I like Andrews idea about creating waveform sample packs. Maybe as a community, we can just do it ourselves and share it somewhere. Some of the issues with presets and packs is the communities fault. Its really not a strong sharing community. For example Soundmondo has been up for ever yet how many are sharing exciting new performances? How many are wishing to convert their hardware synths into waveforms to distribute? Not many. I see more support within the softsynth community than Yamaha products.

In an ideal Montage:
The FM-X engine would be able to make samples for the AWM2 engine.

That's a good one to add to Ideascale! There are many requests on there for adding onboard Sampling functionality, but this is somewhat different in that the source is from one of the 'engines'. You could expand that also to include the ability to sample an AWM2 engine PART(s)...it could be a great way to easily take a multi-Element (& possibly multi-PART) AWM2 sound, and sample it down to just one single waveform for AWM2...

Of course with SampleRobot we can already do this using a computer. As you know, SampleRobot provides great options for deciding what range of keys, what keys to sample/stretch, loop points, etc. So, if it were to be added as an onboard utility, it would likely need to have these capabilities. Looking at how the Montage started without a Sampler or Sequencer, and the idea was to offload these to computer DAW's and use SampleRobot, it is hard to say how high on the list it would become for Yamaha to add onboard Sampling, but it never hurts to try! 😉

I myself would likely not use an onboard sampler on the Montage and continue to utilize SampleRobot mainly because I am so familiar with using it now and it does everything I need it to, allowing my to zero in very precisely & quickly to find starting points or the best loop points, etc. I've never even attempted to use the new Sequencer that they added in OS v3.0 because I do all my sequencing and ARPs via Pro Tools/Windows 10.
But that's just my personal preference and workflow/method that I prefer. I am all for adding new things to the Montage if people have a need for it.

Concerning samples, there are many very good ones on some Easysounds banks : Analog Xperience, Phat Analog I, II, III include very good samples from Moog, Omberheim, Roland, etc....
https://easysoundsshop.de/en/yamaha-synthesizer/yamaha-montage-premium-series/?p=1

ok now I think Roland is working harder at this point. A new 3.0 update just came out with an option to get a wavetable synth modal expansion. So we cant blame the pandemic as to why the Montage isnt getting more valuable updates. I think the Montage cant do anything more at this point. +1 Roland. they built the new Fantom with the goal of providing more value over time.

Casio had a release of an interesting not-a-vocoder-but-similar keyboard that isn't the same class of product but an interesting entry nonetheless. Yamaha has vocaloid technology which may be able to answer this with a similarly classed device.

The Fantom update is interesting although requires some amount of purchase to add what is essentially a plug-in to the keyboard. I think the subscription model of updates makes sense for some. $149, as one cost example, probably isn't bad if you had no expectation of wavetable to begin with - need wavetable - and do not have an alternative (or otherwise like having it integrated into the keyboard). And, as far as customers go for it, is a good way to monetize further development.

These maybe "gimme the moon on a stick" type wishes, but for the record I'll state them.

1) The addition of a basic "VA" Engine. A standard oscillator (Saw, PWM, Sync etc) that could bolt onto the front of the existing AWM2 Engine. In effect, instead of choosing an AWM2 sample "Element" you could choose a VA Oscillator. Hopefully the rest (LFO, AEG, PEG, FEG, Filter Selections etc) would be the same existing AWM2 "code".

2) Allow Phase Shifting, Operator (oscillator) sync and Pulse Width Modulation in FM-X. Again the hope would be to make "Classic Analogue" synth sounds a little easier to establish at source. My understanding of FM is limited, so this may not be achievable in the context of how FM actually works.

These maybe "gimme the moon on a stick" type wishes, but for the record I'll state them.

1) The addition of a basic "VA" Engine. A standard oscillator (Saw, PWM, Sync etc) that could bolt onto the front of the existing AWM2 Engine. In effect, instead of choosing an AWM2 sample "Element" you could choose a VA Oscillator. Hopefully the rest (LFO, AEG, PEG, FEG, Filter Selections etc) would be the same existing AWM2 "code".

2) Allow Phase Shifting, Operator (oscillator) sync and Pulse Width Modulation in FM-X. Again the hope would be to make "Classic Analogue" synth sounds a little easier to establish at source. My understanding of FM is limited, so this may not be achievable in the context of how FM actually works.

There's the Ideascale site where you can put suggestions (and where your VA request is already at the top).

I personally think a VA engine would be a terrible waste of resources, both as dev time and instrument processing power.
VA is the easiest and cheapest to come around, if you need it. And AWM2 already does 90% of it.

Montage is such an advanced digital synth, I'd say additions should be in that spirit, to further enhance it as an originally sounding digital flagship.

Making AWM also do wavetable would be more in that spirit, and has been demonstrated in limited form by a user.

FM-X is great but hasn't been touched since the launch, apart from the SmartMorph thing.
Phase modulation, user-defined algorithms, higher res skirt parms, more LFO destinations etc would be very welcome.

@Dragos

I am still too much of a noob to have it all really figured out. I've seen "Wavetable" Synth videos, looks and sounds cool, I've not really got my head around it yet. But I've also seen videoes of people "playing" the Oscillator, Tuning, Sync and PWM knobs on old Analogue Synths, I'm not sure a "Saw Sample" gives you the same freedom.

FM-X.... it is still a black art to many, so "Preset Selection" is still the norm (little changed in 40 years since the DX7). Making Simple 2 Operator Stacks behave more like familiar Subtractive Synthesis might be a good money Spinner for Yamaha.

Also, I am quite tunnel visioned in the sense I only bought a synth to enable me to make "old synth" sounds. I am stoked the MODX can do more, but I have little interest in EDM etc. I completely missed the "modern music" boat.

@Antony get yourself a Waldorf Blofeld module as a complement to your MODX and be happy.
Less than 500EUR, does VA and wavetable, sounds amazing, 16 part multi timbral, small and solid.
😉

Just upgrade basics of MODX/Montage...

Essential:

Total Accessibility Navigation:
Full Shift and navigation button access to the left side of the touchscreen UI features, and all functionality of the device such that it’s possible to use the Montage/MODX without ever needing to see or touch the screen.

Low hanging fruit:

Fix the envelope followers - both the actuation mechanics and the UI/UX
Make Envelope Followers Great, such that are joyous to use. This means getting them both visually editable in a manner that makes sense and, much more importantly, making them work in a way that’s significantly responsive, not so sloppy that it’s easier to wait until later and do it in a DAW. These are a great idea, impressively badly done, by virtue of the poor quality of their response to the audio signal. It’s somewhere between bad and appalling. This is easily fixed by “listening” to the MIDI, as well as the audio of the part being followed, and providing an envelope for sensitivity across the audio frequency and amplitude spectrums - so the envelope is generated with “intelligence” based on the MIDI info AND the user’s interests in the audio signal. Yes, I know, some are probably happy with it, but there’s zero celebration of this feature by any of the users of Montage/MODX in any of the online content created by users. The silence is deafening - for a feature that extends across every single one of the 16 parts and the master and A/D input: this is a spectacularly flawed release of a potentially incredible and massively significant controller mechanism. There is no single greater failure in the articulation and execution of this product.

Curved Amplitude Envelopes, let’s move on from the AEG’s of the 1980’s, please.

Vastly improve the nature of the Filter Envelopes such that they don’t squelch through resonance like an uncontrolled toy synthesiser from the 70’s. This is appalling, and the number one reason it’s difficult to get good sound designers to take AWM2 seriously. Each one I’ve spoken to has recoiled in horror on discovering this foible/flaw, and disregarded it on this basis, just dropping it and bookmarking the Montage/MODX as something to ignore and/or mock.

Tempo synced Element level LFO, with sine wave as one of the shapes! This absence of a very common tool compounds the issues of the horrid FEG behaviour in terms of significantly limiting AWM2's general applicability to good/great creative and common sound design practices.

Live updates showing resultant parameter values whenever they’re being modified by the Motion Sequencer and/or SuperKnob and/or Assignable Knobs, so all users can transparently see what’s happening. Yes, I know, we can do it by ear, but that’s not nearly good enough in a touchscreen equipped device with this huge array of otherwise unobservable modding possible within it.

Velocity as a controller. I can’t even begin to believe this was overlooked. There’s something odd about the fact this isn’t a thing, but Envelope Followers are for every Part.

Assign control “sketch padding” via the Mod Wheel, such that whatever is created upon it can later be routed instantly to the SuperKnob, all or one.

Faster rates for the Motion Sequencer than 50%.

Begin and end values for Motion Sequencer steps, not just end values: IOW, unique slopes for each step to be possible.

Cue Dragos suggesting the use of IDEASCALE - and my response being the suggestion that that’s pointless, useless and hidden, and solo “idea” based, not fit for discussion of the lowest hanging fruit and the holistic approach required to actual usage.

Brightness and contrast controls for the screen.

Fully editable Step Sequencer for control values and notes, that can read and feed the Arpeggiator and Pattern Sequences. This is so obviously needed to more fully complete this instrument’s abilities that it boggles the mind to wonder what’s been more important than doing this. FM-X "Smart" Morph???

And add UNDO - for the love of user sanity, please!!!

Regarding envelope follower ...

but there’s zero celebration of this feature by any of the users of Montage/MODX

While I agree there could be many improvements here as well as extending the reach of followers to multiple channels (being able to do element/op and/or part mixes) EQ, etc - I have discussed how I use envelope follower. It's the only way to "communicate" from one Part to another Part. So, in this regard, it can be used as a way from one Part to "tell" another Part to do something. For this application, I think being able to output only certain elements or ops would be helpful so I could target only certain "oscillators" specifically for envelope follower. But even still, I use it today to setup latching state changes as generated by one Part to direct another Part to do something. There's a less crude way to do this sort of thing if some kind of Part-to-Part signaling was formally setup. That's a whole other topic in itself. However, crude and all - it's the one lever one has to pull to output from one Part and input into another.

My use of the follower is tolerant of slow edge rates (thinking in terms of analog signal slew rates). I'm not taking away from the ideas here - only chiming in that there are applications that take advantage of the system as it stands. And I've found no better way to accomplish some tasks other than to use envelope follower.

I do agree that presentation of this feature is not user friendly and probably tends to push users away from experimenting with it rather than invite.

Yamaha should interview serious modern sound designers and ask them what does the Montage really need to make any sound. What does it need to make it your go to for song creation?

Yamaha should interview serious modern sound designers and ask them what does the Montage really need to make any sound. What does it need to make it your go to for song creation?

They are actually doing that.

Yamaha should interview serious modern sound designers and ask them what does the Montage really need to make any sound. What does it need to make it your go to for song creation?

A full functioning linear sequencer!!!
Thanks everyone for the recommendations in this thread. I'll think about them. I'm just one of those people who wants what he wants.