Category Archives: MOX

Yamaha MODX vs. Montage

Posted on by

I’m pretty well convinced that the Yamaha MODX leak is legitimate.

BTW, I think Yamaha will pronounce the name “MO D X” to reflect a continuation of the MO heritage and to emphasize the FM-X technology by recalling the DX synth line.

Here’s a quick table comparing MODX versus Montage. There are still a few blanks in the table which need to be filled out.

Feature MODX Montage
Display 7″ WVGA color TFT 7″ WVGA color TFT
AWM2 poly 128 128
FM-X poly 64 128
SSS 4 parts 8 parts
Faders 4 8
Encoders 4 8
Buttons 4 8
Ribbon No Yes
USB audio in 4 channels (2 stereo) 6 channels (3 stereo)
USB audio out 10 channels (5 stereo) 16 channels
Sampling frequency 44.1kHz Up to 192kHz
ADC inputs 2 2
Dual insert effects 12 parts+A/D 16 parts+A/D
Waveforms 6,347 6,347
Waveform ROM 5.67GB 5.67GB
Flash ROM 1.00GB 1.75GB
User Performances 640 640
Library Performances 5,120 5,120
Scenes 8 per Perf
Arpeggios 10,239 10,000+
Simult Arp 8
MIDI IN,OUT IN,OUT,THRU
Output Unbalanced Balanced
Keyboard Synth FSX
Aftertouch No Yes
Weight 61-key 14.6 pounds 33.1 pounds

Of course, the important question is, “How much of the Montage did Yamaha leave out?”

First, let me say, you do get a lot. The MODX has full fat waveforms, arpeggios and performances (including voices in the flat Yamaha user interface world). Having heard and played the Full Monty, I will definitely be looking at the MODX to replace my MOX6, especially if the MODX6 weighs in at roughly the same weight.

There have always been differences between the top-of-the-line (TOTL) synth and its mid-range brother. The Montage has a metal chassis, balanced outputs, internal power supply (AKA “AC power”) and an FSX keybed with aftertouch. Therefore, I expected a plastic chassis, unbalanced outputs, external power supply and a synth action (61-key model) without aftertouch. Given the history of the MO product line, one could also expect fewer sliders, knobs and buttons. I’m glad to see the return of sliders, by the way. The plastic case of the MOX6 has held up rather well and usually guitars walk away worse for wear when they collide with the MOX6!

At this price point, I wouldn’t expect Pure Analog Circuit (PAC) audio either. I’m still a little surprised that the Genos offers TOSlink in place of PAC, BTW.

Thankfully, Yamaha did not skimp on the display. It’s the same 7″ wide VGA color TFT. I suspect that the Montage and MOXD share the same software code base, which was not true of the Motif XS/XF and the MOX/MOXF. The MODX has the same number of user and library performances. All of this parity is great news for the end user.

The MODX audio spec is cut down from the Montage. I expected this, too, knowing about the internal architecture of the Montage. The Montage has a dedicated SSP2 integrated circuit (IC) for audio routing and USB interface. This is like having a Steinberg UR44+ in the guts of your studio synthesizer. Thus, the MODX (probably without the SSP2) has fewer USB audio input and output channels. Although the leak doesn’t reveal the sampling rate, I doubt if the MODX will do 192kHz. [I wouldn’t mind being wrong about this doubt.]

The leaked write-up suggests that the MODX has the same effect algorithms as the Montage. The number of dual insert effects is lower in the MODX: 12 parts plus A/D input versus the Montage’s 16 parts plus A/D input.

I suspect that the number of parts per performance has been reduced from sixteen to eight. The front panel buttons provide access to eight elements (as expected with AWM2) or eight parts. Seamless Sound Switching (SSS) is supported for performances with up to 4 parts (versus 8 Montage parts). Take this speculation with a grain of salt as it’s trying to read between the lines of the write-up.

It is true, however, that the four sliders, encoder knobs and buttons are shared across eight parts or elements. Each control type has a button to select between group 1 to 4 and group 5 to 8.

  • With four sliders, don’t expect to go all “Hammond” with drawbars.
  • With four immediately accessible scenes (i.e., without making two button presses under live fire), don’t expect to jump across more than four voices on the fly.

The second concern is a serious one because Yamaha ditched a whole raft of buttons from the right hand side of the front panel (cost saving!) I currently rely on the MOX buttons to select among sixteen voices on the fly. This is important to me because I’m holding down bass and melody lines with our trio. I must make fast patch changes or something gets dropped musically.

The only place where I feel like Yamaha gratuitously tiered the Montage over the MODX is expansion flash memory. The expansion flash memory is the left over flash ROM capacity beyond the factory sound set. Trust me, Yamaha is not saving money by cutting this spec — it is a marketing decision.

There is so much yet to learn about the MODX. I’m hoping that Yamaha retained the deep performance (voice) editing from the Montage. The leaked write-up does not mention a “performance recorder,” so this is a total blank spot, too. Pricing for all models is yet known. Yamaha may sell the MODX at a premium versus the MOXF until the old MOXF stock is sold.

At this stage, I’m quite pleased. My MOX is going strong and makes it to the gig every Sunday. However, I have tasted the future with Genos™ and look forward to trying the Yamaha MODX.

Copyright © 2018 Paul J. Drongowski

Do you question?

Posted on by

The latest hot rumor. Do you question whether this is real or a hoax? An on-line retailer is running the text below with a price of 1,399 British pounds for the 76-key model. The Keyboard Magazine Forum has a picture of a 61-key model. Real or not?

I’ll post more thoughts later. I’ve gotta gig in an hour…

[Update: Please see my MODX vs. Montage comparison.]

[Previous update: Very likely real. Amazon accidentally posted a page for an 88-key model. The page is no longer active.]

AWM2 Synthesis Engine and FM-X Technology

The AWM2 acts as the heart of the synthesizer. The AWM2 (Advanced Wave Memory) synthesis engine is exclusive to Yamaha synthesizers, renowned for its versatility and sound design capabilities. The AWM2 provides processes both samples and synth sounds, providing ultra-realistic emulation of acoustic instruments, digital sounds and drums.

The FM-X (Frequency Modulation) section provides unique and expressive ways to create synth sounds. The highly-programmable technology provides the means for dynamic, electro-modern music creation. It can create everything from 80s synth sounds to cutting-edge EDM leads. The unique technology provides an 8-operator FM architecture with 64-note polyphony and a wide variety of filter types.

Semi-Weighted Keybed and Versatile Performance Controls

The MODX7 features a 76-note semi-weighted keybed, providing fluid playability. The semi-weighted keys provide added expression, emulating the feel of a traditional piano. The AWM2 engine delivers 128-note [?] polyphony and 64-notes of FM-X polyphony, opening up a new world of possibilities for creating sounds.

A wide range of performance controls are included, ideal for live sets and for use with music production. Empower your creativity with versatile controls for virtually every parameter.

The Super Knob is a highly unique control, acting as a virtual conductor for your music. It directs individual dynamic elements into a signal control. It provides simultaneous control of up to 128 parameters within a single performance. This gives you the ability to mix functions such as Volume, Pan, Effect and other parameters such as Filters, LFOs and more.

Four additional faders and encoders are included. These can be assigned to different functions and used for hands-on control of settings. Between each slider (fader) is a Scene button, It features eight Scenes which can be for different assignments such as Motion Sequence, Arpeggio Select number and even complete mixing. A range of transport controls are included, as well as a modulation and pitch wheel.

Integrated Premium-Grade Effects

A wide range of premium-grade effects are included for adding flare to your sounds. From high-definition Reverbs to Virtual Circuit Modelling effects, the powerful DSP engine delivers unparalleled audio fidelity and performance.

The effects range from standard delays and compressores to cutting-edge effects such as Beat Repeat, Vinyl Break or Bit Crusher. The specialised Spiralizer effect creating the sonic illusion of a tone rising or falling in pitch. There is even a Compression with a sidechain, allowing you to achieve the modern-day ducking effect.

Built-In USB Audio Interface

Aiding modern-day computer-based production, the MODX7 features an integrated 2-in/10-out multi-channel USB audio interface. The high-grade interface is coupled with two A/D inputs, making the MODX the perfect choice as a centrepiece in any studio or live setup. It provides single-cable connectivity, and even works with your favourite iOS device.

Envelope Follower and Motion Sequences

The Envelope Follower converts audio into a control source for virtually any synth parameter. For example you can use a drum loop to drive an effects parameter for a unique rhythm and/or vocal recording.

Motion Sequences give you the ability to create tempo-synchronised sequences which can be assigned to any parameter. This opens up new way to control rhythms and sound. It also features dedicated controls on the front-panel, allowing for real-time manipulation.

Ergonomic, Lightweight and Portable

The sleek and streamlined design is highly portable, making it ideal for live performances and studio sessions. The ergonomic layout is split into various sections allowing you to easily navigate between parameters, settings and sounds. The large LCD touch-screen provides a hands-on approach to accessing sounds and files. The Waveform-Rom of the synthesizer has been expanded from 741MB to 5.67GB. It also provides Seamless Sound Switching (SSS) for performances with up to four parts.

The compact and lightweight design makes it easy to transport. A dedicated transport case is available for the MODX, so you can transport your synth with maximum protection and comfort. The rear of the synth features a variety of connections. A foot switch/sustain output is available for incorporating expression pedals. There are also connections available for A/D input, as well as USB connectivity for USB to Device and USB to Host.

Features

  • AWM2 (Advanced Wave Memory 2) sample and synthesis engine
  • 76-note semi-weighted keybed for fluid playability
  • Unparalleled sonic versatility for creating sounds from iconic 80s sounds to modern-day EDM cutting-edge leads
  • Integrated performance controls include faders and encoders for in-depth control over parameters
  • Ideal for both studio and stage use
  • FM-X Synth Engine
  • LCD-Touchscreen 7″-Colour-Wide-VGA-TFT
  • Waveform-ROM expanded from 741 MB to 5.67 GB
  • 2,370 new Waveforms, 6,347 total in ROM
  • 1 GB Flash-ROM built-in
  • Ca. 2,000 preset performances
  • 640 user performances
  • 5,120 library performances
  • Seamless Sound Switching “SSS” for Performances with up to four Parts
  • 13 dual insert effects (12 Parts + A/D Input)
  • Over 256 preset live set slots, 2,048 User & 2,048 library live set slots
  • 10,239 arpeggios
  • Eight arpeggio Parts simultaneously
  • Eight Scenes per Performance
  • Master keyboard functions for each Performance
  • Multichannel USB Audio Interface, 2-in/10-out

Which guitar is which?

Posted on by

I hope my recent post about single coil and double coil guitar tone and amp simulators was helpful. Today, I want to further reduce theory to practice.

A quick recap

Guitar pickups are important to overall guitar tone. There are two main types of pickup: single coil and double coil. Players generally describe the sound of a single coil pickup as bright or thin and describe the sound of a double coil pickup as warm or heavy. Double coil pickups are also called “humbuckers” because the design mitigates pickup noise and hum. Pickup tone tends to favor certain styles of music:

  • Single coil: Blues, funk, soul, pop, surf, light rock and country styles
  • Double coil (Humbucker): Hard rock, metal, punk, blues and jazz styles

Of course, there are no hard and fast rules and exceptions abound!

Fender guitars frequently use single coil pickups while Gibson favors double coil. Three guitar models are favorites and are in wide use:

  • Fender Telecaster (Usually 2 single coil pick-ups): Bright, banjo-like tone, twangy.
  • Fender Stratocaster (3 single coil pick-ups): Bright, cutting tone.
  • Gibson Les Paul (2 humbucker, dual coil pick-ups) Warm tone with sustain.

The Telecaster was originally developed in 1951 for country swing music. It was quickly adopted by early rock and rollers. The Stratocaster appeared in 1954, but is usually associated with 60s rock. It is often used in rock, blues, soul, surf and country music. The darker tone and sustain of the Les Paul make it suitable for hard rock, metal, blues and jazz styles.

These aren’t the only (in)famous guitars around. The Rickenbacker solid and semi-acoustic models are also classic. Think about the chime-y Beatles and Byrds radio hits from the 1960s. Single coil Ricks are not uncommon.

If you would like to hear the difference in raw tone between Fender Telecaster (single coil), Fender Stratocaster (single coil) and Gibson Les Paul (double coil humbucker), cruise over to this comparison video. The demonstrator compares raw tone starting at roughly 7 minutes into the video, ending at about 11 minutes. The first part of the video is the usual yacking and the last part of the video puts the guitars through an overdrive effect with the demonstrator playing over a backing track. The last part is less informative because our ears need to sort out the guitar from the backing track. Plus, once you put a guitar into a distortion effect, all bets are off. Are you hearing the true guitar tone or just an effected, synthesized tone?

Method to the madness

My ultimate goal is to identify and classify synth and arranger guitar voices, single coil vs. double coil, in order to quickly chose an appropriate guitar voice (patch) for MIDI sequencing. I work with Yamaha gear (Genos workstation, PSR-S950 arranger, and MOX6 synthesizer), so the following discussion will focus on Yamaha. However, you should be able to apply the same method (and guesswork about names!) to Korg, Nord, whoever.

Yamaha provides some major clues as to the origin of its guitar samples, but they are quite reticent to use brand names. Arranger (Genos and S950) voice names are especially opaque. Therefore, the best we can do is to use the clues when possible and to always, always use our ears.

Fortunately, the deep voice editing of the MOX6 lets me dive into the guts of a guitar patch to find the base waveform information including waveform name. In order to get the analysis started, I went into the Mega Voice patches to find the underlying waveforms. When Yamaha sample a guitar, they sample multiple articulations (open string, slap, slide, hammer on, etc.). The waveforms for a particular instrument are a family and share the same root name like “60s Clean.” Given the base waveforms, I then can identify regular synth voices which use the same waveforms. The regular voices are more easily played on the keyboard than Mega Voices, making it easier to perform A/B testing.

Mega Voices are a good entry point for analysis because the MOX, Motif and Montage family have roughly equivalent Mega Voices as the S950, Tyros and Genos product family. This allows A/B testing across and within product lines.

Development history is important, too. I took note of new Mega Voices added to each product generation. Each new Mega Voice is a new waveform family. Given a Mega Voice, I look for new Super Articulation (SArt) voices which were also added at the same time and try to find the SArt voices which are based on the Mega Voice. The chosen SArt voices become reference sounds for further A/B testing and starting points for voice selection when sequencing a song.

When A/B testing, all EQ, filter and DSP effects (including reverb and chorus) must be turned OFF. We need to reveal the sound of the underlying raw waveforms (samples). Even so, there may still be sonic differences due to VCF and VCA programming. I found that this kind of critical listening is quite tiring and it’s better to work for 30 minutes, walk away and come back later with fresh ears. Otherwise, everything starts to sound the same!

Breakdown

Enough faffing around, get to the bottom line.

First up is a correspondence table between Montage (Motif, MOX) Mega Voice guiters and Genos (Tyros, PSR S-series) Mega Voice guitars.

       Genos name            Motif/MOX name        Motif/MOX waveform
---------------------------  --------------------  ------------------
8 10 4 60sVintage                                  n/a [Strat]
8 11 4 60sVintageSlap                              n/a [Strat]
8  4 4 50sVintageFinger                            TC Cln Fing *
8  5 4 50sVintageFingerSlap                        TC Cln Fing Slap
8  6 4 50sVintagePick                              TC Cln Pick *
8  7 4 50sVintageSlap                              TC Cln Pick Slap
8  8 4 SlapAmpGuitar       
8  3 4 SingleCoilGuitar      Mega 1coil Old R&R    1Coil *
8  1 4 SolidGuitar1          Mega 60s *            60s Clean *
8  2 4 SolidGuitar2          Mega 60s *            60s Clean *
8  0 4 CleanGuitar           Mega 1coil *          Clean *
8  0 7 JazzGuitar            Mega Jazz Guitar      Jazz *
8  0 5 OverdriveGuitar       Mega Ovdr Fuzz        Overdrive *
8  0 6 DistortionGuitar      Mega Ovdr Distortion  Distortion *

A star (“*”) in the table is a placeholder for all of the voices and variants within a family. Motif/MOX have many variants of “Mega 60s” and “Mega 1coil” voices. They all use the “60s Clean” and “Clean” waveforms in different ways, including different stomp box and amplifier effects. A star in the waveform column denotes a waveform family, i.e., collectively a group of waveforms for all of the articulations sampled from the same instrument.

A few observations. Montage did not add any new guitar Mega Voices. Montage does not have a Stratocaster waveform. [A future upgrade for Montage?] Finally, I couldn’t quite work out where “SlapAmpGuitar” fit into the voice universe.

“Slap,” by the way, is a playing technique borrowed from bass players. The thumb hits a string instead of a pick or finger. Usually the lowest string is slapped because it is the most easily hit by the thumb. The slap may be combined with palm or finger muting to prevent other notes/strings from sounding with the slap.

Beyond Mega Voice

Folks know by now that Mega Voices are for styles and arpeggios. Yamaha never intended them to be played using the keyboard. It’s darn near impossible to play with the kind of precision required to trigger the appropriate articulation (waveform) when needed. They’re good for sequencing (styles, arpeggios) because a sequence can be edited in a DAW with precise control over note velocities.

None the less, musicians wanted to be able to play these great sounding voices and Yamaha responded with Expanded Articulation (Motif XS and later) and Super Articulation (Tyros 2 and later). I won’t dive into Expanded Articulation here. Super Articulation, however, effectively puts a software script in front of a Mega Voice. The script translates each player gesture to one of the several articulation waveforms which comprise a Mega Voice.

This description is notional. I doubt if the software uses an actual Mega Voice as the target. Some gestures like legato technique are handled in the AWM2 engine à la Expanded Articulation.

If you followed my suggestion to audition the Mega Voices without EQ, effects, etc., then you surely know how difficult it is to play a Mega Voice from the keyboard. Should you try this, I recommend setting the touch curve to HARD in order to hit those ultra low key velocities. Or, set RIGHT1, RIGHT2 and RIGHT3 to a fixed velocity. By changing the velocity level, you’ll be able to play a specific waveform within a Mega Voice precisely and reliably. Please refer to the Mega Voice maps in the Data List file to see the correspondence between velocity levels and waveforms.

To audition without Mega Voice and to select Genos (Tyros, S950) voices for sequencing, it’s far easier and fun to play a Super Articulation (SArt) voice. Problem is, with Yamaha’s opaque voice naming, it’s difficult to know the exact waveform family you’re triggering. So, I built a table of SArt reference voices by matching SA voices with their Mega Voice equivalent. 

Genos Mega Voice      SArt reference   Waveform
--------------------  ---------------  ------------------------
60sVintage            60sVintageClean  [Strat]
60sVintageSlap        TBD              [Strat]
50sVintageFinger      CleanFingers     TC Cln Fing *
50sVintageFingerSlap  FingerSlapSlide  TC Cln Fing Slap
50sVintagePick        VintageWarm      TC Cln Pick *
50sVintageSlap        TBD              TC Cln Pick Slap
SlapAmpGuitar         TBD              TC Cln Fing Slap Amp/Lin
SingleCoilGuitar      SingleCoilClean  1Coil *
SolidGuitar1          WarmSolid        60s Clean *
SolidGuitar2          WarmSoild        60s Clean *
CleanGuitar           CleanSolid       Clean *
JazzGuitar            JazzClean        Jazz *
OverdriveGuitar       TBD              Overdrive *
DistortionGuitar      HeavyRockGuitar  Distortion *

Single coil vs. double coil? That’s easy. The only double coil guitars are SolidGuitar1, SolidGuitar2, and any SArt voice built on the 60s Clean waveform. All other guitars are single coil.

Hmmm. I’ll bet that a double coil Gibson Les Paul and/or Gibson SG are in the works. Yamaha will eventually fill the gap!

A few entries in the table are TBD, “to be determined.” Definitively identifying slap guitar has eluded me so far. I can hear a difference between non-slap and slap, but finger slap vs. picked slap, my ears aren’t there yet.

All in all, it was a useful exercise to strip away the effects and EQ. It reminds me of the scene in the documentary “It Might Get Loud” in which The Edge demonstrates his effects pedal board. First, the plain tone of the guitar, then the huge sound with all of the effects piled on. Thanks to the tech built into our keyboards, we can be a little bit like The Edge.

Copyright © 2018 Paul J. Drongowski

Single coil, double coil

Posted on by

Today’s exploration is practical even if it is excessively wonk-ish.

Last week, I decided to update MIDI sequences for a few classic tunes by The Alan Parsons Project. Parsons and Eric Woolfson laid down 70s progressive rock tracks with serious groove: “I Wouldn’t Want To Be Like You,” “What Goes Up”, and “Breakdown”. Classic in their own right are the guitar solos by Ian Bairnson. Bairnson contributed electric guitar (and the occasional saxophone!) to the Parsons/Woolfson wonder duo.

I’m striving for authenticity, so one of the first questions to ask is “What guitars and amplifiers did Bairnson use for the I Robot and Pyramid albums?” Fortunately, Ian has a page dedicated to his gear. Very likely, he played a Les Paul Custom through a Marshall 50 head driving a 4×12 Marshall angle-front cabinet. Thanks for posting this information, Ian!

The next hurdle is searching through the many tens (or hundreds) of synth guitar patches, amp simulators and speaker cabinet sims to find the most authentic audio waveforms and signal processing effects. Bang, we run into a practical and wonk-ish problem: Which of these many digital choices are likely candidates and which choices can we ignore? Unfortunately, manufacturers (at the very least, their attorneys) make the search difficult by avoiding any use of brand names (e.g., Gibson, Fender, Les Paul, etc.) in patch and effect names. Sometimes the patch/effect names are suggestive euphemisms, most times not.

For these kinds of sequencing jobs, I’m arranging on Yamaha gear, either PSR-S950 or Genos. Although I love their sound, it’s seems that Yamaha have deliberately gone out of their way to divorce patch/effect names from their real-world, branded counterparts. The number of candidates is small in organ-land, i.e., “Organ flutes,” as Yamaha calls them, mean Hammond B-3. The number of candidates in guitar-land is much, much larger and harder to discern.

Here’s some info that might help you out. Kind of decoder for guitar instrument and amp/cabinet sim names. Even though I looked to authoritative sources, there’s still guesswork involved. So, apologies up front if I’ve led anyone astray.

Single vs. double coil

This is a biggy. Guitarists are ever in pursuit of “tone.” Of course, a big part of tone is the electric guitar at the front-end of the signal chain. In this analysis, I’m concentrating mainly on solid body guitars and I’m ignoring acoustic, hollow-body and semi-hollow instruments.

Some might argue that player style, articulations and dynamics are the true front-end. If you want to argue that point, please go to a guitar forum. 🙂

For solid body, the choice of pick-up is important. If you’re not familiar with electric guitars, the pick-up is the set of wire coils beneath the guitar strings that sense vibrating strings and convert mechanical vibration to electrical vibration. The electrical signal is sent to a volume/tone circuit and then on to a guitar amplifier. A guitar may have more than one pick-up, say, one pick-up by the neck, one under the bridge and one in the middle between the two. The pick-ups may be switched into alternative combinations. Along with the volume/tone controls, the tonal possibilities are nearly endless.

Seems kind of pathetic to rely on only one or a few guitar waveforms (samples), doesn’t it?

There are two main kinds of pick-up: single coil and double coil (humbucker). The humbucker was invented and patented by Gibson as a means of mitigating the noise (hum) present produced by a single coil pickup. The sound of a single coil pick-up is often described with terms like “bright,” “crisp,” “bite,” “attack.” Double coil pick-ups are described as “thick,” “round,” “warm,” “dark,” “heavy.”

Due to parentage, Gibson guitars usually have double coil pick-ups. Fender guitars usually have single coil pick-ups. Naturally, the quest for tone has led to hybrids using both kinds of pick-up, regardless of manufacturer.

Reducing these observations to practice, when Ian Bairnston says he used a Gibson Les Paul Custom for his work with The Alan Parsons Project, we should be looking for samples (waveforms) of a double coil electric guitar, of which the Les Paul is an excellent example. Even if you couldn’t give two wits about synth patch names, use your ears an listen for a thick, round, warm, dark, heavy tone.

Detective work

OK, I’m a wonk and did a little detective work.

Yamaha arranger patch names are obtuse about single vs. double, etc. Worse, the voices are pre-programmed with DSP effects which mask the characteristics of the fundamental waveform. So, step zero is to be aware of the masking and turn off all EQ, DSP, chorus and reverb effects when listening and making comparisons.

Doubly worse is the lack of deep voice editing where we can deep dive a voice and discover the basic waveforms underlying a voice patch, including the waveform names. This is where my trusty Yamaha MOX6 synthesizer comes into play. I use the MOX6 to deep dive its patches and then compare patch elements against candidate voices on the PSR-S950 arranger. This always leads to interesting discoveries.

Although I refer to the MOX specifically, please remember that the MOX is a member of the Motif/MOX family. Comments can be extrapolated to the Motif XS on which the MOX is based, and the Motif XF/MOXF which are a superset of the Motif XS/MOX.

A large number of MOX programs have “Dual Coil” in their name. These programs are based on the “60s Clean” waveforms. Think of “60s Clean” as a family of waveforms with multiple articulations: open strings, slide, slap, FX, etc.

Other MOX programs are “Single Coil”. These programs are based on the “Clean” family of waveforms. If you listen and compare “60s Clean” versus “Clean,” you can hear the difference between single coil and double coil. The voice programming switches between the waveforms depending on key velocity, articulation buttons, and so forth.

The “60s Clean” and “Clean” waveform families make up the “Mega 60s Clean” and “Mega 1coil Clean” MOX megavoices, respectively. Please recall that a MegaVoice uses velocity switching, articulation switches (AF1 and AF2) and note ranges to configure a versatile voice suitable for arpeggio and style sequencing. Given the underlying waveforms, we can conclude that Mega 60s Clean is dual coil and Mega 1coil Clean is single coil.

Mid- and upper-range Yamaha arranger workstations also have MegaVoices, albeit they may have small differences in patch programming. The fundamental waveforms, however, are the same. Yamaha, like all manufacturers, recycle waveforms (samples). It’s not that older waveforms are bad; they provide backward compatibility and legacy support. Ever increasing waveform memory capacity makes it easy and inexpensive to include legacy waveforms and voices.

Given that conceptual basis, I did a little A/B testing between the MOX synth and the S950 arranger. Here is a summary of the correspondence between guitar voices:

    PSR-S950 Voice     MOX6 Voice
    -----------------  ---------------------
    MV CleanGuitar     Mega 1coil Clean

    MV SolidGuitar1    Mega 60s Clean
    MV SolidGuitar2    Mega 60s Clean

    MV SingleCoil      n/a
    MV JazzGuitar      n/a

    MV OverdriveGtr    Mega Ovdr Fuzz
    MV DistortionGtr   Mega Ovdr Distortion

    MV SteelGuitar     Mega Steel
    MV NylonGuitar     Mega Nylon

This is what my ears tell me when all of the EQ, DSP, chorus and reverb effects OFF.

MV SolidGuitar1 and MV SolidGuitar2 are based on the same waveform. The patch programming is different: different EQ, VCF and VCA parameter values. The default DSP effects are different, too.

Naturally, you’re curious about the missing S950 MV SingleCoil and MV JazzGuitar voices in the MOX6 column of the table. The MOX does not have equivalent voices. However, the Motif XF eventually added “Mega 1coil Old R&R” and “Mega Jazz Guitar”, both patches based on new single coil and jazz guitar waveform families. Indeed, the MV SingleCoil is great for that old rock’n’roll twang.

Hey, S950 owners! I’ll bet that you didn’t know that you have a piece of the Motif XF under your fingertips.

[I’m still categorizing SArt voices as single or double coil. Watch this space.]

Amplify this!

That’s it for the front-end of the signal chain. What about amp simulation?

The riddle of amp sim names is difficult to solve. Fortunately, guitarists are positively obsessive about vintage amps and the Web has many informative sites. (Too many, perhaps?) Armed with a few clues from the Yamaha Synth site, I forged out onto the Web and arrived at these educated guesses about amp simulators:

    DSP effect/sim      Real-world
    ------------------  ---------------------------------
    US Combo            Fender (Bassman?)
    Jazz Combo          Roland Jazz Chorus
    US High Gain        Boutique (Mesa Boogie Rectifier?)
    British Lead        Marshall Plexi
    British Combo       Vox (AC30)
    British Legend      Marshall (Bluesbreaker? JCM800?)
    Tweed Guy           Fender 55 Tweed Deluxe
    Boutique DC         Matchless DC30 (Boutique AC30)
    Y-Amp               Yamaha V-Amp
    DISTOMP             Yamaha stomp pedal FX
    80s Small Box       No specific make/model
    Small Stereo Dist   No specific make/model
    MultiFX             No specific make/model

The list compares quite favorably with Guitar World’s 10 most iconic guitar amplifiers:

    Vox AC30 Top Boost (1x12, 2x12)                 1958
    Fender Deluxe (1950s tweed)                     1955-1960
    Mesa/Boogie Dual Rectifier                      1989
    Marshall JCM800                                 1981
    Marshall 1959 Super Lead 100 Watt Plexi (4x12)  1965
    Roland JC-120 Jazz Chorus (2x12)                1975
    Peavey 5150 (2004: 6505)                        1992
    Fender Twin Reverb                              1965-1967
    Fender Bassman (4x10)                           1957-1960
    Hiwatt DR103 (4x12)                             1972

Several of the amp sims include cabinet simulation, too. Here are my guesses:

    DSP Sim  Real-world
    -------  --------------------------------
    BS 4x12  British stack (Marshall)
    AC 2x12  American combo (Fender?)
    AC 1x12  American combo (Fender?)
    AC 4x10  American combo (Fender?)
    BC 2x12  British combo (Vox?)
    AM 4x12  American modern (Mesa Boogie?)
    YC 4x12  Yamaha
    JC 2x12  Roland Jazz Chorus
    OC 2x12  Orange combo
    OC 1x8   Orange combo

The abbreviations “BS” and “AC” are potentially confusing. “AC” suggests the (in)famous AC series of Vox amps. “BS” suggests “Bassman”. However, I don’t recall a Vox AC 4×10, while the Fender 4×10 is iconic. A Yamaha site spelled out “BS” as “British Stack,” so I’m sticking with “A” for American and “B” for “British”.

Back to Bairnson, I’m trying the British Legend amp sim with a BS 4×12 cabinet first, then tweak.

I hope you enjoyed this somewhat wonk-ish walk through synthesizer and simulated guitar-ville. In the end, it’s tone that matters and let the ears decide.

Copyright © 2018 Paul J. Drongowski

NAMM 2018: Half Monty, Full Monty

Posted on by

Winter NAMM 2018 is January 25 to 28 in Anaheim, California. Get your ear protectors ready!

Even though I’ve been concentrating on the Yamaha Genos™, two Yamaha promotions have not escaped my attention.

Back in October, Yamaha began offering a MOXF promotion: Buy a MOXF and get an FL512M flash memory expansion board and the MOXF Premium Content Pack. Not bad. The MOX6 is my gig workhorse and I still enjoy playing it even though I have often pined for flash expansion memory. If you like the Motif XF sound or miss built-in sequencing, then now is a good time to find a good deal on the MOXF and buy one.

This is one of those rare times when a promotion is a harbinger of a future product release. The MOXF uses the previous generation AWM2 tone generation chip, SWP51L. The SWP51L has been superceded by the SWP70 family now deployed in the Montage, PSR-S770/S970 and Genos. The MOXF is the only current product in the synth and arranger product lines based on the SWP51L. Once Yamaha uses up its internal supply of SWP51Ls, that’s it.

So, the MOXF is due to be refreshed (like the MX line) or updated. If you’re OK with the MOXF as it is — and it is a fine machine — then make your move now or wait a little longer for close-out.

Be sure to take advantage of the free flash offer or get you dealer to kick in an expansion board. Yamaha have moved to built-in flash expansion memory and this is definitely the end of the line for the Yamaha flash expansion boards. The boards do not “speak” with the new tone generator and you won’t need them for future Yamaha products.

What would the MOXF replacement look and sound like? Would the MOXF be a “half-Monty?” Tough question.

I’ve spent a lot of time researching both the Montage and Genos as my next instrument for the long-term. Due to the widespread availability of Montage, I’ve had more seat time with Montage (several hours over several days) than the Genos (a two hour go at Audioworks CT). I play an MOX6 and/or PSR-S950 on a daily basis.

Given this experience, Yamaha’s top-of-the-line (TOTL) instruments are more than an incremental cut above middle-of-the-line instruments. In terms of control (knobs, sliders and such) and sound, the TOTL is way above the mid-range.

Hope springs eternal. People are hoping that the next mid-range arranger workstation will be a “mini-Genos.” Similarly, synth people may be hoping for a “half-Monty.”

I think these people will be disappointed. Montage and Genos command a premium price and they both need the feature set and sound to justify the TOTL value proposition. I think the big gap between TOTL and mid-range will persist. In the case of the MOXF replacement, Yamaha aren’t under much pressure to make and sell a half-Monty (e.g., a synth with the Montage’s AWM2 sound set, no FM). The recently refreshed MX, at the low end, has the Motif XS sound set, now ten years old. The MOXF has the very respectable seven year old Motif XF sound set and the sequencing capability that so many people miss in Montage. Thus, Yamaha could give the MOXF a minor spiff and still have a very marketable product in the mid-range.

The same reasoning applies to the next mid-range arranger workstations.

Hey, so I mentioned two promotions. The second promotion is “Buy a Montage and get a pair of HS5 studio monitors for free.” Until the Yamaha promotion came along, Sweetwater was giving away a free Yamaha Reface CS with the purchase of a Montage. The Montage (AKA “the full Monty”) is just turning two years old. I’m a little surprised that the Montage needs a promotion at this point to spur sales.

Might we expect a Montage 2.0 at NAMM? Yamaha have issued a series of successful, substantive updates for the Montage and a major software update might give the full Monty a bit of a shove and a boost.

Copyright © 2017 Paul J. Drongowski

First glimpse: Yamaha MX88BK

Posted on by

Thanks to Michael at the PSR Tutorial forum, we have the first glimpse of the newest member of Yamaha’s MX synthesizer family — the MX88 in black (MX88BK). The MX88BK is an 88-key version of the popular MX49 and MX61 keyboards. The MX88BK has a GHS graded hammer action. It has the same 128 voice polyphony as its brother and sister, and has the same software update for class-compliant USB audio/MIDI.

The MX88BK is 6.6 x 52 x 16 inches and weighs 30.6 pounds. The MX88BK will have a street price around $1,000 USD.

The MX88BK is the replacement for the MM8. The Yamaha USA site still shows the MM8 as a current product and it’s still possible to order the MM8 from on-line retailers. The MM8 has a GHS keyboard and has a street price around $900 USD. Yamaha is offering a $200 rebate on the MM8. The offer is valid from April 1, 2017 through June 30, 2017.

The MM8’s price hits the sweet spot of a GHS piano/synthesizer keyboard around $1,000 (new). The MX88BK will hit the same spot. This is Yamaha’s strategy of offering products across a spectrum of prices and buyers — something for everybody.

The long view

Posted on by

Here’s some information attributed to Martin Harris from Yamaha. Martin is one of the key sound developers at Yamaha:

  • Better Pianos
  • New Strings – 70 piece Seattle Symphony Orchestra Mega
  • New Orchestral Brass – highly dynamic
  • New Tuned Percussion – Glock, Xylo, Marimba and Vibes (with motor on)
  • New Mega guitars – Telecaster with Finger and Plectrum
  • SA2 Celtic Violin
  • New Synth Voices
  • New Classical Choir – Cathedral ambience
  • New Gospel Choir – Various articulations and Ad libs
  • New Pop Vocals – 4 session singers, 2 male and 2 female
  • Singing many dynamics and many articulations (wave cycling)

Montage? No, Tyros 4. The “SA2” should be a clue as the Montage does not provide Super Articulation 2 (SA2) voices.

My purpose here is not to be tricky, but to make the case that sample-based workstations or synthesizers draw from the sound pool that is available at development time, much the same way that hardware designers draw on the pool of available components. Products cannot be composed of imaginary circuits (“sand”), software, and sounds, after all.

To better illustrate this point, here is a rough timeline for the Tyros and Motif product lines with a few mid-range products (S9xx and MOX) thrown in:

             Tyros                        Motif/Montage
----   ------------------  ------------------------------------------
Year   Model     Physical  Model     Physical  Uncompressed waveforms
----   ------------------  ------------------------------------------
2001                       Motif      48MB     84MB 1,309 waveforms
2002   Tyros      96MB
2003                       Motif ES   96MB     175MB 1,859 waveforms
2004
2005   Tyros 2   192MB
2006
2007                       Motif XS  128MB     355MB 2,670 waveforms
2008   Tyros 3   256MB
2009
2010   Tyros 4   512MB     Motif XF  256MB     741MB 3,977 waveforms
2011                       MOX       128MB     355MB 2,670 waveforms
2012   PSR-S950  256MB
2013   Tyros 5   768MB     MOXF      256MB     741MB 3,977 waveforms
2014
2015   PSR-S970    2GB
2016                       Montage     4GB     5.67GB 6,347 waveforms

I included physical wave memory size for each product. I also included the uncompressed total sample size and number of waveforms for each member of the Motif/Montage line.

Clearly, Yamaha know how to ride the memory technology curve. Memory technology has progressed to the point where it is no longer a significant hardware design factor. Rather, the amount of wave memory in a product depends more upon the ability of the sound designers to fill it with quality content and mid- versus premium-product grading (i.e., the target market segment and price point for the model). For example, note that the mid-range S970 has more than twice the physical wave memory than the Tyros 5. Although the “expansion memory” is reserved in the S970’s physical wave memory, the S970 waveform content is substantially smaller than the Tyros 5.

The other characteristic to note is how the Tyros and Motif lines tend to leapfrog each other. Generally, the Tyros line leads the Motif line in physical wave memory and content. This is partly due to the higher memory requirements of SA2 voices, which require many additional articulation samples.

Both the Tyros 4 and Motif XF were released in 2010. Both machines use two SWP51L tone generators. (Newer products like the Montage use the SWP70 tone generator.) The Tyros 4 has twice the physical wave memory capacity with respect to the Motif XF. Yet, the Tyros 4 has sample content which did not make it to a deliverable product in the Motif line until the Montage in 2016: Seattle strings, orchestral brass, Celtic violin, vocals (choir and scat), Telecaster guitar and suitcase electric piano.

Tyros 5 expanded this content in 2013. The Motif XF, on the other hand, received a significant update in January 2014. The V.150 update added the “Real Distortion” effects implemented by the Tyros 5. (A few Real Distortion effects actually premiered in the mid-range S950.) The V1.50 update and the “White Motif” color job were life-extenders for the Motif line. I’ve conjectured before that Montage development was late and this is further evidence.

So, what can we expect in the Tyros successor which I’m calling the “Tyros++”. (Yamaha have trademarked the name “GENOS” which may be the name of the follow-on. Only Yamaha really knows.) Personally, I’m hoping for the new orchestral woodwinds from Montage. These are superbly expressive voices. I’m also expecting improved electric pianos, again, of comparable quality to the Montage.

SA2 voices will probably remain exclusive to the Tyros line. Many folks hoped that Montage would have SA2 and it didn’t. SA2 is an important product differentiator — kind of like the premium “Natural” piano voices are to the Clavinova line. I suspect that FM voices will be a differentiator for the premium Montage line in years to come as well. Yamaha tends to think of these three product lines as distinct, so cross-over is carefully controlled and limited.

All of this talk about samples and wave memory size is overly reductionist. The three main (DMI) product lines — Tyros, Motif/Montage, Clavinova — have distinct personalities and features. Motif/Montage is a synthesizer for stage and production studio. Clavinova is primarily a home or church piano. Tyros serves double duty as a home keyboard and as a workstation for performing professionals. (Oddly, many USA customers scoff at this latter role.)

Although these are all fine instruments, the personalities have quirks. Upper-range Clavinovas are Tyros-in-disguise except for multi-pads, third RIGHT voice (i.e., only two voice layers in the right hand), and no expansion memory. Tyros does not have the deep editing or modulation features of the Motif/Montage. The Motif and Montage — strangely! — do not have a tonewheeel organ mode. This latter omission is hard to understand since the Montage competes against other “stage” products like the Korg Kronos and Nord Stage.

Having compared voice programming between PSR-S950 (Tyros 3 without SA2 voices) and MOX (Motif XS sound set), the product lines are voiced (programmed) differently. Motif/Montage effect programming has a harder edge than the Tyros, which is oriented toward oldies, pop and jazz standards. (Yes, Virginia, the Tyros does have latent EDM potential to be tapped.) If the Tyros++ includes the orchestral woodwinds, for example, they will probably be programmed rather differently than Montage. Tyros++ four-part divisi ensembles with the new orchestral woodwinds would be simply brilliant. Can’t wait to see and hear what happens!

One finally editorial comment. The world is filled with product reviews. Publications like Keyboard magazine, Electronic Musician, etc. focus on individual products and rarely present a deep, long-term perspective on products. Sound On Sound reviews occasionally give historical background — usually for esoteric, retro studio pieces. As consumers, we need the long view in order to make the most informed choice.

Motif styles for your arranger!

Posted on by

I’m pleased to announce my collection of Motif performance styles for the Yamaha PSR-S950 arranger and its close cousins: Tyros 5, PSR-S770 and PSR-S970.

Motif and MOX are great song-writing machines with thousands of built-in musical phrases. In Motif-speak, these phrases are called “arpeggios.” Motif/MOX also have built-in “Performances” which combine these musical phrases into jam-along song starters. Although Motif-series workstations are not arranger keyboards, the Performances are fun for live jams, covering many modern genres (contemporary jazz, funk and R&B) which are underserved by arranger workstations.

To fill this gap, I translated 23 Motif performances to PSR/Tyros styles. In keeping with the original source material, these styles are stripped down and lean. No orchestration to get in the way! Some styles use only bass and drum. INTROs and ENDINGs are short and basic. Depending upon the source performance, a translated style may have only three MAIN sections. However, all styles bring the groove.

Many of the styles use Megavoice bass and guitar. Plus, I’ve added appropriate OTS voices. Of course, you’re welcome to ditch the OTS voices and replace them with your own.

Here is the link to the ZIP file: perf_for_s950.zip. The file unzips into a directory named “PERF_for_S950”. The ZIP file includes a short READ ME file with more information.

If you would like to know how I translate a Motif/MOX performance to a PSR/Tyros style, please read the following articles:

Tenor to the max!

Posted on by

A few posts ago, I deconstructed the Yamaha MOX (Motif XS) tenor saxophone patches. The article summarizes the waveform assignment and Expanded Articulation (XA) control for each element within a preset voice. I’m not going to dive into the basics here, so I recommend reviewing the article for background information on XA and its behavior.

The blog entry covered the MOX (Motif XS) tenor sax presets, but not the newer Motif XF (MOXF) presets. The XF series workstations have two additional waveforms:

  1. Tenor Sax2 Growl
  2. Tenor Sax2 Falls

bringing the XF up to the level of Tyros/PSR Super Articulation tenor sax voices. This article deconstructs the “Tenor MAX” preset which makes use of these additional waveforms. The analysis is relevant even in the Montage era because the Montage tenor sax is based upon the XF waveforms (no update in the new model).

Pushing the main topic aside for a moment, Super Articulation 2 (SArt2) voices are a whole different technology and even to this day, the Motif and Montage do not implement SArt2 voices. SArt2 seems to be a premium feature that is reserved for Tyros. SArt2 requires realtime analysis of playing gestures and computation which is beyond basic AWM2 synthesis.

The table below gives the waveform, key range, and velocity range for each element in the “Tenor MAX” patch.

    Elem#  Waveform            XA        Notes   Velocity
    -----  ------------------  --------  ------  --------
      1    Tenor Sax2 Soft     AllAFOff  C-2 G8    1   79
      2    Tenor Sax2 Med      AllAFOff  C-2 G8   80  110
      3    Tenor Sax2 Growl    AllAFOff  C-2 G8  126  127
      4    Tenor Sax2 Hard     AllAFOff  C-2 G8  111  125
      5    Tenor Sax2 Hard     AF2 On    C-2 G8    1  127
      6    Tenor Sax2 Falls    AF1 On    C-2 G8    1  127

When the AF1 and AF2 buttons are OFF, one of the first four waveforms are triggered based upon the key velocity. The four elements cover the dynamic range from soft, through medium, through hard, all the way up to growl. The AF1 and AF2 buttons select particular waveforms depending upon the player’s intention. When AF2 is ON, all key velocities trigger the hard waveform. When AF1 is ON, all key velocities trigger sax falls.

So, bottom line, the “Tenor MAX” programming is just about what I expected.

I hope the analysis of tenor sax programming has helped you to understand XA and Motif/MOX voice programming. If you’re a Tyros/PSR player, then I hope that this analysis has helped you to understand a little bit of the technology beneath the Super Articulation voices.

Montage review: Yes, I’ve played one!

Posted on by

The Yamaha Montage synthesizer is now hitting stores in North America. One of the local retailers (GC in Natick) have a Montage set up for demo. Let’s go!

The demo unit is a Montage8 with the 88-key balanced hammer effect keyboard. I have always liked Yamaha’s upper-end “piano” actions and the Montage8 is no exception. I primarily play lighter “synth” action keyboards like the MOX and the PSR-S950. Fortunately, I spent the previous week working out on the Nord Elecro 2 waterfall keyboard, which requires a slightly heavier touch. I played the Montage8 for a little bit more than an hour without my hands wilting — a good sign.

First off, the demo unit was plugged into two Yamaha HS7 monitors and a Yamaha HS8S subwoofer. GC usually patches keyboards through grotty keyboard amplifiers, so I suspect that Yamaha provided the monitors in order to create the best impression of the Montage. I was dismayed when I started off with a few B-3 organ patches and could not contain the low end. The front panel EQ simply didn’t do the job. Time to check the monitor settings. The HS7s were flat, but the HS8S subwoofer level was cranked. After backing off the sub, all was right with the world.

Yes, some people like to simulate small earthquakes with subsonic frequencies. This, however, is not conducive for acoustic music. It’s not conducive for peaceful co-existence with your bass player either. If you encounter a Montage in the wild, check the EQ before proceeding!

So, as you may have gathered already, this is not a review of Montage for EDM. I took along my church audition folder (covering gospel to contemporary Christian to traditional and semi-classical music) and a small binder of rock, jazz, soul and everything in between. I’d like to think that this is the first time anyone has played “Jesu, Joy of Man’s Desiring” on the Montage, however poorly.

The electric pianos are terrific. I had a fine old time playing soul jazz and what not. Great connection between keys and sound. Comparing against Nord Stage, I would say that the Montage is top notch in this department and definitely a cut above the old Nord Electro 2. Yamaha did not put the Reface CP (Spectral Component Modeling) technology into Montage; they didn’t need to.

Tonewheel organ is still Yamaha’s Achilles’ heel. There is some modest improvement, but the Montage is not in clone territory. In this area, I would say, “Advantage Nord.” If I can cover B-3 with the MOX on Sunday, I’m sure that the Montage is up for medium duty. However, the tonewheel organs lack the visceral thrill of the EPs. I will say that the 88-key action did not inhibit my playing style too much. (If I was going to buy a Montage, tho’, it would be a 6.)

The pipe organs got some tweaks, mainly by enhancing the Motif pipe organ sounds via FM. There are a few lovely patches, but I will still look to the Tyros (and the PSR expansion pack) for true realism. The Nord Electro 5d has modeled principal organ pipes where the drawbars change the registration. Ummm, here, I would give the edge to Nord. Plus, the pipe organs in the Nord sample library are more on par with the Tyros and PSR expansion pack. Hate to say it: Montage pipe organs are good “synthesizer pipe organs,” and that ain’t entirely a compliment.

The new strings are wonderfully realistic, especially for solo/melody lines. I really enjoyed bringing sections in and out dynamically. (The expression pedal was sync’ed to the SuperKnob.) With the changes in our music ministry group, I’ve been playing more melodic and exposed parts. I could really dig playing a reflective improvisation for meditation using the strings and woodwinds under Motion Control.

The classical woodwinds got a boost in Montage, too. The woodwinds are all excellent although the sonic delta above Motif XF (MOXF and MOX, too) was not as “Wow” as the strings. Most likely, my ears were getting tired at that point…

Since I was losing objectivity, I just briefly touched on brass. I need good French horns and Montage did not disappoint. I wish that I had spent time with the solo trumpets and trombones, but my ears were telling me to knock it off.

The new Telecaster (TC) is quite a treat. The “Real Distortion” effects (Motif XF update 1.50) are now standard and the programmers made good use of them. I wish that the Montage had the voice INFO screen from the PSR/Tyros series. The INFO screen displays playing tips and articulations for each voice. This makes it a lot easier to find and exploit the sonic “Easter eggs” in the patches. (“Play AF1 to get a slide. Play AF2 to get a hammer on.”)

Fortunately, it was a rainy Saturday afternoon and the store was empty — disturbed only by the occasional uncontrolled rugrat pounding on some poor defenseless keyboard. Overall, I felt like I really heard the Montage and could make a fair evaluation.

I did not dive into editing, arpeggios, motion sequencing, recording, etc., so this is surely not a comprehensive review. Anyone spending less than one month with this ax cannot claim “comprehensive.” It just ain’t possible, so I would call my initial opinion, “first impressions.” That said, I can see why the Live Sets are important. I mainly dove in through Category Search where some of the touch buttons are a wee too small. Punching up a sound in full combat requires BIG buttons.

Montage looks, feels and sounds like a luxury good. Montage is also priced like a luxury good. The Montage8 MAP is $4000 USD. It is quite a beast physically and I would most likely go for the Montage6 at a “mere” 33 pounds and $3000 USD. None of the Montage line would be an easy schlep, especially when I have to buzz in and out of my church gig fast.

Would I buy one? Tough call. On the same field trip, I got to sit in a Tesla Model S ($71,000 USD) — a luxury car built around a computer monitor or two. I just recently bought a Scion iM (AKA Toyota Auris, Levin, Blade, whatever) for about $20,000 USD. Both cars could get me to the gym and back. I like my iM. What does that say about me as a customer? Do you think I would buy a Montage? Enigmatic.

See the list of new waveforms in the Montage. Also, check out the latest blog posts! Update: May 10, 2016.