No need to have a crystal ball. Comparisons between the two instruments should focus on what's available today. If changes are made, those updates can be noted.

No need to have a crystal ball. Comparisons between the two instruments should focus on what's available today. If changes are made, those updates can be noted.

I agree most comparisons should be regarding what's currently available. At the same time, when deciding to purchase a new Synth, I had to factor in the age and longevity of the synth, because I didn't want to buy a synth that was 2+ years old only to have a new better one come out 6 months after I made my purchase. Another big factor of why I chose the Montage over the Kronos 2. So for buyers in today's market that are deciding "do I buy this new Roland Fantom that is guaranteed to have life in it for several years, or buy a Yamaha Montage that potentially could be replaced soon", it's a legit concern and question to ask when making such a big decision. The cost of those synths is quite high, and unless you're rolling in the dough & can afford every new synth, every time one comes out, then I think the longevity of a synth & not just it's current capabilities, needs to be factored in to some degree...

Until I hear otherwise, I am holding out some hope that the Montage is not going anywhere anytime soon and that there is still plenty of life left in it with new updates to come at some point. But I am not holding my breath and waiting for the updates, as I am quite happy with what it currently does and I'm still learning. Sure there are things I'd like to see in an update & I've added them as ideas on ideascale, but I am with what I have now and still hold out hope for more future left in the Montage.

Actually, they could do both- do an incremental update of the hardware of Montage (like doubling the amount of Flash Memory to 8GB physical, thus offering more space for user samples), this would be "Montage+", and at the same time provide OS update for both new and old Montage with new features like a VA engine and a fix of the Midi receive channel issue. I think that would be the best road.

Yeah, that is a possibility and would really not be good if they did that, because I bought my Montage only 6 months ago and could really use the extra User memory seeing as my sampling of a VST piano has some major drawbacks due to size limitations. I had to cut back the size by using less velocity layers, shortening the length of the lower notes and changing the steps to 3 on most of the layers. Turns out that using 3 step samples stretches a bit too much and when you hit a chord, it sounds like you did a really quick arpeggio, because the 2 or 3 notes you press at the same time, don't quite sound out at the same time. So I basically have to scrap my plan to use SampleRobot to capture and import 2 VST piano libraries, and just capture one piano library without the steps. I really could have used an extra 1GB, but I will forgo having the Bechstein and capture the C7 piano instead...

Actually, they could do both- do an incremental update of the hardware of Montage (like doubling the amount of Flash Memory to 8GB physical, thus offering more space for user samples), this would be "Montage+", and at the same time provide OS update for both new and old Montage with new features like a VA engine and a fix of the Midi receive channel issue. I think that would be the best road.

There is precedent here; this is almost exactly what Yamaha did 9 years ago between the Motif XS and XF. An announcement soon would be right on schedule too; the XF was announced 3 years after the XS was released.

In that case it spelled the end of updates for the XS firmware, though. I'd like to believe that they wouldn't make that mistake again.

There is precedent here; this is almost exactly what Yamaha did 9 years ago between the Motif XS and XF. An announcement soon would be right on schedule too; the XF was announced 3 years after the XS was released.
In that case it spelled the end of updates for the XS firmware, though. I'd like to believe that they wouldn't make that mistake again.

If they ended updates to the Montage OS soon, that would be really bad!
Usually with every new Synth or Workstation that Yamaha release, they change the file name and compatibility; such as the Montage .X7L is compatible with the MODX, but the .X8L is not compatible with the Montage. If they did a "Montage +" as was mentioned as a possibility above, then I would guess this new Synth would save as .X9L and likely no longer be able to load into the MODX. This would be a really bad move on Yamaha's part, to have a new flagship synth that their hottest selling MODX can't load libraries from...

Until I hear otherwise, I am going to remain hopeful that things stay as they currently are with the hardware and that they only provide updates to the OS for both the Montage and MODX. Hopefully it's all good news for everyone in a few days after their 24 Hour Live Stream Event! 😉

Phil Clendeninn absolutely has stated, in this forum, that the Montage has, in reserve, new and amazing things upcoming in new firmware. He stated this with no uncertainty. He actually guaranteed it.
Can't find the post, but he remembers for sure. Phil is not the kind of guy to make such statements unless true!
We shall see. Also, since he has stated so, we then may proceed to ask him to explain himself. no?

And I've stated, in this forum, that the Montage OS is pretty much finished. I would love to be proven wrong. Prove me wrong Yamaha.:)

https://www.smstrumentimusicali.it/reportage-roland-fantom-jupiter-xm/?fbclid=IwAR38RAbhlf6srkyH__9jh-B61Yoejx4UAwTICQfdaD7FbC0PdjHCKQfNQSo

Looks like extra models have been confirmed for the Fantom... no info on when these will be released though.... also multisampling mentioned. 🙂

(JX-8P, JUNO 106, JP-8 etc.. I have a feeling these will be along the lines of the amazing ACB technlogy from Roland Cloud)

Lets remember; back to 2016 prior to Montage release that it was originally promoted as the successor to the Motif XF- and that series. Montage is- a synthesizer. Not a workstation. Nor is this new Fantom the old workstations of the past- and yes I'd put Kronos as one of those. (The Combi/Program setup has been on EVERY Korg Workstation. - old). So its not an apples to oranges with a few key comparisons.

1. I got my Montage 8 - because it felt that for the 1st time, a dedicated audio interface was built under the hood for computer integration. The FA series failed at that given the need to adjust the DAW of your choices preferences too much. The Motion Control, interplay with the Arp animated sounds so differently. It felt musical in a way i had not enjoyed on my Kronos.

2. The Sounds- beefed up from the XF were really incredible. And the non-mode, open (plus sign button) to freely add sounds on top of other sounds, allowed a free creative spark.

3. And as a former Guitar Center employee- the market between Montage and MODX, has been stale. MInilogue XD and Krome EX (same Combi/Prog setup), from Korg. Roland gave us an FA-07, Aerophone, and Boutique synths. Sequential gave us the Prophet X, and XL. Nothing new - well, rephrase, nothing fresh. Companies just putting new gear out there. Kurzweil's new PC -based workstation is not on par with Montage, nor MODX.

So what is Fantom?

Its 2 Zen Core chips - 1 the V Piano chip which is listed as unlimited in polyphony. The other is a new Zen Core synthesizer chip which is supplemented by the BCM/ACB chip technology that allows recreation of any Roland synths of the past which much more power and clarity. Think: The System 8 can "become" legendary synths. This is the idea behind that pairing. Other than some XV/Integra sounds (similar to the XF tones being Montagi-fied) - these tones have been restructured to play in this new frontier. Beyond that 90% of the sounds left are absolutely new. Designed to take advantage of no-modes, and this powerful core based chip tech. Each "partial" is a full layered tone. Its not a copy of FM architecture, but the tree-like graph we see when we discuss FM, has been rethought and not for FM. The architecture in Fantom beefs this tree up exponentially. Each 'Scene' has 16 parts. Represented by a touch button. That is a 4 layer full- effected sound. 4 other layers to that same tone can be added and split (like the plus sign-buttons empty slot in Montage). each partial, and element can max the LFO to 4 each- totalling 8- so that in all 16 parts, 128 LFOs!!

Path remain is tied in with Seamless Sound Switching. Its got a 16x3 Audio interface. 2 Arps, a TR-based Step/beat sequencer, pattern/real-time, and loop (tied to pads). External eurorack/analog gear can be routed in thru CV/Gate in and out- and Fantom can capture those tones and use with Fantom tones.

Look its not apples to oranges, but it totally rethinks "workstation"

Personally speaking, here's my take on it (just as a disclaimer I never played the new Fantom, so I am feeding upon my knowledge and sound demos on YouTube)

**The no.1 advantage of the Fantom over the Montage is the screen, hands down. Since like 90% of the editing and navigating is done using it (even though Montage has many buttons, Yamaha themselves gathered that most users just use the screen mostly). So, a better, faster screen that supports more gestures such as the Fantom's is a breeze to work with. Saves time, frustration, and more music making/inspiration that way. It also doesn't help that Montage's screen is sometimes laggy/sluggish.

likewise, the no.1 advantage of the Montage over the Fantom is actually the FM engine. Since FM is generally a more rare inclusion in synths, and considering it can result is more various and unique sounds, I personally like it both for its ability to sound traditional, cheesy, classy or avantgarde at the same time. FM-X is hands down the strongest FM engine there is with 8 (!) OP, and the Yamaha multi stage envelopes dating back to the DX7 are still genius ... with a boring ADSR, how can you create evolving sounds? I also prefer Yamaha's implementation of FM over the Korg's Kronos, regardless of the 'only 6 OP' and less overall FM options of the Korg, I know the implementation is different... I'm not a tech guy but Yamaha's sound better.

I wholeheartedly agree with YAMAHA's not having XLR outputs,every once in awhile I recheck my Montage 8 and forgot I don't have them... I miss them. I really think a keyboard that is intended for live use at that price range has to have them. CV and Phantom power are much less important for most people including myself though. +1 Roland

**Triggers Pads, +1 Roland. Honestly I didn't use them at all back when I had the FA-06, but it's a feature nonetheless with the Montage you have to resort to using a touch screen and not physical pads.

Keyboard action and bulid quality: now I'm not really sure, because I haven't played the Fantom but I think Yamaha might take this one, because from my experience with Roland keyboards and Roland higher end digital pianos, Yamaha is just better in bulid quality and keyboard feel in the vast majority of the cases. Will have to wait and see.

Roland has a VA engine, but seriously it is way inferior to the Yamaha's FM. a digital synth emulating analog? why though? I mean sure but the montage does that well with the AWM and has great sampled prophet sound waves.... just a missed opportunity to do something original by Roland. Overall I was never impressed with Roland sounds, I was only using modern Roland gear, exclusively except I had a DX7II at some point, then sold everything and bought the Montage 8. Never looked back. Yamaha pianos are the best for my taste as a pro player... The pads/brass/strings are gorgeous, they delete the Roland... Organs and EPs are actually very good (not sure while people seem to complain, prolly copy paste other commenters) but not the best I ever hear - that is Keyscape Rhodes and Pianet hands down, or Nord organ clone modeling (the one thing Nord is good for).

EDdit Oh, and a full featured sequencer on a keyboard? for me personally... useless . Cubase is wayyyy faster, and more intuitive. I like having separate designated "modules" for each type of work that has to be done. There's the synth, that's for making sounds, effects, shaping them, layering and making performances live. And there's the sequencer which is the studio. a PC is way better suited to handle it due to having mouse + keyboard, the 2 best inventions in controlling DAW tech.

Its going to boil down to what people want in a keyboard and their sound preference.

**The no.1 advantage of the Fantom over the Montage is the screen, hands down. Since like 90% of the editing and navigating is done using it (even though Montage has many buttons, Yamaha themselves gathered that most users just use the screen mostly). So, a better, faster screen that supports more gestures such as the Fantom's is a breeze to work with. Saves time, frustration, and more music making/inspiration that way. It also doesn't help that Montage's screen is sometimes laggy/sluggish.

Not only that - but the button/knobs below the Fantom touchscreen allows for one to navigate through the interface (in most cases) without actually touching the screen. Some prefer not to use a touch screen (for a number of reasons) and having an either-or choice is beneficial. Montage chose to take away the function key buttons below the touchscreen which could have also evolved to the push button + rotary encoders of Fantom. Therefore, most editing work you see substantial use of the touchscreen where Fantom editing you see it both ways - some using the button/dial approach - some using touchscreen.

**Triggers Pads, +1 Roland. Honestly I didn't use them at all back when I had the FA-06, but it's a feature nonetheless with the Montage you have to resort to using a touch screen and not physical pads.

As I keep up with reports from owners of the Fantom (in other forums) - I see reports of the Fantom pads being sub-par. Useful perhaps for DAW or macro control - but not as pads to trigger drum samples or anything musical. The reports seem to indicate the feel is bad, triggering sometimes double-triggers, and are not dynamic. This seems to be coming from folks that are accustomed to pads of dedicated gear that primarily triggers samples with pads and doesn't have other responsibilities (like Akai MPC). Between nothing and bad pads - maybe bad pads are better. For DAW control - it's good to have more buttons. Yamaha top tier synth/workstations have never really had these pads - but it looks like it would not be difficult to "one up" in this department if well executed. That's if the market cares for multi-function pads or not. I currently trigger one-shot type samples using piano keys and might rather keep my keybed "clean" and delegate this to a pad or button instead. The summary statement is that it seems this is a luke-warm physical pad implementation of Roland vs. none in Montage.

Guess it's worth mentioning that some of the modes of these pads in Fantom are available as buttons on Montage. The mute/solo or zone (PART in Montage) selection.

I wouldnt have believed it until today but Yamaha upped their game in this last firmware update. New effects and a sequencer. I think even some other enhancements that havnt been mentioned. Nice. It also shows they can add things entirely unexpected into the Montage/Modx so at this point it is advised to keep submitting ideas but we have to be patient. If our ideas werent adopted they were heard and emphasis was put on a way to get to where we want to be musically nonetheless. That is a big deal to me +1 Yamaha. Thank you.

Some things are not adopted but I might say they are not yet adopted. Maybe they wont ever be brought in but maybe a working solution will be found by us either way to make the tunes!

Hi guys, for me as an average user the main question is the "easy to use" factor. I had the MODX8 but honestly it was too complicated to use, so i sold it. On the othter hand
i had a couple of Roland products in the past and they were really easy to use and understand. So can someone who owns the Fantom comment if its easy to use or better one who knows both boards. Many thanks in advance.

Hi guys, for me as an average user the main question is the "easy to use" factor. I had the MODX8 but honestly it was too complicated to use, so i sold it. On the othter hand
i had a couple of Roland products in the past and they were really easy to use and understand. So can someone who owns the Fantom comment if its easy to use or better one who knows both boards. Many thanks in advance.

I own a MODX and Fantom 6. If you are familiar with Roland Architecture then the roland is a lot quicker to edit on. The Fantom simplifies novaigation on a new scale once you learn all the short cuts,.... I love programming it. I also own 2 x Kurz Forte's... have to say the MODX is easier than the kurzweils to follow, Kurzweil are still the kings of flexibility and control, but difficult to understand at times.