Scott, I was thinking...why would it be ,that you think SMF's[especially Tune1000] sound inferior to arranger playing and other sources...

I think part of the problem may be your inexperience using instruments that sound good[especially SMF playback]...Yamaha is poor in sequence playback of SMF's[XG...forget it]...And your other favorite choice of keyboard..Technics, also lacks in this department...

If you allowed yourself[with open mind] to listen ..playback with a quality GS instrument...you may develop a different opinion...

Also, give a listen to a quality sequence played by a Ketron product..

I have sequences that I use with GS instruments...you almost can't tell from the original recording...There are some great sequence program people that are detailed oriented, and deserve to be played on a Roland GS..

No flaming here...just another observation..

Fran is So correct for sure......there is no comparison...Yamaha stinks at SMF playback to my ears.........Roland & Ketron will make you hear songs the way they are supposed to be heard & played too.

Especially Ketron. The SD1 has a unique feature that allows you to utilize their "live drums" on any SMF playback... very cool.

Glenn

Ya know, Fran, I don't think Scott's preference for arranger vs. SMF's has anything to do with the "quality" of the sound, but rather with the more "dynamic", "interactive" nature of using styles vs. the "hard-wired" programming of an SMF. With the arranger you can make adjustments to the tune on-the-fly according to the mood of the audience, adding an extra verse or two if the song is going well and you wanna keep 'em dancing, or shortening it cleanly if the mood says it's time to move on.

Granted, with a SMF you can make it sound more like the original CD (which may be important in certain contexts), but you loose the ability to "adapt" the song to your own creative ideas and the give-and-take between the artist and audience in real-time.



[This message has been edited by BillErickson (edited 11-18-2005).]

Bill that is true...but I am referring more of the "canned" notion..

BTW, with today's top arrangers,,you can place markers in SMF's allowing flexibility to go back to the bridge, or even close out a tune...You are not locked in...It's just like working with a band, but you have all the control and no mistakes..

Interesting topic, but don’t forget that the reason Roland introduced the GS sound set was because they wanted to get out of the limitation of 128 voices that General Midi allowed, Yamaha also did the same with there XG sound set.
Creative Labs with their earlier sound cards also supplied the GS sound set that could be loaded and played by the Sound Blaster cards, thus giving a vaster wealth of sounds compared to the Onboard FM synthesis.
The GS sounds also come as standard with Windows Media Player, and you can select them from the Sounds and Audio Devices in Control Panel. (If your computer uses an Onboard Sound Chip then the GS voices are set up by default)
Interestingly the GS sounds are not that well known compared to XG which became the most used standard after GM.

Bill

Bill I am not sure I agree totally with you..
You are correct that GS incorporated variation sounds and not just the GM standard of 128 patches.
But from day one the Sequence programmers go to standard has been GS [actually a true GS as in Roland GS instruments]..even today it is the standard..

Although the new PC's have the licensed standard GS wavetable..it does not behave as a Roland GS product..
They use the standard GS potential differences from GM , but do not utilize the variation sounds[tones] and drum kits accurately as a Roland Hardware piece, or Roland's GS software..

I don't believe Yamaha's XG has the same broad appeal[except Yammie people]...

For those who prefer SMF above arranger-playing :
In my (limited?) view, using SMF is the same as using karaoke-tracks. When you use karaoke songs they can sound like the original songs, but hey ..... I'm a musician, NOT a discjockey !!

Within a few seconds it's clear to me wether the playing is 'live' or fully sequenced (SMF)..... 'the easy way'. Please have a listen at the 'demo/songs' homepages of various members and many things become clear!

Bill is very right!

I'm gonna throw my 2 cents in. I'm a rookie here, I don't make my living in the music business and most likely will not. For me it's a part time have some fun gig. I understand there's lots of discussion here and it's very stimulating conversation sometimes very amusing as well. The one question I ask if Scott prefers performing with certain equipment and parameters and Fran doing them his way and both their audiences happy with what they hear. Why then is one performer trying to sell the other on why his method is better? Or why his gear is better than the others?