Montage duplicates the Motif XF waveforms. Maybe they're "improved" - but 100% named the same and fully compatible with the Motif XF. I would say they are "the same".

Montage adds the following tonewheel waveforms that are not in Motif XF:

495	Tonewheel1 Fast Organ TnWhl

	496	Tonewheel1 Slow Organ TnWhl

	497	Tonewheel2 Fast Organ TnWhl

	498	Tonewheel2 Slow Organ TnWhl

	499	Tonewheel3 Fast L Organ TnWhl

	500	Tonewheel3 Fast R Organ TnWhl

	501	Tonewheel3 Fast St Organ TnWhl

	502	Tonewheel3 Slow L Organ TnWhl

	503	Tonewheel3 Slow R Organ TnWhl

	504	Tonewheel3 Slow St Organ TnWhl

	505	Tonewheel4 Fast Organ TnWhl

	506	Tonewheel5 Fast Organ TnWhl

	507	Tonewheel6 Fast Organ TnWhl

For reference, the waveforms that are duplicates of Motif XF are Montage's waveform numbers 441-494 and 508-513. (the new ones are wedged in the middle). It'd take more time to tease out which Performances utilize the new waveforms 496-507. Hopefully you're not really concerned about that.

Organimation was first released before the new rotary speaker effect was available. I'm not sure if they updated the set to use the new effect or not. Certainly, there cannot be a better effect in Organimation than exists in Montage since libraries do not change the effects you have to choose from - only can reprogram the settings of the effects you have (or combine multiple effects in a unique way) and perhaps sound "better" than what is in the presets.

I believe Organimation has its own set of samples - so that's a world of possible difference from B's Knees which uses the preset waveforms (441-494, 508-513). They may also mix in other preset waveforms outside of this range - I don't have the set to look at.

The Presets with the new rotating effect generally end in "2". Because what they did is left the original Performance alone and then when the new effect was available, made a new copy - tagged a "2" to the end of the name - and swapped out the rotating speaker with the new effect.

"The Preacher 2", "J's Jazz 2", "Jazz To All Out 2".

The new rotating speaker effect was released on a certain version of firmware (v1.50) so you can look at the data list for v1.5 and look for the "*1" which designates new Performances to get a complete list. There were many organs added in 1.5 - not sure if they all use the new effect or not.

Montage duplicates the Motif XF waveforms. Maybe they're "improved" - but 100% named the same and fully compatible with the Motif XF. I would say they are "the same".

Montage adds the following tonewheel waveforms that are not in Motif XF:

I believe Organimation has its own set of samples - so that's a world of possible difference from B's Knees which uses the preset waveforms (441-494, 508-513). They may also mix in other preset waveforms outside of this range - I don't have the set to look at.

The Presets with the new rotating effect generally end in "2". Because what they did is left the original Performance alone and then when the new effect was available, made a new copy - tagged a "2" to the end of the name - and swapped out the rotating speaker with the new effect.

"The Preacher 2", "J's Jazz 2", "Jazz To All Out 2".

The new rotating speaker effect was released on a certain version of firmware (v1.50) so you can look at the data list for v1.5 and look for the "*1" which designates new Performances to get a complete list. There were many organs added in 1.5 - not sure if they all use the new effect or not.

Wow, that is perfect. I'll check the #2s' effects (rotating speaker) and if I purchase the B's Knees, I'll look where I might be able to replace the older rotating speaker with the new effect. Maybe even check the new waveforms to see if some of the older elements can be swapped with a newer/better element without causing any harm and making some improvements...

I listened to the B's Knees a few times and some of the sounds are pretty awesome, especially the one used to play "A Whiter Shade Of Pale" is pretty close to the record. Maybe swap in the new rotating speaker effect on that one!

Thanks!

Do you think these shoes look good on me?
Is what your asking... do these sounds sound better than those sounds?
Will these sounds sound better to me?
Honest answer: I don’t know.

The programming is what is different, and that says more, sometimes, than is it the same or different Waveform or the same or different Effect processor. In Organimation, the same Effect processor (Rotary Speaker 1) is used; same as in “B’s Knees”. However, the programmer used the Rotary Speaker as both Insert A and Insert B... in an A—>B in series routing scenario. Back-to-back Rotary Speakers.

Will you prefer this programming over the single use of a Rotary Speaker Insert? Again, it’s a “shoes question”... meaning only you can decide if this is what you’re after. If you normally play in Mono, (L/Mono Out only) you may like the increased depth of Doppler Effect pleasing, or not; if you normally play in Stereo, (both Outputs connected) you may see the effect as too much, just enough, or not like it at all... it’s personal taste on much of this... always.

Organ (Tone Wheel) samples may not differ as much you think... they basically are a sample of the one Fundamental harmonic. So looking for a significantly better sample of a Tone Wheel drawbar would cause some discussion about what could be improved... it’s not like a certain harmonic would be missing in the 16’ sample (if you get my meaning).

So much of programming organ sounds is based on what you do with it... add to it (noises, leakage, click, etc.), what you process it with (Rotary Effect, overdrive, etc). and in the “presence” you give it by combining components.

By duplicating the Rotary Speaker programming in two blocks — there is a character to the resulting sound. Depending on what you are looking for, you can expound on that or eliminate. While I have little beyond the advice that it is always going to be a “personal taste” choice, discussing/explaining how to get the most out of what is provided is our goal here (website).

So until a better Tone Wheel sine wave sample comes along, why not experiment with what is already on board. The organ sound you create can be very different... try a “B’s Knees” program and contrast it with an “Organimation” program... they use the same Waveforms, same Effect Type Rotary Speaker, yet these sets are clearly very, very different.

If I were you I’d study the organ sounds on-board... at least until you have a good idea of how they are accomplishing the things that are accomplished. For example, if there is “Percussion”, what type is it? Is it based on the Octave or the 5th? Does it mimic B3 behavior where the percussion is monophonic (only sounds when you hit-it-and-quit-it... no Percussion when you play legato? And most importantly when synthesizing a drawbar organ: can you get to the sounds you require. Can you, and/or do you need to activate/deactivate the Percussion on this particular organ program.

Multi Part Organ — analyze what each Part is contributing. Figure out how it is setup to real-time control it.
Determine if Element Level or Part Volume are farmed out to other controllers. Know what each Element is doing and exactly when it is used (and not used).

When synthesizing a drawbar organ nothing wastes more resources than an B3 Sound with the drawbar setting of 0.
It’s okay to create an Oscillator that initially sits at 0... if you intend at some point to use it... but if the drawbar settings you are going to use never include that drawbar set to something other than 0, why waste the Oscillator? The synth is no more an Organ than it is a Piano or a Flute.

I know a few folks who know the drawbar system well enough to actually “program” useful synth emulations for specific tunes. They know the system well enough to “work it” and translate that to a Synthesizer. Many players, however, work the drawbars completely by “feel”, they play them ‘by ear’... which means they require all nine Sliders because it’s a feel/hear thing for them.

You want to get to the point where you know the drawbar system as the “harmonic level controls” they actually are... so that you can provide yourself with the harmonics you need to build the exact sound you want... there are a finite number (although it’s a large number) of drawbar combinations. A bunch of them are not useful... but don’t try to recreate them all... why would you? But do endeavor to create your own — based on what works in your music.

Once you learn the math of the organ drawbar system — and you combine that with, say, the ability to build sounds with FM synthesis — building Tone Wheel sounds with character (virtual any kind of character) becomes possible. Granted the drawbar system is one way to real-time control the Tone Wheel sound; the synth offers other methods to control the change in sound and that’s where “programming” comes in.

Do you think these shoes look good on me?

The programming is what is different, and that says more, sometimes, than is it the same or different Waveform or the same or different Effect processor. In Organimation, the same Effect processor (Rotary Speaker 1) is used; same as in “B’s Knees”. However, the programmer used the Rotary Speaker as both Insert A and Insert B... in an A—>B in series routing scenario. Back-to-back Rotary Speakers.

Will you prefer this programming over the single use of a Rotary Speaker Insert? Again, it’s a “shoes question”... meaning only you can decide if this is what you’re after.

So until a better Tone Wheel sine wave sample comes along, why not experiment with what is already on board. The organ sound you create can be very different... try a “B’s Knees” program and contrast it with an “Organimation” program... they use the same Waveforms, same Effect Type Rotary Speaker, yet these sets are clearly very, very different.

That is surprising to know that it's just programming differences between the two products (3 counting the Montage/Motif sounds), as I was somehow under the impression that the "B's Knees" used the preset waveforms from the Yamaha Synths, but that "Organimation" used it's own separate waveforms. Thanks for the clarification.

If I were you I’d study the organ sounds on-board... at least until you have a good idea of how they are accomplishing the things that are accomplished.

Multi Part Organ — analyze what each Part is contributing. Figure out how it is setup to real-time control it.
Determine if Element Level or Part Volume are farmed out to other controllers. Know what each Element is doing and exactly when it is used (and not used).

When synthesizing a drawbar organ nothing wastes more resources than an B3 Sound with the drawbar setting of 0.

You want to get to the point where you know the drawbar system as the “harmonic level controls” they actually are... so that you can provide yourself with the harmonics you need to build the exact sound you want...

Thanks BM, a lot to think about, check out, understand and play with.

As you may have noticed, this is kind of a duplicate thread on Organs/B's Knees, because when I first tried to post the thread, the YamahaSynth site crashed with a MySQL error. After it came back online, I couldn't find that thread (B's Knees Organ Wavefrom Samples), so I figured it never was save in the database; however it appears that it was recovered from backup, or I just didn't see it for some reason. Regardless, I started this new thread later on the same topic, but it took a slight different direction.

But oddly, both threads are different and I am learning and gaining knowledge from both.

To be honest, I am not a true Organ guy. I just want to have the best options for Tonewheel/Rock/Hammond Organ sounds. I'm likely not going to be moving drawbars by ear. But I can appreciate the differences in sound and know what sounds best for me.
I am more of a Piano and a Synth sound guy, though I do love all the sample based sounds, including Hammond Organs.

I love to take sounds, enhance them if possible and make them better for me. A perfect example is the W. Olszak 'WO Studio Piano'. I love what he did with the CFX Grand sound and it is one of my favorite 'Go To's"; however I noticed that when playing very softly to moderately soft on the high keys of PART 3 (G#5 - G8), there is a jump between the very soft touch and a moderately soft touch. So after figuring it out and adjust things, I think I fixed it for my purposes with the following modifications to some settings in PART 3 of that Performance:
- Element 1 - Set "Velocity Limit" to (1 - 29)
- Element 2 - Set "Velocity Limit" to (30 - 45)
- Element 1 - under Amplitude - Set "Level/Vel" to (+19), set "Offset" to (0), set "Curve" to (4)
Then hit the [COMPARE] button to check the difference...

And that seemed to do the trick. For anyone reading this that has or hasn't noticed the (G#5 - G8) notes PART 3 issue in that Performance, give these settings a try and see if you find it better or worse when playing very softly to medium soft on the highest notes...

Anyway, so I'll likely play with modifying Organ sounds a bit too and make them better for my ears.

They are actually different samples... but what I want you to do is recall the Factory 16’ drawbar sample, then recall the 16’ drawbar sample from Organimation... do that comparison, I think it will reveal a lot to you — in your quest for newer, fresher data. Again, they are technically speaking different samples. But you will quickly hear... the things you normally use to benchmark the quality of the instrument sample are mostly missing... it is after all almost devoid of harmonics. It is just the 16’ drawbar alone... what I’m saying is — a lot has to do with what you do with it! But let me correct this... there are definitely different samples in Organimation... what I think you’ll discover is that the difference is not occurring at the sample. It is mostly done after the sample... (programming).

The Tone Wheel organ, more so than almost all other instruments, is always a function of the programming... and not just the combination (mix) of drawbars (harmonic). I know that’s an oversimplification but really when you compare the 16’ samples, the 8’ samples, etc., etc., you may find you agree, a lot of what “makes the difference” in making great B3 sounds is the programming... this includes the behavior. And this you can be involved in... the starting points are very good and a good variety are on offer...

Both programmers approach the bulk of the Library by using the “additive synthesis” paradigm of each Oscillator = a different Drawbar...In the XF where you were limited to 8 Elements, each Waveform Set paired two of the drawbars to match the 8 sliders.
Organimation has a combined 7th and 8th drawbar Waveform... where Factory pairs the 1st and 3rd drawbars in a Waveform... in a situation where you have 8 Faders, a combined pair is a programming thing.
1 3/5’ + 1 1/3’ (minor 3rd) are the 7th and 8th drawbars
16’ + 8’ (Octave) are the 1st and 3rd drawbars

Take a listen to the provided Tone Wheel Waveforms... you’ll find a nice variety in the Factory library ... even sampled “Leslie” both Slow and Fast. Again, if you have a good idea of what you’re going for, you can build it. Check “Dave’s Nu Organ” — some of what’s new about MONTAGE can be found there!

I mention FM-X because of its uncanny ability to create Tone Wheel organ tones... and why not, it is built from Sine Wave generators.

And any organist will tell you the pedal is Expression on an organ... working the dynamics, which means working the Swell pedal on an organ, is essential to make the instrument jump up and bark...

Myself, I wasn't really happy with how percussion was programmed with "All 9 Bars!" - so I modified the programming of that PART to sound like I wanted in terms of pitch, attack, and release.

The comment about the raw drawbar sound (the samples) is completely true. I've got a Hammond CV and a Leslie 147. Sounds great - and the "sample" part of it - the CV organ (before the Leslie) is about tops. Then I've got a transistor organ - a Thomas 2 manual. Play this thing and it sounds very unlike the Hammond. That classic transistor sound. But the organ has a smaller built-in true Leslie speaker. Turn that on, and the organ transforms into something very very close to that tone-wheel sound. So the samples are not where the meat of the sound is generally. The rotating speaker does a lot to color the sound. This is why so much focus on the rotating speaker was made vs. anyone complaining about the waveforms. Certainly if you switch the rotating speaker off - then the "samples" or raw sound matters more. But the samples in Montage are very good. I've got a Voce V3 that I was very fond of. Did some comparisons with the Montage and although I like the effects of the V3 better (rotating speaker, leakage, etc) - I really dig the raw core samples more on the Montage. It holds up very well with give/take - often leaning towards the Montage as better.

Myself, I wasn't really happy with how percussion was programmed with "All 9 Bars!" - so I modified the programming of that PART to sound like I wanted in terms of pitch, attack, and release.

Was it just a few modifications to that one percussion element? If so, would you mind sharing what you set the pitch, attack, release, etc. to?

Check “Dave’s Nu Organ”

I'm going to take possibly a not so wild guess and ask, would that be Dave Polich's new Performance?

https://soundmondo.yamahasynth.com/voices/37467

https://soundmondo.yamahasynth.com/voices/37467

It appears that you programmed that sound...awesome! And "Grammy Nominated Song Writer"...kool!

I wouldn't really mind sharing - but I've moved past that. I'm not sure if I even still have it around. It's not something I believe I kept as part of my daily gig Performances. I believe what happened is that I was working on making it more match a B3 reference. I accomplished what I was after and moved on. I do not actually need this level of authenticity currently for the sounds I use at gigs which is why it "died on the vine". I guess I can go through it again and take notes. The main focus you should have is not necessarily organ sounds - but how to use the synth programming capabilities to change any sound into something that's yours. Learning what's available to you and knowing how parameters relate to changes in the sound. Yes, this is a lot. There are lots of parameters in an AWM2 Performance/PART/element stack. But this can pay dividends rather than treating Montage as a bank of presets and searching for answers to "plug in" from Soundmondo, other legitimate free sources, or by paying for libraries. When you can massage what's there - you'll find relying on others or your wallet is not necessary to generate content that is useful for you.

The main focus you should have is not necessarily organ sounds - but how to use the synth programming capabilities to change any sound into something that's yours. Learning what's available to you and knowing how parameters relate to changes in the sound. Yes, this is a lot. There are lots of parameters in an AWM2 Performance/PART/element stack. But this can pay dividends rather than treating Montage as a bank of presets and searching for answers to "plug in" from Soundmondo, other legitimate free sources, or by paying for libraries. When you can massage what's there - you'll find relying on others or your wallet is not necessary to generate content that is useful for you.

No worries.

I definitely will be mostly programming/tweaking existing sounds, and possibly even creating something completely new from scratch. For some sounds though, I may purchase the library, such as B's Knees. It's relatively one of the more inexpensive libraries out there, but just listening to the demo, it appears to have the best tweaking already done of what I might use for organ sounds, and since I'm not huge on Organ sounds anyway, I would rather spend that small amount of money and take that time I saved to work on programming/tweaking other sounds.
Also, at some point I will definitely want a C7 Piano. Whether I buy a library or not will depend on whether (A) I can use SampleRobot & lots of tweaking to capture my Synthogy Ivory C7 or not, &/or (B) whether Yamaha give us a C7 in the next software update. Also, being that I love variety, especially for piano sounds, I plan to purchase the Synthogy American Grand (Steinway) at some point. Other than those, I will likely create/tweak Performances on the Montage based on what's already there for the most part, plus check out some of the free libraries sounds and tweak those to my liking...

It appears that you programmed that sound...awesome!

No, that’s the same organ that you have in your Factory Preset data (and 'Dave' is Dave Polich), all I’ve done is apply “nicknames” to the Common and Part 1 Assign Knobs... when you are combining sounds into one Performance, it can be important to consider what items are assigned to the AsgnKnobs.

When “merging” Performances you must reconsider what Part Assign Knobs need to be linked to the upper Common Assign Knobs. This is because when you Merge a Performance, the Part Assign Knob settings are brought along automatically... but if you wish to link any of them to the Super Knob, you must activate this in the new Performance home.

As you get into programming/tweaking you’ll want to take advantage of the ability to apply nicknames to certain Knob functions.
On the main HOME you can view the “Common Assign Knobs” - I’ve provided names for those linked to the Super Knob:

Press [PART SELECT 1]
If you look at “Part 1 Assign” you see the 7 parameters selected for direct control.
You can clearly see that four of them are linked to Super Knob movement. It happens to be a (correspondingly numbered) Common Assign Knob 1-4... while 5, 6 and 7 are not linked, these you would “perform” directly:

So you can deduce that Dave provided detailed control over the Distortion Overdrive... by linking four parameters to the Super Knob... these parameters not only change the amount of overdrive but the character of that overdriven signal. Additionally, made available 'on demand' are convenient Send amount control to a Reverb and a Delay... as well as the organ “power down” (accomplished with “Coarse” tuning and Part “Volume” combined to an Assign Knob)

Extra Credit:
Multiple parameter Destinations can be stacked to an Assign Knob so often the “nickname” that you create for a parameter needs to reflect what it does and not just the name of the individual parameter... Part Assign Knob 5 is controlling Coarse tuning in one ControlSet, and Volume in another, together they mimic the B3 being powered down -- Hold a chord and turn Assign Knob 5 (for those who remember). The reason the assignment of nicknames is left to you is to encourage you to build from the provided data... When you STORE a Factory Performance be sure to rename it and customize it to your use case.

If you never need this faux “Power Down” effect, those Knobs and that Control Set quickly becomes a candidate for reprogramming. Customize the data for how YOU want to use it. That what your User Bank is all about! Take the opportunity to STORE the Performance so that it is ready to perform. Notice how the Sliders default to Element Level. This is because the Performance was Stored while accessing “Element/Operator Control”.

The first 5 Sliders act as virtual drawbars (as they set Element Level for footages)
Sliders 6 and 7 are the Rotor Speaker Noises
Slider 8 is the Percussion level... Notice its behavior (solo Element 8) it is mono when you play legato and polyphonic when you lift and retrigger... (accurate behavior for B3 percussion)

Pianos are generally have one-sample-per-key. Pianos tend to be the king-of-the-hill receiving the most care when constructing. Given that, if you are to SampleRobot capture another piano - you'll want to capture every key. You'll also want to know how your source samples change at different velocities and perhaps try to match those velocity thresholds when you sample. The software sets can have uber-large "memory" since they tend to stream off your hard disk or utilize the rather large dynamic ram available in modern computers (16GB usually a reasonable minimum for an audio workstation). What I'm getting at is that you may have to "cheat" and not sample all of the different velocities the software piano has - but compromise and pick your count/range.

The "nice" thing is that SampleRobot automatically figures out the loop points for you - so you don't have to necessarily worry about that. But there are other aspects of the instrument that need to be considered, going in, for you to be successful. The key-off noises and other aspects of the possible sound need to be treated on their own. If you want any of that. I would probably just use the internal (preset) sounds for that. But if you wanted to 100% copy the software VSTi - you would somehow set it up to only produce the key-off noises and sample those as their own set (I would swap to key-on not key-off in the software if possible). Then go in and hand-edit the piano samples to add these key-off samples.

There's generally a lot more to consider with the piano instruments vs. some others. It's because the piano usually goes "all out" sicking the best programmers and consume the most resources of any given software or hardware platform. Not the easiest place to start - but can be rewarding to tackle assuming you reach an acceptable finish line.

Time is worth money to many people. Somewhere in there is a breaking point where purchasing a piano as a library makes sense.

Circling back to organs - organs are relatively easy compared to pianos. Sure, there's lots of stuff with organs - but there's generally less nuance since organs are always on and off with no differences in strike velocity. That's a lot of removed complexity.