http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aP6V6JrH3BU

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1D6nKP6YBy0

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1D6nKP6YBy0

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NoXv-WfqTOU

[This message has been edited by Dnj (edited 04-27-2007).]

Why is it anyone thinks that using the built-in mikes in a camcorder is the right way to make a demo video...? Don't they have line in jacks? Even some big companies (Ketron, Roland and many more) are willing to put out videos recorded on the camcorder mikes. What's the point..?

They all end up sounding like bad Casio's...

Agreed Diki. He's a great player, but it's hard to judge the quality of the voices in those demos.

Some of the patterns on the last demo remind me of the old Korg Wavestation (a little bit JM Jarre as well).

I'm not sure when this machine is available in the UK, a local shop tells me not until July

Diki: I disagree completely. Lower the bar for getting media on-line and you get more content. I don't think anyone would make the decision to buy or not buy a Motif based on these videos. However, it gives you more info on what is possible. More information is a good thing. I say keep it coming and I'll sift it out and make up my own mind. If everything had to be production quality you would have much less to choose from.

Well I'll tell ya from hands on that the sounds on the Motif XS are nothing short of amazing! I even liked the synth sounds better than the Motif ES (both were side by side in the store so I was doing a lot of comparing between the two).... The new arps with the intel. chord recognition are very cool too.

Sadly though Yamaha has dropped some things that I thought were pretty critical to Motif users. There's no longer a breath control jack, no step recording, and plug ins. One guy turned away from the unit soley on the lack of breath control jack. It was odd too, he was blown away by the sound, and newer features, but said the unit was useless to him without the breath control jack. (he's was also a sax player, and loved being able to drop solos using that jack) Oh well, maybe Yamaha will add those things back with the next release.

Squeak



[This message has been edited by squeak_D (edited 04-28-2007).]

I enjoyed these videos......although I still want to see more assorted style arpeggios eg: 3/4, shuffle, cha cha , merengue, tango, salsa, polka, 6/8 etc etc ...vs all the funky stuff.....sounds wise its terrific.....demo sound and rhythm videos would be great to look at also done by real players....the Motif XS is looking very interesting.

Donny ... I agree, but don't you think they are trying to cater to a 'younger' market'?
In the meanwhile they are missing a whole market of OMB performers ...
t.

Tony: I don't think that the Motif will move alot of OMB guys from arrangers to synths. Except maybe for Squeak. It's great that the two classes of keyboards are having more and more crossover. But there is still a clear market for each.

There used to be a company called Anatek that made a breath controller input to MIDI converter. They still in business?

Might be a way to restore that functionality....

[This message has been edited by Diki (edited 04-28-2007).]

Diki,

I dont think Anatek is making them anymore, but there's one by Midi Solutions. I don't see why it wouldn't work with the Motif XS. The one from Midi Solutions is a little expensive though. The converter box costs $169 at MusiciansFriend.

Squeak

Tony.....OMB artists come in all flavors....making & creating music is all about the whole genre circle around the world which included ALL TYPES of music...
I would hope Yamaha knows that....I know one thing without what I mentioned I would never consider purchasing a Motif because it would never fill my needs.

It would probably work fine, but then the question becomes which parameters are going to be available for you to control with it in real time that will make a difference in a sax or horn voice. The way Yamaha has it's internal voices set up, without the VL 150 board, I wouldn't really need or necessarily want to use a breathe controller for these voices, though it is a cool way to add an additional controller for synth voices. In the T2 for example, if when you want to turn on the articulation in an articulation voice, you only need an on / off switch to access the articulation part. The articulations do not appear to have a variable control, at least not one that you can access in real time with a variable controller ( eg 1-127 ).

It's quite likely that like in the T2 and ES, the XS breathe sounds are one sample element of a multisampled voice. The only way it would matter to me is if I could control the velocity or volume of the individual breathe sample in real time. I am guessing you could probably do this by sending a sysex message from outside of the board, but in this case you would need a computer and the appropriate software to do so. That's more than a little impractical for live play.

If the step recorder is gone, does that mean the Remix tool is gone as well ? If so.. that's too bad... I didn't use the step recorder function very much, but the Remix tool inside of it was quite cool for mashing up the different drum and bass patterns. At Motifator, Yamaha has justified the step sequencer's removal by pointing out ( correctly ) that pattern sequencing is much easier to do in an external app. The patterns in the ES were just a repeat of what the arps can produce.. But... Getting an exact match with the output of the arps from the ES in an app like FL, that is normally setup to step record one or a few measures at time isn't always easy. The timing is always off a few clicks, meaning I always had to edit the recorded data to have it fit inside of a single ( or set ) of measures. It's finicky, kind of in the same way that recording styles or multipads in a PSR or the Tyros is. If you've ever done it, you know what I mean ... If you are off even by a click or two, your pattern is messsed up until you edit it.

As far as the XS blurring the line a bit between workstation and arranger, that's all good, but I agree with Robert G in that I think each caters to a completely different market and type of player, and I think that's probably a good thing.


AJ




[This message has been edited by Bluezplayer (edited 04-28-2007).]

that grand piano is awesome!!!!!!

DNJ the motif series will never carry merengue or tangos on it.It is aimed at a completely different market. It has some arranger functions but it is definately not an aranger. The arranger functions are designed to help musicians create in studio and not for live OMB performance alhough it could be adapted in some instances to do this for certain songs. Yamaha understand marketing and would not cannabalise sales from one very successful product range to another.There is more than enough choice available through established arranger keyboard lines, the psr series and tyros series. And i am confident that most OMB players dont even use 60% of the functions on their existing arrangers in terms of sound creation synthesis and sampling. So what the hell are they going to do with a full blown dedicated synth sampler with lots of funk,dance orientated arps????

So judging by your reply Spalding.....
the mesh between arrangers & synths is so very far away if at all in the future. I would hope not ...but in reality that is what is happening a little missing here & a little missing there so close but yet so far makes the pocket emptier...its a never ending game with us the poor consumer stuck in the middle as usual.

QUOTE]Originally posted by Spalding1:
not at all DNJ. The gap btween arrangers and synths is almost indistinguishable but the gap between the types of customer that would buy an isntrument that is associated with old men in working mens clubs is immense . Thats wht the XS will never carry tango's waltzes,fox trot, two steps etc

Yamaha have taken great care to distance the XS from its arranger range of products. It has some arranger functions but you wont find the word arranger on their marketing literature. That why they use words like "arps" which is synth talk for styles . They call them "intelligent" because they follow your chords. So what have arrangers been doing for the last 15 years ????

They market the XS to a different customer where "coolness" matters. Fox trots etc are definately not cool and if yamaha were to include these "arps" they would decimate not just the XS sales but quite posibly the motif range too as the marketing brand would be damaged.[/QUOTE]

I have bought an arranger keyboard like the pax DESPITE the fact tht it has fox trots etc on it. They are not styles that i would use in public just because there is no call for them in the circles and venues that i play. I have looked beyond the "old man/nursing home " immage of typical arrangers and have seen the capabilities and the way that an arranger assists me in what i do which is mainly
gospel music arranging. Korg, Yamaha, Etc would be confused by a customer like me !!!


[This message has been edited by Spalding1 (edited 04-29-2007).]

[This message has been edited by Spalding1 (edited 04-29-2007).]

Well...Spalding I cant agree with you or any manufacturer that wants to go their way of rejection to their train of thought that certain styles are not hip, cool, or have the nursing home adult music status that's all BS to me. Just because you dont have a need for these types of music there are millions that do around the world.....all styles of music should be included in automated arranger instruments & workstations or at least give the player the ability to purchase plug-in cards that reflect a certain style family so thta they may pursue their objective musically....purists, one way thinkers, & naysayers are the things I stay away from ......playing music is for everyone & will always be.

DNJ its not about the music. Its about selling products and maximising profits. The manufacturers dont decide what music is cool, the market does. And the market that the XS and motif range is aimed at says that fox trots,waltzes and twosteps are not cool. You may not like it but all busineses operate under the same principles.If they dont pay attention to what the market wants they simply wont survive. Maybe some day the synth market may develope an interest in the older styles again but i doubt it. If korg were to design an instrument like what i have but replace fox trots merengue ,tangos with more contemporary styles that would just suit me fine. If there were enough people out there like me to make a profit for korg then they would make it so.

Anyway there is enough choice out there to satisfy everyone but not everyone wants the same packageing. Thats why there are so many products being sold that meet either real or percieved needs. Its not personal.Its just business.

[This message has been edited by Spalding1 (edited 04-29-2007).]

[This message has been edited by Spalding1 (edited 04-29-2007).]

But what we are primarily arguing about here is CONTENT, not capabilities. It appears to me that either type of keyboard is capable of doing a fair job at the other's forte, but the manufacturers concentrate the style (or arp) development on the primary market for each tool.

Hardly surprising, given the enormous cost of style and arp development (must be expensive, or why are third party styles so rare and expensive?), but it seems to me that some kind of software style to arp, or arp to style converter could go a long way towards eventually bridging the content gap.

I have long wished for the majors to get their workstation arp developers to work on a set of full styles for arrangers. While there is definitely SOME shortcomings in the usual arranger sound-set for modern styles, these guys are used to working with what they get (sound development usually comes before style or arp development), and I am sure they could come up with some innovative new styles for the arrangers we have.

And likewise, some of the best style developers could increase their earnings by making arps of more conventional styles for the XS users.

But only the market will prove if there is sufficient people interested to make it profitable. I believe, eventually, some form of copy protection will have to be developed for arps and styles to stop the rampant 'swapping' and trading that goes on. Then, when profits aren't being scavenged by piracy, more talented programmers will be willing to put the time and skill into developing what we want...

Yamaha Europe sold a "regi-stick" usb storage thing for Tyros 2 that was loaded with registrations for specific tunes.

seems to me that technology might be applied to this discussion: I, for one, would buy a stick dedicated to the modern sounds (particularly drum kits) that are lacking in the T2. yamaha doesn't have to build content from the ground up -- they can transfer some of those Motif series arps to multipads (or styles)....eventually if this proved viable, I'd imagine a whole line of these, for R&B, for world music, etc...

Interesting post.. Tom Moon touched on something there too. What I think is holding Yammie back in attracting another market is their unwillingness to share things from the Motif line with their pro arrangers. The Yamaha pro arrangers by Yamaha's position is worthy enough to share some of its voices with the Motif, but Yammie won't go the other way. This is IMO a serious HOLD BACK to Yamaha's pro arranger market for those interested in a more modern based arranger or an arranger with a little more flavor so to say.

Why won't they go the other way? The Korg PA series have Triton based sound engines, doesn't the Roland G-70 have a Fantom based piano sample? I just don't understand why Yamaha feels their pro arranger is not worthy of sharing some things from the Motif, clearly they feel the Tyros line is worthy of sharing its voices.

Oh well, maybe in a few more years Yamaha will realize the huge potential in going the other way. Wouldn't it be great to have some drums from the Motif XS? Wouldn't it be great to have some arps from the Motif XS, and a few other things?

There's no way that anyone can say that it's too much work to do this and blah blah blah. The Yamaha MM6 alone is a perfect example. Last time I read the specs it said "Motif Classic" based sound set, and the MM6 is an arranger. Why not have a Tyros with a few "Motif XS" based sounds...?? After demoing the T2 I'd say that one major thing that had me scratching my head was the overall construction quality. Now even I'd be tempted with a Tyros that had some Motif sounds **I say this as I duck and cover my head from the piles of flung poo from my Roland buddies**

Squeak


[This message has been edited by squeak_D (edited 04-29-2007).]

Yamaha have always had separate lines for arrangers and synths, (The arrangers developing from the Electone (Organ)) whereas Roland and Korg arrangers were mainly developed from their synth line, hence the inclusion in their arranger keyboards of some of the sounds from their synth rangers. (The Yamaha arrangers are designed purely for the home market (And if you don’t believe that last comment then just ask Yamaha)
Enjoy whatever you play

Bill

I have to say, though, that Yamaha take their 'home' users MUCH more seriously than Roland do their 'pro' arranger users... Not in build quality, or 'liveness' of overall sound, but in the capabilities that they think their target user can comprehend and use.

There is no arguing that, of the Big3, Roland allow the user FAR less voice editing capabilities, and don't even provide an area for storage of user voice edits, other than the registration (UPG) itself. No 'custom' voices to call up live, with all your tweaks and effects. Just basic presets, and ONLY the Upper1 Part can recall a ROM effect and EQ preset with the ROM voice on a global basis. Pathetic.

Yamaha, OTOH, despite apparently aiming squarely at the 'home' user (let's face it, folks, their 'pro' workstations are built like tanks compared to the T2), somehow seem to think that their poor little home user can comprehend a VERY complex sampler, pretty close to full voice editing capabilities (at least with computer support), user patch storage and a HD recorder.

There just seems something out of whack here... Surely the 'pro' built arranger should have the 'pro' editing capabilities. But it just doesn't work out that way.

Sadly, if you are determined to use only one keyboard on a gig (as I prefer), many pros are forced away from the T2 not only by the lack of 76 keys (pros usually CAN play piano, and many prefer to do it on a 76 or bigger), but by the at least perceived difference in build quality between Y's workstation and arranger lines.

Roland do a grand job of interface design, and OS intuitiveness (hold almost any button down for a couple of seconds, and the screen switches to the edit page of that function, for instance), but IMO, a poor job of acknowledging that the user is in need of more than basic voice editing. And while the Roland TOTLs are based around the Fantom 'engine', they still only have Sound Canvas editing, and a lot of the Fantom sounds on board are only the samples, you can't edit even the Sound Canvas parameters on some of them (different voice architecture, I suppose).

But there just seems to be an enormous difference in their market research. Although most of us would think that the G70/E80 and the T2 are aimed squarely at the same target customer, somehow each of them has a COMPLETELY different idea of what we want. How are they arriving at such opposite conclusions?