Rather than a G70, if money is an issue, I might look at an E60/50. The one big thing those add (if I remember rightly) is some of the new kits that are in the BK are included. I like them a lot.

Did you get my PM John?

Thanks for the advice Diki. I had one last month remember, but I thought the acoustic piano on it, which I use a lot, also in the tweaked styles acc. tracks, was very poor.....

Dennis,
sorry but I rarely watch PMs. I did now and have answered yours.

regards,
John

But if the other arrangers have good pianos, why nix it just for one sound..? Using three makes a lot of decisions easier...

So eventually I ditched the BK-7m as well and last night the owner of a music shop over 130 kilometres away brought me a mint Roland G70 at a very very competitive rate, which is now sitting in my room along with the Korg PA800 and Yamaha PSR 750.
Not having played Roland for the last decade but being very familiar with the G800 generation I thought it would be a breeze but it is not. That is like any major totl keyboard the amount of parameters is dazzling, but that is not much of a problem really apart from being a time thief... The structure of saving and loading registrations, styles, etc. I find truly obnoxious, other than that it sounds promising along my other boards. So now I can put the "four D's " contributions to good use after all and I will not even have to do without Touch Screen,Aftertouch and Dynamic Arranger, things so conspiciously absent on the new Roland flagship. Extra thanks to Diki who in a PM explained a few pressing matters to me.
Having said all that and with all my personal experiences in arranger keyboards it remains a mystery to me why these companies continue to churn ot new arranger keyboards doing two steps forward but ( at least) one step backwards. I guess that is where the money is to be made really. It is amazing to see how many cannot wait for a Tyros 5 (or equivalent) to hit the scene. Truly remarkable!

regards,
John

I admit that Roland seem to be the worst culprit when it comes to dropping things as well as simply adding more...

I have no idea why this is. Poor market research is where I'd first put it. I have NEVER been contacted by Roland in the 20 years of using their arrangers professionally!

Then they have ZERO customer relations. You see Steve Demming from Yamaha often come here and ask for input. Ever seen anyone from Roland here? Me neither

And, obviously, Yamaha DOES LISTEN!

Cheers,

Gary

Gary with all due respect (and you know I have tremendous respect for you and the way you have remained loyal to the PSR3000 over many years), Yamaha may listen to some extent, but releasing a new Tyros or new PSR every two or three years with relatively minor steps forward is also relative. What it does accomplish is to lure the loyal Yamaha fan to part with his hard earned cash and swap, say the Tyros 3 for a Tyros 4 and so forth. I think all major company are to blame, but then again they are companies and they are basically in it for the money, not for the musician who is their prime target !!!

Incidentally, having now at my disposal all three major brands I can once more utter my disbelief at those who think Korg's OS is hard to grasp. I think all PA Korgs with their touch screens and O.S. are superior to Roland and Yamaha. Yamaha in itself is not that hard to grasp but trails due to the lack of a touchscreen. The previous generation of Rolands, including my "new " G70 do sport a touchscreen but I still think that their O.S. was probably developed in China, not in Japan.... , whereas their new BK series even lacks the conveniences of a touchscreen. I have been told by a friend of mine who acquired the BK9 that, although some of the samples are absolutely great, the operating system with the non touchscreens and the dial is a real pain in the you-know-what.
The step backwards no doubt......

regards,
John

John it is what we are use to using ..that makes it seem easier..

Here is an example for you...Lets take a style..change a couple instruments in the accomp. Maybe add some effect changes, maybe change velocity of the drums...also get rid of the hand clap...change the pitch of the snare, and make some changes with the Eq on some of the drum instruments...Like the results..but I want to add 6 layer sound for live play..3 on the left side and 3 on the right...may be a 3 way split....Now I like the results, and want to save for instant recall....No problem with the made in Italy touchscreen on the G70...and it can easily be done in less than 2 minutes...now try this on the Korg..yes I know , some of the above cannot be done on the Korg, but do the best you can...let me know when you are done ..I am going to breakfast..will that be enough time

And if you are trying this on a Yamaha,,I will take a couple days off to relax..will that be enough time to finish on the Yamaha?

As I said for the most part it is what we are use too...but the edits on the G70 with touch screen are far better when you want to get the job done, especially on stage..

This will also be the biggest short coming on the BK9...

Touch screens rule..and when you add OS that can do the job..you have a winner..

Most OS's, if you spend enough time on them, end up seeming pretty familiar. Once you get used to them, you never really remember the effort and head scratching you had when you first got into it.

John, trust me... if you came into Korg for the first time after using Roland, or Yamaha, you would be getting those headaches daily!

I think that one of the areas that Korg suffer from the most is that NOTHING is ROM, essentially. Everything can be overwritten with your own stuff. Styles in the main section, Tones, effects, you name it. From working with Korg users, one of the most frequent problems they present me with is 'I've overwritten a Factory sound/style/Performance (whatever) and now my Performances or Songbooks are messed up!'

Maybe not the hardest issue to fix, but it simply illustrates the potential pitfalls Korg can present you. In truth, as long as I have my OWN area of storage where I can put my own stuff, I don't really feel the burning desire to mess with the ROM area (or what is a ROM area for most other arrangers)..! I think Korg unnecessarily complicate things with this system. Of course, it's great for the power users that everything is completely user configurable. Korg have made the closest thing to a true workstation in the arranger pantheon. BUT.... you have to look at what the average arranger user's general technical ability is. On the whole, these things are bought because somebody wants something EASIER than a full blown workstation!

This is the only arranger with basically a FULL WS as the underpinnings, including a full featured sampler, then a VERY complicated arranger is tacked on over the top... It's hardly surprising that, to people coming to it from arrangers designed primarily for simplicity and ease of use, it is like walking into a NASA briefing!

Personally, if I want to be baffled by a piece of gear, I'll stick with my Kurzweil! When it comes to arrangers, I want as much simplicity as I can get away with without losing total control. I am sure, if I get a TOTL Korg, eventually I'll have it down. But I know, simply from messing with my friend's PA3X, that it will take a LOT longer than anything else in the arranger world!

Fran's challenge is a valid one. When it comes to rapidly setting up Performances from scratch, and doing the main tweaks that optimize a style for you, and then saving it without risking messing something else up, my tip of the hat goes to Roland. And, I'm sure that anyone coming to BOTH for the first time (say from Yamaha) will get the Roland OS down MUCH faster...