Here's a link to the one of several excellent quality demo videos of the new Yamaha MOX6/MOX8 Workstations.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ob_vt3XHLfI

It was officially announced today and the videos were up this morning as well as full info and sound demos on the Yamaha site.

These workstations look really nice. I may get a MOX6 which is essentially a Motif XS without the Sampler but with a few features not on the Motif such as the USB Audio/MIDI and a few from the SX90/70 Series.

I am hoping this will MAP at around $1099. If so what a deal. Plus its only 15 pounds. A nice economical and portable alternative to the full Motif. The 88 key only weighs 32 pounds.

Wov.. that thing makes me regret getting the M50!! Oh man... gotta sweettalk my wife to let me buy another keyboard this year

Ohhhh Nooooo! Yamaha why did you do it again.?.? I saw those YouTube vids.., drooled all over my laptop, and cracked a smile from one ear to the next.

That smile turned into a frown as soon as I saw something on the spec sheet at Yammies site. Please tell me it doesn't say 64 note poly again

They've increased the voice set and all these new goodies.., but didn't bump the poly up?

I used to own the MO8. Amazing board to play. Good sounds, great patch editing, ect. However.., the MO6/8 were choking on a 64 note Mofit ES based sound engine. How is this new MO line going to fair driving an XS sound engine with 64 notes under the hood? If Yamaha upped the poly on this thing it would be a budget workstation market KILLER! THe M50 has more poly... Even the new Juno-Gi has more poly.

just curious is the MO series made in Japan?

Looks like there is a 76 key model above the 88 on the stand behind the demo-er. Am I wrong?

Different variations and a mic input (no VH ,but well), it may serve as a arranger ( partiallly at least).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f11PZuSu_tU&feature=related

Different variations and a mic input (no VH ,but well), it may serve as a arranger ( partiallly at least).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f11PZuSu_tU&feature=related

Different variations and a mic input (no VH ,but well), it may serve as a arranger ( partiallly at least).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f11PZuSu_tU&feature=related

Different variations and a mic input (no VH ,but well), it may serve as a arranger ( partiallly at least).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f11PZuSu_tU&feature=related

Doesn't matter HOW many times you post it...!

A WS is a very poor substitute for an arranger. Nothing drops in on the fly, all patterns have to be called up a bar in advance, destinations have to be hand selected. It's a LOT of button pushing to do something that takes ONE on an arranger.

I don't understand why WS keyboards don't have arranger abilities. It is trivial to add them, simply just a little more ROM space. It isn't rocket science. Why doesn't a Motif have the ability to call up arranger styles. Maybe it is nothing more than a marketing decision.

i am sure thats the reason Nigel but mark my words, we will see pretty much full arranger capability on workstations before the decade is out.

Karma technology has already been exported to yamaha workstations and James from Korg forums already demonstrated how quickly it could be adapted to arranger style play . so that capability has already been licensed for two of the top 3 workstation makers .

exciting times are ahead for arrangers.

What seems to be missing isn't the CONTENT... Those are MIDI files, easily ported. Your basic problem with WS's is that they use an arpeggiator paradigm for playing things. Chords are not revoiced into instrument accurate voicings, lines are not played with voice leading, and patterns don't drop in on each other (like calling up a fill in the MIDDLE of a bar) and go to a particular destination (like a fill that changes to another variation, or an Intro that goes to the selected variation).

The mode of operation is far more computer-like, cuing up 'chunks' in advance, rather than the natural, musical flow of arranger operation.

Will it ever change? I have my doubts. Unfortunately, WS's are primarily sold to people who have NEVER played an arranger, and their needs, rather than ours, becomes a priority for the manufacturers.

But make no mistake... there is a TON of stuff that an arranger does that you never even think about (voice wrapping, complex chord generation, incorrect note correction etc..) that WS's have not even STARTED to address. I have my doubts they ever will...

I post it once but clicked 4 times, I guess.Can't deleted it.
Not a substitue but , still you have something with both bass and drums patterns following (no fills /intro/ending ofcourse.) Mic input with EFX helps too (too bad only vocoder and no VH). 15 Ib for 61 keys ( newly developed ? - I hope it's better that MO6 which is better than M50)and 32 Ib for 88 keys is very interesting.

Great piano sound, I must admit. I love the color black and seperate foot controller in ( plus assign F/S and Damper in) too. And yes it's still 64 poly (says 124 poly for SeQ).

http://www.yamahasynth.com/products/synthesizers/mox/

Street price should be $ 1000 or $ 1100 max.


88 keys version can be the killer for P 155 , CP 33 and even more expensive (sub $2000 CPs) because of the weight and funtionality.

http://www.yamahasynth.com/library/2d_product_photo/synthesizers/mox/

Because it would immediately be regarded as an ARRANGER.....with 'deep' editing capabilities . And we all know that that's the kiss of death in the WS-oriented 'youth' market. Plus, all the added WS goodies would be the kiss of death in the arranger-oriented elderly market . Let's face it, young people want unlimited choices, old folks want simplicity in the form of fewer choices (see how many over 60 folks are waiting in line at the next new iphone introduction). Fran still has a corded phone........with rotary dial .

Nope. Never going to happen. Like trying to combine a VW bug with a Lincoln Town Car to make a 'car for the masses'. Different strokes for decidedly different folks.

chas

What is even stranger is that Korg make the PA2Xpro (and now the PA3Xpro) and it is advertised (or spoken of in less than hushed tones here on SZ) as an Arranger Workstation with "deep editing capabilities"...guess it doesn't matter to the "aged" market...in fact it appears to be selling rather well to old farts and young farts equally well.

I believe that eventually, dedicated workstations will be able to play and load styles...on the Korg, they just have to rub out the word "Arranger".

Ian

Precisely Ian !

Kronos is a Workstation

PA3x is an Arranger

Crossing the Arranger name off a PA3x doesn’t make it into a Kronos.

Unless you consider that the PA3x can do everything (And sound as good) that a Kronos can of course. (The answer BTW is NO, it can’t)

No matter which way you look at it, Arrangers are NOT Workstations (Not even close) with Styles.

Bill

No one said it did, Bill.

A Kronos uses completely different voice architecture.

However, the Korg PA3XPro has editing on par with other Korg workstations...n'est-ce pas?

It has full arranger functions...with me so far?

Does it lack some workstation features? Maybe, depending on which workstation you compare it to, but it still can be used as one.

Does a workstation lack features the PA3XPro has? Yep. No auto-accompaniment for starters.

You see Bill, my analogy was simply to point out that arrangers (especially in the PA3Xpro's case) are probably closer to workstations, than one likes to believe.

I don't have a problem with that, and apparently, neither does Spalding or many more on this forum.

Ian

Hi Ian

I understand where you are coming from, however I have been using VST instruments for over 12 years now (Long before I had the Wersi to load them into) and modern hardware Workstations are still behind there software counterparts, therefore I am familiar with the editing and performance capabilities of both arrangers (Of which the Korg is one of the most advanced) and Workstations.

Having experience of both, I can give you a 110% absolute total guarantee, that there is no hardware arranger that comes anywhere close to Workstation editing and performance, (Not even the Korg) no matter what Arranger players would like to believe.

Simple facts I am afraid

That the 2 could be combined in the future, then yes, quite possibly, but for now they are miles apart.

I hope the above shows where I am coming from on this subject, rather just random postings

Bill

I do see where you're coming from Bill...I just happen not to agree with you.

Ian

TBH, The Korg series are really the ONLY arrangers that approach WS depth of editing. Little else comes close, and even there, the Korg editing and capabilities are far closer to older Triton-type editing that the latest Korg WS's like M3 and Kronos.

Right now, we have a gap that is killing the future of the arranger, IMO. On the one hand, we have the current market for arrangers, which seems to not really WANT depth of editing, more OOTB ease of use and minimal customization (the most successful arranger brand is also the least tweakable, on the whole), and, at the same time, the youth market is wholly fixated on WS's, with very deep editing possibilities, but little live ease of use or musical operation of arps and loops.

I see the only way for the arranger to survive, especially in the US market is to turn it into a MODERN music device. I'm afraid, you put a keyboard in front of a kid in his twenties with more foxtrot styles in it than hiphop, he's going to laugh his ass off! Look at the CONTENT that modern WS's have, their arps and loops. You MIGHT find a few Latin patterns, maybe a few swing things, but probably at least 90% of the content is techno, hiphop, rap, alternative, modern R&B, things like that.

Overall, there's nothing WRONG with the arranger as a musical device. But the manufacturers have relegated it to an old fogies' machine by their choice of CONTENT, and the stubborn refusal to include even a simple arpeggiator, let alone the more complex ones found in MoXF, etc..

Until that content disparity is addressed, it's going to remain a niche product in the States, and more a schlager machine in Europe. Of course, you have the problem that the people making arrangers now don't WANT to blur the line any more, because things are already working out quite nicely for them. You want a WS and an arranger, you have to buy TWO keyboards. Profit!

Only an independent has much of a chance of breaking this stalemate. I had high hopes for the MS, but it doesn't seem like Lionstracs have deep enough pockets to develop and content this up to what's actually needed, so it has returned to more of a WS paradigm, and content is very hit and miss. And, before anyone chimes in about how you are SUPPOSED to develop your own content for it, examine the absurdity of that... Yamaha, Korg, Roland, none of the major players in the WS market sell a keyboard where it is up to YOU to make the basic content. Everything successful comes OOTB with enough high quality content to keep those that are creatively challenged and technically limited still able to create high quality music. Yamaha would only sell a FRACTION of MoXF's if they came basically empty (or with poor content), they at least have figured THAT out, unlike Lionstracs.

Maybe Ketron can take a shot at it? They don't currently make a WS... Plenty of opportunity to take a stab at the market. TBH, they already HAVE an arpeggiator (though it could do though with a more elaborate one), so they are halfway there, they can do audio loop slicing and playback (but it needs a better user front end for them to put their own loops in), they have key triggered one shots (essential for hiphop and rap), they actually have most of the pieces.

But you STILL can't sell something full of bachata's and bolero's, foxtrots and waltzes to a kid! They would need to clean house COMPLETELY of all the legacy styles, and fill it to the brim with modern rhythms. This, I honestly think would sell like hotcakes. But one quickstep would queer the pitch completely.

Will we ever see it? It depends... I think the demand is there. Is there the will to make it? That is the big question, isn't it..?

You have stated the case very well Dikki and mark my words before this decade is that is exactly what we will see.

The arranger must not just have modern content to sell to kids, or the under 30/40 crowd...it must be sold at the same price as a comparable workstation/synth.

Ian

I think kids are just smart enough to see that an arranger is basically a very controllable glorified CD/MP3 player that deludes a lot of untrained, untalented people into thinking that they're musicians. There are exceptions, of course, mostly here at Synthzone . But I would guess that less than 20% of dedicated arranger players are competent 'traditional' musicians (including a handful that are actually eeking out a living as one). Just a wild guess, of course.

chas

I suppose it depends on how you view an arranger keyboard, Chas.

To me, (and perhaps to you) and the several pro players using one here on SZ, it is just another tool in the box.

For me, I have "arranger" gigs, and then "solo piano" gigs, and sometimes I just go to the studio and play what is needed for the recording.

If there are those who "look down" on the use of an arranger for professional purposes, it is usually those who are a tad narrow minded in regards to music production.

A friend (guitarist) of mine and I do song demos for a third party songwriter/vocalist, and for 90% of the recording, we use an arranger keyboard...mainly for bass and drums, and a few sweetening tracks.

We can do several songs in a session, and the client spends less, we make a very nice profit, and the people that listen to his demos are more than impressed with the quality.

That's only one use.

I'm sure we (meaning you, I and other SZ'ers) can think of many more, without having to say it's "just a very controllable glorified CD/MP3 player that deludes a lot of untrained, untalented people into thinking that they're musicians".

The late Oscar Peterson bought a 9000 Pro and a CVP-109 at one of Yamaha's seminars, and I was lucky enough to spend most of the day with him, showing him how they worked, although, Oscar, being a real gadget freak, had no trouble whatsoever in getting comfortable with both instruments...and yes, he used the accompaniments...in fact we had a great time making custom styles, some of which I believe I still have here on a floppy disk.

He did not look down on arrangers...he embraced new technology...maybe he was one of a few that did, but I'm glad it was someone of his caliber, as it made me more comfortable with them as well.

Ian

If you look at the world today, everything revolves around software; the hardware is just something to access the software.

Examples:-

Phones
Tablets
Computers
PVR
TV
Blue Ray Players/Recorders
Even some cars you can choose your dashboard layout and functions (With more on the way)
Mixers
DJ Decks
In fact pretty much everything is going that way, so I would be pretty surprised if the keyboard as we know it today will still be around by the end of the decade.
The future has been put into effect by Apple (Although contrary to what some people believe they did not invent the idea) with its iPhone/iPad principle. (You have a basic device (Keyboard in our case) and buy the Apps you want, to do what you want)

That in my opinion is the future, (And I always try to keep an eye on probable future trends) and not a dedicated keyboard for a specific task.

Bill

Ian, my statement may offend someone (if the shoe fits....) but I'll bet if you were able to fact-check it, it would be essentially accurate. As far as Oscar is concerned, that's a really poor example, as Oscar didn't need to try to fool anyone, need a 'crutch', or prove anything. As you said, he was a gadget freak, and what RICH, musically-oriented, gadget freak wouldn't be attracted to an arranger? If I were rich, I'd own every one ever made. The TRUE test; did you ever see him play a gig with one? Use one on a recording? Base an arrangement on an arranger style? Like I said, Oscar? Poor example. There is a big gap between technology and artistry. Neither is a substitute for the other. JMO.

chas

Well, Chas, I'm not going to try and make you a fan of arranger keyboards. Oscar was, for sure...he wanted them for recording, and trying out compositions.

And, I am, unabashedly, a big fan as well.

No, my friend, if you don't see their value as another tool in the tool box, I doubt very much if I could convince you.

I'm secure enough in my own playing skills that using an arranger doesn't make me feel one bit less a keyboardist/musician.

Actually, it makes me feel more progressive.

Happy playing.

Ian