From the inventor of Karma:

Source: http://www.korgforums.com/forum/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?p=689786&sid=d219f8bb4f4d14209fb9e4d3f794861b

https://yamahasynth.com/index.php?option=com_easydiscuss&view=post&id=7503&Itemid=851

So, if I understand this explanation correctly (difficult read), it would not be possible for a program such as KARMA Motif that sends MIDI on multiple different MIDI channels (i.e. Drums Ch4, Bass Ch 5, synth parts on channels 6, 7, 8, Drum Fill on Ch9, live keyboard parts on Ch 2 and Ch 3 etc.) to play a Montage "Performance"?

For the XF, XS, MOX, MOXF, Rack-XS, and S70/S90 XS, KARMA Motif uses the Yamaha's "Song" Mode or "Multi" Mode which is a 16 channel multi-timbral setup capable of receiving on up to 16 MIDI channels individually and simultaneously, so it can generate multiple parts on different MIDI channels and play each part with a corresponding Voice.

I understood that there is now just a 16-part Performance period, but I had assumed that you would be able to "play it" in such a fashion from an external program similar to the aforementioned Yamaha synths. No?

Is my understanding correct?

... and later in the thread:

----
SanderXpander wrote:
You can have 16 midi channels in multi mode but every "part" is then fixed to its corresponding midi channel number. So part 1 is channel 1, part 2 is channel 2 etc.
----

[Stephen Kay]
Wow, that's a really inconvenient limitation. For example, let's say I put a KARMA Module playing bass on Channel 5/Part 5. Let's say I want to layer a synth sound along with it. In the Motif XF, XS, Rack-XS, MOX, MOXF, S70/S90XS (can we just say "every synth Yamaha has ever made recently"?) I would just add the sound in a vacant Part, and set the MIDI Channel of that part to 5 - voila, it layers along with the bass.

This is kind of a normal function you would expect a keyboard to have: assign a few parts to the same MIDI channel in order to layer them.

----
Quote (Not Stephen Kay):
As limiting as this is it wouldn't even be so awful if basic sounds like the main piano sound didn't consist of four parts. So you can't buy a 61 key Montage and play the piano from an 88 key controller while using all the wonderful gizmos for a synth sound on top. Not only that, but in the link the Yamaha rep insists that this is normal behavior for any midi device (contrary to all Montage predecessors they have created) and that you need to really be playing on the Montage keyboard to really understand and enjoy what it's about (as if that somehow affects playing a piano patch).
----

[Stephen Kay]

So, the Montage is basically made to be a self-contained unit that you can only fully play and "enjoy" from its own keyboard. Hmmm...

I'm not under any illusions that people are waiting breathlessly for me to support the Montage in my KARMA Motif software; however, I have received a number of inquiries and this sort of design decision makes it very difficult. Not to mention the complete removal of the DAW Remote Mode that I have used in their other products to create an interactive virtual KARMA control surface.

This provokes me to vent here that this is one of the most disappointing and frustrating aspects of the Montage so far after a year owning it. My Montage is surrounded by a dozen other synths, many like the JD-XA are multitimbral and all the multitimbral ones can have their parts' MIDI channels set to arbitrary and overlapping values - except Montage. Yamaha makes zero sense on this because even they / Bad Mister recommend sound designing with a few separate parts as part of a single "voice" (for example the Bosendorfer Piano) but it ends up being a half dozen MIDI channels and the difficulties like the above ensue.

This immediately forces a Montage user to either put the synth in omni mode (and thus, effectively have all parts become a single voice - so no longer can you address and sequence, say, just violins on Channel 7 separately using Montage as a multi-timbral workhorse with all of its AWM2 that begs to be so) or you have to use a DAW and even then its a convoluted tedious process (Ableton, instrument rack, 4 copies of an External instrument all configured differently, 19 clicks later I can play the piano). More importantly, the DAW option is not how I (and a growing number of musicians) work. I use an MPC Live and Digitakt to compose and arrange. Others use Octatrack, Deluge, other synth's sequencers, and the quickly and vastly growing Eurorack options. Dragging out a laptop and Cubase or Ableton just to merge some MIDI channels is not happening in our world nor should it be required when just setting the channel number per voice should be trivial (even ultra cheap synths can do this) and frankly just obvious.

Be careful Yamaha. Forward looking ideas in the Montage, but you're missing that your competitors are seeing the future and adding CV/Gate, more and better sequencing. I know you know your audience, but that audience may change (or die off) on you and you'll wish you listened more to the new one along the way.

It's ironic that the first reaction to something like this will be "use a DAW" but the more you sell that as your answer the more we will respond with "if I'm in-the-box the whole time, I have far more powerful automation abilities than Montage's SuperKnob and Kontact libraries could replace the instrument set in Montage...". Montage is clearly titled a "Performance Synthesizer" and its macro-automation, scenes and mixer built in scream out-of-box. But then it drops such an easy ball on this MIDI issue, crippling that.

Thanks Jason
Well
I sort of expected that. As I knew about the midi part. And figured. That in itself. Was a show stopper.
Now. I did not know about the removal of the. DAW REMOTE Mode & Button. 1 of his videos. I saw him hit the button. And Knew. I did not have any such button. On the Montage.
So again. I figured. There was the Second nail in the Coffin.
It is no wonder. That Motif owners. Will not Give up their Motifs(Outside of some Motif Peoples. Petty Reasons.)
Karma. While. Not the easiest thing to understand. Makes a Keyboard. A super keyboard. No matter the brand.
I guess I will have to find a Used Rack XS.
But I would. Really prefer to use the Sounds, Buttons, Sliders. I have in the Montage.

Yamaha had been "investing" into the idea that keyboards would integrate well with DAWs - namely Cubase (for obvious reasons) - but others as well. One pillar of this was transport controls with a control surface on the keyboard that would map to various functions on the DAW - with a dedicated port for these communications.

Montage has, at launch, abandoned this particular pillar of computer integration. It is a bit out of step with other decisions made. This generation we are more dependent on computers due to lack of hardware sequencers and samplers. However, the DAW experience is a bit crippled with the lack of transport controls.

These controls are part of the communication Stephen Kay uses to make the Motif version of Karma work.

Lack of control of the incoming MIDI channels (per PART) is something that has been discussed before. I'm not sure this is a real limitation of implementing something like Karma - or doing anything else assuming a computer is in control. If an external keyboard device is in control - then these have their own limitations so lack of configuration options on MIDI receive presents a compatibility issue with certain configurations. Having a computer send the same MIDI messages to multiple channels in order to control a multi-channel instrument and then send different single streams to other channels doesn't seem like a huge task. However, there may be architecture issues "built in" to Mr Kay's code that makes it difficult to deal with.

That said - why force more data on the bus if you do not need to use more bandwidth? If you really have two parts you always want layered with the same note on/off messages - setting both to the same MIDI channel would ensure not having to double up on MIDI messages.

This is kind of a sticky subject with Yamaha. I've seen lots of energy investment into the new paradigm. Things like resource conservation or integration do not seem to be "good" reasons and are often dismissed.

Tom wrote:

To Bad Mister
Any possibility. That Karma-labs. Can Fit Karma to the Montage? Like they have for the Motif?
I sorta wonder. if the internal use of midi. On the Montage. And the way the arps are stored.
May Interfere. With how karma. Works on the Motif.
I will not buy another Kronos. It is just too far behind The Tech. Curve. And to tiny of fonts.
Matter of fact. I do not want any new Keyboard. (that's a first). If it can not be done. Maybe I'll buy a used Rack XS unit.
Your thoughts please.

Your question is best asked of Stephen Kay, today.

Clearly he had not even seen one at that time of that old thread. The MONTAGE, unlike the Motif XF in Song/Pattern Mixing Mode, is not constructed around the internal Sequencer. That is, Unlike the XF, you are not transmitting via a Track to the Tone Generator. MONTAGE when played multi-timbrally is not built on that paradigm, at all.

In MONTAGE you address each Part that you play directly with messages generated by the keyboard/controllers... via KBD CTRL using parameter messages.

This is not to say an engine like Karma couldn't be developed, but to even begin thinking about it requires an understanding of the shift in the approach I just mentioned.
Basic difference is this:

To layer two sounds on Motif XF when in MIXING Mode, you selected a TRACK, you transmit to the Tone Generator on the MIDI Channel of the one selected Track, each Track could be set to transmit on a single channel, 1-16. The XF could only transmit on one MIDI channel at a time to the sequencer. If you selected Track 1, it defaulted to transmitting on MIDI Channel 1; in your MIXING setup, every Part you set the MIDI Receive Channel to 1 would necessarily respond to the data connected to Track 1.

To layer the same two sounds on MONTAGE, you activate a second KBD CTRL icon - this allows your keyboard to send control messages to a second Part. You activate KBD CTRL on each Part you want to address... a set of messages is generated for each.

In a nutshell, that's the difference. Motif XF only transmits on a single MIDI Channel at a time when in Mixing Mode, so therefore to layer sounds you stack items on the same Receive Channel.
MONTAGE can transmit to as many as eight Parts and therefore it does the layering thing quite differently... you layer by transmitting directly to the additional Part or Parts. MIDI Channels are not involved...

The same key-on and Control messages are transmitted Out via each Part with KBD CTRL activated. What each Part does with the data can be unique to the Part, based on your programming. If there is an Arpeggiator on the Part, it's KEY MODE will determine whether your direct messages are routed to the Tone Engine or whether the messages encoded in the assigned ARP Phrase will be routed to the Tone Engine.

Significant difference. Motif XF it's a Receive thing, MONTAGE it's a Transmit thing.
Motif XF you layer two Parts on a single channel, using cc07 both will move together to the same volume, using cc10 both pan to the same location, using cc11 both change volume but remain proportional, using cc74 you open the filter on all attached Filters, ... it's MIDI just as you've known it for 30 years. If you're still with me then try next to grasp why this is different... you could get around this in XF, by using direct Parameter Control assignments but you were limited to just six Source/Destination Control Sets per Part and you only had two Assign Knobs per Part. Additionally to use the Part Assign Knob you had to individually select that Part.

MONTAGE your two layered Parts can be addressed independently... to address Volume, the "Part Volume" of both Parts can be handled by the same physical Control but totally independently. A single gesture could slightly increase the volume of one Part while turning the other down significantly... direction and amount of change, totally independent! This means you can scale the movement amount and direction independently for each by programming within the synthesizer; the physical control set to move Part Pan position can move one Part from center to hard left and another from hard right to slightly right of center with a single gesture - in fact, Element Pan is independently available; when you desire to control Filters, MONTAGE recognizes you may be addressing a dozen or maybe even two dozen different individual filters, when playing multiple KBD CTRL Parts, how about allowing you to address each of those Filters independently... if you desire? There are sixteen Source/Destination Control Sets per Part, and eight Assign Knobs per Part... not to mention each can act as a "super" Knob for its layer, then there are eight more Assign Knobs at the top level that are in fact, linked to the Super Knob. This means you have a set of controls that can be accessed even when you have not directly selected that Part. Yes, you can control Parts you have under an external control like an ARP or Motion sequence... you can setup to fade out all Parts but yourself or all Parts. You could fade in an entirely new set of instruments... oh its endless, the possibilities.

Old way, "all together" (or you could opt out by defeating reception of the controller via the RECEIVE SWITCHES.
New way, because we are transmitting to each Part and can design what the message is going to do to the Part, at the Part, MONTAGE is doing something slightly new and different then you may be familiar with...

I can tell from the responses in the thread from May 2016, most (as is still the case) aren't clear on what's really different about MONTAGE - it had just started to ship back then.... confusion, yes, especially if you haven't seen one up close... all you see is that your whole basic understanding of Receive channel as a solution has been shook. It's seen as a "limitation" when actually it sets you free to a completely different approach. If you still see it as a "limitation", you have not stopped trying to make it fit where it probably doesn't go. Rather than that, try understanding how it works, then determine if you would even want an additional, Karma-like engine, here. I really don't see a problem with it once you understand how to address this powerful engine.

It's music, it's synthesis, it's performing, it's control... I don't think you can simply port over something built around a sequencer layout, to a synth engine NOT built around a sequencer...? But don't ask me, ask the programmer... I can tell you, it can't be done the same way. Doesn't mean you can't accomplish a goal that would be like Karma...

Until you personally create your own Performance data using the new features available to MONTAGE users, discussions looking backward towards what Motif XF was and how it worked are only interesting from a historical standpoint. "Looking backwards" to CV/Gate is funny as mentioned here (that's the antithesis of "new"), from the standpoint of what Motion Control is doing with A/D Input as a modulation/modifying Source, Side Chaining, Envelope Following, Motion automation... instead of looking backward, MONTAGE sets a challenge, imho, to those who want to explore new stuff expressly NOT done before.

Take you analog synth, MIDI to it from MONTAGE, route the audio out of the analog synth to the MONTAGE A/D Input. You can now apply and control MONTAGE Effect, you can morph to it and control it like any internal MONTAGE Part! The A/D Input can be routed to modify any of the synth Parts in .MONTAGE, you can even have it as a tempo source.

The MONTAGE "Aha Moment"
The first time you connect a MONTAGE to an external device, and you realize that YES, it is actually sending the same messages OUT via MIDI, on each of the KBD CTRL Parts correspondingly numbered MIDI Channel... you either think it is a mistake, or you have an "aha moment". Hopefully, eventually you have the aha moment!

Eventually, you realize that playing the same data back to the Parts will cause them to playback just what they did when you recorded the data... and that this is true whether you are MIDI I/O Mode = MULTI or SINGLE! Once that makes a wrinkle, you're on your way. Each Part is taking the same messages generated by your Key presses and controller movements, but the synthesis engine in the MONTAGE takes that same identical data in each stream and each does what it should. You either see it, or it takes a minute.... (or perhaps you never do).

Just be aware, while it can be used Multi-timbrally like XF where the default is one instrument per Part, but it can also be used where you gather its extensive resources to create a multifaceted Performance that you interact with in realtime.

I'm just saying, don't let getting Parts to layer throw you (as in the linked threads) ... it simply means transmitting the same data again to each Part you wish to control... just send the same data to each Part... your realtime performance gestures are documented as usual, the new stuff is on the Tone Engine side; the MCSE (Motion Control Synthesis Engine) and its massive Control Matrix will decipher the Control data messages for each Part. What you used to solve by stacking sounds on a single channel is now solved by transmitting to the Parts and programming the response at the synthesis engine. To me this is a more musical endeavor (synthesizer programming) and the detail and degree of control is astounding.

Hope that helps.

From what I understand "partly" about karma cause of my curiosity to it. Its more then a way how to send midi to a midi channel and their for isn't as direct straight forward to understanding basic midi.

Stephen Kay explained karma for yamaha is more complex and enhanced then karma for korg which is in the keyboard. The yamaha software version has many upgrades advancing what it is it does.

Stephen also explained a bit how karma works and well its midi he talks about sysex and send receive in bulk. I've taken a little study in how to send bulk midi from one of my casio px5s quite complex so I imagine
the Montage midi implementation and everything else how to send and receive bulk sysex can be a head scratch if you're not verse in midi and software development.

Maybe in the near future karma for the latest Yamaha synth. But how cool that truly would be the Montage and especially the Genos nearly do the same thing. Watch the video from motifnews magic dance session the switching is all karma like.

It's a true statement that the old thread contains a very early understanding of what Montage is. The participants are guessing at things which are much better understood and documented today.

I understand the current MIDI implementation and gave a quick "one liner" (not joke, but pseudo-code) of how Karma could deal with layering -- it's not a big deal. That said - it consumes more MIDI bandwidth, as mentioned. Arguably unnecessarily - given competition allows for more flexibility with incoming MIDI configuration (16-part multitimbral keyboards). This is a rock that would kill a couple birds - but there may be a deeper "can't pass go" reason why the flexibility cannot be added to Montage. This is why you would receive pages of hand waving. One could also argue that 16x the data if you wanted to layer all the parts is "not a big deal" -- but also consider wireless MIDI in the mix or also consider a MIDI chain with other keyboards which may not have the same MIDI buffer size and more prone to overflow.

The transport control issue isn't one that's easily solved if Karma for Yamaha really "needs" this. There are other reasons aside from Karma which would pull for transport controls to get implemented. Every once and a while I see hints that transport controls may be on the radar of future dev. Certainly this is a limitation that is more clearly identified as a "miss" for certain audiences and I think Yamaha support more easily "gets" this. Not that push-back isn't in the queue.

Chris has been sharing lots of software he uses for live sequencing. Not Karma - but there's stuff out there you may be able to leverage. It's not my thing - so I'm not going to go deep-dive looking for Karma-like software. But maybe he'd be interested in coming up with an alternative available today.

As an update: lack of Karma is now due to the fixed received MIDI channel architecture of Montage. The hypothetical version of Karma for Montage depends on being able to layer multiple PARTs on the same MIDI channel. This is an update checked 9/2018 with Stephen Kay.

There are lots of things Montage can do - but it cannot realize a number of user goals which would include requiring assigning overlapping receive MIDI channels.

The fact that this is an "old idea" - meaning something that worked in the past - does not invalidate the utility for this feature.

I'd rather see, as an example, a response that addresses the source of limitation rather than blaming the user for wanting something wrong or - worse - suggesting they are somehow incapable of understanding Montage. If Montage will "blow up" if you assign any less than all PARTs to the same MIDI channel - or will "blow up" if you assign more than one group of PARTs to two (or more) sets of MIDI channels (meaning one group shares the same channel, another group shares a different channel) - then this would be a preferred response.

Transport controls work now - so that's one item off the list. Still not sure if Karma really needed this - but worth updating the thread if I'm going to dig up old content with this update.