I don’t have an issue with having to use an external DAW to create and manage MIDI content, but on a gig I need/want just one device to perform the job. The Montage makes it difficult to do this. I did not say impossible. I’ve known midi since day one and I don’t believe what I expected from the Montage needed to be as it is. As a performer in a band, it’s priceless, but as a solo act, I regret not keeping my previous synth.

I think there are as many variations of expections/wants/needs of the Montage as there are trees in a forest.

So people feel restricted by having just 16 tracks to work with? I've had that complaint for a while, ever since Yamaha dropped the number of midi channels down from 64 to 16 back in 2001 after the MU series was discontinued. Why 16? I think 32 would have been a more reasonable number. It's not like the USB midi interface is restricted in any way. My older Yamaha MU2000ex has 64 channels and a sequencer in a pretty small box, so I know more channels can't be that difficult to design in.

I get around the problem by having more than one synthesizer. Once you get one, they seem to multiply in the dark. Guitars seem to do that too...

I don't have Montage, but there is only one way Yamaha can make me satisfied and it is by embedding an updated version of QY700 into Montage. As you may know MOTIF XF has some portion of QY series inside, but it's not with all the bells and whistles.

Regarding the integrated sampling, I see no point and no easy way to do sampling on a keyboard! It's a futile effort, why do you torture yourself and struggle in pain and agony by sampling on a keyboard?! What a keyboard can offer you more than a DAW with half-ass wave editing capabilities?

In a DAW I can do batch processing on files...

I strongly though, believe that Montage should be able to play MIDI files. I don't want to open up a DAW in a live performance. May be MainStage and that's it.

Thanks for the detailed replies from both Bad Mister and Jason—much appreciated! I seem to be in the minority where I almost never record MIDI sequences, and only record audio tracks (I've been using my Roland Fantom G's internal 24-track audio recorder as my primary recording system). I just bought Apple Logic Pro X (presumably to replace my Fantom's recorder), and although I like it a lot, getting my audio-over-USB synths and external controllers to work with it has been a challenge (sometimes things work—sometimes they just don't).

I made my initial observations about Yamaha's shift in their product concept for their flagship keyboard in my post comparing the Motif XF to the Montage, and since I also own a Korg Kronos, I won't need any sampling capabilities beyond what the Kronos provides. As I begin explore the world of VST/AUs and other software solutions, I'm discovering the "soft side" of synths (I just bought UVI's Synth Anthology 2, and though I really like it, my Nektar controller refuses to make sounds with it—even though it works fine with Logic's Alchemy soft synths). The array of soft sound solutions and applications is pretty overwhelming—there's a lot of product out there, which reflects the growing popularity of hardware-less synth set-ups (i.e., it's getting harder and harder to tell where the groove-box ends and the "real" instruments begin).

Clearly, Yamaha designed the Montage with this shift in the soft-synth landscape in mind. No more flash-RAM expansion, no more in-board sequencer, in other words, no more Motif—the paradigm has shifted (that the Montage comes with 16-track audio-over-USB built-in is big nod in that direction as well as being a significant feature in and of itself).

Montage is impressive in so many ways. I also appreciate the difference between recording 16 parts, vs 16 complex and manipulable performances (each made of many parts). All of that is truly impressive.

However, I do find the tone of some of the responses from Yamaha people (?), in these threads, about the lack of on-board sequencers, quite condescending. There also seems to be some confusion between the quality of musicianship, vs engineering. No, I should not need to learn the intricacies of MIDI etc - I need an intuitive musical instrument, that does what I need in an accessible and pleasurable way. As someone said - leave the engineering, to engineers. Finally, this also means that the actual effective cost of the instrument, is X (retail price) + $1000 (laptop and software). And now it is not one, single, versatile instrument, but an indirect combination of various hardware. Making it harder is not consumer-friendly.

Again, I find Montage an exciting and very interesting instrument - but, guess what, many of us consumers would want / need ... well, you know what I want to say. I guess it is our fault to still want what we need? Or, perhaps to demand it from an instrument that refuses to give us that?

The tutorials I have seen online, for connecting Montage to DAWs, seemed neither enticing nor inviting. But maybe that's me... - or maybe making life more difficult, instead of focusing on making music on one instrument, is still not the way to go for some (many?) of us.

As I trudge through this new world (new to me) of DAWs, softsynths, plug-ins, VST/AUs (and as I commented in the MIDI-controller thread), I see the Montage as the most capable "live" instrument currently on the market. I would be happy (well, not exactly "happy"), but things would be a lot easier if instead of trying to connect five USB-hardware synths to my new DAW (and somehow making it all work), simply concentrating on making a single hardware synth, the Montage, the only external instrument connected to my DAW seems an attractive approach. This seems to be aligned with what Yamaha had in mind anyway.

Every sound the Montage lacks could be handled by specialized plug-ins (e.g., UVI Falcon, Orchestra Tools' Metropolis Ark I, II, II, Toontrack's Superior Drummer 3). Add an NI Komplete Kontrol S61 MK2 MIDI-controller to the mix, and I think that would be the makings of the perfect hybrid hardware/softsynth system.

(That said, I just played some EXs orchestral library chords on my Kronos and laid it down into my Roland Fantom G's 24-track audio recorder, then punched-in a couple of weird sounds from my VirusTI keyboard, all in about two minutes. All-hardware . . . and everything just worked.)

Finally, this also means that the actual effective cost of the instrument, is X (retail price) + $1000 (laptop and software). And now it is not one, single, versatile instrument, but an indirect combination of various hardware. Making it harder is not consumer-friendly.

Whole comment well said. I am still astounded how every other synth I own even down to $199 early Roland Boutiques have some kind of sequencer. $199 and you get 16 step sequencer with dedicated button per step. $3999, full touch UI and operating system and you get “you’re making music wrong you dolt, use a PC... with our Performance Synthesizer.”

BM

What if the Audio vs Midi future is different than you think..???

You wrote:

"MIDI MIXING can be avoided if you *think audio* as the ultimate goal... set your levels so that audio recording is optimized, build your musical 'monitor' mix (the balance you give the players) as a submix of your recorded/optimized levels."

There is the assumption that audio is the immediate target, and ultimately you're right until we're all transformed into digital beings we will have to deal with audio. But think of it this way: there are now midi players everywhere: cellphones, I pads, computers, etc. That wasn't always the case. 😉 A sequencer (or midi player) use to be restricted to a desktop computer and most of the world did not have one. But that has changed! Now if all of our devices can potentially be midi players, then all that remains is that samples be universally available, or at least very cheap or commoditized. So instead of being so focused on audio, we can focus on midi where the files are smaller, easier to deal with internet-wise, transmit midi everywhere and only at the very last instant use whatever device that is responsible for the audio to do the final rendering or painting of midi.;) That my friend 😉 could change everything. I have reason to believe that Midi recording studios will eventually replace audio recording studios:D

Maybe the real future is Midi everywhere and not audio. If that's the case then Yamaha will have to back track on taking Midi out of their flagship. Everything is being represented by data these days including music. So imagine a future where you don't have to worry about reducing the 120 tracks down to 2 audio tracks 😀

Also for many workflows Audio is not the ultimate goal especially for those of us that are on the composing end, who are responsible for charts, leadsheets, scores, etc. For folks in this category we keep the music Midi as long as possible because it affords us the greatest flexibility at every level!!!!

I know Yamaha may have imagined that they made the optimal decision to remove pattern mode, and full midi editing. They may have believed they were just going by the numbers. But the fact of the matter is:

1. They lost market share by making that move (dropping the music production midi/sampling capabilities)
2. They might loose the 'Computer Sequencer Wars' to Protools or some yet unknown competitor.
3. They could be dead wrong about the future of Midi. (Midi 2.0) might open up some shocking, industry transformative possibilities.

For Yamaha's sake, I hope they use the 20th Anniversary of the Motif, or their 50th Anniversary of Synthesizers to Add full blown Midi editing to their flagship whatever it is by then. For the simple fact that Midi Players will be everywhere and instrument/sound samples are quickly becoming a commodity. And the winner will be he who has the nicest midi production instrument:)

SOC (system of chip e.g ARM, RaspberryPI, etc) technology is changing the hardware cost/benefit analysis so fast, that dedicated hardware is far cheaper than its ever been, and making devices dedicated to music production will be far more effective & cheaper than using general purpose computers + VST/Plugins. At the moment the Korg Kronos has the right idea. Do it all in your own hardware;)