I wouldn't get hung up worrying about the Osmose as a competitor to the Montage. From what I'm hearing, even the Fantom 0 is outselling the MODX+ by a huge amount and the Akai MPC 61 is also outselling the MODX+.
None of this could be good for Yamaha's Synths, especially their flagship Montage...

Feels like Yamaha are quietly sinking with the Montage & MODX+ and fading off into the distance...

If Yamaha had come out with adding the AN-X engine (& several other features/enhancements) on both the MODX and Montage sooner than later, they may have been able to save face and get their sales back, but it's not sounding good...not sure what they are thinking or planning, but doing & saying nothing is not working!!

I sold my Montage 8 a while back and got the Fantom. I couldn't believe what all it could do like Genos type sounds and endless free upgrades. Yamaha would give us a few new voices but Roland would give you hundreds. A full 16 voice anything you wanted except only one V-piano in slot one. Built nice and I/Os and on and on, I was amazed by the expanse of it and even pads, it even had slide guitar phases. It was like they took everything they had and made it available to Fantom. Yamaha doesn't do this, they part out an allowance that only goes to a specific design and only get what you get. I know those platforms allow for greater Yamaha could still beat it on piano waveforms, EPs and some acoustic stuff but hasn't everything that can be done using static sounds already been done? At this point, for example the CK, all they are really doing is reducing the cost and simplifying the UI and offering a new look and practical options but it still sounds the same. If the sound has reached its maximum quality limit there's only one other thing to do and that's to offer playability and more control. The natural evolution is taking us toward MPE or MIDI2 or something exciting. To be able to play a physical keyboard like it's a guitar (actually better than a guitar with more dimensions) is way better than key on key off or even aftertouch. I know you know but it's like each individual key is a separate instrumentalist. Each instrumentalist such as in a string section, can play in a unique way whether harmony low and mid with a solo or lead on top. Each can make a different variation in the sound same as a real orchestra section can. So each key has a built-in modulation wheel, pitch bend wheel and vibrato control completely separate from all other keys. It's so much more than static sound. I picked it up instantly because it purely intuitive and natural. Sure some voices are naturally static like piano but that's for a rhythmic purpose. You can play it like that or not but at least you have the option to change if you feel like it.

The fact you can't find the Montage in stock online or in stores is quite a shock. The supply chain crisis is now getting better actually so parts and accessories should be easier to acquire for the Montage and other Yamaha keyboards. Dealers are saying that more Montage will become available at some point, but I wonder if they mean the Montage successor that Yamaha may be getting ready to launch. The Montage has been on the market roughly 7 years now and in that time technology has advanced significantly. Clavia SE recently launched the new Nord Stage 4, and it's a hot ticket item, needless to say. If you've listened to any of the demos of the Stage 4 by professional keyboard players on YouTube, etc., the Stage 4 is on another level soundwise, I dare say. And even though the Stage 4 only has 120 note polyphony (for pianos) Clavia has apparently figured out how to allocate the polyphony in such a way to where note drop off is basically a non-issue. OTOH, on the Yamaha YC-88/73/61 that have 128 note polyphony if you have a Piano on slot A and a pad on slot B, the piano notes will cut off rapidly at random intervals when holding the sustain pedal. The Stage 4, does not have this issue even with every layer in every section turned on. This could also be true for the Montage, i.e., note drop off at random intervals in certain situations, but I don't own a Montage currently, so I can't verify it. But if and when a Montage successor is released I think Yamaha will up the ante and give the Nord Stage 4 a run for its money. Clavia SE is a small company compared to Yamaha, but those Swedes really know their stuff, in my opinion. Yamaha, OTOH, is the number one seller of keyboards and acoustic Pianos on the planet, and they also have the monetary resources to stay at the cutting edge of technology and sound development going forward. I'm looking forward to a Montage successor and a Genos successor, but Yamaha obviously has its own timetable for releasing new products. Whatever you play, enjoy what you play! And start saving those pennies. 😉

Nord must be good but it was always twice as expensive as most in the same class so I'd rather buy two different boards and MIDI them together than to buy one Nord. Seems like they haven't figured out that secret plus they always offered the custom waveform option which I would never use. My gear stays in my studio so someone might have to have everything in one unit but I'd much rather buy 2 or 3 rather than one for the same price. The CK61 is only $999, probably less in a few months. Gosh I've looked at Nord 20 times over 30 years and never pulled the trigger because of price. I played one type in guitar center not sure what it was, a long time ago but wasn't that impressive at that time. The custom waveforms/samples was the biggest draw because Yamaha would never offer that on a stage board in a million years. Yamaha is stingy with providing "unlimited" voices. It's their platform and memory that prohibits that luxury. Roland's platform is pretty unlimited but acoustically not as good as Yamaha. Yamaha would have to change completely, away from AWM2 in hopes of getting something like an MPE to work. I'm very curious if the new Montage will be MPE, other synthesis types to stay ahead of the competition or will it be another underpowered rompler? If all it is, is another Montage with double brains or two under one hood it will still be more of the same just more of it. I think it will be something totally new after all they've had 7 years to think and plan for it.

[quotePost id=121897]The custom waveforms/samples was the biggest draw because Yamaha would never offer that on a stage board in a million years. Yamaha is stingy with providing "unlimited" voices. It's their platform and memory that prohibits that luxury. Roland's platform is pretty unlimited but acoustically not as good as Yamaha. [/quotePost]
In terms of current models, Yamaha provides the platform/memory for custom waveforms/samples in MODX/Montage series and in their arranger line (PSR-SX600 and up, through Genos). Roland provides the platform/memory for custom waveforms/samples in Juno DS and Fantom/Fantom-0. Roland also provides some memory expansion in some other models, but limited to factory expansion packs only, no custom waveforms/samples. In terms of what you might be thinking of as a "stage board," their closest equivalents to Yamaha's YC (which would be VR09/VR730) do not provide for any such expansions, though there are "hidden" sounds which you can access using a freeware third-party editor.

[quotePost id=121897]Yamaha would have to change completely, away from AWM2 in hopes of getting something like an MPE to work. [/quotePost]
MPE is about the controller and routing different motions to different parameters. I don't see any reason why AWM2 couldn't accommodate that.

AWM2 and FM-X are limited in their dynamics by the Generator nature of their envelopes, and the ways the LFO's cycle, too, such that MPE would be inherently limited by the approaches of generating entire envelopes at note on.

[quotePost id=121914]AWM2 and FM-X are limited in their dynamics by the Generator nature of their envelopes, and the ways the LFO's cycle, too, such that MPE would be inherently limited by the approaches of generating entire envelopes at note on.[/quotePost]

You're conflating different things. Saying that AWM2 cannot do (for example) everything the Haken engine in the Osmose can do does not mean that AWM2 cannot support MPE. And for that matter, the Osmose ability to control the attack with key position (which I think is what you're referring to when talking about not generating entire envelopes at note on) is not even itself an MPE function (though the ability to then do it for each note individually when playing polyphonically is).

Per-note control of Montage's existing pitch bend, modulation, and aftertouch functions when playing polyphonically would be a perfectly good MPE implementation, and there's nothing in the AWM2 sound generating engine that would preclude being able to do that. What it would take is a keyboard design that supports the individual note gestures, and the ability to assign each played note to its own MIDI channel.

Also, for MPE info, see the "MIDI Polyphonic Expression (MPE) Specification Adopted" article on the official MIDI web site. I've been trying to include the link without having my post flagged as spam. It's crazy, how aggressive this forum is about thinking something is spam, yet still allowing tons of spam through. I think their algorithm needs a bit of work. 😉

Anyway, the rest of the point is really that, if you're expecting every MPE implementation to do everything the Osmose does, I think you're going to be disappointed by just about every board that isn't an Osmose. 😉 And if nothing else, some of what Osmose does is patented.

I've been trying to include the link without having my post flagged as spam.

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1-26r0pVtVBrZHM6VGA05hpF-ij5xT6aaXY9BfDzyTx8/edit

The 'official' spec can only be downloaded from the MIDI site by registered members of MIDI. There is a link to that spec on the first page of the link I provided.

If you take the link you will see this on the first page:

M1-100-UM MIDI Polyphonic Expression is a version 1.1 update which replaces the previous rp53 version 1.0. Version 1.1 has significant editorial improvements for clarity but has no technical design changes.

So the doc link I posted is for 1.0 but 'has no technical design changes'.

By the way, Yamaha has published 5 chapters of 'Yamaha Synth 40 years History' that has a lot of info about the chain of development events for the different instruments and tone generators.
https://europe.yamaha.com/en/products/contents/music_production/synth_40th/history/index.html

See Chapter 3 in particular.

What it would take is a keyboard design that supports the individual note gestures, and the ability to assign each played note to its own MIDI channel.

Wouldn't it also take a tone generator for each note?

How many 'envelopes' are created when a triad is played for a performance with one part and one element? Arent the current envelope parameters shared by ALL simultaneous notes for an element?

Per-note control of Montage's existing pitch bend, modulation, and aftertouch functions when playing polyphonically would be a perfectly good MPE implementation, and there's nothing in the AWM2 sound generating engine that would preclude being able to do that.

The Drone Generator (FM-X perf) Smart Morph performance demonstrates that all of the envelope parameters, including attack, can be changed dynamically.

1. load Drone Generator
2. Edit part 1 - Common
3. Go to Pitch / Filter -> Filter EG
4. Play one or more notes
5. Watch the various parameters go through a cycle of 6 different settings in coordination with the Super Knob.

I was talking about "Stage Boards" that Yamaha wouldn't offer custom samples like Nord does but Nord is also double the price.

So the AWM2 best they offer is Genos super articulation which adds a sampled nuance or custom behavior such as a fret noise (sometimes automated not controlled so it's somewhat fake) or if you hit the key hard the brass falls off etc. Nevertheless that brass fall and fret noise is exactly the same every time you trigger it. It's still a static sound being triggered and not fluid in and out.

For them to have a single MPE voice that works (other than side to side note bending) they'd have to make many samples of an instrument in different ways like soft, barking, hard, vibrato, growl etc. (think of all the sounds a sax can make) and somehow avoid obvious sample switching problems and implement that into the key range from barely a touch to normal range to after touch etc. It would use so much memory and take forever to get right it would not be feasible. That's why all we have is some very basic and general super articulations that are still static AWM2 samples. It's either on or off no 25% on or 75% on meshing together or morphing together or perfectly blending. Then each note as if each note is a different instrument, has to perform independently of every other note or key. We know not all waveforms are triggered simultaneously but a bunch can be in a large chord.

Yamaha got into modeling technology on the CP1 (maybe elsewhere) and use it on some stage boards but it wasn't that feasible because CP1 only has what 15 voices? Osmose made over 500 voices, guess it's unlimited, but reminds me of Yamaha's VL1 that attempted to replicate acoustic behaviors but also not feasible because it was also a fortune to own. Yamaha was extremely interested in replicating because of that project. Osmose is $1,799 for both the matrix onboard sound engine and the MPE keyboard. Seriously that's almost fee for what it can do. If Yamaha made this it would cost $10,000 and have 3 voices. Exaggerating but we know they can make one but can they really make one anyone can afford? Anyone can afford an Osmose which is a really big deal. We all know Yamaha can do anything but it's not always simple or affordable unless it's a stage board excluding the CP1. I wonder if Montage 2 will be MPE but Osmose beat them to the punch. I do hope Yamaha makes me eat my words. IF the best technology they have currently is the CP1 and Genos I'm not sure what's coming next. Seems to have run it's course many year ago. It is still the best for pianos and acoustic static voices but they've done all they can do with it. FM/DX is still kicking in YC/Montage but still not user friendly, YC/CP1 not editable. Korg made it easy on the Opsix but that's all that does. YC FM is cool except you can't make it stop sounding so it is still behaving like an organ when it's not an organ or I don't want an organ. Needs to cutoff when chords are sustained.

If the EaganMatrix gets any better or more exciting more stable we might not need to many other technologies. Samples will always have a place such as for pianos and naturally static sounds. Obviously the Osmoses' future will be a larger form factor and duplicate engines for layers and splits. What makes it so exciting are three things coming together that work; 1) the MPE keyboard assuming it doesn't break within a few year requiring expensive repairs 2) the sound engine that isn't a dud and unlimited 3) It's affordable. It's not perfect so there are some improvements coming.

I counted and it boots up in less than 10 seconds. Crashed twice. Studio work vs stage work remains to be seen. Needs an internal power supply to be taken seriously. Needs a USB thumb drive option for saving without a computer (besides the user 128 slots). The editor could become user friendly eventually. The Macros offer a lot of on the fly adjustability, shallow diving. You can leave the "synth" menu open, still change voices and tweak pretty quickly if required. I doubt the screen is readable in daylight but haven't tested that. It remains to be understood how much improvements can be made to the current system. Not one single arpeggiator voice was programmed but it has a nice option so I expect a lot more is coming. Hopefully more user customization options. I'm thinking they just needed the board to hit the street asap was originally due when C19 hit and caused delays. It might be bigger than the DX7 and VL1 combined. It's a lot more fun that's for certain. Remember that silly breath controller that was what $400?

[quotePost id=121925]The 'official' spec can only be downloaded from the MIDI site by registered members of MIDI. [/quotePost]Yes, there's plenty more detail to be had, but someone doesn't have to read the whole spec to get the info that supported my post, that descriptive info of what MPE is is on the page I referenced which does not require registration.

[quotePost id=121927]

What it would take is a keyboard design that supports the individual note gestures, and the ability to assign each played note to its own MIDI channel.

Wouldn't it also take a tone generator for each note? [/quotePost]
I'm not sure I understand. Most polyphonic keyboards have a tone generator for each note, a possible exception maybe being divide-down systems, depending on how you look at it.

[quotePost id=121927]How many 'envelopes' are created when a triad is played for a performance with one part and one element? Arent the current envelope parameters shared by ALL simultaneous notes for an element?[/quotePost]
Again, I'm not seeing the relevance of this line of thought.

[quotePost id=121927]The Drone Generator (FM-X perf) Smart Morph performance demonstrates that all of the envelope parameters, including attack, can be changed dynamically.[/quotePost]
I think we're getting into a lot of tangents here, which may interest other people following this, but I was only making a simple point, that there's nothing about AWM2 tone generation that precludes it from being manipulated in an MPE manner (e.g. note-by-note control of pitch/mod/aftertouch, accomplished via an appropriate controller and the ability to assign different notes to different MIDI channels).

[quotePost id=121928]So the AWM2 best they offer is Genos super articulation which adds a sampled nuance or custom behavior such as a fret noise (sometimes automated not controlled so it's somewhat fake) or if you hit the key hard the brass falls off etc. Nevertheless that brass fall and fret noise is exactly the same every time you trigger it. It's still a static sound being triggered and not fluid in and out.[/quotePost]Even the Montage supports round robin sample assignment that will not be exactly the same every time you trigger it. Genos SA2 can do a lot more, which brings me to...

[quotePost id=121928]For them to have a single MPE voice that works (other than side to side note bending) they'd have to make many samples of an instrument in different ways like soft, barking, hard, vibrato, growl etc. (think of all the sounds a sax can make) and somehow avoid obvious sample switching problems and implement that into the key range from barely a touch to normal range to after touch etc. It would use so much memory and take forever to get right it would not be feasible. That's why all we have is some very basic and general super articulations that are still static AWM2 samples. It's either on or off no 25% on or 75% on meshing together or morphing together or perfectly blending. [/quotePost]
First, no, MPE does not require any of those things. It requires only that played notes be assignable to different MIDI channels, where things like pitch bend and modulation can be independently assigned to some notes and not others.

But second, Genos already does real-time sample splicing along the lines of some of what you describe. See http://sandsoftwaresound.net/sa-and-sa2-yamahas-words/ - for example:

SA2 uses Articulation Element Modeling (AEM) to “stitch” samples together in real-time in response to what the musician plays...SA2 is a very complicated critter because it takes note timing into consideration.

But there's a lot more interesting info there as well.

On a little further thought here, I think there is a conflating of two different thoughts here... "I'd like Yamaha to support MPE" and "I'd like Yamaha to do what Osmose does," which are two entirely different propositions. I can imagine Yamaha supporting MPE... it is a defined standard with growing support. I don't think Yamaha will be doing the things that make Osmose unique, which, again, isn't merely MPE. As I said, the gradual controlled attack stuff that has been alluded to doesn't have anything to do with MPE, except to the extent that, when played polyphonically, the control is per individual note. But one could conceivably create a monophonic synth with that capability, and it wouldn't need to be MPE at all! But regardless, when it comes to Yamaha doing some similar things, I suspect that some of what Osmose is doing is proprietary; and also, Yamaha doesn't typically pursue small niches. Osmose already exists. If it's what you want you can buy it. And Yamaha can now sit back and see just how well it actually sells, before deciding to what extent they may want to put resources into something similar.