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.

I don't disagree that the CFX is one of the best sampled pianos out there. It has more an actual real acoustic grand sound as opposed to a recorded piano sound.

What I am mainly saying is that certain parts of what makes up the pianos on the Montage could be improved via modeling to be more realistic and shapeable via adjusting parameters; such as resonance, pedal off noise (doesn't currently exist on the Montage), even the Key off noise needs tweaking for it to behave/sound like a real piano when notes are held for any length of time.

Totally agree there...

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

Fortunately I have both and yes, the workflow on the Fantom is definitely easier to learn but the Montage just, in most categories, sounds better.

Now if we can just shake off this zombie apocolypse I can get back to using them in my native environment; on a stage.

While Montage is almost dead, the new Fantom is still a bunch of promises... By the way I thought for a while to get rid of Montage and moving towards the new Fantom but, as already experenced with the old Fantom XR, it was abandoned. Nobody developed MIDI drivers for newer OSX releases anymore. We must admit to ourselves that the time for workstation has ended.

It's very funny to see Mr Jason doing advertising for Roland Fantom on a Yamaha forum !
We all understand you are completely in love with Fantom. So we suppose you are playing on Fantom !! All the better if you enjoy what you get !

Personnaly, when I had the choice betwen both, I've chosen the Montage because of its sound quality far away from the Fantom. My opinion is that the sound quality of the Fantom absolutely doesn't worth 3,000 $. Whatever such or such feature, what is important for me is and always will alway be the sound quality.

We must admit to ourselves that the time for workstation has ended.

It is perhaps the reason why Korg has just released the Nautilus !!

@Fred

I bring in 3rd party comparisons as a way to, hopefully, elevate my Yamaha gear. Some competitive ideas or gaps on the Yamaha side are worthwhile to discuss to help feed user feedback for marketing/R&D to work to bridge the gap if they deem it worthwhile. Without some form of feedback - little will be done unless we're lucky enough some not-yet-realized feature is already on the roadmap. NOTE: I'm aware Ideascale is the place for discussing features more specifically. I started here as a precursor.

I do have a Fantom but it has been sitting unpacked in its box since November of last year.

The Yamaha Montage is my workhorse and the only keyboard I bring to gigs. Even when I unpack the Fantom - it will replace an 88-key studio controller and is not intended to make its way to gigs. I find most 88's - no matter how great they are - weigh too much for me to carry to a gig.

Regarding Roland: I've posted factual differences as well as a few opinions that are fairly balanced (some critical, some not). I agree with your opinion about the sound - I prefer Yamaha's. Certain flexibility in configuration has been historically better on the Roland side. It's a mixed bag. It always is.

You're entitled to your opinion if you think I have some pretense or nefarious motive for introducing and participating in this thread. Others may not come to that conclusion - and I would hope you're in the minority. Still, I respect your feedback even if I don't agree.

Roland just released 4 modal expansions for free on the Fantom! (JX-8P, Jupiter-8, Juno-106 & SH-101)

Roland just released 4 modal expansions for free on the Fantom! (JX-8P, Jupiter-8, Juno-106 & SH-101)

Yamaha, why don't you release the C7 library for free in response, as is available on all your other major keyboards (Genos, CPxx, YCxx)..?

It seems they don't know how to find and retain great programming talent, nor what to do with it when they have it.

Want evidence of this?

Where's the brightness control for the screen on your MODX or Montage?

A primarily live focused instrument, primarily operated through its touchscreen doesn't have a brightness control for its only screen, a quite dominant feature.

Nor does the Operating System have differing contrast themes.

Think about how that decision could possibly have been made. That's the kind of thinking that's going on at Yamaha.

It's a miracle that the Montage exists.

Regarding contrast - a generic ideascale item was submitted in 2018 to keep in mind high contrast for design in general. I pointed out a specific issue with Montage - but the idea is broader in scope.

https://yamahasynth.ideascale.com/a/dtd/Touch-Feel-Review-Color-Contrast-In-Product-Design/210429-45978

I also had this idea to allow for "skinning" the interface. This is difficult to implement - but would provide a mechanism for the community to create high-contrast menus

https://yamahasynth.ideascale.com/a/dtd/Ability-to-Skin-Keyboard-User-Interface/211833-45978

... I agree that high contrast in physical design and high contrast modes for screens (when feasible - as with Montage/MODX) would enhance usability for many users.

I'm not sure if there's a tie-in for the Fantom.

As a tie-in, I do see Fantom has added LCD brightness control since an older firmware release last year (2020).

No screen dimming, Montage...?
Really...?
Didn't know it...Hard to believe.

Anyway, if I were to choose between screen dimming and keyboard range, I would choose the latter.
Montage accepts, say, D3-D5 and D5-D3 while Fantom still admitting only D3-D5.
Then two zones are needed in Fantom to accomplish D5-D3 by setting a zone to A0-D3 and another to D5-C8.
A pity.

Montage is truly outstanding.

This would be the Yamaha advantage. If Roland's key range must be Range Lo<=Range Hi.

Yamaha allows for Lo>Hi - and when Lo>Hi - the range is "inverted" (notes from lowest note through Hi - which is the lower value, and also Lo through highest note) where the range is more defining a "dead zone" in the middle. The advantage is that you can notch out a range and have the same sound on either side of this "hole".

Montage/MODX's synth parameter manual explain it this way:

Note Limit Determines the lowest and highest notes of the keyboard range for an Element.
The selected Element will sound only when you play notes within this range.

If you first specify the highest note and then the lowest note, for example
“C5 to C4,” then the note range covers both “C-2 to C4” and “C5 to G8,”
with no sound for the Element between C4 and C5.

I copied the description for the element range - the Part-level note range is similar but applies to the entire Part. Arpeggio note limits work the same way.

The MODX/Montage backlit buttons have three states of "brightness"

The SuperKnob's lighting has brightness, color and flashing strength adjustment.

There is a setting to turn off onscreen blur and anti-aliasing, and animation "effects".

Understand Yamaha, within the context of the above, neglected to provide screen brightness control AND failed to provide themes of low, high and normal contrast.

--------------------

There are two obvious needs, amongst the many others, and the common sense provision of brightness controls for a screen being normal:

High Contrast and strong brightness for those with challenged vision and/or those working in bright environments (eg under strong daylight, under stage or film lighting or an otherwise brightened room).

Low Contrast and low brightness for differently challenged vision and/or working in dimmed environments.

Wearing sunglasses at night and/or in a dimmed room to operate the MODX/Montage, is necessary, and a bad joke.

---------------

Further, Ideascale is being deliberately used to hide issues of poor design, poor implementations and other problems like this. It shouldn't take submissions and votes and promoting of attention to an internet dark hole in order to remedy something so absolutely antithetical to good user experience. It should have been done on day one.

Heres a new point to add. Michael on another post on this forum said that the Montage puts "greater overall emphasis on acoustic versus EDM type tones."

I believe this was confirmed when Roland added 4 expansions to their VA engine into the Fantom this month. But if you like 100 pianos and string symphonies, and old tunes then look to the Montage. Dont get me wrong. I can make modern music on it and it sounds great. but it feels like work. (edit)

Also consider the Montage never put in a VA engine and instead focused on the DX7 sounds. Roland just put in 4 new engines just like that, with probably more coming. That is how you truly can make any sound - a sound I would want to make anyway. I dont need a banjo or an accordian.

The only thing I can think of what I dont like about the new Roland Fantom is that if you edit presets used in performances, that you have to individually save those preset sounds first or you lose the dits when you call up a performance. That was a dumb move. and no velocity pads? Another dumb move considering all that Fantom has in it already.

Is this a reference to Fantom's v2.1 f/w addition of the "Model" tone type?

Looks like this adds some specific emulation of different properties of vintage synths - then you can load expansion banks that utilize these to emulate a Jupiter 8, Juno 106, JX-8P, and SH-101.

As much as emulating the sounds - I understand part of this is also changing how the controls interact/work.

This is really one "engine" and some expansion packs to utilize the "engine" - but still an interesting addition.