Did this demo involve some yet to be announced Montage firmware update that makes the Roli integration more practical to use?

If not, and Hans-Peter did this by having the Roli connected to multiple parts in the Montage, then this is nothing new ... this approach has been around for a while. I tried this approach with my Montage and Roli and found that it was impractical for me to use because, in order to have polyphonic pitch bend, I needed to use multiple parts, each set to the same patch, making patch set up time consuming. Furthermore, to tweak a sound I needed to modify all parts concurrently… which may be feasible with the super knob, but not otherwise practical. I found using this approach was more trouble that it is worth and then went back to using SW synths like UVI Falcon (which has had great MPE support for several years now). Even if it involves use of multiple parts, it seems like a FW update to Montage could allow users to define a set of parts to be connected together so that any changes in one part are reflected in the other parts ... which would make Montage-Roli integration much more usable.

There's a few HW synths out there that offer MPE compatibility, but none from major manufacturers and none with the range of sounds provided by Montage/MODX. In my opinion, Montage/MODX controlled by Roli devices will open up a huge market for both companies, providing they can make it easy to use, practical to modify patches, and the connections are done without a computer or iPad involved.

It is good to hear that Yamaha has an interest in integration with Roli. I hope the relationship results in a firmware update very soon because Roli expressivity + Yamaha sounds = Killer Setup!

What is tedious for some folks is the very coolest thing about sound design to others. If it is too time consuming, then one should wait for the preset version to come out... (programmed by someone else who has the time and enjoys the cutting edge...)

Guitar Synthesizers (not a new concept either) is when it was discovered that to get the proper behavior to emulate pitch bending on a guitar, the guitar synth needed to transmit on six MIDI channels simultaneously — one for each string. You should not be dismayed by this, this is the physics necessary to make independent pitch bend possible. Really, programming it six times (yeah everyone does that once) then the clever realize the workflow necessary is to program the first “string” (synth) and then copy. You only have to repeat your self six times once or twice before you discover a better workflow. You don’t need to modify all the parts concurrently, you can work with one Part and then COPY.

Agreed, tweaking a sound can be daunting depending on how much you bite off... an AWM2 MONTAGE Synth sound with more than 64 Oscillators, or an FM-X Sound with 64 Operators can be a very large bite... if instant gratification is a necessary requirement, it may currently come at a price of time and effort... at this time.

Waiting for it to be ‘easy to use’ is not a bad thing, it is what most folks do! ...but if you’re not one to blaze the trail yourself, then you are doomed to having to be patient. If you’ve been around MONTAGE/MODX many folks are kicking and screaming about the paradigm where you are transmitting on multiple channels... the first step to the next-big-thing is this very thing (imho) transmitting on multiple channels simultaneously, it certainly not in layering multiple Parts on a single channel... that was the paradigm for the first 30 years of MIDI.

Best we can recommend, if it all is not worth the time/effort in your view, is to be patient... the future eventually arrives. Let others with the time and proclivity tackle the tough stuff... I’ve heard some very interesting things coming from the MONTAGE and alternate controllers... hopefully those with alternate controllers and a MONTAGE will find it worth it to explore... before the new rule book is written.

Thanks for your response. I'll interpret " be patient... the future eventually arrives" as meaning that some kind of enhancement is coming ... which may or may not be true ... but it makes it easier to be patient! 🙂

that is awesome, and what about the dysfunction of montage/modx pitch bend that prevent to get a smooth pitch bend and give us a stepped pitch bend coarse instead, never a natural, smooth glide will be possible in montage. beautiful demo but nothing new, we know the huge possibilities of montage for mpe controllers except for the pitch bend again that have been make up in this performance.

If the controller supports all 14 bits of 0xEn (n=0-F for channels 1-16) then the pitch bend will be smooth. The internal pitch bend controller is hampered by its adherence to only 7bits - but external controllers are not. If pitch bend is the mechanism used - then the controller needs to utilize all bits available and the bend will be smooth even at +/-24 range. At least much much (much) better than the results when using the internal pitch bend controller (wheel).

Roli's pitch bend range seems to chop up the 14-bits. I don't see a mode where you get the full 14bits of data like I can accomplish with a DAW or other software. I also don't have a controller to experiment with the output to see what it does. I would probably set the pitch bend range to something low on Roli's side (+/-2 is the minimum).

Keith McMillen's K-Board 4 (another MPE device) seems to transmit all 14bits of pitch bend. I would assume those with that controller would have better luck with the increments per step.

All what I know is that Linnstrument send a 14 bit data but montage respond with a stepped pitch bend to it, like it was 7 bits?

Wow, the Roli looks like something out of an alien sci-fi movie...pretty kool! 😉

Wow, the Roli looks like something out of an alien sci-fi movie...pretty kool! 😉

I have the 25. It is indeed very kool!

http://spot.pcc.edu/~mtrigobo/personal/music.html

Michael Trigobof writes;
I have the 25. It is indeed very kool!

So does it means that for your use, you don t need more than +2 pitchbend range, then you are lucky.