Top right hand side is not the most convenient location to quickly switch sounds IMO.

Sometimes the music leaves my left hand free - sometimes my right hand. Or sometimes I can simultaneously play the necessary notes in my right hand and reach over to buttons using free fingers on the right hand and sometimes the left hand is best for these same acrobatics.

I'd prefer the freedom of choice with scene buttons scattered from left to right. Maybe even 32. Even if there are only 8 or 16 scenes - allow for a bunch of buttons allowing only 8 (or 16) of the full 32 to get assigned (so it's not necessarily an expansion of the scene memory required) - but flexibility in location of where the scene buttons can be pressed. So one idea would be if 32 buttons - it'd be 4 banks of 8 where the same 8 scene buttons are repeated on the far left /right and two sets in the middle. Scene 1-8 for each bank. Or perhaps if growing the scene count - then 1-16 on the left side and repeated 1-16 on the right side. 32 is certainly a mess of buttons - it's the "utopia" request. I'd take "just" 16 and would suggest having them spread out for hand-location flexibility.

As it stands now - I typically use scene 8 first then 7 then ... because the last scene buttons are generally more in the area my hand is left vs. the first scene buttons. But this does depend on the song. More flexibility would help. Currently my planned solution to this is to create a device to MIDI scene changes so I can place buttons where I want.

I also had the KORG Kronos 2 and it was a nightmare. You can do anything with it but with a very steep learning curve. so i really like what i see on YT about the GUI of the Fantom and hope its a lot easier than the Kronos

Attempting to use the Kronos is like doing Trigonometry, I understand the need for sophistication but all of the needless complexity is a mood and a creativity killer.
I want to make music, not screw around with unlimited Windows and tabs.

It's almost comical when I look at this massive keyboard (Montage 8) and the waste of space on the top panel.
I wished the Montage had the same or bigger screen size like the Kronos.

Come on Yamaha, this is so obvious. You know you cannot upgrade a hardware, and so if you are going to do something, just do it right.

I am also curios as to why the Montage has no digital outs,

@Patrick - re. digital outs: just look at almost all the analog and digital mixers from the past few years and you'll see why. There aren't any S/PDIF or TOSLINK inputs anymore!

@Patrick - re. digital outs: just look at almost all the analog and digital mixers from the past few years and you'll see why. There aren't any S/PDIF or TOSLINK inputs anymore!

Well, my Kronos has Digital Inputs and Digital Outputs.
Which is very useful and I use these ports for connecting digital devices for sampling and other idea.

I have to say that I have 2 Roland M1000 Digital Line Mixers so that's about 10 Stereo Inputs when chained together.

Attempting to use the Kronos is like doing Trigonometry, I understand the need for sophistication but all of the needless complexity is a mood and a creativity killer.
I want to make music, not screw around with unlimited Windows and tabs.

I just took delivery of a Fantom 7 this morning and I'm already doing just about everything I need to intuitively.

My Montage I'm pretty comfortable doing most stuff and just end up scratching my head occasionally but usually figure it out.

The Kronos. Had one when they first came out and got rid of it after about 6 months because I didn't have time to mess about figuring it out.

About a year ago I got to thinking it couldn't be as bad as I remembered so I got a Kronos 2. Still can't make head nor tail of it in most areas so mostly use it as a player for audio backing tracks, which it does exceptionally well.

I just took delivery of a Fantom 7 this morning and I'm already doing just about everything I need to intuitively.

My Montage I'm pretty comfortable doing most stuff and just end up scratching my head occasionally but usually figure it out.

The Kronos. Had one when they first came out and got rid of it after about 6 months because I didn't have time to mess about figuring it out.

About a year ago I got to thinking it couldn't be as bad as I remembered so I got a Kronos 2. Still can't make head nor tail of it in most areas so mostly use it as a player for audio backing tracks, which it does exceptionally well.

Don't get me started with the Kronos. 😀
I am on my 3rd Unit, the first 2 were duds.

The first unit will not startup after a week. I called the dealership and they sent me another one that was dead on arrival, same issue, refused to start.

Then I got the 3rd one and there was Fan noise.

In the end, I kept the first unit because after I downgraded the Firmware (OS), the startup issues went away,

Between Korg, Yamaha and Roland I have to say Korg has the worse product quality and usability.

It's always Yamaha, Roland then Korg.

The Kronos is a complete mess but I had to own it for bragging rights. :p

Otherwise, the Keyboard is completely useless, the sampling is completely useless.

Speaking for myself, I think for the Montage, Yamaha almost fell into the same Korg attitude, make a complicated machine that is near none musical.

Again, I get the idea of making things next gen but that is why we have DAW's.

I love the Montage except for the small screen; which is just dumb, especially on the Montage 8, a lot of wasted real estate.

Well, now that the new Fantom has been out over a year now...

It has had 3 updates ...

Is it still "king" as some on here have stated...?

King or not - Fantom is certainly a different approach with modeling the current Yamaha flagship synth does not have, a different sound set (that's complementary, not redundant), and a different bag of tricks. The approach of being able to VST the "entire" instrument using a PC is cool for sound design without needing the actual keyboard.

The designation of "king" is opinion - so this is difficult to tease out. There are lots of features each keyboard (between Fantom and Montage) bring to the table that the other doesn't do or does worse. How that fits into your musical world is a matter of personal taste.

BTW: Fantom has had more than 3 updates. Removing the update detail:

UPDATE HISTORY
[ Ver.2.01 ] NOV 2020
[ Ver.2.00 ] SEP 2020
[ Ver.1.60 ] MAY 2020
[ Ver.1.51 ] MAR 2020
[ Ver.1.11 ] DEC 2019
[ Ver.1.10 ] OCT 2019

Version 2.0 was interesting as Roland felt there were enough significant updates to warrant bumping up the major revision number (from "1" to "2" ). And I agree it's a fairly significant amount of additions. Neither keyboard has stayed stagnant - but both have significantly improved through firmware. I don't think either has eclipsed the other entirely through firmware updates. So whatever one's relative opinion was a year or so ago should be generally the same today.

The most important thing for any istrument; the Montage sounds better!

It would be great if Yamaha could see value in Modeling and add at least some Piano modeling. Maybe even if just to model everything but the main piano sample layers, such as the resonance, key off/pedal off noise, open/closed lid, etc.

Even better, if Yamaha decided to use modeling technology for the main Piano sound as well, starting with the most recorded piano on the planet for Pop/Rock ... the C7 Grand!!
Correct me if I'm wrong, but has any other Synth company modeled the C7? I've heard Steinway-like & other pianos, but not a modeled C7. This could just give the Montage/MODX THE Edge over all other synths if they did so!?

But, even if Yamaha gave us the C7 library using the samples on the CP88 / Genos, it would be a HUGE boost and a Major new feature/enhancement that many keyboard players would highly consider when choosing their next Synth. Word would spread pretty fast that the Montage/MODX now have the new authentic Yamaha sampled C7 Grand!! Adding modeling would just be a great bonus as well... no need for any hardware changes for this either!!

...what a way to kick off 2021 if they did 😉

As a nearly one year Fantom 8 user I still think Montage is far much complex.
The videos available clearly shows how deep Montage can be, so deep I often get lost.
I am still planning to get a Montage or whatever might come next, but I need much more understanding of those things involved in music making.

I have some things for Roland Fantom to improve, after my personal experience...if you are somehow interested here are them...

1...Screen off option.

2...Scene lock, only keyboard and screen operational.

3...No partial selected in yellow. Currently at least one must be selected.

4...Chain play for songs.

5...Selection of active zone for each keyboard group.

6...Pads configured with sounds of zones but for each scene.

7...Arpeggio per zone.

8...More recording measures...50...64? or even linear recording.

9...More tuning range (now 415.3–466 .2).
At least 392 for Versaiiles pitch and 485 for Bag pipes?

10...Initial scenes listed on a separate window when saving a scene
or same list as now but highlighting initial scenes... yellowish?

11...HOLD-KEY-OFF-NORMAL and HOLD-KEY-OFF-DECAY, same as
current KEY-OFF-NORMAL and KEY-OFF-DECAY but requesting a HOLD
time to be triggered...almost replacing aftertouch.

In fact I think all current delay modes should have a HOLD TO TRIGGER time, except NORMAL. With NORMAL the sound will play after the delay currently available; but with HOLD, a HOLD TO TRIGGER should be required and then accomplished after the delay time already available. Currently the sound is produced immediately after the delay is done, ruining creativity, so to speak. The same goes for the other two remaining, KEY-OFF-NORMAL and KEY-OFF-DECAY.
Having all this available will allow to sound four partials separated just by playing one single key: the sound NORMAL after a delay; the sound HOLD after a HOLD TO TRIGGER and a delay; the sound after releasing the key and a delay; and finally the sound after releasing the key and a delay IF a HOLD TO TRIGGER was accomplished.

12...Selection of starting chain (currently starting scene is available).

13... Moving through keyboard switch groups by S1, S2, S3...a pedal.

14... Outward keyboard range selection (D5-D3 will play below and up to D3, also above D5 including D5. Within D3 and D5 no sounding. Montage has this already,

15...Assignments to S1,S2,S3 should change values stopping also at the initial
settings. If you have a setting of 15, operating them now will go to -64,
then to +63. It should make -64 then 15, then +64, then 15, then -64...and
so on.

16... Operating manuals available from system settings to be seen on the screen.

17...Fixing the glissando issue. Not working when portamento is selected until
we go out from and back to glissando.

18...Scene names are too short. Memo helps, but it is also too short. Complex
scenes would benefit from a whole sheet [Scene sheet] explaining how
should be performed [D6 triggers arpeggio that will stop holding D5 down
more than 500...and things like that, easily remembered when building the
scene but forgotten after a month].

19...I think perhaps VALVES should be used when configuring VELOCITY.
Often I use many instruments that are call in on the basis of velocity....but if I happen to fail in using the required velocity after a while [my little finger, so to speak, becoming weak] some zones or some partials will not sound.
So selecting a VALVE as active will make any sound previously triggered to keep sounding while its keyboard range is played.
Think of it as a check valve.
Could it be placed after the velocity upper range selector....?
Valve on, valve off....Lovely.
A further step will allow S1,S2,S3 to reset that valves to the start position in order to do the very same from the very beginning....if you wish so.

20... Ability to connect to an external touch monitor.

21...I think perhaps it might be a good idea to place a red asterisk when changes have taken place along the playing of a scene.
That way one will be warned the original performance has been changed before proceeding any further, such as saving the scene or even playing it again.
Same way as you are already shown the yellow asterisk...

22...Copy/paste zones.

The most important thing for any istrument; the Montage sounds better!

Totally agree there...

The "problem" comes when you look at the Fantom's aesthetics, UI, work-flow, power, etc - all of which are better.

It would be great if Yamaha could see value in Modeling and add at least some Piano modeling. Maybe even if just to model everything but the main piano sample layers, such as the resonance, key off/pedal off noise, open/closed lid, etc.

Even better, if Yamaha decided to use modeling technology for the main Piano sound as well, starting with the most recorded piano on the planet for Pop/Rock ... the C7 Grand!!

NO!

Yamaha has some of the best sounding pianos in any synth/workstation, etc.

Modeled pianos sound terrible!

There is nothing better than real, sampled pianos - there is a reason that is what Yamaha, Nord, Korg, Kawai, etc. all use.

Sound is subjective. What sounds great in my ear sounds (potentially) horrible in yours.

What I like about "modeled" anything is the response. Without a sample dictating the dynamics - the model is a lot more "free" to respond to stimulus and interact. I like the response of FM even if I'm not fond of all of the sounds. Likewise, modeled has a place for me even if the core sound isn't perfect.

That's not to say it's wrong to think modeled, for you, sounds horrible. If every modeled sound makes your skin crawl - then don't use it since it would kill your mojo. And I suppose if I hated strawberry ice cream, I'd wish Neapolitan would get rid of it and just give me chocolate+vanilla. So I get not wanting to burden your instrument with excess baggage. However, expanding the choices for sound palette - I see this as a good thing. I am biased - because I like to paint with modeled sometimes. I also understand that resources are finite - and maybe we can't get a long list of engines inside a Yamaha flagship. If it can be done - without throwing something else overboard - it'd be great to see modeled engines (analog, bowed strings, hammered strings, etc). Maybe other products to test the waters and MIDI-into an existing rig.

I see both sides even if I do lean towards the wishful thinking of modeled choices.

Horrible, terrific, or somewhere between - it is a bullet (for pianos, at least) where Yamaha's competitive offering is missing something Roland's product has.