Earle wrote:

I went from an XF8 to a CP4 because I wanted to concentrate on playing instead of the enticing distraction of sound design, sampling, etc. I have no regrets, except I miss a MIDI sequencer and have compensated by connecting my iPad to the CP4 and recording MIDI tracts into Cubasis and editing them there, which is passable. The truth that I don't think Yamaha wants the world to know is that the AW2 sounds from the CP4 are significantly better than the AW2 sounds from the XF8, at least in my opinion because I have owned and played both (using Yamaha studio monitor speakers). But per a response to my earlier post, I understand that the AW2 sounds of the Montage are worlds better than those of the XF (and by extension I assume the CP4 as well) and that twists my arm to buy the Montage. Therefore, I am considering a return to complexity and fairly sure that I will sell the CP4 and buy a Montage 8 because I do not see the argument of having both since the CP4 which is based on "Performances" like the Montage never leaves my home studio.

Hi Earle, welcome to YamahaSynth.
And while your theories about AWM2 are interesting, they have no basis in fact. Perhaps this will help... The CP4 Stage combines two technologies SCM (Spectral Component Modeling) which is Physical Modeling and AWM2 (Advanced Wave Memory 2) which is a proprietary method of sample-based data storage. The AWM2 sounds are derived directly from the Motif XF LIBRARY. If you like them "better" or think they "sound better", this might be just an opinion (which you are free to have) but when you say you "don't think Yamaha wants the world to know that the AW2(sic) sounds from the CP4 are significantly better than the AW2 sounds from the XF8" well that is (truly) pure opinion, as they are taken from the Motif XF8... And we say so openly!

In fact, the difference is exactly as you conjecture earlier in your post...you don't have to deal with the "distraction of sound design" (hmm). While interesting, it clearly shows you have the right product, because the difference between the synth sounds selected from the XF to be in the CP4 Stage, are identical to sounds in the XF but are placed there without the detailed Editing capability. Obviously, in the Motif XF diving deep into the architecture allows extensive editing and customization of the AWM2 sound engine. The editing parameters found on those same sounds in the CP4 Stage, cannot be be as deeply edited. That's why, for you, the CP4 Stage is the right product. The sounds were selected to work well in combination with the selected contemporary piano sound.

The acoustic and electric pianos found on the CP4 Stage are recreated via SCM - a rather new Physical Modeling technology where velocity switching of pre-recorded samples is not used. The data representing the instrument modeled is assembled via pure number crunching, harmonic analysis and reassembly on demand. Suffice it to say, an entirely different sound creation process. But the other sounds in the CP4 Stage library are AWM2 sample based and taken directly from the Motif XF library.

But getting back to Montage MIDI sequencing, I have read the Owner's Manual and other threads and can not find an answer to this question. If I record a MIDI sequence in the Montage and hit a wrong note on one of the performance tracks, is there any editing capability in the Montage itself to correct that wrong note other than punching in/out with a new recording which may have its own mistakes? And if so, what other MIDI sequencing editing capabilities does the Montage itself offer on board? If none, then I think it is a design mistake and failure to understand that many of us do not want to be chained to a computer and want a standalone keyboard with MIDI sequencing and editing as well as all advance, new technology that a Montage offers.

There is no editing of a sequence data recorded in Montage, and additionally, I'm afraid if sound designing is "distraction" you might want to consider sticking with the CP4 Stage. You can record in Montage, you can export your data as a .mid file; drag and drop this into your favorite DAW, and then edit your wrong note there.

Far be it for me to talk you out of a new purchase, but please go into this with your eyes wide open. Clearly, the concept of the Montage is about "sound design" on two levels: one for the casual tweaker (we'll refer to them as "snorkelers"...) Not afraid to get in there and combine sounds and control the outcome, and then there will be the "scuba divers"... Who will dive deep and find the hidden treasures and satisfaction of sound designing in arguably the most powerful synthesizer engine to date.

The sequencer in the Montage is a "direct Performance Recorder", it's a sketch pad, it's there to document everything you play. Let me pass on some ideas about what we are thinking here. At this price point, the majority ('majority' means not everyone, just "most" everyone) users have a favorite DAW software... Be it Cubase, Pro Tools, Logic Pro, Ableton Live, etc., whatever. Editing on a computer is quick/easy, often graphic. Burdening the operating system with a full on sequencer was redundant for this customer. And not just that... The NEW paradigm for Montage is bigger than the "one-track-at-a-time/one-MIDI-Channel-at-a-time" sequencing paradigm of say the Motif/MOXF series.

Because your basic playable sounds now can occupy multiple Channels of MIDI, life in the Montage world is a bit different. For example, a single playable Motion Control engine Performance could occupy 8 MIDI channels... Let that sink in for a minute. You can, while performing change strings into strings with brass swells, changing the size of the string ensemble and the brass ensembles from solo instruments, to quartets through to the entire orchestral ensemble... Each of these musical Parts on its own Midi Channel, on its own Track. Sending each of these segments to separate Midi channels and/or to separate audio outputs!!! Remember, the Montage features 32 bus audio outputs (stereo plus 30 assignable audio bus outs! Simultaneously!)

Making a mistake, like playing the wrong note has implications on several tracks depending on what degree of morphing through your orchestral palette you are doing... I think only time will tell you if working the way you describe and have been using in the past, is worth continuing in the light of this new performing workflow that Montage has placed before you. Guaranteed there are going to be some changes in your workflow, particularly if editing on board the synthesizer is a requirement in your workflow.

If sound design is an "enticing distraction"... Get ready to be completely enticed and distracted into a world where sound designing is paramount/compelling/without boundaries. And is part of the inspiration in playing, Montage.

Worry about developing a workflow that accommodates what you will now be able to do... Don't try to fold and fit Montage into your current work paradigm... It will not fit! Montage is challenging you with, perhaps, developing a new workflow! (At least consider that) reminds me of when reel-to-reel recording was so popular that the introduction of sequencing Midi challenged everyone's workflow. Some never changed, most found a new method of working to gain the benefit of something new (at least be unafraid to attempt something new). Sound design is going to apart of this new workflow... It is a music synthesizer!

You don't have to have a degree in it ... Snorkelers welcome, but when you put on your scuba gear, you can dive deep into an area "where no one has gone before!"

If you understand *direct Performance Record* from the Motif XS/XF and MOX/MOXF series, you can begin to understand what sequence recording is about on Montage. If you wish to continue in a fashion like the typical built in sequencer -where one Voice occupies one Part on one MIDI channel, you can do so on Montage - you would do so by limiting your sound selection to what Montage refers to as "Single Part" programs... So that one instrument always fits on one track and is addressed by one Midi channel.

A Montage "Single Part" program occupies just one Part slot of sixteen, just like a Motif XF Voice does in a Mixing.
A Montage "Multi Part" program occupies more than one and as many as eight Parts, each Part occupies a slot, but is available for simultaneous Keyboard Control. Keyboard Control means you can play/control it with the Montage keyboard. You can bring in a Part as a single component of what you are performing in real time. Motion Control can bring in entirely different environments, different combinations of sound...

Montage is bigger than the current "single Voice to a single Part on a single Midi channel" paradigm. It will not always be contained by that paradigm. It offers (demands) a different workflow.

We suggest you check out Montage before you decide whether or not you might be a candidate for a new workflow. Who knows, you might just find "sound designing" as compelling and enticing as you currently find recording one channel at a time and correcting your mistakes in the keyboard. ...just saying, it's a new era.

Thank you Bad Mister for your comprehensive explanation. But how do the SCM piano sounds in the CP4 compare to the Montage piano sounds? In another of my posts which got diverted to a "performances" issue, you said that the Montage AW2 sounds were an improvement over the XF AW2 sounds. Is this also true for the Montage piano sounds compared to the CP4 piano sounds?

Anyway, glad I kept the scuba gear. Sounds like it's time to put it back on and jump into the water again.

Greetings,

I don't own a DAW. I do my sequencing on a workstation and take the finished product to the studio where we record the audio into Logic Pro and then add the vocals.

A sequencer, therefore, is a necessity for me. I like to concentrate on the music and leave the computer work to my very able engineer.

I was eagerly awaiting the Montage because I had experienced some problems with my Kronos and wanted to go another route which would not involve the use of an SSD.

I'm very sad because having started with Roland and then moving on to Korg and the aforementioned Kronos, I felt it was high time to experience what Yamaha has to offer.

The Kronos will now be my only option. It's not a bad one. I love the way it sounds. However I'm left wondering why a workstation with 256 note polyphony still can't make it's way to market while performance boards like the Montage and that one from Roland can.

I have my suspicions but would like to hear from those who know whether there is some insurmountable, technological mountain range barrier which prevents this.

Thank you for allowing me to post my comments.

Hi Phil,

A couple of additional clarification questions related to the performance sequencer and audio recorder on the Montage.

Assume we work in an old-fashion (i.e. pre-Montage) workflow where we use Single Part Performances (a la Voice Mode on Motif XF) so one Performance is sequenced on one MIDI track in the Montage sequencer:

1. Is it possible to do track-on-track MIDI recording on the Montage sequencer (first record piano, then bass, then drums, etc...) (real old-fashioned as you can see)?

2. It is not possible to edit the recorded MIDI data as such, but is it possible to change the Singe Part Performance on a track, for example change the bass from electric to acoustic bass) in order to pilot what sounds best?

Assume we now work in the new workflow with Multi Part Performances (where a performance may occupy several MIDI tracks):

3. Is it possible to do "performance-on-performance" MIDI recording where each Performance may be recorded on more than one MIDI track, e.g. first Performance takes 2 MIDI tracks, then add the next Performance e.g. using the next 4 MIDI tracks, etc?

If we instead of MIDI recording do Audio recording on the Montage (on a flash drive as far as I understand) either with a Single Part or Multi Part Performances):

4. Is it possible with Audio Recording to do "performance-on-performance" recording?

Thanks for your kind help.

1. Is it possible to do track-on-track MIDI recording on the Montage sequencer (first record piano, then bass, then drums, etc...) (real old-fashioned as you can see)?

Yes.

2. It is not possible to edit the recorded MIDI data as such, but is it possible to change the Singe Part Performance on a track, for example change the bass from electric to acoustic bass) in order to pilot what sounds best?

Yes.

Assume we now work in the new workflow with Multi Part Performances (where a performance may occupy several MIDI tracks):

3. Is it possible to do "performance-on-performance" MIDI recording where each Performance may be recorded on more than one MIDI track, e.g. first Performance takes 2 MIDI tracks, then add the next Performance e.g. using the next 4 MIDI tracks, etc?

Sorry, I don't know if that workflow is possible inside the Montage _ but we'll let you know as the firmware gets closer and closer to being finalized.

If we instead of MIDI recording do Audio recording on the Montage (on a flash drive as far as I understand) either with a Single Part or Multi Part Performances):

4. Is it possible with Audio Recording to do "performance-on-performance" recording?

Sorry, I don't know if that workflow is possible inside the Montage _ but we'll let you know as the firmware gets closer and closer to being finalized. if audio recording is to have multiple passes, it would be far more effecient to assign your Montage Parts to multiple audio outputs (there are 30 assignable audio outputs in addition to the main stereo output). I don't really think it does any sound-on-sound wave recording to a USB stick (for many reasons).

The wav recording to USB drive can be 24-bit/44.1kHz or 16-bit/44.1kHz stereo.
Because it is clocked, multiple recordings can be sync'd - in other words, recording a .wav to a USB drive that recording can be drag n dropped into your DAW project at specific measure locations.

Excellent, I was hoping for "Yes" to the first two questions which is exactly what I need together with Punch In/Out (ref Owner's Manual) to replicate on the Montage the quick prototyping of a song that I do on my Motif XF today.

If I need to make a final song I agree that DAW (in my case mostly Logic Pro) is the better environment to do this in.

Regarding the audio recording I also agree that it makes more sense to go to the DAW via the USB audio transfer.

Thank you very much for your reply.

1. Is it possible to do track-on-track MIDI recording on the Montage sequencer (first record piano, then bass, then drums, etc...) (real old-fashioned as you can see)?
Yes.

Hi Phil,

You previously replied that it is possible to do track-on-track MIDI recording on the Montage. Can you please explain how to do this - or where to find information about it.

Thank you very much in advance for your help.

I also previously replied, in depth, that this is not, repeat NOT, what it was designed to do. You can do whatever you want once your in the water... You can swim against the tide, if that is your nature. I suggest the one-track-at-a-time paradigm is not what the Montage was designed for... I would refer you to my thoughts on that but they are above in this very thread.

I find it best to describe and use the recorder in the Montage as a "direct Performance Recorder"... That is, to document an interaction between the player and the current Performance. You can choose to record that interaction either as a .mid file (on-board) or as a .wav file (USB drive); these can then be exported to your DAW where you can continue your work.

Remember, the design concept of multi-Part recording requires that all Tracks go into record... Because as you interact with the Motion Control Engine you can be transmitting to some Parts only under certain conditions. For example, say you are performing on an 8 Part Performance... You could be outputting data to eight Parts, but not to all of them simultaneously- only when the Super Knob, and the Assign Switches activate the particular Part. This multi Part recording can be, in certain cases, quite different from just recording data as traditional.

The recorder in Montage is able to capture your direct play, while capturing the output of the arpeggiator(s) on those Parts assigned to follow arp phrases. It does this without you having to make any extraordinary settings in your recording device. This way you can simply transfer the data as a captured file.

If you wish to follow the one track at a time workflow, we highly recommend you do so with a DAW, rendering audio when necessary.

Thanks for the reply. I understand the Performance Recorder is not designed for one track at a time recording and I understand the challenges of recording multi-part performances which may include motion control and more. I understand your conclusion is that it is not possible to record single-part performances one at a time in the Performance Recorder.

Hi all,
If that's not possible, please look at this video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WLZic7sXIBo
in minute 14:15 aprox. what are Bert doing?
this is not the performance recorder?
And also he is recording midi data or audio?

Thanks in advance

Sorry, I don't speak Dutch. You should reach out to Bert and he'll tell you exactly what's going on.

My best guess: Bert is playing along with a Performance that he has pre-assembled. You can import audio samples (the vocals were done elsewhere and imported as .wav and made a Waveform source within a Part), they can be mapped to Keys of a Part, they can then be triggered by Midi events... He then had several pre-selected Parts in that same Performance that he was using to overdub (add parts). All of the Parts were placed (off camera) in a Performance (it has sixteen Parts) and were waiting for him to select the Part. This is more of a "demonstration" than a recommended workflow. Certainly, you can put down one instrument at a time, but you'll see when using it, that it is designed as a "direct Performance Recorder" - a sketch sequencer.

You can sketch your ideas, by playing along with tracks... Or by creating your own. External audio could be input via the A/D Input from whatever source you may have, you can then play along and record your keyboard Parts. Montage can derive tempo from an external audio source... So the possibilities are many.

If you are getting the point that Montage is not Motif, then we are being successful. It is quite different when it comes to recording... Particularly when recording MIDI. In a situation where you limit yourself to single Part sounds, you can use the sequencer to playback 16 tracks of data, you can certainly leave certain Parts for you to play along with the file.

In the INIT "MULTI/GM" Performance you have all single Part programs set to the sixteen PARTs. This is probably best as a starting point when revoicing a .mid file, substituting Monatge sounds for the file's selection. Or for playing back your own .mid files created in your DAW.

ok, thanks!

Xavi & Peter,

BM answered "Yes" to the Montage's capability to do track-on-track MIDI recording (one part at a time). What he was pointing out is that IN ADDITION TO THAT CAPABILITY (track-on-track midi recording), the Montage can do, and was designed to do, much more.

I own a Motif. While I do like the on-board recording capability for when I have an idea, it is MUCH more efficient using the computer to edit and expand on the idea. I have also done a full song on the Motif XF, but, it takes a while and I still had to take it to my computer for better editing. Imagine recording a piece and having to go back to edit it note by note on a small screen when you can barely see the notes or in the EDIT MODE when you have to sort through all the notes to fix them. A DAW makes EDITING and manipulating data a walk in the park for me. ALSO, instead of 16 tracks on the Motif, which can be occupied fairly quickly when it comes to drum parts, I can have as many tracks as my DAW allows. If you have a good set up between your keyboard and your DAW, you will realize your recording capability is much more powerful. With my current MOTIF XF, when recording, I have to do it one voice, one MIDI channel, and one track (from the DAW) at a time.

With the MONTAGE, I will be able to record ALL 8 parts of a performance at the same time and each part on its own MIDI or audio track on my DAW without losing the audio quality of the instruments. This is a powerful feature. Sometimes I would try to play more than 4 layers of instruments on the MOTIF XF from the PATTERN or MIX MODE by having all instruments travel through one MIDI channel so I can play them at the same time. However, by the time I get to the 3rd or 4th instrument, I can hear the lost of sound quality and skipped notes. The MONTAGE is capable of playing all 8 parts simultaneously without compromising sound quality.

So, to me as I feel more powerful recording on my DAW than a Keyboard, a basic recorder on board that can capture my idea, whether I choose to do it through a performance, or one track at a time, is sufficient as I believe my DAW gives me far more recording power than any sequencer on any keyboard. To ALL MY FRIENDS who want a MONTAGE, but, worried about the lost of recording capabilities, I would recommend trying to get comfortable EDITING on a DAW, even the most basic DAW. Once you get comfortable recording on a DAW, come back and tell me about your experience :).

Sorry - I get carried away a little bit. It's good to know there are some passionate musicians out there like myself. BTW, I am still waiting for my MONTAGE 8 to get here. I can't way to get my fingers on it. It seems that everyone who has received it have some very positive things to say about it.

So, with great alacrity, I await the arrival of my MONTAGE!!! My MOTIF XF8 is on the market for sale.

Edouard and Xavi,

Thanks for your reply. I also have a Motif XF8 in addition to the Montage 8. I fully agree with you and I also use DAW (mostly Logic Pro) when I get serious. I understand the Montage is a different creation than Motif for many reasons. But as I stated somewhere else, for quick prototyping I think a track on track MIDI recording feature (or more general a performance on performance MIDI recording feature) could be convenient and all I am asking is whether it is possible and if so, how to do it. I have studied the Montage but not a lot sofar - and have not been able to figure out how to do it. Phil earlier wrote it is possible but now I am inclined to think it is not the case unless someone explains how to do it.

I also do not understand what Bert is saying in the video but I can hear that he says something like "MIDI recording" just before recording the first instrument (piano). Could it be he is using a DAW on the laptop next to the Montage?