I’m going to have a graphic made up with the MONTAGE front panel showing all 592 Knobs plus one Super Knob, as separate entities… to make the point about how knowing where you are (current front panel status) is so important. So when someone finds this difficult, well, yeah… it’s deep! You have to respect the learning curve, it’s real. But we’ll worth the effort (imho).

@BadMister , would that info translate to the MODX as well?

where did you find that chart??

@Gabi:

There's an old message where I start to map out the knobs and how they work under all modes. I used a different system of defining the mode and wrote it in long form. From there, Michael was inspired to put the data in chart form and fill in any places I left up to the user as homework.

This chart (or understanding of every knob's function in my case) by turning the knob and looking at what it does. That's what Michael did and just wrote down what he saw.

There's great benefit in using MIDI tools - the same (types of ones Michael and I have used - in order to discover what the keyboard is doing. Although I can do it, what I see from your frustration, I did not want to just hand you a chart with the answers. Instead of giving you a cooked fish dinner, I wanted to teach you how to fish. Because once you start looking at the MIDI bus to answer these questions - it demystifies what's going on. It demystifies why you think that every time you do something - you get a random result. Because when you spin a knob and get a different result - you'll start looking for other clues (in part, because you've been guided in these threads) to look at selecting a single Part vs. selecting no single Part (selecting "Common" ) - or touching a fixed-function switch like [TONE] and the rest vs. [ASSIGN].

But that's how the chart is arrived at. Change modes - turn a knob - write down what happens.

I’m going to have a graphic made up with the MONTAGE front panel showing all 592 Knobs plus one Super Knob, as separate entities… to make the point about how knowing where you are (current front panel status) is so important. So when someone finds this difficult, well, yeah… it’s deep! You have to respect the learning curve, it’s real. But we’ll worth the effort (imho)

Each of the 16 Part has 32 Knobs (the 24 Quick Edit + 8 Assign), the Common level has 32 Knobs (the 24 Quick Edit + 8 Assign), plus the three rows of side-by-side “Multi” Knobs for the 16 Part’s Pan, VarSend, and RevSend.

I thought that Pan, VarSend, and RevSend were part of the 24 Quick Edit Knobs. What am I missing?

32 Knobs x 17 (16 Parts + Common) = 544 Knobs by my calculation, leaving out the Super Knob. Where do the rest of the Knobs come from?

yeah this all kind of reminds me of what Bad Mister said in the other thread: only musicians use MIDI. the M stands for music. well, some musicians can´t even read music, thow only musicians need notation. Including most of the famous rockers. I read many musician biographies, from Keith Richards to Phil Collins, every single one of them says they never learned how to read music. But they still became millionaires.... So why do I need to learn the manual of MIDI messages to be able to use the Montage and Cubase?....

But they still became millionaires.... So why do I need to learn the manual of MIDI messages to be able to use the Montage and Cubase?....

They became millionaires without ever using a Montage or Cubase. If they wanted to use either one or both, they would have to learn all of that, just like the rest of us.

But they still became millionaires.... So why do I need to learn the manual of MIDI messages to be able to use the Montage and Cubase?....

They became millionaires without ever using a Montage or Cubase. If they wanted to use either one or both, they would have to learn all of that, just like the rest of us.

yes, they were lucky 😉

yes, they were lucky 😉

No, they were talented, hard working and they stuck to their objectives.

They might not read music (I doubt it, but sounds cool in an autobiography) but they DO know how to play their chosen instrument, and spent a lot of time on that.

"They might not read music ...."

Reading is neccesary to read, not to speak, as human beings have been doing for centuries, and sadly even nowadays: illiteracy numbers are hard to believe as we make good 2021.
Same goes for music. Sure you have heard those magnificent African tunes.

Not discouraging those willing to learn, but don't stop your singing or your creativity just for your not being able to read a staff made by others, who are not necessarily the ones seen playing, since the ability to write and to play are not necessarily paired.

So why do I need to learn the manual of MIDI messages to be able to use the Montage and Cubase?.

You don't have to learn about the details of MIDI in order to operate Montage or Cubase. Outside of your examples given who are not, at their primary function, keyboard players -- there are also examples of past keyboardist's who would become proficient at equipment entirely through trial and error. Not by knowing how anything worked under the hood. However, they were willing to study the instrument and see what happened after turning every knob in nearly every combination in order to build an understanding - related in their own made-up terms - of the entire operation.

There's lots of things you can do to learn the instrument in a similar manner. Let me give an example. You can set the multi-function of the knobs to the ()REVERB setting. Without knowing what the 8 knobs are, you can notice the word "REVERB" is also printed above the [TONE] row. You can spin one of the knobs at random. Change Parts. You see none of the knobs change. You can determine it doesn't matter what Part is selected (through trial and error) and see these are always the same. Set all of the REVERB knobs here to "0" (full counter-clockwise). Ok, then go to the other REVERB - press [TONE]. Turn the knob. Come back to the multi-function REVERB knobs again -- is there a knob no longer set to "0"? Yes, assuming you had a Part selected. You could keep experimenting with just these knobs to gain a full understanding of how the various REVERB knobs work. How Part selection has an impact. How no Part selection (Common selected) has an impact. How these are related. Build an understanding without anyone telling you anything of how all of these things relate.

However - I don't see this happening. I see, for you - and this isn't a slam - it's a reality - that you need a certain amount of structure. You need to know some of what's behind the walls without doing the discovery to find out for yourself what's there. And, for this, it may help to use - as I've suggested - a MIDI monitor. This may influence needing to learn MIDI commands although most Monitors will translate the messages for you so there should still not be a need to read any manuals.

The difference between the two approaches - between those who know without knowing and those who are in the dark - is fundamentally dedication. Both may get frustrated when something is difficult. However, those who persevere in spite of this and keep a child-like curiosity in how the system works and are constantly rewarded by discoveries will eventually reach a point of understanding. Many times even exceeding the knowledge of those who take a more academic approach. Those who learn by doing can usually transfer what they've learned on one system and more-or-less instantly grasp a totally new instrument because they haven't memorized a sequence of button presses - but have a more organic understanding of cause/effect and how that relates to a musical goal. There's less concern about the order of operations.

Sounds great for the "non readers" approach. But there's room for both. And it's somewhat of a scale. Not all or nothing.

Take whichever approach works for you. Maybe you're still learning about which works best for you. That's OK. Learning isn't one size fits all.

I would like to add something to Jason's excellent message:

I have been teaching computer science at a college for almost 20 years. I have noticed that people have many different ways of learning. It takes some folks longer to learn than others. There is no "right" way or "right" speed for learning.

I tell my students that they have to learn to use the brain they were born with to learn the material. This is going to be different for everyone, given their different talents and abilities. They need to learn to be kind to themselves when they don't learn as fast as they wanted to, or things are harder than they thought they would be.

One of the biggest barriers people have when they try to learn a tech topic is worrying about whether they are smart enough to learn it. You can blow enough energy that way that you actually won't be able to learn the material. I had one student who was so afraid of this that I had to sit with her all term and just remind her to breathe and concentrate and not worry about whether she was smart enough. It turned out, once she got past her anxiety about being stupid, that she actually was smart enough.

When people who are not that tech-oriented are learning to use a high-tech device like the Montage or Cubase (or a computer, smart phone, etc), they sometimes wonder, "Why did they make it so hard?" It makes them angry that the techies created these difficulties, and this anger is another barrier to learning.

What non-techies don't realize is that they are asking the wrong question. They don't realize that since the 1960s, brilliant people have been working as hard as they could to make using technology as easy as possible. It's still "so hard" because what we currently have is the best that those incredibly bright and talented people were able to accomplish. It would be more useful and appropriate to be grateful for "how easy" it all is, compared to using punch cards or the lights and switches on the console of a mainframe computer. Entire generations of technology and programming methods have been invented for the sole purpose of making devices that would be easier for non-techies to use.

You can create significant barriers for yourself by reacting emotionally in unhelpful ways when you try something, it doesn't work, and you don't at that moment have the first idea why not. I have been through all of those unhelpful reactions in my own career as a software engineer, but I learned early on that I was better off not reacting that way.

The right way to make progress is to look at your current problem, pick up and hold as many of the pieces of it as you can in your mind, and wait patiently for the light bulb in your head to go on. Doing anything else will just waste your time and energy, and slow you down. It can take hours or days for the fog in your head to clear. But it's important to just stick with it, concentrate on your problem, and not allow yourself to be distracted by how "stupid" you think you are or get mad at the "idiots" who made things so hard for you.

If you follow this path, people on this forum (and many other places on the Internet) will be happy to try to help you climb the learning curve. We've all been there, and we know what it's like. You can just look back through the history of this forum and see how confused I was about so many things when I first started learning to use my Montage.

thank you. all of my automation stuff works in my old cubase elements 10 and nothing works with my upgrade to cubase elements 11. does anyone have a clue why?

Sorry, no idea.

Maybe it would help to uninstall and reinstall version 11.

thank you. all of my automation stuff works in my old cubase elements 10 and nothing works with my upgrade to cubase elements 11. does anyone have a clue why?

Modern software versioning demands and production methods means each new feature comes at the cost of stability and reliability and performance.

There are ways to solve this. It's not an inevitable or organic aspect of software being software. It's a byproduct of permitting software makers to consider themselves engineers.

There's little to no genuine rigour in software, despite the claims of it being a part of "Computer Science" and a field of engineering and maths. It's none of these things, despite having tiny.slivers of maths intrinsic to it.

To Yamaha's credit, the reliability of the Montage/MODX operating system and software is top notch. Its design ... not so much.

Cubase and Steinberg, on the other hand, are not nearly as reliable, stable or performant.

They're not as bad as Windows, but they're heading in that direction, largely because they're using coding frameworks that are much more general in nature than what's in the Montage/MODX.

My main point is this: use old software if it works. Do not upgrade a version unless you absolutely must.

This is true of all software, especially operating systems. Most production companies making 3D renderings are still working in Windows 7 and using very old versions of the best creative software on the planet.

Most musicians using a Mac are using both old hardware and old versions of the OS because they're more stable and performant.

Many big name Hollywood writers are using Microsoft Word... which is shocking in itself, but many of them are using 2003's edition, which is notably faster, lighter and more stable.

We live in an era where software is generally getting worse, or much worse, with each "update".

With the exception of Yamaha's firmware updates.

So, if you can, reinstall Cubase 10, and uninstall Cubase 11.

Most production companies making 3D renderings are still working in Windows 7 and using very old versions of the best creative software on the planet.

As someone who's making a living in the high-end film/computer graphics industry, I find this statement to be the opposite of my experience.

Most production companies making 3D renderings are still working in Windows 7 and using very old versions of the best creative software on the planet.

As someone who's making a living in the high-end film/computer graphics industry, I find this statement to be the opposite of my experience.

Where are most of the production companies making 3D renderings?

Here's a hint:

https://gs.statcounter.com/windows-version-market-share/desktop/china