To be fair Dean said he spent seven hours every day for the last three weeks with the new keyboard. That indicates to me a serious level of commitment to the board. He couldn't get his head around the operating system. That's not really the fault of the user that's probably the fault of the manual. I certainly would not have continued to struggle with the instrument for three weeks seven hours a day and be frustrated continually. He has done the right thing by giving it a go. It's not a lifetime commitment. He's not married to the keyboard ! He gave the board a good go and now is free to go ahead and pick something that is more suited to his learning style playing style preference or whatever. As they say in my favourite sport no blood no foul !

As I've said before manufactures should be making DVD's of the operation of these instruments. The BK9 does so much its impossible to cover it adequately in a manuel. Nothing like looking over someones shoulder and watching an expert preform the functions your interested in.
I was a computer teacher in a Middle School and I couldn't imagine having the kids read about how to do something new or even telling them how to do it. ( Kids attentions spans are very short these days, as is mine ) I would lock all the computers onto my computer screen and demo whatever I wanted them to do.
Done !! They would pick it up immediately.
Too bad there isn't someone nearby to help out in person. Theres things I've been wanting to explore using SMFs but haven't been able to find any help either so I've dropped the idea.

There are considerable resources available on the web to help those having problems overcome the roadblocks to understanding. In fact, I helped Deane out with a couple myself, and also posted the solution to one of the reasons he has given to selling it (being unable to figure out how to set a global split point).

I am sorry, spalding, but if I gt a Wersi, then after a mere three weeks, announced I was going to sell it because I couldn't figure it out, despite your help telling me how to do something I couldn't grok from the manual, you would probably have a different opinion about how difficult or bug ridden the OS was than me!

Personally, I find Korg's extremely opaque, I have quite an issue figuring out how to save what I want, where I want. I find some issues with how one can easily edit styles and SMF's. But every Korg user tells me, no matter how much time I may have spent on one (my friend's PA3X leaves me stumped quite often), they are quite simple to operate. How can that be? Pretty easy, actually!

Modern arrangers are incredibly complex beasts, and there are many ways to skin a cat when it comes to a lot of operational stuff. Just because someone can't find it easily (including web resources, or questions to the Tech Support guys at the Manufacturer site) doesn't mean it can't be done. Not only do you have to learn how to do something, you have to UNLEARN how to do it when you come from somewhere else. This takes time and patience, something I fear Deane hasn't allowed sufficient of to achieve fluency on the new arranger.

Bottom line is, nothing that he has stated as a cause for not keeping his gives me any problem at all. I somehow have figured out how to set global splits (and many other kinds of holds), I understand that Favorites can only call up ROM Tones, I know what to do to save a Performance into a List so that my edited Tones are where I need them. I think this quote is the most telling:



I am quite sure that, if he had not used a Korg prior to the PA900, he would have had as many problems than he has with the Roland. And I also think that basically expecting to go to a completely different manufacturer's arranger, and then expecting to be able to set it up so that it operates the same way you did something on a different manufacturer's arranger is unrealistic. Just as anyone would tell me the same, were I to get a Korg, then complain that I can't run it the same way I ran my Roland!

Korg have their 'way', Yamaha have theirs, and Roland have yet another... Never shall they meet.

And praise the Lord you could not, cause no matter how many chapters you want to devote to this issue the Korg OS imho is easier, faster and more accessible.
Anyway I agree with Spalding here, why don't you give it a rest Diki, I mean Deane is done with it ( and he is not alone) , you by contrast continue to be happy and satisfied with Roland. Enough said. Perhaps you could post some of your recordings on the BK9 just for a change ? I mean all the time and energy spent on this and other forums should allow for that, wouldn't you agree ?

regards,
John

Having read Johns suggestion to Deane regarding pairing the S950 with the KMA, I decided to try this with my S910. I midi'd my Yamaha lower to the KMA to control the KMA accomp. Even though I have only had 30 minutes on them, I am very pleased.

I have resisted this approach since lugging up to three KB's in the 1980's. This is very simple and light, since both don't weigh much more than my others alone.

The real reason is that I like the Korg styles and sounds, but I can't get my head around it's OS other than the basics. The small keys don't bother me for playing OTS solo's, as well as all the features of my S910.

This might be a Jack of all trades, master of none approach but it only the end result I care about.

It all comes down to what we are use to...Just as John says the Korg is easier to use...and Diki will tell you Roland is easier...and Gary will say Yamaha...

The fact is you have to apply yourself to understand a system..

Just yesterday, a friend (Pro musician), had problems with his Korg PAx...His start/stop buttom..sunk (literally)..on the job..He has taking it apart and fixed it, but he did not know there were work arounds to finish the job...He has played this keyboard for 9 years or so...and is a long time Korg owner..

I asked why he didn't put the start/stop on the assigned pedal..The look from him was my answer..He had no clue what I was talking about..
Sometimes this is the way folks use their gear..to do what they think they want and no further....We all have to understand the gear we use....I have found nearly every problem to be human error..

I never liked the Korg Folder system using their OS & Ive performed with many many KORGS in my carreer,...although I had no problems with using it but its more of a "comfort zone " while playing that makes a big difference....we all do it different. Just play and enjoy I say..

I am quite familiar with all the operating systems of Korg, Roland, Ketron and Yamaha. They all have their strong points and weaknesses. Let me tell you though, the familiarity did not come over night (how about 25 years or so) and after doing a lot of work at home, I still learn something new almost every time I play, much of it on the job.
I think Roland has become a little harder with recent models. Yes, the USB has made things better, but as far as real-time control, the G70, E50, 60 and 80 were much easier. Main draw back with them was the method of introducing new files via the card, using dedicated folders.
I actually believe Yamaha has the clunkiest OS now. (I will now take cover behind something large and bullet-proof).
Anyway, Deane's post was not asking for advice as to how to do something, or whether he should keep the BK9, he as just letting us know that he was selling it because he preferred other options.
DonM

Well said Don.

I have been Yamaha arranger only for at least 12 years and just lately switched to the new Korg Pa900 - two totally different OS's, but very similar things to be done with an arranger are done pretty easily either way for me.

I do have to say I think Korg has captured the market for me as far as blending the Touch screen with the OS.

For me - all manufacturers fall down because they do not print a menu tree for their OS where you can just look at the tree and know where stuff is on that tree - I always have to make my own and then everything falls into place instantly.

Bill G

The thing is, when someone here buys an arranger, then rapidly sells it, there is a certain taint to its reputation. All I am trying to do is point out that the reasons Deane may have given up aren't necessarily things you can't do, but things he didn't spend enough time finding out HOW to do, or finding out alternatives that exist with a different workflow.

I am not trying to persuade Deane to reconsider, his decision is his to make.

But I am trying to point out to others that may be considering a BK-9 that just because Deane had problems, that doesn't mean that anyone else WILL... You owe it to yourself to try it for yourself, rather than taking the impressions of someone that didn't spend sufficient time with it to find out alternatives to the Korg workflow.

In fact, Deane's BK-9 is available! Now's a great time to find out cheaper than buying a new one..!

And John, it's kind of hard to take seriously your taunt of 'give it a rest' when the next thing you do is evangelize how 'easy' the OS of YOUR favorite arranger is! There are plenty of people here with reservations about how easy Korg's are to use.You can't have it both ways... Deane's decision that the Roland OS is hard is valid means I should not offer a counter opinion, but that ALSO means that anyone else's opinion (including mine) that Korg's are hard to figure out means that YOU should not offer a counter opinion!

Or we should both agree that going from one arranger manufacturer to another is hard, but to experts of the destination arranger, 'hard' is a pretty relative term. I find Roland's easy, you find Korg's easy. That doesn't do a darn thing to settle which actually IS...