that is why they are rumors...no one knows...but we'll see...
either way I am keeping the BK9

I very much doubt the genos will be replaced any time soon. I DO get that we who play arrangers would seem a dwindling market here in the US, but this thing is still pretty fresh. I'd be a lot less surprised to find the PA4x replaced. It sure seems to be nearing the end of it's run, and a lot of refurbs are showing up in different places.

AS far as the workstation label goes... absolutely meaningless to me. Knowing the history of Yamaha arrangers, I didn't expect advanced voice editing features in the Genos on par with their workstations. That has never been a feature in their arrangers, and frankly for the average player I would think it doesn't need to be. Korgs and even higher end Casio's allow for more edit power for those who want those features on an arranger. As far as other workstation features ? Styles vs step sequencing pre-made or user patterns.. deeper sampling in most workstations.. etc etc. Not important for me personally.

I see the Genos for a substantially better price than we've seen "advertised" out there, and I can afford it. I guess I'll decide if it's worth spending the money for what is essentially a pleasure board and great jamming tool.

I really want to love the PA4x too. It's a superb machine, as was the PSR S975 and T5 when I sampled them. Just not sure I love any of them more than then Genos. I'm already rather happy with the assortment of hardware and virtual instruments I already have. The reason for all this I guess was that I was simply quite surprised at how far Yamaha seems to have progressed from the Tyros 2 I still have to where they are now.

I was also surprised that the PA4x didn't "grab me" so to speak, at least on my initial comparison. Perhaps it's because I'm a different player than I was 10 or 20 years ago, with zero need or desire to play for a living. Or maybe I don't see enough difference between the PA3x and 4x. Really, I think it's likely because as I recall, I did a good deal of editing including EQ and effects as well as other parameters while making custom combis in the PA3x before I was happy with it, whereas the Genos feels more "plug and play". Perhaps as I've aged and struggled at times with a few medical issues, the latter is a pretty good thing.

Donny hears these voices ... in his head

According to this, PSR Arrangers also qualify as workstations???

The term "workstation" means nothing at all. It's just a generic name that everybody uses it for as long as I can remember. They even use it for low end arranger keyboards. It just makes the product sound cool and impressive I guess.

It's no different than people considering themselves keyboardist, pianist, guitarist or whatever. The name by itself doesn't suggest the depth of a feature or skill level at all. It's just one big category for everybody which is fine.

Workstation means you can do all and everything onboard witouth the ue use of external tools... includingvrecording (audio and midi) and sound mastering. A workstation allows you to produce fullfledged productions, from start to finish.

Which means :
Content creation and edditing (midi files/styles/arps).
Yamaha Genos does not offer enough here

Sound creation and edditing (nearly non excistant on Yamaha arrangers)

Recording.. this part is available on yamaha arrangers.. but there is no good fine tuning edditingvand mastering available..


Korg pa4x offers much more in this then the Genos, but does not pretend to be a workstation.. workstation means a lot... but yamaha is falsely using it as a marketing thing

That's what I was trying to say. Even an entry level arranger can be called a "workstation" without meeting those requirements. Just a simple midi sequencer is enough to qualify a device as workstation.

Workstation is a very loose term when used with arranger keyboards.

Korg calls the Pa500 a professional Arranger workstation as well.

Not according to the definition used by most pro musicians.. A workstation is a complete production platform, for producing content and final productions..

Just ask outside of the arranger world and anyone you will ask will disqualify both Korg and Yamaha for calling these arrangers workstations.

According to my definition, the only thing in Arranger country that comes close is the Korg PA4x, and even there quite a lot of things are missing.


Its both Korg and Yamaha and others abusing the term Workstation, and thats what i have been blaming mostly Yamaha for, for quite some time.

The Genos disquallifies as a workstation, so it should either get the missing features, or not be named a workstation.

That shouldn't be to hard? should it?

And if you want to know who made that definition of a workstation, well that was Yamaha and espescially Roland.

The "label" is of zero importance to me. I guess it's sort of a loosely applied term that could help point me in a certain direction when choosing new gear. Pretty much once I'm in the music store, I've already done research that points me in the direction of the right gear to check out. A visual glance at an actual board that I may not have researched, along with noting which boards sit next to it, often tells me enough to help me determine if it might fit into my plans.

Beyond that, I couldn't care less. IF I were still playing with others in a band, having a "workstation" vs any other type of instrument is not going to change how I play or make a difference in my ability. So I simply don't care about it. They can call the Genos ( or insert your choice ) a workstation, synth, arranger, strange alien instrument from another planet... etc etc. I simply don't care

As soon as the new models are released all thoughts will change,
and the vicious cycle continues over & over.