Completely agree with the points Dikki made .

All these good points.

But, I think vArranger has a better chance, as it is already came a long way and Dan is actively developing and improving things.

Also, given that all new things start less impressive, of course for now it can not compete with close systems, but time will come. For example, a common one, five years ago there were not tablets - now more than half the ”gadget people” have one. We're talking maybe hundreds of million..... Progress.

I see no reason why software will NOT (LE) take over in arrangers just as it did in so many other areas. A matter of progress. And it will happen. If Dan with vArranger will be among the firsts, I can only be happy for him and encourage him in this direction.

As for sampling - I think this might be a little of extra headache, but by all means, Dan should continue. Or he could indeed contact one of the sound libraries producers (and there are so many, not only NI, IK or alike) and create a great partnership wich will introduce, in a big way, THE software arranger! Why not? It's been done before and it works. (...Most of the times!) It's all a matter of convincing them of the potential - which I believe is there.

Yes I will continue
I will inform you about the drums sampling project when it is done.

There are 77 distinct drum kits in my BK-9. Balanced so that, on the whole, you can change any one for any other, and it still sounds good (with the exception of ethnic kits with totally different mapping to GS). This gives the styles an incredible variety, and the user incredible opportunity to change them and make a style his OWN...

What software writer is going to be able to compete with that? Sure, maybe a few basic kits, brushes, sticks, rock, etc., but 77 of them?

There are 1,718 Tones in the BK-9. Now, not ALL of them with different samples, but a huge number are. What software maker is going to have the time and resources to compete with that? We have come so far from the old 128 GM sound set that it is ancient history. Well over ten times as many, now, in an inexpensive arranger.

I'm sorry, but I just don't see anyone with deep enough pockets to make something 'soft' that comes close.

I don't think you have to. Unlike a closed arranger,vArranger has the ability to hot swap a myriad of sources, and will, in time, be of better quality.

As there is currently no open arrangers made, Diki’s comments are moot.

Wersi are not hugely expensive as they cost no more (And in many cases cost less) then other manufactures equivalent products, so don’t know why this was bought up. (Also all Wersi updates have always (And continue to be) free)

Consider This
Assume for a moment that the T4 was based on PC software/hardware, now as all the new features on the T5 are just software upgrades, they could have easily have been downloaded into a T4 (For a cost) to make it into a T5, but at a fraction of the cost it takes to trade in a T4 and buy a new T5. (That is the advantage of a computer based software arranger)
NOTE: The above also applies to all the big boys.

Happy (Lighter Wallet) playing

Bill

I will not create 1100 sounds and 77 kits.

I will start with ... drums, bass, piano, epiano, sax, brass, flute...
Not tons, but very good quality.

If all drumkits in roland can be swaped, it's a good thing.
That mean that I only have to do one mapping to be Roland style compatible

Most of drumkits use the same sounds, but only changes some snaredrums, etc...

Sounds like a lot of work...

But who is going to spend $400 wihtout having tested the software first?


If you are that confident and putting that much time in what seems to be becoming a great product... give people an opportunity to test and try it. Thats my opinion, which i told several times, but you dont respond to it as if you deem it not important..

Thing is Dan, first things first. You make a software arranger, but no styles. Therefore, you are playing Yamaha, Ketron and whatever else styles that it is compatible with. I don't know if you have spent much time on any of the latest arrangers (although they have been WAY past the GM soundset for over ten years), but these styles don't just use ONE piano, or one bass, or one Rhodes, etc. They have dozens of them, as different as chalk and cheese. What works with one style doesn't work for another.

If you think about it, this is like expecting a 50's Latin band to use the exact same instruments as a 90's rock band! Not just a piano, drums, percussion and bass and guitar, but the SAME piano, bass, drums and guitar. But in reality, they wouldn't have one thing in common. Musical instruments in the real world have evolved over the years. In fact even the lowly Rhodes came in several different varieties, all quite different from each other. Guitarists play Strats, Tele's, Gibson's (Les Paul's and 335's) PRS's and a myriad others, none sounding alike.

I kind of shudder at the thought of an arranger with such a limited palette, even if those few sounds are quite excellent. The idea sounds OK, until you think that, that's ALL you are going to have. To cover everything from 20's jazz to 90's smooth rock, to 21st century electronica... It just can't be done. If it could, don't you think the majors would have only 128 sounds, but they all be GREAT?

The styles are going to call up thousands of different sounds, but you are going to try to play them ALL with the same few?

This is what sank the MS. Be careful navigating the same waters...

Bachus, I did not create a test version, because of piracy problems.
I am not an expert on how to prevent piracy, and I am sorry that many person abort the idea of vArranger because of that.

There is a money back possibility, I can explain the conditions in a private email