[quotePost id=115205]

If you want VA in your arsenal, Yamaha forces you to buy something else. If MODX is on the sales floor next to a Fantom-0 or Nautilus or PC4, which give you your VA without buying or finding space for or going to gig with additional gear, the competitors will look more persuasive. (Of course, if you don't care about VA, it doesn't matter, and there are also lots of people who don't need it.)[/quotePost]
This can be said about any engine.
Some of those don't have FM at all, others have FM that's way under FM-X etc.

The Motif was pretty succesful yet it only had AWM2.

It's not only the number of engines but also the quality and the whole system: modulations etc. The MODX looks very competitive in this area, IMO.
If the number of engines would be the only criteria, everybody would only buy the Kronos/ Nautilus.

And BTW, the Akai MPC keyboard workstation is around the corner, so the competition will heat up even more very soon.

I gotta chime in here. I wish there would be some of these great updates. But I dont believe it will happen. Too much time has passed. Yamaha sat quiet for too long. Definitely need a step sequencer in here. None of the updates to date have proven that Yamaha is listening to us with regard to VA. It likely just cannot be done. Hows that FM thing going these days? I havent heard anything about FM synthesis in a long while. Everything is VA and modular these days.

[quotePost id=115208]This can be said about any engine.
Some of those don't have FM at all, others have FM that's way under FM-X etc.[/quotePost]Of course. That's why I said, "Of course, if you don't care about VA, it doesn't matter, and there are also lots of people who don't need it." But if you would like VA (not a particularly rare desire), and the competitive boards have it, it puts Yamaha at a competitive disadvantage in that respect.

[quotePost id=115208]The Motif was pretty succesful yet it only had AWM2.[/quotePost]OTOH, the competitive Korgs and Rolands of the time also only had sampled sounds. In fact, the Motif was unusual because you could add PLG cards to get FM and VA synthesis (among other things), making it quite the opposite of today. Back then, if you wanted to integrate the sounds of multiple different sound engines, Yamaha was the only way to go from among the boards of the "big three," and today, Yamaha is the least capable in this respect.

[quotePost id=115208]It's not only the number of engines but also the quality and the whole system: modulations etc. The MODX looks very competitive in this area, IMO.[/quotePost]Absolutely. And that also relates to what I said earlier, "To me, one of the biggest advantages Yamaha has had over the years has simply been the quality of their sounds. In terms of straight sampled sounds, Yamaha's are still first-rate. It's in these areas that go beyond straight sampling where competitors are nipping at their heels, sonically."

Yamaha certainly does seem to be asleep at the wheel, don't they...

Imitation is the greatest form of flattery.

I guess all the web/forum hubbub about MODX's "selling like hot-cakes" is true.

If it wasn't true, I doubt Roland would have developed the Fantom 0 (they already had the "lesser"/"budget" FA.

Yamaha "dared" with the MODX and broke the mould. I believe they overcame the Marketing rule of protecting "Prestige and Premium" differentiation, and went straight to the baseline... making money.

Fender "won" with a similar strategy on their Mexican guitars, forsake the USA luxury, but make the "budget" core product (a musical instrument) equal.

They tapped into the "would really like to have, but could never afford" market. It was a gamble going against traditional Business 101... but it was an unmitigated success.

Antony, you're missing something. This is TRADITIONAL business...

MB: S, E, C, A (then engine sizes/outputs)

BMW: 7, 6*, 5, 4, 3, 2 (then engine sizes/outputs)
*6 is now called 8

Audi: 8, 7, 6, 5, 4 (A, R, S & Q as shape and performance differentiators, plus engine sizes/outputs)

etc. This is how model lineups always work, have always worked. It's why we call things halo and marquee products, and is most famously stated by the former GM of GM, when he was talking about the Corvette.

Almost all major synth makers do this, or variations of the theme.

Not sure why you're making the proclamations of this being something new, or significant, or that Yamaha is driving this. They're benefiting from it.

Korg's sound engines in various forms filter down throughout what they make.

At Roland, the entire point of ZenCore is to filter it down through lessor models.

Yamaha's is so obvious because there's only two sound engines, so they couldn't very well remove one, whereas Roland and Korg are spoilt for choices, and can mix and match.

[quotePost id=115211][quotePost id=115208]The Motif was pretty succesful yet it only had AWM2.[/quotePost]OTOH, the competitive Korgs and Rolands of the time also only had sampled sounds. In fact, the Motif was unusual because you could add PLG cards to get FM and VA synthesis (among other things), making it quite the opposite of today. Back then, if you wanted to integrate the sounds of multiple different sound engines, Yamaha was the only way to go from among the boards of the "big three," and today, Yamaha is the least capable in this respect.[/quotePost]
Not sure this was true for later Motif series like XF, exactly those which were contemporaries with the Kronos for example.

In the end, it depends what type of user you are. For a performing artist (which is probably the primary target of these boards), it certainly makes sense to have multiple engines.
For others (like me, who are probably a smaller segment, but still significant), this board sits in a studio and is used for production or learning. So me, as a user, couldn't care less about piano or organ engines. I'm only interested in what this board can give me that can't be found somewhere else (in a convenient way). From that perspective, the Fantom 0 is exchangeable with something else like the Nautilus or a Kurzweil, but the MODX is not.
There are exactly two things in this board that I'd want in the MODX: the better specced audio interface and sampling. (I still find it hard to believe that the MODX doesn't offer at least 48Khz/24 in the audio interface, even if only for a Stereo pair).
And at the end of the day, adding an Akai MPC One to the MODX gives you a combo that keeps all the good things about the MODX and is a lot more powerful than the Fantom 0 in any other area (sampling, sequencing, synthesis engines). And still very portable and more ergonomic.

[quotePost id=115223]Imitation is the greatest form of flattery.[/quotePost]
Yamaha certainly set the template for the Fantom and its branching. Not bad for a big, slow moving corporation.

[quotePost id=115226]
Not sure this was true for later Motif series like XF, exactly those which were contemporaries with the Kronos for example.

In the end, it depends what type of user you are. For a performing artist (which is probably the primary target of these boards), it certainly makes sense to have multiple engines.
For others (like me, who are probably a smaller segment, but still significant), this board sits in a studio and is used for production or learning. So me, as a user, couldn't care less about piano or organ engines. I'm only interested in what this board can give me that can't be found somewhere else (in a convenient way). From that perspective, the Fantom 0 is exchangeable with something else like the Nautilus or a Kurzweil, but the MODX is not.
There are exactly two things in this board that I'd want in the MODX: the better specced audio interface and sampling. (I still find it hard to believe that the MODX doesn't offer at least 48Khz/24 in the audio interface, even if only for a Stereo pair).
And at the end of the day, adding an Akai MPC One to the MODX gives you a combo that keeps all the good things about the MODX and is a lot more powerful than the Fantom 0 in any other area (sampling, sequencing, synthesis engines). And still very portable and more ergonomic.

[quotePost id=115223]Imitation is the greatest form of flattery.[/quotePost]
Yamaha certainly set the template for the Fantom and its branching. Not bad for a big, slow moving corporation.[/quotePost]

Oh... look. Trolling!

Or is it that you're both completely unaware of the histories of synths and workstations, brands and manufacturing, marketing and advertising, corporations and workforces, financiers and secrets, yin and yang?

[quotePost id=115226][quotePost id=115211][quotePost id=115208]The Motif was pretty succesful yet it only had AWM2.[/quotePost]OTOH, the competitive Korgs and Rolands of the time also only had sampled sounds. In fact, the Motif was unusual because you could add PLG cards to get FM and VA synthesis (among other things), making it quite the opposite of today. Back then, if you wanted to integrate the sounds of multiple different sound engines, Yamaha was the only way to go from among the boards of the "big three," and today, Yamaha is the least capable in this respect.[/quotePost]
Not sure this was true for later Motif series like XF, exactly those which were contemporaries with the Kronos for example.[/quotePost]I was talking about the original Motif. Though it was also true of the subsequent Motif ES, the last Motif to have plug-in expansions. PLG compatibility was also in even older Yamahas (e.g. S30/S80).

There was, however, a brief overlap between the end of the Motif ES' production and the beginning of the Korg OASYS, so for a very short time, both companies had multi-engine platforms, one phasing it out and one phasing it in.

[quotePost id=115226]In the end, it depends what type of user you are. For a performing artist (which is probably the primary target of these boards), it certainly makes sense to have multiple engines.
For others (like me...), this board sits in a studio and is used for production or learning. So...I'm only interested in what this board can give me that can't be found somewhere else (in a convenient way). From that perspective, the Fantom 0 is exchangeable with something else like the Nautilus or a Kurzweil, but the MODX is not.[/quotePost]I have a somewhat different take. For studio use, I'd say Fantom 0 is not so exchangeable. Because in a studio, you can always get a "missing sound" from somewhere else, even software, but something you can't duplicate is ergonomics/workflow. And that's where I'd say a Fantom-0 could not effectively be replaced by, say, a Nautilus (Fantom-0 having, for example, the extensive control surface and the Logic/Ableton integration). Though each brand does have unique things it might bring to the table relative to the others. Yamaha has its Motion Control, Kronos had Karma, for example. Sticking closer to the MODX price range than the Kronos range, only Kurzweil has aftertouch. So you can probably always find things that would be difficult if not impossible to duplicate in swapping any of these boards for any other, having little or nothing to do with the sounds themselves.

[quotePost id=115226]And at the end of the day, adding an Akai MPC One to the MODX gives you a combo that keeps all the good things about the MODX and is a lot more powerful than the Fantom 0 in any other area (sampling, sequencing, synthesis engines). And still very portable and more ergonomic.[/quotePost]
Well, replacing one item with two items can also change the equation a bit. 😉

[quotePost id=115234]And that's where I'd say a Fantom-0 could not effectively be replaced by, say, a Nautilus (Fantom-0 having, for example, the extensive control surface and the Logic/Ableton integration).[/quotePost]
I like a lot that the Fantom-0 brings such extensive control options in this price range, should put some pressure on everyone else, including Yamaha.
[quotePost id=115234]Well, replacing one item with two items can also change the equation a bit. ;-)[/quotePost]
It certainly does, and again it comes to where the user needs are. 🙂

In fairness to Dragos point, I think he's coming from the perspective of whether or not to add one of these new Roland's to an existing Montage/MODX, not choosing which one or the other, as someone new to the market will be. This is the same position I'm in, despite the nature of this thread starting on the premise of the influence this new Fantom-lite has on the new buyer's market hopefully being a motivator for a better firmware update than aliased morphing of FM-X sounds.

From an "already got a MODX/Montage" perspective, the lack of aftertouch in the new Fantom-lites sways me to the same choice, that of adding an Akai MPC and getting all its benefits (and still further avoiding DAWs on computers).

Which still leaves the aftertouch issue unresolved in a massively multitimbral machine.

For me, polyphonic aftertouch, having tried it, is like fast refresh monitors and salt. Can't go back to how things were without it.

Both the Montage and BigBoy Fantom only offer channel aftertouch. Which is no longer sufficient, for me. And the latency issues with using a polyphonic aftertouch controller with a MODX, whilst being a hugely annoying factor against this approach for me, are made even worse by the fact that the MODX and Montage can't utilise polyphonic aftertouch.

So I'll keep dreaming that someone will make the perfect work boot for compositional drafting in a single box.

Until then, I'll continue browsing ebay for mint condition Andromedas in my area.

One possibly interesting side effect of this announcement from Roland:

Some of the MODX and FA of the world have jumped onto the secondhand market. Noticeable, because they're not usually there, at all.

And it has a nice sequencer...a REAL sequencer for writing and constructing full, detailed songs. I have been upset about the sequencer ever since I bought my Montage almost 2 years ago. Having come from a MOX6, I was so disappointed. I think I may buy this Fantom 0 and try to get something out of my Montage that I've been staring at for so long.

[quotePost id=115332]And it has a nice sequencer...a REAL sequencer for writing and constructing full, detailed songs. I have been upset about the sequencer ever since I bought my Montage almost 2 years ago. Having come from a MOX6, I was so disappointed. I think I may buy this Fantom 0 and try to get something out of my Montage that I've been staring at for so long.[/quotePost]
Not really. In fact in some respects I understand it's inferior to the one in the MODX (at least that's what I understand from forums and reviews, no first hand experience). The guys in the Fantom world seem to complain just as much as those here about the sequencer.
There are tons of very good sequencers that you can attach to your Montage, like the MPC One discussed above.
Or just use a DAW.