I like everything in one unit so that I don't have to deal with a lot of equipment at once. I don't have the space for a laptop on or next to my Montage. Or the ability to manage those things together. I used to write all my songs on the Mox, then hook it to my laptop and record each individual track in wave form. After that, I could use any preferred software to mix and master. I've even taken the waves to local studios to be mixed. It was a setup I was used to. I'm still hoping for that sequencer though.

You can try a modern hardware sequencer which should offer sequencing capabilities way above any workstation, while being physically compact (something like the Squarp Pyramid https://squarp.net/pyramid ).
Should work very well as a complement to the Montage if DAW sequencing is something you can't accommodate.

For me, since the keyboard integrates well with an iPad (Camelot Pro, Cubasis) and I already carry an iPad for sheet music/performance notes - the offline sequencer would best be an app on the iPad.

Still, some users would prefer a totally stand-alone without any connected devices and I do get this. Whenever you have features in a previous generation and take them away there is the predictable customer (dis)satisfaction issue that arises.

We'll have to see how much further some of these features go. There are lots of competing requests and certainly any new features (sound engines, MIDI features, ... a much more extensive list than can be quickly summarized) would be welcome. Anything chosen alienating some users, satisfying some, and not important to others.

Still, some users would prefer a totally stand-alone without any connected devices and I do get this. Whenever you have features in a previous generation and take them away there is the predictable customer (dis)satisfaction issue that arises.

Sure, but the current generation is much more advanced in terms of synthesis and control/modulation.
So if they'd tried to upgrade the workstation abilities to the same degree, I think the result would be too complex and too close to a DAW (so they rightly said just use one) and without physical space for the required interface.
I think they did the right thing by offering performers a quite powerful specialized sequencer to assemble their pieces and leaving those interested in more elaborate step sequencing workflows to use DAWs or dedicated sequencers.
It's not possible to bring the user interface and functionality of the Pyramid I mentioned above into a keyboard, and it would be pointless anyway.

I don't use the full-fledged sequencer. I never have. When the pattern sequencer was announced - I wasn't concerned about the functionality lacking anything. I saw it as perhaps "gravy" for creating arpeggios. So I personally do not "need" a full-fledged sequencer. However, this is but one opinion.

You can make any kind of argument you want - but whenever a feature is ripped out - you have customer sat issues. This happened when servers got rid of floppy drives. Go figure. And then CD drives. Go figure. USB took over as portable storage. And these are even cases where there was a replacement technology to provide the exact same feature. This gen there is no "exact same feature" replacement. The onboard feature is removed. I think what we've seen is that onboard sampling was excess fat not needed in a workstation (that's arguable - there are certain record-while-play features people have wanted that seem to be tied to sampling memory that seemed to be "borrowed" as a buffer). We haven't seen nearly the customer sat. with removing sampling as removing the previous gen's sequencing capabilities. I think there's enough data to show maybe upselling the full sequencer as a "plugin" (eeprom hardware key or software key) may be worth considering monetizing this in the future. Or maybe just throw it in.

Circling back to my usage - even though I don't personally use the feature - I do see those who months before Montage availability were using the predecessor for "full" sequencing (as defined by Motif XF capabilities) and were bummed that nearly all of those features were torn out -- and still somewhat bummed that only half of the features made their way back in through subsequent firmware updates.

This is part of why I would always suggest those with a working Motif XF to keep it for a long time after getting the Montage or MODX. There's several features lost and the two do complement each other to fill in gaps both ways. Some can develop a new workflow and deal with the losses and retire the Motif. Some may want to go back/forth. At least you need to make an informed decision and it's often too late after shedding the Motif to recover.

You can make any kind of argument you want - but whenever a feature is ripped out - you have customer sat issues. This happened when servers got rid of floppy drives. Go figure. And then CD drives. Go figure. USB took over as portable storage.

Yes, and now everybody agrees that USB is a better medium and getting rid of floppies and CDs was a good move.

There's always the vocal minority, but I'd be really curious to see how many of those screaming about full fledged sequencers (just because a flagship needs to have one by definition) are/would actually use it.

This is a bizarre thing to wonder. Perhaps more evidence of a muted ability to perceive the reasonings, beliefs, experiences, objectives, passions and pursuits of others.

Those that buy a workstation for the sequencer use it. That's why they buy it.

Had a Kronos, probably used the sequencer every second time I turned it on. Maybe a bit more than that. KARMA every single time I turned it on.

Probably hook up iPad about every second time I use the MODX, for the same reasons - need a sequencer to try structure stuff that happens automatically, and often want insight into an arp, or to simply build one that reliably does what I've asked of it.

If you're using a multi-timbral synth as a monotimbral or merely layered synth, then I can see how the need for an immediately accessible sequencer wouldn't be a familiarity.

For such a capable synth (especially its motion and 8 timbres), the lack of an event based sequencer of some sort is as others have said. I keep saying it should have a step sequencer, as this is the easiest to do in terms of UI and programming. I don't think the CPU is up to the task of scrolling a timeline, is another reason I keep suggesting this, but mostly because a step sequencer is absolutely ideal for making and viewing/editing arps - a 10,000 piece puzzle of the magic of this thing, that's obscured to the point of being a bit of a bummer.

Just the ability to actually make own arpeggios and have them come out as expected should be in the MODX/Montage, by way of a step sequencer, by this point in time.

Don't bother commenting about how this can be done with the Pattern Sequencer, there's other threads that reveal this isn't nearly as useful as you're imagining it - unless you've tried making a somewhat useful arp, you don't know just how retarded (and I really do mean to use exactly that word, as in held back, limited and painful) the making of arps is onboard the MODX/Montage.

It should be a joy to make both controller and note based arps, and blend and interplay them, both from the defaults and from an init/blank.

Instead, this is both retarded and obscured by the lack of vision into those that are there and what can be made.

This is a bizarre thing to wonder. Perhaps more evidence of a muted ability to perceive the reasonings, beliefs, experiences, objectives, passions and pursuits of others.

I guess when you're a troll, this is the evidence you're looking after.

Forgot an epic reason to include a step sequencer:

Making drum patterns and/or arpeggios.

Probably no better use case scenario for a step sequencer, and no modern instrument more in need of the ability to customise drum patterns/sequences/arpeggios than the MODX - with its purpose built button for rhythm pattern inclusions into performances, of quite dated patterns.

And there's no doubt the Montage users would love the ability to make and shape their own beats within a step sequencer. There's even 32 buttons ready to be a TRS style on/off panel. Hold down the key(s) on the keyboard of drum sounds you want, then start activating in pattern position, via those 32 step-buttons - dreamy.

So long as there's a page button, for more than 32 steps. etc

@Jonathan, for sequencing maybe you could use an ipad with Cubasis on it? That takes up no space.

Keep in mind that FM has been somewhat both demystified and de-deified in the past few years.

FM is the hallmark (or was) of the Montage and MODX, along with the unrealised potential of Motion via SuperKnob and Motion Sequencer.

Most modern synths (hardware and software) can do variations of FM synthesis that are both easier to design/control and better sounding than what's coming out of a Montage/MODX.

Motion is inherent to just about all modern plugins, in various forms, some of them far more capable than the Montage/MODX ability to animate values.

This was true before the Montage was released, but much more so now, many years later.

Yamaha knew all this going in, but still aimed this way.

That means they didn't have much else to offer.

That's probably more true today, too.

The preset curves for motion control and sequencing use all 128 values. You know this because the user curves do not have the "resolution" to reproduce the built-in curves such as the AM or bounce or ...

There's no more CPU horsepower needed in order to allow users to create their own custom curves at the same resolution as the built-in ones. These would have to be stored somewhere - but I'm sure 128bytes (unpacked - packed due to 7-bit would consume less space but not worth the bother likely) times the number of curves allowed for this full-up editing would lend to more interesting control opportunities. Currently there are only 8 inflection points in user curves - but a more complete user curve would allow for doing "higher resolution" things -- or "more accurate" things with the curves. At least that's low hanging fruit to extend the current functionality.

They're not curves. And. that's the whole problem.

I personally do not so much want the "curves" to be literal curves. I'd rather just have a map of 128 values inputs I can assign each to an output value of 0-127 so I can generate my own patterns.

The benefits of actual curves?

No aliasing, due to live calculation of floats, in curves.

Curves sound better, too, particularly at extremities of change (both not very much change, and lots of change)

As some have mentioned about the competition, the Fantom does double the work and offerings of the Montage and sounds as good as the Genos.

Yamaha has a massive task (impossible for their AWM2 technology) of not only matching Fantom but doubling or beating it.

Yamaha would have to double the power and performance of Montage, add Genos to the Montage, add the CP1 technology for keys because AWM2 sucks, add pads and full capability sequencer, double the memory, make it simple to use etc., etc.

I didn't even crack open the Fantom user's manual to use it and I never figured out the Montage.

Yamaha just can't make things easy for people without master's degrees to operate.

As a "remedy" to complicated they released their stage board line which are still AWM2 old and boring sounding the same as 30 years ago. The YC FM can't be controlled or programmed. The Korg OPsix did it with no problem whatsoever.

Their stage boards are okay but are essentially disposable boards.

No I'm not a Roland fan boy as I've never owned a Roland anything before. I've been Yamaha for 40 years.

Yamaha has always had implementation, simplification and CPU/DSP lack of power problems. Some are calling it programming problems which is correct too.

I like Yamaha quality, appearance & durability but more money has gone into that side rather than the technology, user friendliness and implementation of those.

Roland caught up in a hurry as Fantom looks and feels amazing and the Hammond SKpro w/monosynth is also a YC killer. So much fun to layer a monosynth with awesome on-board organs.

I'm not confident Yamaha will ever take the lead again. They will likely however play a matching game just to say even.