Headphones are Sony MDR-V500. They are working in Stereo, they are not faulty. Checked they are plugged fully/firmly into the MODX HPhone socket.

Starting with a AWM2 INIT.

Part 1 - Element 1 Edit. Category Search.

Searching through various sounds, looking for the closest/appropriate sound. Everything I try, regardless of suffix waveform _L _R or St .... only sound through my Right headphone earpiece?

Why is that?

Can I change it?

What is happening is NOT right. When you enter “Element - Waveform Search” (amber) the items in the search result field should sound from the center of the stereo panorama. This will be true whether or not the Waveform has an “L”, an “R” or “St” in its name. All the Waveform result should initially sound from the center. You can Pan each Element, but the default is Center. When you select the “Init” > “Init Normal (AWM2)” the default will be Bank = Preset, Number 1, Piano “CF3 Stretch Sw St” (a stretch tuned Yamaha CFIIIS acoustic grand, velocity Switching Stereo sample set)... dead center of the stereo field.

Elements can, however, be panned, as follows:
First, you must select a candidate Waveform using the Main and Sub Categories > press Enter > this will return you to the Element “Osc/Tune” screen
Touch “Amplitude” > “Level/Pan” — it is here that you find not only the “Volume” for the Element, but also the response to “Velocity”, how it responds across the scale and where in the stereo field it will sound (“Pan”, “Alternate Pan”, “Random Pan” and even “Scaling Pan” position across the keyboard).
“Pan” sets a position, L63 ~ C ~ R63
“Alternate Pan” sets the position of the first note, each successive note will alternate to the opposite position in the stereo field
“Random Pan” each successive note sounds in a different location
“Scaling Pan” = +63, for example, low notes will be in your left ear and proceed toward the right as you ascend the scale.
“Scale Pan” = -64 reverses this.

I tried again this morning, and its back in Stereo.

I think it might have been the physical pan control was all the way right, because I had been messing with Cutoff and Resonance controls.

My bad.

Thanks.

I'm certain now it was the Pan Knob. I didn't realise I had it stored, when I looked in home, there it was at the top in the knob displau

I'll have to watch out for that.

Cheers.

Need an indicator for samples stored with vibrato in them, too. To go with the L/R, a V

Need an indicator for samples stored with vibrato in them, too. To go with the L/R, a V

Since those stored with the natural vibrato of the performer, when auditioned it is fairly obvious they have vibrato... It was more efficient to identify the Waveforms without vibrato with the designation “Non-Vib”.

Agreed, when auditioning in isolation, which is only one operation of the synth.

HOWEVER... when searching for them.. how to search for those that only have vibrato... or... as is more important.. DO NOT HAVE?

But much, much more importantly, a good deal of good presets use vibrato samples, and it's not obvious where the vibrato is coming from.

Three times, I've gone searching through all parts and their elements to find where an LFO or Motion Control is creating the vibrato, only to, after exhausting all possibilities of it being controlled and created vibrato, finding that it's in the ruddy sample...and therefore inflexible and unadjustable!

Twice on stringed instruments and once on a sax... this has nearly driven me mad. I don't expect something of this quality (in terms of instrument) to be using sampled vibrato.

This is a super annoying thing to do in a beast of a synth that can make vibratos in so many ways, and then surface ways to control their rates in so many ways.

And it's ruddy hard to find that this kind of cheat is being done, as it's not possible to preview (within an element) a sample without all manner of its processing, without turning everything off!

Hence the suggestion, that when cheating with vibrato recorded in samples, Yamaha find a way to warn us.

There is a method, (although long winded, trial and error) for "listening" to samples before selecting them.

Mute all Parts except the one you want to edit (this might not be necessary - check)

From Performance Home, Part Select, Edit.

On the bottom screen banner select "All" (see page 130 of Reference Manual).

Use the Green Buttons under SW [element switch] to turn off all elements except the element you are replacing or adding.

Click in the Waveform (Element Name) field, and click Category Search.

The screen should go to a brown/yellow type pallette. From here you can go through all the waveforms and play a key for each one to hear what it sounds like.

There are thousands of them.

So, best use the search filters, for example

Main: Brass Sub: Synth

Once I have a Main and Sub selected, I highlight the first waveform in the list, play middle C, then click the Right Arrow button, play the next and so on. I just go through the whole list one by one, and "Favourite" any that grab my attention... making a short list.

Set the "Favourite" filter (from All, Preset, Favourite, User, Library) then go through your shortlist.

Some things to watch out for:-

Be prepared to search a few different Main/Sub sets. For example, you might want a Saw wave, and expect to find it in Brass, but it is actually under SynComp.... etc. After searching through categories for a while, you start to remember where certain things are.

Use the Data List Manual. All waveforms are listed in here in a readable format. Take some time to read through it (a bit boring but it will help familiarise yourself). You can use the Adobe PDF search function here also (e.g. search Brass).

I noticed some sample sets sound quite different depending where on the keyboard you play, higher/lower keys or harder/softer velocities. So, don't forget to check this out on your favourited shortlists. I suspect this is all to do with "Key Banks" (See Reference Manual Page 109). You cannot edit Preset Waveforms. There may be a way to import Preset Waveforms into your User Memory and edit them there.... but I haven't discovered how to do this yet.

(On the Modx Waveform Category Search) you can do a keyword search in the top right box.... it can be useful sometimes (for example type in "Saw" or "Brass" or "PWM" etc).

Note: Reverse Engineering. Over time, I have been listening to the MODX Auditions of every Preset Performance. I Favourite all Performances that have any desirable sounds in them. I then Edit these performances to discover what waveforms (or FM-X algorithms, carriers and modulators) were used to get the sounds and make a mental note.

Summary.... at first it seems like a mountain of monotonous, labour intensive trial and error.... and it is. But, you quickly become familiar with where everything is, and the workload drops off quite rapidly.

I've done all this as part of inspecting what's available and what can be done and some of how it's done.

My point has nothing do with general familiarity and all to do with common usage.

When a few of the best sax and string presets have vibrato, as discovered by my daughter and used in her mixes, in an instrument of this calibre and capability (motion being its second most significant feature, and adjustability of motion its third) it might be wise to consider the user's expectation of adjustable vibrato being in presets, since this is a form of motion.

I thought, wrongly, the rates would be on the mod wheel. Nope. So went investigating.

Can you imagine how surprised I was to find the vibrato in the last placed I looked, baked into the samples?

This is, to my mind, kind of ridiculous in an instrument like this.

There should, to my mind, be a very clear way to determine that a preset is of a lesser quality due to things like vibrato (and sometimes other forms of expressiveness) having been baked into the samples it uses, if this ridiculous approach to vibrato is going to be used in an instrument of this calibre with its particularly strong focus on modulation, motion and morphing.

If you look at Yamaha gear with broader strokes - you see a bias towards adding/baking/forcing vibrato into the instrument without means of modulating. The marketing name for these kind of "patches" in Yamaha-speak is "Sweet". Given the name, you can infer how vibrato is put a bit on a pedestal.

Now the common response is that Yamaha supplies (and it does, ... sometimes) samples with no vibrato added. However, if you run this claim through objective analysis you'll find (analyzing acoustic non-percussive instruments) that there are more samples with vibrato than those without - both in total - and by instrument family/type.

It has been my feedback that Yamaha has let the pendulum swing too far into "sweet" and to (please) invest more heavily into striking a balance between "sweet" and "dry" (NV). There are situations where you cannot find certain instruments sans vibrato.

As a slight aside, from a guitar forum perspective, there was quite some debate on excessive vs appropriate use of Vibrato pedals (example Boss VB-2w, made in Japan), .

It was apparent there was a cultural aspect (popular for music in Japan for example), but I detected an over-reliance from some "Western" guitarists, who quite plainly admitted using them as an alternative for "vibrato technique".

I chimed in with my opinion, that "vibrato on everything" is sickly, and with the exception of songs where this is the desired effect (example Lucy In The Sky with Diamonds), a somewhat redundant effect.

As such, I pointed out that for the majority of music, Vibrato is, and should be, used sparingly for adding emphasis and colour to music.

I have never owned, nor willI I ever own, a Vibrato pedal. The guitar is perfectly situated for adding vibrato manually, and appropriately at any given point when playing music. Not only that, the pitch depth and speed of the vibrato can be controlled and varied in real time. This is a vital perspective because the type of vibrato employed has to fit the tempo, mood and groove of the music being played. Vibrato has to be used in context with the music.

The problem with LFO vibrato is its fixed pitch depth and speed. So more often than not, it is out of context. This is even when the Depth and Rate can be adjusted (e.g. Boss VB-2w).

Hence the problem with "baked in" vibrato samples. They are largely redundant, except for specific pieces of music where they coincidentally fit. Otherwise, new pieces of music created around them.

I missed Andrew's point earlier on, but now I see his concern. I have not reached a level where this oversight has become a problem for me yet.

Perhaps this "issue" could be floated back to Yamaha?

It's been floated 5/2019:

https://yamahasynth.ideascale.com/a/dtd/More-Non-Vibrato-Preset-Waveforms-for-AWM2-in-Synths/233270-45978

More Non-Vibrato Preset Waveforms for AWM2 in Synths
===============================================
Across the board, Yamaha displays an affinity towards vibrato by looking at the number of samples with vibrato sampled-in vs. samples with no vibrato. When you want vibrato - a sampled vibrato is better sounding although does suffer from the issue of not being dynamic in terms of volume/rate/etc. When you do not want vibrato - it's often discouraging to find that there are few choices (maybe a 1 to 5 or "worse" ratio) for non-vibrato samples. Recently I was looking at the Tenor Sax samples and noticed that every sample has vibrato. And the vibrato used on each is nearly identical in the type used.

As a start, it would be great to see instruments with a more balanced mix of non-vibrato vs. vibrato samples.

My previous run-in with lack of vibrato samples is in the solo string instruments (violin). There are not many choices for a "fiddle" sound due to lack of non-vibrato samples.

Does any of the ideascale stuff ever make a difference?

Sounds like a philosophical question, rhetorical, and/or projection of doubt.

The R&D team is involved with the site and this same team is fairly close to the engineering.

There was certainly an element of cynicism in my question. Perhaps not quite so obvious was a large complement of hope.

Large corporations that actually digest and act on customer feedback are pretty rare.