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.

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

John C.

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..

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.

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.