For what it's worth both the Pa-600 and Pa-900 are being built in China whereas the top of the line Pa3X is built in Italy. Chinese production quality has improved quite a bit over the last 10 years I might add. Italy, on the other hand, is well known for producing top quality products with a focus of attention on detail. I have yet to play the Pa-600 or the Pa-900 because Guitar Center still doesn't carry them at any of the local GC's in my area. By the way, I noticed that Guitar Center is in big financial trouble owing approximately $1 billion to their creditors. I suspect that some of the keyboard companies are hesitant to ship their products to GC outlets because of the financial mess they're in. On the other hand Yamaha continues to ship products to the Guitar Centers in my area which is nice to know. I would have kept the PSR-s950 if not for the few minor inconveniences I had with it. Examples being the really cheesy keys, an inferior Vocal Harmony and being unable to navigate the keyboard buttons in low-light venues. Other than that it was a nice arranger.

Korg has just released the new Pa-300 arranger and from what I've gathered it's made in Italy although don't quote me on that. But it only has half as much WAV ROM as the Pa-900 but in contrast it has the same amount as the Pa-600. I've heard several people's opinion about the Pa-900 and most of what I've heard has been good. But there is a fly in the ointment where one guy said he actually sold his Pa-900 and bought a PSR-s950 and the reason he gave was the Yammie sounded better to his ears. To each his own I reckon.

I see Fran is still bragging about his G70. For what it's worth I played the G70 and wasn't all that impressed. To each his own I reckon.

Arrangers being built today are superior in many ways but in other ways not so much. Case in point, the sound quality has improved quite a bit but the overall build quality has taken a hit if you ask me. Plastic, plastic, and more plastic and the internal components have also taken a hit in some ways too. For instance the PSR-s950 Vocal Harmony components are inferior to the Tyros 1 which I owned but sold a few years back. I also think the Pa-900 VH ain't the greatest either although it's somewhat better than the Yammie in my opinion. Hopefully the Pa4x Vocal Harmony will be a step above the Pa3x but only time will tell. 256 note polyphony would also be a game changer but for whatever reason the Big 3 has milked 128 polyphony for all it's worth and therefore we might be stuck with 128 for another decade or longer which is just plain wrong in my opinion. I have harped on doubling the polyphony for a long time now but it keeps falling on deaf years for the most part. Ketron has upped the ante and Roland actually doubled it on the Jupiter-80 but it's a synth, not an arranger.

PS: Fran said it's been too quite around here so I thought I'd chime in. Glad to see our good friend Don Mason is back on his feet. Bypass surgery techniques have improved quite a bit over the years and so has the recovery time. My advice to Don is stay healthy and a big part of doing that is eating healthy.

All the best, Mike

hey Mike it was a comparison I guess I could brag with the results though

keybplayer With a broad statement like this about the G70 it would be nice to hear more on the reasons for your dislike?

Greetings Donny. A few years ago Guitar Center had a G70 on display and I played around with it for a while and went through the sounds, etc., but unfortunately I was less than thrilled with it. Other people obviously disagree with my assessment and as I said before to each his own.

By the way in my previous post I meant to type: falling on deaf 'ears' when I was talking about polyphony. Sorry for the typo. Now where was I? Oh yeah. The G70 is built like a tank and for that matter so is my Fantom G7. The G70 has a lot of nice features but I was disappointed with the less than stellar sounds that I demo'd. Although the display model was likely 'out of the box' sounds and I'm sure you could tweak them to make them more suitable to your preference. Hey, if Fran thinks the G70 is the bees knees then more power to him. I happen to disagree with him but it's still a very nice arranger. And I enjoyed his song too.

I'm chomping at the bit trying to decide which arranger to get. I miss arrangers and in fact I started out playing on arrangers before anything else. I was seriously considering a Tyros5 76 key but I felt Yamaha dropped the ball by giving it the usual 128 note polyphony. Some people complained the Tyros 4 had note drop off so I was surprised when Yammie didn't address the issue on the Tyros5. Oh well. I figure the Pa4x will cost around $4,000 but I really don't expect Korg to double the polyphony. Korg has been playing catch up when it comes to polyphony. For years it was 62 note then 120 and finally 128 on the Pa-900 thank God. But even 128 note polyphony doesn't cut it any more especially if you compose complex arrangements. It doesn't take rocket science to double the polyphony to 256 and a prime example is the Casio PX-5S that I have mentioned before and it costs less than a grand but as we know it's not an arranger unfortunately.

I hope to check out the Pa-300 when it hits store shelves but that could be six months from now or even longer since Korg is mighty skimpy when it comes to delivering their arranger products to the Guitar Centers in my area. I know I know. I could buy something sight unseen online and take it back if I'm not satisfied and I might end up doing that since one of the Guitar Centers in my area is a hop skip and jump away. I really like to play them beforehand if at all possible but the times they are indeed changing and from what I understand the Big 3 is focusing primarily on online sales as a way to trim costs and meet their sales objectives. And for all we know Guitar Center might not be in business five years from now because of the financial mess they're in.

All the best, Mike

Mike thank you for clearing that up with your reply on the G70.
Sounds like 256 poly is a must for you .....do you create complex arrangements? If so why not forget an arranger and continue being happy playing synths like the ones you have or Kronos, Motif etc,.. which for your needs seems to be better equipped in many ways vs an arranger. Everyone has different needs when choosing an instrument....bottom line is producing great music there are no rules ..

Good Luck

256 polyphony would be nice Donny but 128 will have to do for now because that's all that's available. Except of course the Audya which has 192 polyphony but it only has USB 1.1 plus the price is sky high. That wouldn't be so bad if it also had USB 2.0, better styles and a larger user memory, etc.

Unless something drastically changes during summer NAMM 2014 or winter NAMM 2015 I'm basically stuck between a rock and a hard place. As I stated previously the Big 3 could milk 128 note polyphony for several more years and they might actually be colluding with one another in order to "fix" the polyphony amount at 128 as a way of controlling the market. But as we know that tends to inhibit progress and innovation. We are basically at their mercy and they realize that and therefore they have a tendency to milk certain features and they do it because it's beneficial for them from a business standpoint. Consumers have to put up with it or go without. In my case, if a keyboard doesn't meet certain criteria I will generally look elsewhere. On the other hand, Yammie, Korg and Roland are betting the farm that most people will take the 'bait' hook, line and sinker. The Tyros5 is probably a good example of that in my opinion.

Now before people start shooting flaming arrows in my direction the Tyros5 does have some new sounds that are in some cases superb but the B3 organs are still sub-par and of course it still only has 128 note polyphony. Again, people complained that the Tyros4 experienced note drop off but Yammie decided it was business as usual. Furthermore, the Tyros5 still costs around $6,000 out the door. The sad part is Yammie is laughing all the way to the bank because the Tyros line continues to sell like hotcakes. Which means that most people obviously don't care about various shortcomings (or the lack of quality control, especially on the Tyros5) and continue to shell out the big bucks for what are at best incremental improvements on the Tyros5 in my opinion. To each his own I reckon.

The Korg Pa-300 has piqued my interest because it looks like a solidly built arranger at a bargain basement price and it also has 128 note polyphony. Once I get the hang of playing an arranger again I will at some point upgrade to perhaps the Pa4x or some other high-end arranger product that will hopefully have 256 note polyphony but obviously I won't hold my breath if you know what I mean.

All the best, Mike

Mike why do you need 256+ polyphony? What complex arrangements would eat all that up and in what situation?

If drop outs occur on what you have now....
please post a few demos of it happening so we can hear what your talking about.

Hi DNJ

Have a look at most decent organs and you will find they have a minimum of 256 notes so that they don’t get notes dropping out when playing.

Arrangers with their limitation of a single keyboard are not as critical as you are limited to the amount you can play, but as soon as you start sequencing (To fill in the gaps) it can soon gobble up all the available polyphony. (8 track Midi sequence with 4 note chords (Plus basic single layer voices) means 32 notes have already gone out the Window, plus if there are any sustaining voices you have to allow extra (Say 40 notes) to cover it)

Multiple layered samples also eat up polyphony as each layer requires its own note.

Bill

128 is more then enough for me ......I have never had a drop out with the music I'm performing on stage with any of my arrangers to date.......

Bill is right Donny. Sustain plus multi-layered voices and also three right hand voices simultaneously on the newer Korg arrangers. Combine that with a left hand voice which in many cases is multi-layered and then on top of that multi-pads, styles and also midi files, all playing simultaneously, will eat up polyphony real fast.

I've exceeded the polyphony on my Fantom G7 on occasion and it's not an arranger. Arrangers are multi-faceted instruments that are polyphony intensive. For instance, just playing in auto-accompaniment mode can drain polyphony rather quickly, especially if you use the sustain pedal. Keyboard manufacturers utilize software algorithms in an attempt to minimize the effects of note drop off. But algorithms only provide minimal relief and in reality when you exceed the polyphony limit notes do get cut off and that can be unnerving in a live performance setting. If notes get cut off you won't hear certain sounds (notes) that you are attempting to play and in which your audience deserves to hear. But they won't if you run out of polyphony and quite frankly it is relatively easy to do on an arranger.

If the Big Three doubled the current polyphony standard to 256 it would create huge excitement within the music community. Keyboard players of all stripes have repeatedly asked the Big Three to double the polyphony to 256 but so far it has gone largely unheeded. There are a few like the Roland Juptier-80 and Casio's PX-5S plus certain Yammie Clavinova's and one or two Kawai's and that's about the extent of it. Only the Clavinova is an arranger and they cost an arm and a leg unfortunately. There are some portable organs that have 'unlimited' polyphony but again they aren't arrangers.

By the way, I noticed the Pa-300 doesn't have stereo outputs and so I wouldn't be able to hook it up to an external sound system which is a deal breaker for me unfortunately. I've been itching to play the Pa-900 and if Guitar Center gets one in I'll be sure to demo it if I can. Sometimes they get something in stock but they won't put it up on display for whatever reason. If things don't pan out here locally I might end up purchasing something online. Stay tuned.

All the best, Mike