You can take a 20 year old electric guitar. Route the output through any modern guitar effects processor & VIOLA!!! you end up with an amazing instrument doing things it could NEVER!!! do before.

GBL does same for the older PSRs and my ears (not mere reasoning) tell me the result is stunning. The proof of the pudding is in the eating & not in the analyzing of the recipe...

The GBL team comprises of visionaries - visionaries are people setting out to do what is not considered possible by the masses. And to this effect they SHINE!

Remember when it was stated for a fact that the older hardware could NOT accept Revo drums? Some even insisted that it would damage the Yamaha operating system beyond repair - Ha! And now I have it installed on my PSR S770 - albeit seven layers compared to thirty two on the Genos, but listen to my demos for yourself. I LOVE visionaries...

I saw quite a few returning/selling those due to personal disappointment, some even after multi attempts to try to get to like it. Any thing is subjective to personal opinion and GBL is certainly no exception.

As for me, I highlighted the benefits GBL offers to a PSR S770 and I've proven my point completely to this effect. It's all about cost versus sound output.

1. If you have no financial constraints, go for the flagships instead.
2. If you feel neglected as a result of current financial constraints, then look at GBL again.

It's just THAT simple really...

One thing I guarrantee, if I had a SX900 I would have:

1. Installed the full GHENOS pack including ALL the Genos Revo & other voices.
2. Installed many more free choir human & other stunning voices.
3. Used GBL & turned a great many standard SX900 styles into versions which could no longer be compared to on-board SX900 styles at all.
4. GBL is a tool - you can either use as is or upgrade a great many styles to your liking with it's powerful editing capabilities.

Quote from Rikki:
have you compared it to your sx900?

Personally I still think the sx wins out.

Hi Rikki
I have not compared it to my SX900. I am not concerned as much with the technical aspects of these comparisons,but what it seems to do for me. My take on this is that Groovyband.live is excellent at what Henni laid out,not a claim that it is for all people,but for especially those with a PSR ,or in need of a softsynth. The higher up the ladder you go,the murkier the picture is. There is no doubt that they have come up with great innovations,but still tied to the PSR. As responsive as this team has been to Henni(a great promoter),I would expect more in the future.

Hi Bernie,
Sorry I really only was referring to how sx sounds playing a style vs what Groovyband demo sounds like.

Not all the technical stuff that Groovy is capable of , that sx can’t do.

Spent too many years fiddling round with equipment, decided I just want something I can switch on the button and play. Haha

It‘s NOT a softsynth, it neither produces sounds nor effects of its own, it is a midi-based system that can only arrange the PSR‘s own sounds and effects via midi messages. Let’s stay logical about what midi is.

Again: They state in their FAQ that it’s a purely MIDI-based system. Both your examples don’t apply here: the guitar you mention has new effects - not possible with midi. The drums you mention were obviously loaded into the PSR as a sound package with new samples - not possible with a midi system.

WHATEVER... Forgive me for no longer responding to your loose, non-technical comments in this thread. You obviously do not know anything about effects or midi for that matter.

In risking the fury of a moderator upon me again, may I politely suggest you do a little reading in your spare time perhaps?

It‘s obviously you who doesn’t know anything about midi. Your comment is indeed preposterous. Midi messages can only use those effects that the receiving device can produce. I have used synthesizers (not arrangers) for 30 years, I have produced instrumental playbacks for a singer, used complex settings with two keyboards combined with bass pedal and two modules live, for example, and I am therefore well informed about what midi is, what samples and effects are.

I guess it‘s asked too much of you to keep the discussion on a matter-of-fact instead of an emotional, irrational and personal level?

It's ALL about effects. Midi channels allow more effect parameters than style channels. This is why a style is treated like midi & sent to the PSR which treats it as midi.

The interface makes it look like a style.

* * * SO I REPEAT!!! It's all about adding more effects to midi * * *

* * * SO I REPEAT!!! It's all about adding more effects to midi * * *

* * * SO I REPEAT!!! It's all about adding more effects to midi * * *



Speak for yourself. I've stated FACTS throughout this discussion & I'll continue to do so. It is YOU who do not accept this software for what it does.