By looking at other topics, I would like to start a new one which we can all relate.

Being a arranger player/ KB and Gtr player/band musician for more than 30 years and owned and used most brands both here and internationally, here are my thoughts.

If Korg/ Yamaha/ Roland reps are here, please listen, take notes and talk to your decision makers and/or contact me.:)


Busy Korg styles/ fills/ endings are not new. It impresss you first, but once you start playing western (4/4 , 3/4), meaning English / american songs which need more simple 8 beat / 16 beat with simple bass and fills, Korg’s busy acc start to show limits.

That’s why English/ american songs arranger players ( who mainly use arranger functionality, not taking about SMF payback or own sequencing OR
Own style creators) use more Yamaha arrangers in the real world. For US, UK, Asian (English/ american music 4/4 type playing) arranger players, PSR mid level arrangers sells.


Middle eastern/ east EU/ Balkan / ( and recently East Indian) is another story. Since TOTL/ MOTL inception, they mainly use Korgs / Ketron ( if they can afford it)for their local 3rd part support for styles/sounds/samples. Korg / Ketron and even Roland / GEM had created local country version of their arrangers ( which is unheard of for Yamaha until recently with more generalized with oriental PSR A series). How many 9/8 rhythms can you find in Yamaha arrangers before A series? Try YouTubing Korg arrangers user videos ( who are giging) , you will see most are Mid East/ East EU/Balkans.

Roland was big in in early to mid nineties with E70,86 and later G series. Early 90’s GM boom and GS SMF play back was ( and still is) best in the biz. The SMFs sounded better in GS equipped Roland arrangers/playback machines than more expensive Korg / Yamahas ( because it sound canvas SC series was industry standard gear for SMF commercial writers).

PA 80 generation( 60/50 , of course new micro arranger and recycled Ek50) same sound/ style board) and previous I generation ( I3 to I30 and Is series) Korg suffered lack of 4/4 simple , western (English/ american) music styles compared to Psr 2000 which was cheaper than PA80. Korg started to implement pads that play loops in Pa 1x and later ( remember Yamaha has loopable pads since PSR 6xx , late 90’s). Finally , Roland arrangers joined to have that function after Korg). Even 4x / 1000/700 still suffer busy styles. ( when I3 came out it blew every arranger for hardware/ sounds/ 4 variations and other functionalities that were unheard of in 1993 for an arranger with workstation sound board and hardware ;X3 , plus full blown sequencer and style creator) but cheaper E86 was outselling due to direct disk SMF play, which I3 can’t ) and better 3rd party style support due to prior successful non FD E70 etc). Yamaha wasn’t a major competition until late PSR 740 (1999), 9k , 9k pro (once they start putting 4 variations in 1999 in 740, )and Roland with their G series in mid-late 90’s). Psr 2k and T1 charged the game for the US/ UK players due to ongoing style pool (of 4 variation styles) of western music in early year 2000s. Aging Korg IX , IS series
and I 30 starts to show style limitations which arguably continued to Pa80. Then comes, PSR 3k with, both USB to device and SM slot , mega voice, VH input (like previous 740,8K), series-in MOTL in 2004 (after T1) and the rest was history. Korg had the technology ( Triton Le ,2002 has SM slot), yet PA 1x pro (2003) and Pa50 and PA 1x(2004) still using FDs. Direct style play without loading from disk/USB/ SM and ability to sync SMF to style ( ie-playing rock SMF with onboard Reggae style sync in real-time) also helped Yamaha from competitors even though there are complaints about their hardware/ liveliness/keys.

Technics ( who was on the way out) will be another topic.


Of course g1000 ‘s chord sequencer function followed by Pa 3x to Psr-sx900. Even though Yamaha has the tech ( some of 80’s cheap FM arrangers had chord sequencer), it never made to 2000’s mid / high level arrangers until now.


This is how market is and was ( from I3 to Pa4x, E70 era to EA7, PSR 630/730 ) to SX Series.

If you are performer of western( English lyric music) and your majority of set consist or arranger live playing, you tend to use Yamaha.

If you gig consists of mainly sequenced or SMF play with some arranger playing mixed in , you tend to use non Yamaha ( mainly, Korg , some Roland,). If you are in a band with occasional arranger gig/ or (you are using only drum and bass and muting busy ACCS intentionally)and if you can only afford one MOTL KB , most go with Korg.


If you are Mideast/Balkan/ east EU musician, the main choice is mostly Korg .

Remember, most Korg arranger buyers remorse mostly is never the sounds/ functionality/ editing/ sequencer/ punchiness or live sound.It’s always lack of style support ( unless it’s Mideast/ EU/ East Indian, etc). Realization comes after being forced to mute ACc tracks and/ or forced to use less fills because the styles ( including the bass lines) are overplayed. The option; write your own style or purchase styles or just sequence the song or use drums only and olsy live bass and comping.


Yamaha ‘s buyer remorse mainly is : key feel/ cheap hardware/ nor a real sequencer, lack of deeper editing, overpriced MOTL, not “live sound” ( even though they will not trade it for busy “live” styles, etc.

Recently Yamaha also want to capture that market buy putting sample load ( for last 5 years or so) MOTL and putting Joy stick replacing wheels in Genos/new PSR SX series.Their previous “ oriental” models couldn’t complete with Korg. New models’s Mid East style support still have along way to catch up to Korg.

For western ( English lyric) music arrangers players sooner or later come back to Yamaha mainly for simple styles and great 3rd party style support even they hate the keys , built quality of MOTL PSRs.

Unfortunately unless Korg wakes up and put more simple and abundant 8 beats drum/ bass lines/fills , their arranger sales will suffer in western world.

Until Yamaha has better hardware/ keys/ local 3rd party styles sounds support, their sales will suffer in Oriental/eastern EU market.

Ketron on the other hand, due to price, lack of support and availability, it can not catch up with Yamaha or Korg ( arranger user number wise).

Roland has to put more expressive styles and stop recycling old/ sound styles.Their mid 90’s golden days of MOTL and TOTL over. A few supernatural tones cannot compete with SA2 or even DNC sounds. Their styles still lack realism of even mega voices gtr styles even though they may have better drums. Make up tools are great. Commercial SMFs sounds/ sequenced best in GS, but they have to step up their arranger style game and put linear/ more expressive style department.


Remember, most western( English ) songs that are played by arrangers are simple 8 beats ,4/4 styles that require realistic acoustic guitar strums or simple piano chording/ comps that stays within the measure / more generic simpler bass lines which are not in your face yet in the pocket, drummer like Ringo who doesn’t over improvise and/or does not do crazy fillls. It means one simple style will fit multiple songs without having to rewrite bass lines or mute parts to barely fit the song ( like most Korg styles)Yamaha is killing it in that department and selling well in this area since they got it right for simple styles even though their MOTLs lack built quality, less “live sound”, not that great key feel and relatively overpriced. Unmatched free 3rd party style support can also not be overlooked.


Side Note-
If Yamaha makes a arranger module ( psr Sx 700 in a box) which include all necessary buttons and sells for 1000$, it will do well. With the touch screen now, it will be an easier to navigate. They may attract solo gtr players who wants foot switchable drum machine which has 4 variations and can play SMF/ MP3 Wave file without loading, small foot print). it will also attract solo piano players. The key here is it must have all must have physical buttons. No hidden menus , no shift or double pressing to change key or octave, etc and must have a onboard sequencer without needing a computer /iPad.
Of course , main attraction is 3 rd party style support. Most of the mp3/wave backing track solo performers’ main complaint is, lack of song availability, unable to mute or delete tracks or potions of tracks, lack of control of level adjustments within each track, being unable to edit drum track ( over powering Snare or high volume hi hats, etc) which midi will take care of it and they will also be able to save the edited file as MP3 if the wish. This is another market which is there. Most arranger players want keys and onboard speaker as one light unit but market is there for other solo performers such as guitarists and solo piano players who want backing tracks/ rhythm other than unchangable audio files. As you are aware, you see more solo performers than Duos ( compared to back in the day). The Duo gigs, KB player will take cars of the biz but if you are traveling solo vocalist/ gtr player, arranger module can be beneficial due to less space/ easy to travel ( which will fit in a suit case). Any midi KB will do the job for editing/ writing basic tracks.



Bk7m failed for navigation and small screen and some sterile styles, Ketron failed for the price. ( Previous Korg Is modules failed mainly for style content).


“Western “ in my post refers to most Rock/pop/country/ jazz /simple ballads/light Latin/ dance/ ( non EDM nor Rap) Anglo or Anglo influenced mainly 4/4 ( and less 3/4) popular songs which are the majority of songs on a set list.


Share your thoughts.


PS: sorry for typos. Using iPhone to type.

I think that is a very good, and comprehensive, review of a very important subject. Thank you Jamman.

Interesting comparison. It just goes to show that there’s no perfect keyboard.

...and few perfect Arranger Players/Performers! Especially me!

Interesting analysis.. . I agree with a lot of it.
I might add Roland EA7 is loaded with styles for every region. Too bad it may well be the last decent Roland arranger. It has the most and best, to me, simple country/western styles, except for waltz.
I've not had much trouble finding the styles I need for Korg, although their recent emphasis has been on genres of music that this old man doesn't much get into.
I've had some success converting midi files to styles on the 4X.

No problem, Bernie.

Great! I agree with you on that Roland should be in the game.
EA7 is well designed, slim yet feature packed plus speakers.

Sharing my thoughts as requested:

With this post, I'm finally convinced my style critique of the Korg styles has been correct....too busy...too in-your-face...some of the "wimpish" styles sound like a child's music box...some of the "wild and crazy" heavies sound like they're doing all the playing for you - that you're just a side dish throwing in a few stabs here and there. And some of the styles don't even sound like the style they're named after. My own pecking order for live arranger playing would be #1 Roland #2 Yamaha with Korg somewhere in the bottom of the pile.

Thanks jamman for all the research you did and taking the time to share it with us. I read every word you wrote. It was very enlightening for me.

We have different opinions on which arranger is best for live playing, but that is to be expected as each of us will have different needs and preferences.'
I find the Korg the best for live performance, taking into consideration the excellent vocal processor/harmonizer, the Songbook, the Chord Sequencer and the many assignable sliders and buttons. If I think a style is too busy, too loud, not loud enough, it takes about two minutes to tweak it to my needs. It can then be saved as a SB entry, a custom style, or even to the factory style location.
The Roland EA7 is also excellent for live performance, but does lack text display and vocal harmony. I love the weight, size and light, responsive keybed. Piano players probably wouldn't like it, but this isn't a piano forum is it?
The Yamahas are fine, but have that distinctive Yamaha sound that really hasn't changed much for many years. The Genos and the new PSR may be finally addressing that, but the demos still sound pretty much the same to me, unless you consider the audio drum styles.
I do find the Yamaha operating system and navigation archaic and the Registration system cumbersome, although, again, that has been addressed in the new models. I still would put Yamaha at the bottom of my list for live performance. As mentioned, your views can or probably will be different. I have owned at least 20 different Yamaha arrangers, but I feel they have fallen behind the other companies, at least until this latest generation.
Ketron or course has the live band sound down nearly perfectly. Factory bugs have been their Achilles heel. When they finally address them, they are really great for live performance. It bothers me that there is really only ONE person for support in the U.S. He does a great job of it, but is still sometimes hindered by Ketron Italy.
Just rambling here because I have a night off and can't go to sleep early after nearly 50 years of playing until Midnight or so.

No problem.

While I agree with most of it I have to disagree about Yamaha as I have always rated them as the bottom of the pile when it comes to styles, the main reason is that many of them use specially created voices (Megavoices etc.) to make them which makes them difficult to edit, they are also more song specific which soon becomes very boring and canned, the final problem is because they are designed as an entity, if you try and simplify them too much the style completely falls apart. (While the sounds and drums have come on in leaps and bounds the style makeup still doesn’t sound anything like a real band)
Korg have always been busy as their arrangers came from their professional arm (Hence the reason they were a pain to setup and use in the early days) rather than the home hobby market of all the rest, however if you leave the styles off it is one of the best arrangers out there to play in a live band due to the fact it sounds live, unfortunately their Workstations sound even better and are even more flexible so the Arrangers just stay primarily in the home hobby market.
Roland had some of the best styles and sounds in the G70 era (Nothing else could touch them) as they sounded exactly like a real band (Compared them many times) plus you could edit or simplify them and they still sounded real.
If you want simple styles you need the type that come with entertainment organs, as they are designed to allow the player great flexibility (They have 2 keyboards and pedals on the go) in playing without the style getting in the way or falling apart.

Bill

Hi Jamman,
thank you for bringing up the topic.my 2 cents worth. Have thoroughly enjoyed my Korg keyboards for the last 10 + years, but instead of actually playing music, I spent a lot of my time converting , tweaking styles to suit the music I wanted to play.
Came to the realisation most of the styles I use are my yammie conversions,
so might as well have the real thing and do some playing instead.

Everyone has their own needs, but now ,tend to think if a keyboard doesn’t have styles that are basically suitable and need much more than just a tweak or a few additional user styles ( my case I was trying to turn my Korg into a yammie , stylewise, haha) better off buying the one with the styles that suit.

I agree with you 100%.

That's the difference in people, as I do a minimum of tweaking and converting, but usually find styles in my Ketron, Korg, and Yamaha boards that work fine. I suppose this means I am not discerning enough or I play vanilla type songs that don't require me to go through hoops to perform. This leads me to other factors like sound, navigation, and build quality that I consider at least as important.

Not right or wrong, just different.

I think the fact that its very easy to eddit these styles...
And that its often just a matter of muting some tracks..
On Korg pa4x, its even possible to mute drumsounds ..

Its best to have busy styles on board..
As its much easier to mute something then create something new,..

And if a bass is to busy, just find one in another style or variation thats simpler..

In my book someone that says brand a’s styles are to busy, missed out on the chapter easy edits..


On both Genos aswell as pa4x, muting tracks is often thefirst thing i do(did) after choosing a style..

My favorite arranger keyboards.


I have found the favorite arranger keyboards I have owned or played are:

The Roland G70... in my opinion , absolutely the best arranger for what it does.
Key feel and range, sounds, styles , edits, insert effects, vocal harmonizer,
Sequencer, guitar mode, separate outs,6 fills, etc.

The Ketron SD7...styles and audio guitar, drums .. real sounds, nice speakers..

The Roland E-A7... Great styles, sounds include many SRX sounds, great drums,
editing, best media player, sampling, good speakers.. Lacks a sequencer (big disappointment),
user friendly operation.

The Roland BK9... nice key feel, chord sequencer, 16 track sequencer, some SuperNatural sounds.
Not as user friendly as the E-A7.


Each of the keyboards I listed have advantages over the others, but all around..
I listed them in my order as best.

The touch screens on the G70 and SD7 make them stand out.
The sampling and 6 pads, make the E-A7 stand out.
The chord sequencer, make the BK9 a stand out.

I have rated this list, including time I have spent with several Korgs and Yamahas.

We can of course always mute or edit or rewrite Acc tracks. It’s a given. The topic/ discussion here is style comparison and usefulness having simpler/ generic style pool in your arranger for singing arranger player/ and taking advantage of it (which will benefit arranger players) who needs to create quick backing tracks/finish songs in tight time line without major editing of the basic frame of the song ( of course signature intros/ solos, etc will be done later on that framework).

There will be always exceptions such as a player who always use edited/rewritten 10 styles for 80% of his arranger set ( which exclude Mp3/SMF or sequence play.

“Busy” here didn’t mean all ACC tracks are played. It means ACC
tracks/ bass and drum tracks fills are over complicated/over played with unnecessary licks / comps in between, complex drum fills that a normal drummer rarely uses for that style, etc.

Issue with a busy style and why muting tracks not always work
——————————————————————————————-
Most us will of course not use factory style without adjusting levels/ tones/ mute tracks to get the style that fit your playing.But if the factory style is busy / over played / has over complicated bass lines , muting will not work unless you rewrite the lines of that style.

See below example which is very common.

Most of the time you do need all 4 ( minimum 3) variations to be applicable to modern songs that are not just your verse and chorus. Your variation 1 with ACC1 open and ACC 2 muted may sound Ok but when you progress to variation 3 , that ACC 1 becomes unnaturally/ annoyingly super busy ( like a song style) ; ie as if they are playing short licks at the end of the measure) may become unacceptable to use that style.Muting will not work because you need that ongoing simple AC 1 to continue where you need both hands after triggering the chord ( meaning using joy stick or wheels for a expressive GTR/SAX/ Synth) solo while style is ongoing.

If the bass line gets unnaturally busier/ overplayed in Acc 3 or 4, the style will become unusable.

There will be work around and partial solutions such as using sequenced Pads or chord sequencer ( if your unit has it), but they always lacks simplicity/ defeats the purpose ( getting in the way of music making) and spontaneity/natural flow. Why not fix the main problem instead of creating partial solutions that may or may not work 50% depending on how busy/ overplayed the original style is.



Starting from PA3x , styles with 8/16 gets better but not quite there yet. Big chunk of the style pool still carry legacy/ PA80 flavor of ACC busy- ness.

Again, the issue here is only when you to use arranger styles in your live gig or when you create backing tracks. Having more /abundant generic styles are invaluable asset. Styles that are over played, busy, recognizable yet unusable in your face bass lines , complex fills and unorthodox or song specific related comping / stabs are liabilities ( just taking the space because your rarely or never use them).

The only way out/ solution for most players ( including some of us here) is to mute all ACC tracks , Use LH for bass ( if the bass track is busy), use piano or Ep for RH. ( basically using arranger as drum machine with 4 variations and fills), which is great ( but defeats the purpose of the style play arranger function ; mainly due to over orchestration that can not be selectively muted as in given example ).

Like I mentioned before, If Korg can tackle this issue ( by going back to drawing board and find out why more generic less busy styles works for Yamaha and they are in demand by users always asking for Yamaha styles to Korg conversions which is not the other way around in general ). Korg can get bigger western market ( since they already have great features as editing power/ better seq and other things that I mentioned). They have improved some what but they need total revision for Pre 3x style banks ( which carried over to 4x, 1000 & 700) with very few exceptions.

Hi,
It’s ok to mute tracks, I’ve even muted or deleted cv’s which definitely helps simplify in some instances, but still need to find the of type of style I want in the first place. Its the machine I’ve loved over the past 10 years, not the styles. It’s probably only because of the genre of music I play,
The Korg piano type ballads are a bit too full on for me, whereas the yammie ones , even though repetitive work well with a heap of the tunes I like to play. There’s at least 4 I couldn’t do without, whereas I wouldn’t miss any of the korg ones, except for an old Korg I series 4/4 ballad I dumbed down.

My ideal keyboard, a Korg with a heap of simpler yammie type styles. Haha

Good points!

I have to say with the last 5 years of Yamaha styles I'm ready for more than the "studio" sound..

I disagree...


As i said, its not fair to judge a keyboard based on how it sounds out of the box..
Espescially not in a “pro” community like synthzone..

You need to judge a keyboard on the sound you can create with reasonable effort..
This is where Korg and Yamaha really differ in approach..

I don’t have to explain how the plethora of free user created styles and resources is a wealth unparralled when it comes to creating your own sounds... where the midi to style converter on korg pa4x offers another approach to do just this..

As said, i don’t think there is any use to compare the onboard styles as they are from my point of view they are just building blocks.. personally i allways eddit each style i use to my liking... unless its a very great downloaded song specific style/performance on the Genos...

Both the Genos and the pa4x have busy styles and less busy styles.. both allow you to create exactly what you want.. altough the style engine of the pa4x is more advanced when it comes to creating and edditing, where yamaha lives by the plethora of downloadable free content..

In the end most users must be able to copy paste from other styles? Which adds huge potential above just muting tracks..

How easy it was years back, you listened for a few minutes and said, I want that one.

John C.

Buying is still as easy...
But since all the high end arrangers sound so good..
It becomes a matter of features and workflow that make your decision..

Knowing, you can make these toolboxes sound exactly how you want them to sound, with the right amount of effort...

https://app.box.com/s/uwop9o0ehwefik4agj793vye6opwoeoh

I still have a few Roland Music Style Disks.The style I`ve used for this song is called 50`s Ballade.It is one of 16 on MSD 107
which are floppy disks which I bought when I purchased the Roland EM2000 (which I still have)but as the E80 also has a floppy disk drive I thought I`ll give them a try and they seem to work ok.
It states on the disk "This Music Style Disk can only be used in Roland instruments type E86 etc",which shows their age.

You are welcome to disagree.

If you read carefully, the discussion is about Arranger onboard built in styles.Not arranger onboard styles after rewriting the style/extensive editing that include copying from different styles to make it work.

When I signed onboard in the beginning to be a musician, it was to play music. It was NOT learning how to program an arranger, learn rhythm patterns, how to play the different instrument sounds, bass lines, music software, smartphone apps, etc. Every minute I have to spend on these tasks is a minute I wasn't able to use to make myself a better musician.

John C was correct. He wrote: "How easy it was years back, you listened for a few minutes and said, I want that one."

No one is wrong here, just different. Some dig deeper, and deeper, and some open the box and play, and play. We are not all wired the same. I like busy styles because I can change or delete. If they were not as busy as I would want, I would have to record new parts.

I love to organize. I spend a lot of time putting a new song into the keyboard. This is what I believe in, but there is a price to pay. The amount of time I spend playing VS organizing tells the rest of the story.

In the past I spent 70% of the time playing, and 30% organizing, that has changed. The realization that I am playing less troubles me.
As the saying goes: To each his own.

John C.

I think every modern arranger has a registration, and/or songbook feature. You can adjust levels, changes kits, sounds, mute parts, etc., then just save them. That's about as deep as I get as far as editing. I want to PLAY.
And, there are tons of extra styles out there for Korg, Roland and Yamaha.

Yup. Is that you or me talking?

It appears to me that for the home player, Yamaha has been the traditional winner because of the full sounding styles. If your looking to record your own songs...the drums in the Yamaha (up until Genos and maybe PSR-SX900) lacked punch and definition to sound good enough for recording. I know Gary and others have put countless hours into editing and improving Yammie drums, but to me...they are not strong enough.

I love the ability to just grab a knob on the sd40 and adjust volume quickly. The sd90 has taken that capability to another level. So from an old studio guy...knobs and faders are awesome. I’m to lazy to dig into sub-menus to adjust levels and eq. To me...the more individual control of each instrument the better. That way...you can make styles much more customizable. We’ll have wait and see if the new sx900 offers easier control of this.
JM

Well, if you like knobs and faders, the live controlls on Genos are incredible.. set them up,once and controll your hearts delight..

Its one of the things that makes me love the Genos..

My example of natural/ simple expressive style of realistic guitar strums/ bass line.


https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=IZQZRbPuBzg




Old vid of Tyros 2 guitars and ballad styles



https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Eoq2SXDgnbI
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=UG8iFyEirmU





PA 4x pop/ ballad styles


https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=K8MZI4TT6GQ


https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=3Alcr4FvRyA


You can notice that primitive style programming / lack of dynamics in Korg IMHO.

Transitions from chord to chord on the Korg always felt rather 'lumpy' and it seemed easier for the Korg to get the wrong interpretation of a chord.


I believe someone mentioned before that coding language ( for styles) that Yamaha uses is different from Korg and Roland. That could be the reason for chord interpretation of timeliness.