Bill, you seem to be describing every single combination of MIDI Controller and DAW - whether that be MPC, PC, iPad or any other sequencer capable of hosting audio plugins (synths).

I, on the other hand, would like a world in which a standalone Synth had a reasonable sequencer and an excellent sound design interface.

Yamaha's MODX/Montage miss in terms of a not having a reasonable sequencer (one able to feed and edit its own conditional arpeggios would be a good start, and note/event edit its Patterns/Songs a bare minimum) and is somewhat at odds with its own claims of being a good synth for sound design because the mechanics of creating and editing sounds is clumsy, at best.

Programming FM sounds on the MODX/Montage is not remotely enjoyable, and gets worse the better you get at utilising the prowesses and features of FM. This is just as true on the Montage, despite all the extra buttons and sliders.

The Motion Sequencer and Assignable Knob connections are utterly horrid. They've had more than enough time to think about how to improve these processes and the mechanics of connectivity creation and editing, and to provide means of insight into resultant values/ranges.

That we can't copy effects settings around, nor save them as presets, for a synth that is very much about its effects and their integration with Motion and Controllers and their dynamic influences over the rather barebones sound engines, is kind of bordering on the ridiculous.

Over the history of development going back 40ish years or so (reasonably modern Yamaha synthesizers) we see slow and steady improvements to workflow/GUI ("elegance" ). Is is our shared opinion that the threshold of elegance we, as users, would strive for has not been achieved. However, there has been an improvement and the interface is better than what was previously presented.

Given this reality of past performance, I do not see anything revolutionary in terms of the interface. It seems things will slowly improve in different areas. Of course, tradition/culture could very well be redirected to accomplish "anything" -- but I don't think it's realistic that there is going to be any drastic uprooting of some of the framework which tends to drive the user interface (since "elegance" does not seem to override the Yamaha tendency to provide little abstraction to the underlying architecture).

I have, in the past, wished and hoped for improvements to the system elegance in order to facilitate various "daily" tasks I have in programming the keyboard. Some (maybe all) of your specific asks would fold in as well to serve this elegance. What I'm getting at is we're on the same side of this.

I think the only place where we are not aligned is on the expectation. I wish for this happen as a future -- a future I hope is realized (whatever that means) soon enough for me to be alive to utilize it. I believe there is more of a demand on your side. At least where you see, in your opinion, the highest gap between elegance and what exists today.

I don't mind the difference in stances - but one does need to make sure expectations do not exceed the capacity of Yamaha to respond (or at least cognizant of these limitations). I don't, truthfully, know how to "define" Yamaha's capacity. I only have a sense based on the user experience with Yamaha synths for the past 25ish years. I do not see this (my particular sense) as fact or definitive. I do "secretly" hope they prove me wrong on this front.

[quotePost id=118725]
Programming FM sounds on the MODX/Montage is not remotely enjoyable, and gets worse the better you get at utilising the prowesses and features of FM. This is just as true on the Montage, despite all the extra buttons and sliders.[/quotePost]
I find programming FM-X better on the Montage than on the DX7II. Plus after learning a few helpful tricks (such as how to copy operators from one PART to another, etc.) & utilizing the right side buttons, it makes it much easier for me to take parts of algorithms that I want from 2 or more PARTs to create/tweak a new FM-X PART using an algorithm that fits.
I know it's not the newer modern GUI type look with the ability to click with a mouse like computer based software synths, or like some of the new functionality that the Fantom's appear to have, but for straight FM-X programming, it's quite improved over the years and I find I am able to wrap my brain around it more easily then in the past.

What I would mostly like to see improved is having additional algorithms to choose from. For many of the existing algorithms Operator 1 & 2 are just singles that are wasted, when they could be stacked and allow for more algorithm options. There have been a few occasions where I ended up creating and using 2 different FM-X PARTs layered (KBD CTRL on) whereby many of the operators on each are not used, because I couldn't find an algorithm that fit. An even bigger bonus, but likely a pipe dream would be if they allowed us to create new algorithms and change how the operators are stacked in some cases (or maybe just allow us to create custom algorithms).

I did add the first idea above of having additional algorithms to utilize Operator 1 & 2 more to Ideascale, so hopefully in a future update maybe..!?
Not holding my breath, but fingers crossed... 😉

That we can't copy effects settings around, nor save them as presets, for a synth that is very much about its effects and their integration with Motion and Controllers and their dynamic influences over the rather barebones sound engines, is kind of bordering on the ridiculous.

I also added this to Ideascale, as it would be extremely useful. Again, I'm hoping for the best as I think these ideas aren't too big that they involve an overhaul of the system to implement, but lets see what Yamaha deem as a priority...hopefully what we are asking for and discussing. But I will not complain and make do with what I have, because despite all the things that could be improved, once you know the Montage well enough, I find it to be a complete beast whereby you can make it sing & dance like any other synth, and impress anybody listening... I'm yet to hear any synth sounds (including software synths) that I can't emulate.

Over the history of development going back 40ish years or so (reasonably modern Yamaha synthesizers) we see slow and steady improvements to workflow/GUI ("elegance" ). Is is our shared opinion that the threshold of elegance we, as users, would strive for has not been achieved. However, there has been an improvement and the interface is better than what was previously presented.

I agree Jason, though the improvements have been on the slow side, they have been steady and constant over the years. I never expect anything more from what I already have, but I do find it fun to speculate and would love to be surprised & proven wrong from time to time...

What I would mostly like to see improved is having additional algorithms to choose from. For many of the existing algorithms Operator 1 & 2 are just singles that are wasted, when they could be stacked and allow for more algorithm options.

My original reference was software like FM8 that allows for arbitrary connections between operators and carriers and then much later Korg releases an FM synth that allows for custom operator/carrier connections. The reason why I asked is a little different than your goal -- I wanted to be able to better emulate the GS1's algorithms which have outputs of modulators routing to both a carrier and the input of another modulator. Ultimately, this is more flexibility than what you are asking for - but the customizable assignment of operator outputs to multiple operator or carrier inputs would allow for constructing the exact algorithms you're looking for which better utilize what are today carriers without modulator(s) stacked.

I've filed for variants too on an idea that scale down or up a pre-existing idea -- so I'm good with having multiple similar ideascale ideas.

Bill, you're taking the literal for abstracts, and the abstract for literals.

It's the user consideration within the Vital Synth's design and subsequent user operation that I'd like Yamaha to take a LONG hard look at, and consider how a touchscreen, knobs, sliders, assignable buttons, buttons, Motion Sequencers and the SuperKnob can transcend their current workflows to become enjoyable interactive interfaces to the facilities of both synth engines and effects.

The MODX/Montage UI is rife with empty slots that'd be ideally used to add ease of use and faster editing. The Shift button is nowhere near utilised enough, and there's lots of other button combos that could and should be used to extend functionality access and fluidity of editing. And there's the whole issue of the entire UI not being button operable, which it should be. There shouldn't ever be a need to touch the touch screen, for those that want to hammer at getting things done faster, and those with vision issues, and those with screens suffering from liquid infusions during a live show, etc. And so we can cover the sun bright screen during night performances in dark rooms and not sear our retinas.

Yamaha, sure as the sun shines, don't learn from IdeaScale, so maybe they'll learn from Vital and what ONE guy can do in his SECOND synth!

There's not a lot of software that I think has good UI/UX. Audio plugins often have stunning UIs with horrid UX. The appropriately named Diva synth is a prime example. You'd need to buy a new German family sedan's worth of classic synths to approach its sound capabilities, but its UI is a horror show because it's too busy harkening back to a knobby world view, in a space limited by mouse interaction, forcing the user to get busy with a MIDI controller and MIDI Learn. Which is fraught with unfun inconsistencies, at the best of times.

Vital, the synth, transcends the limitations of the mouse, especially utilising hovering very well, and greatly benefits from the ability to display things dynamically, and drag-n-drop relationships. In 30+ years of plugin creation, this is the first one that's pointedly polished the turd that is mouse interaction, making it less of a drag with far fewer traps and weaves a tail of discoverability such that usage will cause you to break out in ever cheesier grins, if you'll excuse the puns.

Let's start with an easy, literal example:

When replacing a Part, give me the option to keep one or both of the Effects in the Part being replaced - and the inverse, too: being able to replace only one or both of the effects from another Part. Now we can work around the lack of User Effects Presets and the inability to copy and paste Effects and their values.

[quotePost id=118732]Ultimately, this is more flexibility than what you are asking for - but the customizable assignment of operator outputs to multiple operator or carrier inputs would allow for constructing the exact algorithms you're looking for which better utilize what are today carriers without modulator(s) stacked.
I've filed for variants too on an idea that scale down or up a pre-existing idea -- so I'm good with having multiple similar ideascale ideas.[/quotePost]
Yeah I too don't see any harm in having multiple similar ideas. I think it only strengthens the overall request regarding enhancements for FM-X. Your idea is far better than what I am asking and would be awesome to have implemented. I would be curious to talk to a Yamaha software engineer just to ask what would be involved in implementing a customizable operator in the FM-X engine vs just adding more preset algorithms? We have fun here speculating and sometimes dreaming about what could be, but I think it would be so fascinating to hear what the actual programmers had to say. Even just listening to the basics that they talked about in 2019 during the live streamed videos of the Montage 3.0/MODX 2.0 & reface updates, I found as interesting as any of the demos on the new functionality we were about to get.

It's the user consideration within the Vital Synth's design and subsequent user operation that I'd like Yamaha to take a LONG hard look at, and consider how a touchscreen, knobs, sliders, assignable buttons, buttons, Motion Sequencers and the SuperKnob can transcend their current workflows to become enjoyable interactive interfaces to the facilities of both synth engines and effects.

I checked out the Vital Synth demos. Really kool stuff!
I don't think we will see that level of functionality on a Montage or MODX+ synth; however I do have an idea that could bring those synths a bit closer in terms of the elegance factor regarding improvements to workflow/GUI. And I don't think this would be such a major overhaul to the OS that it couldn't be done in a reasonable time with not too much effort. I actually suspect that Yamaha's engineers & Performance sound designers already have & use the technology when programming and testing the Montage/MODX+ ... What if Yamaha were to either add a tab to Montage Connect or a completely separate application interface that could be installed on a PC/MAC, which displayed the Montage touch screen interface, as well as clickable buttons / knobs / sliders that allowed us to control the Synth from a PC or MAC via mouse, keyboard, etc..!? Maybe even the Shift key on our PC's keyboards could act as the Shift button on the Montage, etc.!? Maybe a right mouse click on an FM-X operator(s) or an AWM2 element(s) could allow us to drag them from one PART to another & prompt for what ones to copy to or replace..!?

Similar to how Yamaha offloaded the sequencing to a DAW, what if they also provided us with the ability to control & modify the synth settings more simplistically via a DAW as well..?

Other feedbacks are only on modulators and they only feedback to themselves.

There's more variation. Open up a MODX data list and take a look at the algorithm chart.

Algorithm 12, 14

And ONLY algorithm 1 (unless I missed some) has a carrier with a feedback to itself.

Algorithm 55

Bill, if there's a point -- I get it. My response is an aside only to supply helpful information to fill in what was previously articulated.

Darryl posed a rhetorical question that need not be addressed by me or anyone else. I'm not the right source anyhow.

Korg and Modal have shown how PC web/DAW versions of their hardware can be done well, making good editors. Not great, but good.

But that's not a good idea for Yamaha. We've all seen how they're incompetent with this mere forum, and how unreliable and awkward it is to use SoundMondo.

Tried uploading an audio file to this forum? You can't.

Inline a link to online audio or video demonstrating a synth/sound feature? You can't.

Add a sample to a SoundMondo upload? Don't be silly, you can't.

etc etc.

Yamaha doesn't seem to have in-house coders of anything, and oddly analogue in their dealings, despite not making a new CS80 - that which everyone wants.

They can't even make any media honouring Vangelis, a man who did more for Yamaha Synths than all others have, or ever will.

More generally, I think there'll be some kind of refresh/update for the MODX+, to help it sell. It's not priced keenly against the opposition, and has a long lifespan ahead of it, meaning it needs something(s) to be reasons to buy it at what seem (to me) to be unrealistic recommended pricing.

This will almost certainly be check point marketing focused, sadly.

I think Yamaha brought this on themselves since they had years to implement suggestions from ideascale and didnt do so right away. Were they waiting to see what the competition did first?

I'm pretty happy with Superknob link being implemented this is pre Ideascale when this message board was one of the few outlets to channel ideas. Initially I received push back (from Yamaha) about the suggestion. I also don't assume I was the only source for this.

Happy about keyboard control in scenes.

I wasn't asking for it, but happy about the new effects (wave folding, filters, different rotary speaker even though not now the best with YC's latest one).

I think the FM morph's focus on static combinations (not really high resolution enough to be fluid, paths through map constrained to a single line) diminish the utility but I'm happy some attempt was made.

It's a mixed bag but not an empty one.

[quotePost id=118747]I'm pretty happy with Superknob link being implemented this is pre Ideascale when this message board was one of the few outlets to channel ideas. Initially I received push back (from Yamaha) about the suggestion. I also don't assume I was the only source for this.
[/quotePost]

It's amazing that they needed the initial shitfulness pointed out. Well done on battling their resistance, which was just bizarre. Like they don't use their own gear.

This area remains grotesquely unfinished. The construction and reveal of relationships between Assignables and the SuperKnob can be significantly better and isn't difficult to improve. As is the case with transferability, so that we can "draft" relationships on the Mod Wheel, then transfer these to the SuperKnob and/or Assignables.

[quotePost id=118747]
Happy about keyboard control in scenes.
[/quotePost]
This seems exactly like fixing an initial design oversight.

[quotePost id=118747]
I wasn't asking for it, but happy about the new effects (wave folding, filters, different rotary speaker even though not now the best with YC's latest one).
[/quotePost]
These seem exactly like responses to perceived advantages in competing brands, not inspired creations.

[quotePost id=118747]
I think the FM morph's focus on static combinations (not really high resolution enough to be fluid, paths through map constrained to a single line) diminish the utility but I'm happy some attempt was made.
[/quotePost]
I've said it before, this thing is a waste of space. A test rig for parameter locks on the FM engine side. Why were they doing that testing? I'd guess they were thinking it's possible to make a drum machine on a single FM part if they could get parameter swapping to work in realtime. They couldn't, and for some reason they thought they'd skin their randomisation test tooling for parameter changing in such a way that they could claim some kind of AI integration/creation.

There's no usage for this thing.

And there hasn't been an update since, which makes me think they considered the need to update the MODX to + so they could include enough processing to add the parameter locking FM drum machine in a single part feature in the next update, one which will delineate the MODX from the MODX+ by this very feature, as companies like Yamaha are sufficiently confident of their brand that they'll segregate products as soon as they can to strengthen the value proposition. I'd imagine this update would ideally be released before the winter holidays.

But it might take them much longer...

FM Drum Machine.
With some kind of Step Sequencer for programming your drum "Arps".

It would be a pretty cool feature, but without the kinds of Clip flows prevalent in things like Fruity Loops, Ableton Live and Bitwig Studio (and somewhat in the Roland Fantoms) there's the annoying nature of the locked relationship between Arps on Parts to get around. Of which the main way around is limited by SSS irregularities.

[quotePost id=118747]
It's a mixed bag but not an empty one.[/quotePost]

Mostly a bag of crumbs, I'd suggest, so far.

[quotePost id=118739]You mean OFFICIALLY support using your own touchscreen as demoed in this video?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=inrq7ITpVeA [/quotePost]
Not quite, but yeah I think I saw that one a while back or something similar!? That is definitely similar to what I am thinking. One difference in my idea is that it would be connected via the 'USB to Host' cable and DAW driven, as opposed to a video feed from the 'USB to Device' port.

I would be curious to talk to a Yamaha software engineer just to ask what would be involved in implementing a customizable operator in the FM-X engine vs just adding more preset algorithms?

I suspect the 'cost/benefit' ratio isn't going to be very favorable for that.
Although I think it would be relatively easy to provide the 'mechanics' to allow user operators and letting users hook them up, including feeding back to the same operator or others.
The complexity, and associated problems, would likely come from preventing infinite loops and dealing with potential limits on the number and types (carrier/modulator) of operators involved and the numbers of feedback loops.

Hearing them explain how the algorithms are integrated/programmed into the current FM-X engine, and then them explaining those complexities/problems/infinite loops/limits/etc. of just adding more more algorithms vs adding a customization operator would be the fascinating part...

[quotePost id=118744]More generally, I think there'll be some kind of refresh/update for the MODX+, to help it sell. It's not priced keenly against the opposition, and has a long lifespan ahead of it, meaning it needs something(s) to be reasons to buy it at what seem (to me) to be unrealistic recommended pricing.
[/quotePost]
I have no idea, but I suspect there could be a strategically timed pricing strategy going on. 'If' Yamaha are charging each music store close to the same amount for the MODX+ as they did for the MODX, but placed a much higher MSRP on the new one, then stores (as many appear to be doing) eventually drop the price of their MODX+ synths down close to where the original MODX was, it may give the perception to would be buyers that they are getting a 'much' better product for a steal of a deal (even though it really only just more User memory, FM-X polyphony & better wheels).

I do still think that Yamaha added a second SWP70 Tone Generator on the MODX+ & they will reveal a new AN-X virtual analog synth sometime in the new year. Prove me wrong Yamaha lol

[quotePost id=118745]I think Yamaha brought this on themselves since they had years to implement suggestions from ideascale and didnt do so right away. Were they waiting to see what the competition did first? [/quotePost]
I think it might be several factors. I think Yamaha have been listening to people's ideas on here, other forums and ideascale, and weighing which ones are most wanted vs the effort/cost of such changes. Then Covid hit and their plans were unexpected thrown a curve ball. Then Roland came out with the Fantom-0 and maybe Yamaha now sees adding a 3rd virtual modeling based engine as a way to take back some business!? I don't think they were necessarily only waiting for the competition to move first (& may have underestimated Roland's entry into the mid-tier market), although they likely do play chess with the competition to some degree. I think they have been working on things that have been part of the design since before the Montage was released (&/or maybe since the first MODX was released), such as a 3rd engine. I think it likely that anything we've seen in past or future OS updates have been in the works for years and our feedback has some hand in if/when they decide to implement those changes/features/enhancements.

[quotePost id=118747]I'm pretty happy with Superknob link being implemented this is pre Ideascale when this message board was one of the few outlets to channel ideas. Initially I received push back (from Yamaha) about the suggestion. I also don't assume I was the only source for this.[/quotePost]
Thanks for pushing the idea. Yamaha pushing back initially makes me think that it wasn't really in their roadmap, but you convinced them. Likely their Voicing team (or whatever team reviews ideas and makes recommendation internally) eventually liked the idea enough to discuss with the software engineers to see how much effort it would take and in the end it was doable.

Happy about keyboard control in scenes.

Yes, me too. I'm sure this was in their roadmap since day 1, but they didn't have it set in stone as to if/when they would implement it, but in the end they listened to people's ideas & suggestions. Myself and likely many others suggested this exact functionality, and they gave it to us. They are definitely listening.

I wasn't asking for it, but happy about the new effects (wave folding, filters, different rotary speaker even though not now the best with YC's latest one).

I totally agree Jason! I love when they surprise us with new effects, etc., especially things like the Wave Folding one whereby I don't think anyone had asked for it, but I've used it several times and it's quite awesome IMHO

It's a mixed bag but not an empty one.

Definitely! They will never please everyone, maybe not even most people most of the time. But they have given us quite a few updates with some excellent and useful features that we didn't have before, with the possibility of even more. Even the smallest change I suspect take a massive amount of time, effort, testing, fixing, re-testing, testing, testing, so it's no wonder why we don't get a whole lot of major changes too often. But to me it's like Christmas pops up out of nowhere lol. People really wanted an onboard sequencer, despite Yamaha new model of offloading this to a DAW from previous 'Workstation' synths, so they listened and gave us that too...I will never use it, but I'm glad they are listening and prioritizing new features based on our feedback to some extent. I personally love this new roadmap strategy, as I feel like I have a voice in their decision making process as to if/when they might add a feature. I think they have had a long list of things to implement in future synths & future OS updates since the early Motif days, and the more we voice our opinions on forums & ideascale about those ideas that they've already heard or thought of, they more likely we are to see them happen. I know I played some part in the KDB CTRL in Scenes & improving the Pitch Bend smoothness. I've supported enhancements to FM-X adding ideas and Up Voting others' ideas on it, including yours, as well as all ideas regarding a 3rd VA engine (even though I 'may' never use it). We'll see what the new year brings with OS update 4.0 on the Montage, and whether we see either or both of those implemented or not. Fingers crossed, not expecting anything, hoping for anything and happy with what I already have! Thanks for keeping things positive & 'keeping it the coolest' at every turn Jason... 😉

In defense of the Montage I just got done jamming on it - no DAW. Pretty fun either way 😀