When it's actually played it sounds great, however when it comes to the backing, you would be better off with a synth/Workstation and a Karaoke machine for a fraction of the price. (Or just stream the song on Spotify)
Lets face it, no pro musician is going to want to play along to a canned backing when they can express themselves better by playing the keyboard and backing themselves. (For a home hobby player its great, as you can sound great with minimal effort, but even home hobby players want more than this)

Bill

Bill

Please explain the above - those are pure styles only playing, same as any other arranger.

Exactly, its the same every time, totally canned and mainly song specific, thus not allowing the user to put their own stamp on the performance.
Its particularly bad on the Event (And previous Ketron boards) as audio styles are difficult (If not impossible) to edit, at least with Midi styles the user can edit them to make them their own.
To be honest the only part where audio is really good is in the drums, which if they use Rex files they are very easy to swap about.

Bill

DIFFERENT THINKING Thank you Bill
With my four-piece band, and as an OMB, I wanted freedom. The greater part of my attention was on the people I was playing for. I tried to be there completing their every thought. No music backing, and no song sets.

With my band I played rhythm, solo guitar, and all lead singing. My music book was arranged so it was easy to change venues. I called the key to the keyboard ((Hammond B3) The band was tight, as soon as I started the change, they were right there. After a few months it just flowed. Playing New York, New York, and Macho Man seemed to go together.

I set-up my Technics keyboard the same manner. Many of my friends used recorded backing. Changes on the kn7 were easy --- It was rare not having a job on a weekend.

My happy days, John C.

Having had the Audya for many years including most of the styles available for it, I simply cannot agree with your assessment.

Same could be said for all other manufacturers. I guess all this proves is that we are all biased in one way or the other.

I think both styles and backing tracks have their place. I use both, depending on the venue. For the good old music of the senior set, I use styles that I can change to my liking. However, if I want to be somewhat relevant in a younger crowd, I will add backing tracks and play and sing over them. It is one thing to put your stamp on a song you play well, but another to perform a song specific arrangement that is merely recognizable. In other words, which method produces the best results.

Dear Abacus
I respect your opinion, but I disagree. And I disagree because I realize that you have a wrong opinion about both Ketron and Audio Styles.
And I'm telling you this as a professional musician (as I imagine you are) where my main job is music (Live Performing) and I've been working exclusively with Arrangers since 1991. I've been using Ketron since 2000 with the SD1 and later with the Audya (I never went to SD9 because for many reasons I didn't like it) and now with Event. Also, as you may know I also have the Yamaha Genos and the Korg Pa3x. I was also lucky enough to have the new Korg Pa5x (on loan from a well-known E-Shop) for a month to test it out. In fact, I had also made a demo video which is in Greek, but someone can see it here if they want https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oke6zdkrbZE

So, you talked about (canning). How did you really come to this conclusion? Because as far as I know canned is in my opinion a (narrow-minded – because exactly as you said it does not offer freedom of expression) copying of classic music hits (song styles) where contrary to what you say, this logic is followed by Yamaha to the letter but also Korg and as incredible as it may sound to you, the only company that does not use this logic is Ketron. So, when listening to Preset (midi styles) from both Yamaha and Korg, you hear nothing more than an absolute copy of the orchestration of the entire piece of music, even the Drums Fill. And I ask you here: Have you tried (in a Live performance) to play any Rock song for example on Genos and select for example the 80sClassicRock style?
Before you start people immediately know you're going to play Eye of the Tiger [Survivor], and after you've played the song, if you make the mistake of using the same Style again in another song by pressing Intro, then people look at you because it's as if asking you: But haven't you played this song before? And this is because they have made an exact copy of all the music production.
The same will happen if you use e.g HighRoadRock which is an absolute copy of AC/DC - Highway to Hell and the same will happen to all Styles because they are all copies of specific musical hits.
And for the sake of truth, look here and see in the comments below that users place next to each style the corresponding song from which it has been completely copied. https://youtu.be/HBkNZoYzagQ?t=45
And here I wonder if this is not (canning) then what else is? So, I'm telling you the above incident because I live it in my work, since I still play and work (every day) with Genos and since I still haven't managed to prepare the Event for my personal needs.
The same happens with all Styles and Korg and if you want, I challenge anyone to an experiment and put the Event in contrast with any other Arranger they wish to understand what I'm saying. Also, I would like someone to tell me (since you are talking about canned) listening to the Event Audio Styles one by one what is the (specific song) that each Style is based on?
So here let me say a few things about Audio Styles because from what I can see many of you who have maybe never worked with Audio Styles (by Ketron) are jumping to conclusions that are often incorrect.
So let me put my arguments to you.
So, what is the use of an Audio Style, in relation to the classic Midi Styles but above all, what is the purpose of their existence?

Audio Styles have two main advantages over midi styles:

1) Realism, because everything contains the (human factor) through Audio.

2) Creativity, because in an Audio Chord Chanel of a Style one can include as a complementary element (in combination with Midi), anything one can imagine. So theoretically (because it is extremely difficult in terms of implementation), but practically because the possibility exists, you can imagine that right now in the Event with the new Real Chord, even a real Symphony Orchestra can be "accommodated" within the Style.
These two elements are what characterize Audio Styles. Nothing more, nothing less.

But this is where the misunderstanding and misinterpretation starts and I think to some extent it is justified, because until today the role of Audio Styles has not been clarified.
So, I will tell you my opinion and you draw your own conclusions.
Audio Styles have no purpose to replace midi styles, but to add additional elements of realism to the midi style, which realism, cannot be compared (no matter how hard we try) through midi programming, because no matter how hard we try, for example, to create a good rhythmic Drum pattern, this cannot be compared to a real playing, in a good Studio by a good Drummer.
The exact same thing happens with percussions, guitar, bass and any other musical instrument or group of musical instruments we want.
And here now is the basic mistake that many people make, who criticize audio styles. And the mistake is that they compare audio styles with midi styles.
This comparison is wrong, because the point here (as I said before) is not to replace midi style with audio, but to coexist, just as it happens today in every workstation (daw) where midi and audio are now an essential and unbreakable combination, which is considered inconceivable not to exist.
So, consider asking a music producer the same question: Which one is better? Midi or audio? Of course, if such a question were ever asked to a music producer, then he would probably laugh, since we are comparing two completely different things and two different worlds that were born to coexist.
So, we shouldn't talk about comparison (because it's an unfortunate expression anyway), but about the coexistence of these two different worlds.
We would be justified in being critical about this if the Event (for that matter) only had audio styles and nothing else, which would probably be completely silly.
But let me respond to the criticisms and arguments of (the enemies of Audio Styles).

FIRST ARGUMENT
"No extended editing capabilities."
There is criticism from many users of classic midi arrangers, that Audio Styles have very limited (actually) or no editing capabilities within the instrument.
So, I'll tell you even worse:
There is no possibility to edit an audio channel of an audio style, e.g., Audio Drums, Audio Chord, etc.
The only configuration option that exists is that of the basic mix, i.e., Volume, EQ, compressor, or other FX such as Reverb, delay, etc.
So, we should know from the beginning that in,
or on the audio channels of an audio style, there are no processing options within the instrument beyond those of basic mixing. Therefore, we should realize the purpose of their existence, and this should be exploited musically and creatively.
There is no reason to look for things that are not possible.
If we focus on the purpose of audio styles, (which as we said is realism and creativity), then we are on the right track, and this is how we will proceed.
If this is our goal, then we should also learn how to handle audio styles.
Here I would like to make a parenthesis.
Many of us who lived through the 80s and 90s will remember that to have at least a few Audio Channels on your computer in a sequencer, such as Cubase, (which until 1997 only functioned as a midi sequencer), was, and seemed like a real blessing.
Thus, when Steinberg in 1997, with the release of Cubase VST 3.5, combined for the first time a workstation, with the possibility of MIDI + Audio sequencing giving the possibility to coexist with 32 audio channels, together with midi, this came as (uncle gift) for music producers around the world.
So, no one then came out to criticize this (necessary combination) of the two worlds, (Midi + Audio) because the capabilities and purpose of midi are different, and the capabilities and purpose of audio are different.
Everyone understood that this would be the defining, natural progression that should take place hereafter.
And that's how it happened. You will tell me that this example is somewhat extreme in relation to Arrangers, but I bring it as an example because I personally think that it is now time for these two worlds (Audio + Midi) to unite in Arrangers as well.
From there it should be up to each user to choose whether to use this combination or whether to use only one option (audio) or the other (midi) or both. The point here, in my opinion, is to have free choice, and believe me, that choice absolutely exists in Event.
Personally, however, I combine all the options, i.e., both midi styles and audio styles, but also a combination of the two.

SECOND ARGUMENT
"Time stretch usually does not have good results and especially at a lower speed than the original (20 to 30bpm) there is serious distortion of the sound."
First, we should say that in general today the Time Stretch algorithm, in relation to older ones, has been improved to a huge extent by each company that uses it, either for software or for hardware.
So, there is a much better response, always of course at a reasonable point. But here too it is important to understand that treating an Audio Style as if it where a Midi style is wrong.
It is not going to work if we assume that an audio style with an original tempo of 120bpm, changing it to 80bpm will play without distortion.
It is certain that the result will be disastrous.
But if we use the audio styles in a reasonable way considering its possibilities then we will not have any problem. We also shouldn't forget that midi styles are always out there to serve our needs, so we shouldn't demand things that can't be done from an audio style.
We either accept this or simply do not choose such styles (audio styles).
Unfortunately, there is no other option.
But beyond the necessary compromises, there is something else that also applies to midi styles.
What is this.
If we assume that in a midi style, we want to change the tempo from 120bpm to 80bpm then we have probably chosen the wrong style.
Of course, this thing also applies to midi styles but audio styles.
In this case we should choose another Style that will be closer to the original speed we want, or even better, we could create it (if we know how to do it).
And why is this happening?
Because each style contains a specific structure and orchestration style. Therefore, even if we are talking about midi style, a reasonable range of speed is imposed by the orchestration itself.
For example, an 8 Beat Ballad (depending on the style of the instrumentation), which is composed at 68bpm, usually has a reasonable range of 68bpm to 85bpm.
A Cha-cha created at 118bpm usually has a reasonable bpm range from 118bpm to 130 to 135bpm etc.
Of course, what I'm telling you is not a (rule), but I think we've all noticed it and all or several of us follow what I'm telling you in the end.
So, when we change the speed on a Cha-cha (midi style), which is created at 118bpm and we go to 150bpm, then we understand aurally that the result is not so good, or in some cases, not good at all.
So, with that in mind, let's learn to manage Audio Styles as well, so we won't have any problems.
Here also we should say that if the companies want to develop the audio styles system there are still many solutions, which can spectacularly improve the time stretch problem by placing an elastic audio type algorithm which has very impressive results.

We should also say that Yamaha has for years registered a special patent which provides a solution to a series of problems concerning Full Audio styles, even though it has not yet been used in any of the Arranger Keyboards it has.
Who knows though. Maybe it will in the future, because for it to have registered a special audio style patent, it means that in the future it will be needed.

And to speak with arguments I quote the numbers of Yamaha's registered patent as well as the corresponding link of the specific Yamaha patent:

Patent 9,147,388 Automatic performance technique using audio waveform data, September 29, 2015
Patent 9,040,802 Accompaniment data generating apparatus, May 26, 2015
Patent 8,791,350 Accompaniment data generating apparatus, July 29, 2014
Application 13/982,476 Accompaniment data generating apparatus, March 12, 2012

http://sandsoftwaresound.net/yamaha-patents-summary-2017/
Read the "Styles combining audio and MIDI" description below.

There are other links, but I don't think there is any reason to confuse ourselves with more information.
Personally, however, I never liked the few Audio Styles (which contained only drum audio) that Yamaha had created.
In relation to Ketron's Audio Style, their result was particularly poor, as well as the limitations in relation to Ketron were and are much more since Yamaha does not allow you to have an EQ in the Audio Chanel as opposed to Ketron which in each of the three audio channels in the Event Style (Real Drum, Real Bass, Real Chord) it has a 3 band parametric EQ with the possibility of different settings in each channel and each style.

THIRD ARGUMENT
I can't change a Drums Kit or a Drum Part (kick, snare, etc.)
Wrong approach. We said it before. For this job we don't choose an Audio Style but a midi style.

You also mentioned Slices via REX2 Grooves as a better or alternative solution for someone who needs Audio. Allow me to disagree here as well and I tell you this from my experience, since the Pack I have created for my personal needs on the Yamaha Genos is based 100% on Slices (Rex2).
And I disagree because firstly, it requires a huge effort and a huge waste of time even for someone very experienced in this matter like me, secondly the slices require resources from Ram and precious slots which are easily filled, and thirdly it is an extremely complicated and difficult situation to create something. On the other hand, in Event you don't need to do anything more than copy the audio files you want (if they have the right names) to the specific folder (USER_MODELING) and everything is ready to use.
Finally, I would like to put you a video of me with the Event. So, what is this? This is a 100% midi style (no audio track) and I created this Style 100% on Event without using any computer but everything was done in the onboard STYLE EDIT (style creator).
So, you'll see that Event does great on Midi as well. People just don't know about it.
https://youtu.be/Fk25h13rovE

I apologize for my huge post.

huge but really needed and well argumented !

Thanks

when i was proffesional , long ago ,there were keyboard playeres that prefere using playbacks and those like me who prefer using in live the styles of the arranger , each one and his reasons .
for me to be able being spontany , dynamic , and express my self as a player 'instead of being robotic was the main thing , and also i was only playing without singing so i could consentrate in playing.