Maybe you can help me understand the architecture.

I see each part has its own LFO. This LFO has the capacity to modulate the speed of each element LFO (each element has an LFO) and this modulation can be offset by adjustable phase. Also, you can pick up to 3 different modulation patterns and each pattern can target its own set of element LFOs. I imagine you can use two modulation (destinations) targeting the same element LFO and create a pseudo-random pattern.

Each element LFO has its own rate setting - and there are up to 8 elements per part. So that's 64 LFOs - for the element side - maybe more depending on how you modulate them from the part level. And the part level has one per PART - with up to 8 parts per performance. 68+8. That's AWM2

I guess at the element level, you cannot adjust phase between amplitude, filter, and pitch but that can be done a level up with the modulation somewhat which can target each element with a unique influence.

Let me know if I have this off.

Quite simply, there was no way we could get the LFO,s to act individually per voice.

All LFO modulations would reset whenever a new key was pressed.

This was on the FM-X engine.

Easiest way to test. Put a LFO on pitch. Give it a long delay and make the notes have a long release time.

There was no way to get the modulation to not reset on new voices?

Now I may be missing something here but as far as I could tell there were no options for polyphonic LFO's.

I would love to be wrong on this.

I just tried this and it seems to be just the FM-X Part LFO that has the problem as far as I can tell. All the other LFOs (2nd LFO on FM-X and the element & part LFOs on AWM2) will run independently per voice provided you set Key-On Reset to Off.

Very odd.

OH thank goodness!

I hope this can be fixed then. I probably found a bug.

After the disappointments of Dave Smith prophet/OB6 and Nord lead 4 and A1 all doing monophonic LFO's I was worried that it seems to be the new trend.

Glad that the AWM2 etc is polyphonic. I never tested that in the shop.

Hope it gets fixed asap. Really blown away by the Montage!

@Darren: Actually I think nothing needs to be fixed. I believe you cannot assign the Part LFO to the pitch at all. As far as I can see the only destinations for the Part LFO are parameters of the insert effects of the part. Those are of course shared between all the voices. You do not have a chorus per voice but one per part. So the Part LFO naturally has to be shared by all voices of that part. You can decide if it is restarted with the 1-st key, each key, or not at all.

You are after the 2nd LFO which behaves like you expect. There you can influence the pitch and it does what you want...

AH I see.

I understand now.

Here is where the confusion came from.

As you can see in the picture I was assuming that the LFO 1 was able to effect the OSC Frequency.

However it seems that this is a ring modulator then.

Does this mean the the FMX engine has a serious lack of LFO modulation atm? Just one LFO for the whole synth?

Part LFO can indirectly affect pitch by modulating element LFO.

The confusion looks like InsA was not comprehended to be an insertion effect which are the part level effects such as wah, vocoder, really a laundry list of effects applied mostly to the output of the part. Not part of constructing the core sound. These are essentially two guitar pedals that can be plugged in between each part and the output.

First, there is no such thing as a Voice. I keep seeing this referred to, but it does not exist in Montage.

Does this mean the the FMX engine has a serious lack of LFO modulation atm? Just one LFO for the whole synth?

??? Yikes. New to FM in general? You can control the depth applied to each Operator.

It's fun to watch folks explore deeper and deeper and then find out that "Oh, it does that already!" There is more to Montage than a quick glance can take in.

Keep digging. Please don't jump to such radical and final sounding conclusions. Look, I don't know you, you maybe a synth wizard, but to jump to conclusions so rapidly is a bit risky. To say it doesn't do something because it doesn't do it a specific way - it may it may not - but perhaps, just perhaps, a new way of accomplishing musical goals might be what is being introduced or offered. Those things can be worthy of at least some consideration... Even if they do not specifically address yourcurrent specific need.

Also any discussion of LFOs should also include the way Montage can deal with vibrato, wah-wah and tremolo (the actual musical terms for the things we traditionally use LFOs for: pitch modulation, filter modulation and amplitude modulation). Throughout the Motif-series, 2001-2015, Yamaha has been introducing certain AWM2 waveforms recorded with the natural vibrato of the original (source) player. This, frankly, has been met with a mixed reaction (as you might expect). Some love it, some tolerate it, some dislike it, most found a way to make it work, some never did...

In rational discussions with users, performers, keyboardists, those who disliked it did so because they wanted to control the application of vibrato; the 'when' and the 'how much'. So the Waveform library grew to include both vibrato and non-vibrato versions of many of the acoustic instruments.

Also introduced, to make these components work, was something called "XA Control" (Expanded Articulation Control) that allowed realtime dynamic switching of waveforms during the performing of the sound. It's a lot of number crunching, and "knitting" of audio data. So you have many instruments which do not use LFOs at all to achieve pitch modulation (they use natural vibrato) - and yet you control the application of the vibrato by morphing the non-vibrato waveform (Element) into one with a waveform that has the natural vibrato applied. It's like what an LFO would do when setup to do PMD, but applied by a sophisticated crossfading of Elements, (Motion Control). The results, we trust, are more musically satisfying because the problem was never the nature of the vibrato (it was deemed more realistic, and far less robotic than a traditional LFO) the problem was the performance application of the modulation gesture.

This is one of those "Easter eggs" (hidden treasures), you will not necessarily find peeking into the architecture briefly while in a music store. The Montage represents a cumulative evolution of technology and attempts to move music making forward. (A lofty goal, but a goal nonetheless).

I think you will find there is a whole different approach to what traditionally is done with LFOs. Synthesizers evolve, even today's analog synths are evolving. Many older concepts fall out of favor... That's another way to look at features you find lacking/missing or you just totally didn't anticipate.

But if you don't allow for the fact that something 'new' might be being introduced, something that has all the control and more - for example, the tag "Motion Control Synthesis Engine" we hope is generic enough to cover several Montage concepts...

Among them is the ability to create your own LFO waves, and the ability to create your own Motion Sequences. You can create and apply your own LFO in both engines (AWM2 and FM-X). The Common LFO is per the Part (there are no Voices, btw). Then each AWM2 Waveform has its own Element LFO. There is the ability to adjust the phase of each Element LFO and a way to control it depth (application) on a per Element basis. The LFO Control Box allows three Destinations per Part (and is used to modulate pitch, filter and amplifier)...with adjustable depth per Element. Each FM-X sound has its own Common LFO, in addition to the way FM Synthesis itself, can generate its own LFOs. (Please if you are interested in FM-X even remotely, follow along with the Manny's Modulation Manifesto series of articles...) FM has its own methods of creating low frequency oscillations...

On the non-traditional side...of modulation low frequency and otherwise...
Motion Sequences can be thought of as completely programmable modulation sources for the 21st Century (forgive my exuberance in the face of your skepticism but... It's hard not to get excited about Montage). You can design, to a very detailed degree, controller movements via this highly customizable Motion Seq engine. Each Motion Sequence can be applied to multiple destinations, they can loop (like traditional LFOs) or they can be set as one shots, where they act as envelopes. They can be manually triggered, they can run free, they can be set to restart at each key-on, or only the first key-on.

And the topper - as if this weren't enough - you can apply it to almost any parameter destination via a humongous control matrix.

LFO:
That sounds good, so how do we do to make
LFO wite noise/pink noise??

One of the most important and oldest sound making tools in a synth!!

In the 21st Century.

I was able to make noise with the LFO by setting the rate high and affecting pitch as the modulated parameter. I also had the part LFO drive the element LFO. It's not 100% noise, but very close. Certainly becomes closer with 2+ notes at once. But for a burst of noise - one note should be fine.

My normal way to share audio clips is not working at the moment - but I have a demo queued up.

Part LFO - triangle
Tempo sync ON (tempo=300), Speed = 1/16th, loop=on. Destination Element LFO, depth=127, element 1 ratio =127

Just have one element active (element 1)

Element 1 LFO - triangle - speed 63 (although I recorded with speed=38) pitch mod = 127

Not sure it matters so much what the sample is - but I had one of the P5 Saw waveforms on element 1 left over from some previous work.

... and a demo
https://clyp.it/4fx21dxc

Bad Mister wrote:

First, there is no such thing as a Voice. I keep seeing this referred to, but it does not exist in Montage.

I think that is a misunderstanding on your side. I (and I believe others) was not talking about the "voices" in the Motif sense - which was a misuse of the term from my point of view. But since Yamaha in the Montage is no longer hogging that word for what many companies call a program or a patch, I am free to use it in the sense "128 voice polyphony". So a voice is the minimal element which is used when playing one key. Maybe you are using the word note for that. So if we are talking about that the LFO is shared between voices, it is actually shared between notes.

Apart from that I completely agree, there is nothing missing in the term of LFO for me. The modulation capabilities are superb.

I am impressed!
Nice done Jason!

And thank you for looking into this.

But I am not sure.
The Main montage tempo is set to 300, right?

That do not make it so useful.(It affects ARP's, Daw sync and so on.)

I'm sure you already know.
But I say it anyway.

One example of use the LFO White/Pink Noise modulation.

LFO White/Pink Noise to modulate element/Osc frequency with a small amount.

And both are important White and Pink Noise .

You can set the sync to internal and set it to the highest value. I think you about get to the same point. I usually go to tempo when I want to relate the frequency to something I know. I don't hear any difference if I set the SYNC to internal and a speed of 63 on the PART common LFO. Crisis averted, your arps are free to roam. I think its worthwhile to show different ways to get to the same point.

I guess if you want to put the audience to sleep - pink noise is useful as well. I didn't really try for pink or white noise in spite of the name I may have given the noise in the demo. It's technically neither although close enough. It's the same general method other programmers on different platforms have used. Nothing really new here.

Lots of "you can't do that on Montage" are answered by using a fairly simple interface to make the "impossible" happen. There are limitations like anything else.

Something closer to white or pink noise can probably be accomplished by using effects. I'm not, at the moment, the target audience for using either of them for anything useful - so I'm not inclined to go much further with this. Hopefully I started something you can finish.