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?