work, I can' find it.
DonM

There are pedals that you can program to send sys-ex when pressed, but are you sure you can't call up variations and other things with PC/32/00 commands? I know most of Roland's style divisions can be called up with those. And I think Korg do the same.

Can you point me to a document that details these codes? (I looked in the main S950 manual, couldn't find them)

And, if you CAN'T use simpler, easier to program codes, I'd sure get on Yamaha's case about getting it!

F0 43 7E 00 ss dd F7 - - O ●
11110000 F0 = Exclusive status
01000011 43 = YAMAHA ID
01111110 7E = Style
00000000 00 =
0sssssss ss = Switch No.
00H INTRO A
01H INTRO B
02H INTRO C
03H INTRO D
08H MAIN A
09H MAIN B
0AH MAIN C
0BH MAIN D
10H FILL IN AA
11H FILL IN BB
12H FILL IN CC
13H FILL IN DD
18H BREAK FILL
20H ENDING A
21H ENDING B
22H ENDING C
23H ENDING D
0ddddddd dd = Switch On/Off
00H (Off)
7FH (On)
11110111 F7 = End of Exclusive


Everything is in the PSR S950 Data Manual.

Wow! No wonder Yamaha users don't like them!

I'm not sure about the S50, but on most previous models there was a separate manual dedicated to the codes and sys-ex commands.

Gary

That's where I got the above, from the Data manual.
DonM

Found it... Yikes!

Personally, external control of arrangers is one of my pet peeves. Who wouldn't like to be easily able to link ANY two arrangers together, and have them work as one?

Quite honestly, two MOTL (or even BOTL) arrangers from two different manufacturers, when combined, is usually better than the single TOTL arranger from either! You get a much wider palette of sounds, and can use each of their strengths to counter the other's weaknesses.

But do the manufacturers make this possible? Hell NO!

Utterly incompatible control codes, with no proviso to set them to what we would prefer. Sure, you can link two Roland's, or two Korg's, and they will work... but who in their right minds wants THAT? I want to link a PSR with a G70. Or a PA3x with a BK-7m. Or a BK5 and a PA600... Now THAT would be useful!

Please, please, please... contact your arranger manufacturer, and pressure them into a standardized set of codes for basic arranger operation. We don't need the MIDI Standards Committee to issue new codes (we'd be waiting until NEXT century!). We can use the codes that already WORK.

My suggestion would be the system that uses PC/32/00 codes, that Korg and Roland use (although theirs are different, LOL) and possibly others (don't know Ketron's codes). This, of course, would make mighty Yamaha have to step back from decades of inertia, but c'mon! Sys-ex for Division selection? WTF!

Basically, in practical terms, all you would need is codes for Variation and Fill selection, the Break (of whatever kind it is), Intro and Ending codes, and some kind of communication about transpose selection and if you want to get fancy, OTS selection (optional, IMO).

Tempo is handled by the Master, so rits and accels and initial tempo is good to go.

You know, this is not an awful lot... about the only thing not currently coded is the transposition parameter. The rest is simply having the guts to standardize.

It makes SO MUCH sense for the manufacturers to do this. I can tell you straight away... if I could run a PSR from my G70, or a BK-7m from a PA600 or Tyros4, I'd already have bought those! And I'm sure a LOT of us would. Every arranger has strong points. And every arranger has weak points. But put two together, and one covers the others' weak points.

Only thing holding it up is reluctance by the manufacturers to get together and standardize. But I remind you all... if it weren't for a few manufacturers getting together and going 'It's insane for us all to have exclusive, proprietary ways of communication!' back in the early eighties, we wouldn't have MIDI, and the synth explosion would never have happened.

There is MONEY to be made! Let's go!

Tyros line at least has built-in templates for using their MFC10, but even THAT is not available for PSR!
DonM