Let me agree with you (as i have allways said) when it comes to functionallity and the onboard tools, including arranger features, nothing can compete with the MZ-x ..


Yet .. there is also a lot i dont like, about which i posted extensively.... Thats mostly a matter of preferences for certain things in the single sounds and the onboard styles (attangements)


So why did i post this, because it keeps amazing me how everyone at Casio is trying their best to not call this an arranger.... Why?

Because Casio have no clear marketing strategy for the instrument they created. And they don't know how to categorise it and every demo they produced firmly underlines this point .

They will confuse potential buyers with all these mixed messages . Glad that software update is on the way squeak .

They're evidently not doing a very good job of not calling it an arranger because that is in fact what they call it on the Casio web sites (there are many). Here's one of them: http://www.casiomusicgear.com/products/menu_mz-x/mz-x500

Why do you keep posting about this? I have a theory but we're supposed to remain civil here so I won't say it. But I will say that if the explanations already given in this forum for why Casio is de-emphasizing the arranger nature (not completely surpressing it, otherwise they wouldn't have officially called it that in their literature) aren't convincing you should ask Mike Martin or his counterpart in Europe directly.

double post

Bachus..., sorry, but I don't think you are really understanding this. Yes, the MXZ has some new features aimed at drawing in the younger generation, but what you fail to grasp is that even though there are new EDM kits, and a few new modern styles using them, the traditional styles GREATLY outnumber the modern ones. The realty is that it's more traditional than modern when you look at the actual number comparison.

Casio took a traditional arranger (left AlL the traditional styles in.., along with the recording and editing tools), but pushed their traditional arranger up the ladder by adding the pads and a sampler. Yes, they added Hex Layering.., but this isn't really anything extraordinary when you look at the comprehensive sound editing available on Korg's arranger line.

You're completing missing the point of the MZX, and your claims about it are just flat out wrong in many cases. Granted, it may not be to your liking in the traditional area.., but all the traditional content is there.

I do understand.... Maybe you should reread some other discussions we had in the past... The formfactor of the mzx will get it to cult status with hordes of younger musicians... It has it all..

But as an arranger soundquallity out of the box for typicall arranger styles as well as many acoustic orchestrall instruments lags a dozen of years behind my current setup... And half a decade behind the korg and yamaha instruments around €1000. ...

And Casio knows, thats why they stay far away from promoting this as anything close to an arranger.

Maybe i am spoiled with my much more expensive instruments, but when i compared it at musicstore to a psr970 and a korg pa600 i cam to the same conclusion.... Casio has a lot of work at their hands if they want to catch up with yamaha and korg middle of the road arrangers.


However as a synth workstation, the casio mzx could convince me... Because typical keyboard and synth and piano sounds where top... And all those tools are incredible...


You keep saying Casio does not know how to market this instrument, i think they know, they know their arranger styles are lacking currently for typicall arranger players and so they stay away from even mentioning the arranger capabillities in their video's...



Point however is, if you are happy with the Casio as an arranger, then you are a happy man... So enjoy it...

I did ask them... They promised some nice arranger demo's ... So far they have not delivered on that.....


I can tell you why i keep returning to this single instrument... And thats because on paper this instrument had everything (except 88 keys with aftertouch) that i would have loved to see in a workstation for over a decade... The usefullness of the pads is incredible...

It looked to good to be true for that price, and now i know why... Guess i am highly dissapointed, how this turned out... Not just soundquallity lacks, but also buildquallity as compared to the px-5s the keys feel cheep and fimly..


They promissed an arranger at first... But its convincing in every other way, but not as an arranger...


Now this is the last i will say about Casio instruments for the comming months.... Also to this instrument the golden rule aplies, you get what you pay for...

Last Post 06/26 ... Today is 07/23

Any updated from Casio owners with fixing the sequencer issue and other functions ?

Happy with purchase ?

Casio's response ?

Update stil not released yet. Mike Martin said it would be some time in July, but couldn't give a specific day. Still happy with the keyboard.., but really do wish they would step it up on the firmware update.

I'm sorry to hear that squeak. I thought this issue had been resolved weeks and weeks ago. It's terrible business that they would take your money and then give you a product that is not complete. And leave you hanging for weeks for a fix .very bad business indeed .