Free DJX-II styles/patterns for PSR/Tyros

Once upon a time (around the year 2000), Yamaha was into beat boxes and other spiffy tools for creating dance, hip hop, and other forms of “electronic” music. The DJX-II groove machine was an entry-level keyboard designed for budding DJs and musicians. It combined a funky looking 61-key keyboard, pattern-based sequencer and basic sound engine into an all-in-one, battery-powered instrument with built-in amplifier and speakers. Genres included techno, trance, garage, hip hop, old skool and trip hop.

DJX-II

The musician or DJ could select from 70 preset patterns, each pattern with ten variations. The variations were further categorized into six MAIN patterns and four FILL patterns. The keyboard was divided into five 12-key zones where each octave performed a specific performance function. One of the zones selected the current variation allowing the player to switch between pattern variations. Another zone transposed the pattern into the current root key.

Yamaha still makes the original DJX-II patterns available through its support site. Each of the files is a standard MIDI file (SMF) containing a single pattern. Although they are in SMF format, the files are not immediately useable. The rhythm tracks are programmed for some truly ancient and arcane Yamaha drum kits, none of which adhere to GM or XG layout conventions. Further, the files cannot be imported and played as an arranger workstation style, i.e., they do not contain the information and format needed by a PSR/Tyros style.

Last December, I developed a process for converting a DJX-II pattern file to a PSR/Tyros style file. I wrote and posted an earlier article on the DJX-II style format and conversion process. I then got to work and converted fifteen patterns to PSR/Tyros style format.

The patterns are all on the jazz tip and they include some pretty hip chord changes! I quickly found that I needed to transcribe the chord changes and bass lines in order to play along. I used Sibelius First to notate the MIDI data in each pattern and saved the lead sheets in PDF files. Knowing the changes makes jamming easier and a lot more fun.

At long last, I’m ready to distribute the converted patterns. Here is a link to the the ZIP file. The ZIP file contains fifteen style files (one for each DJX-II pattern), fifteen PDF lead sheets and a README.TXT file with performance tips.

Update: Check out version 2 of the DJX-II style collection. It’s still free!

I strongly recommend reading the README.TXT file before using the new styles. The converted patterns behave like the new Yamaha DJ styles on the PSR-S670. You only need to play a single note in the left hand accompaniment. No chords are necessary because the chord progressions are cooked into the patterns. The note sets the root note for the progression and the arranger and DJ style take over from there.

Current and recent workstation arrangers should play these styles without problem, save the occasional kit or voice substitution. Good news for musicians with entry-level models (e.g., PSR-E443) as the style files are SFF1 and no OTS. Thus, entry-level arrangers should load and play these pattern styles, too.

Please enjoy playing with these “DJ styles.” In terms of the future, the DJX-II trip hop styles are genuinely sick and I hope to convert them one of these days!

What’s in a name?

Anything that we want to go from just a beginner to a pro,
You need a montage (montage)
Oh, it takes a montage (montage)
Team America Lyrics

Back in January before Winter NAMM 2015, there was a lot of speculation about a new Yamaha workstation to replace the venerable Motif product line. Yamaha filed for the trademark name “Montage” in December 2014 and many wondered if this would be the name of the new workstation. (Yamaha have a teaser ad for “Reface” at https://www.yamahasynth.com with a countdown clock leading up to Summer 2015 NAMM week. Your guess is as good as mine!)

Getting a little bit Zen for a moment, it doesn’t matter what a thing is called. All that matters is what the thing is.

Periodically, I troll the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) database for interesting patents and patent applications. Yamaha carefully (and wisely!) protects its inventions through patents. Yamaha R&D, by the way, rarely publishes in the scientific literature, which is another way to stake your ground. Patent protection is stronger legally. A patent costs money, so a corporation is usually serious about a technology when it makes the commitment to file. The Yamaha patent applications cite Japanese applications/patents to establish priority in the United States. Thus, there is usually an existing Japanese application or patent that was filed at an earlier date for each US application.

Of course, a patent does not necessarily indicate that a product will follow. However, I’ve noticed a trend in some (relatively) recent filings by Yamaha.

Let’s start with US Patent Application Publication 2013/0305902, “Accompaniment Data Generating Apparatus,” published November 21, 2013. Quoting the application, “An object of the present invention is to provide an accompaniment data generating apparatus which can generate automatic accompaniment data that uses phrase waveform data including chords.” This rather lengthy patent application describes a musical instrument keyboard that uses audio waveforms in the same way that an arranger or Motif-series workstation uses MIDI phrases (AKA arpeggios). The application cites Japanese Patent Publications No. 2900753 (MIDI-based accompaniment) and No. 4274272 (MIDI-based arpeggio performance) as prior art.

US Patent Application Publication 2013/0047821 (published February 28, 2013) covers similar ground. This application adds waveform pitch shifting and time stretching. It cites Japanese Patent Publication No. 3397082 on the specific capability of pitch shifting and time stretching. Audio phrases (waveforms) need to be transposed via pitch shifting and must fit into the rhythm via time-stretching.

US Patent Application Publication 2013/0305907 (published November 21, 2013) is related to the previous two application. It covers production of chords using audio waveforms, guided by chord root and chord type.

US Patent Application Publication 2014/0033902 (published February 6, 2014) is titled “Technique for Analyzing Rhythm Structure of Music Audio Data.” The technique described in this application identifies the beat positions and intervals in a piece of music in audio form (i.e., rhythm pattern analysis). Figure 1 shows the embodiment (design) of the technique within an accompaniment generation system. The beat position information is used to synchronize playback of both MIDI and audio phrases. The diagram shows a “MIDI reproduction section” and an “Audio reproduction section.”

The most recent publication is 2015/0154979 (June 4, 2015) and is titled “Automated Performance Technology Using Audio Waveform Data.” The application deals with a specific issue that arises when audio waveforms are used for accompaniment (pitch shifting and time stretching). Quoting the application, “it is an object of the present invention to properly deal with a processing delay and sound quality deterioration that are likely to occur when audio waveform data is reproduced with time axis expansion/contraction control performed on the audio waveform data in accordance with a desired performance tempo.”

These are long documents with a lot of detail expressed in excrutiating “patent language.” They are too long and detailed to summarize here. I recommend downloading the patent applications from the USPTO, brewing coffee, and then reading the applications.

Looking at the overall trend, Yamaha are thinking about automated accompaniment that incorporates both MIDI and audio phrases. This technology could be applied to arranger instruments or a new generation of synthesizer workstation. The latest arrangers have “audio styles” which only use audio for the rhythm track. No “harmonic” phrases (e.g., bass line, electric piano comping, etc.) are available. The current Motif generation (the XF and MOXF) have only MIDI-like arpeggios. Possibly, combined audio/MIDI accompaniment was not fully cooked in time for the PSR-S950 and Tyros 5.

I am very interested to see if Yamaha rolls out this technology in future products. The definition of “montage” is “the process or technique of selecting, editing, and piecing together separate sections of film to form a continuous whole.” Hmmm.

Make music with MMS on a PSR

Yamaha Mobile Music Sequencer includes features for Motif, MOX and Tyros5, but did you know that you can create music using MMS on your PSR arranger? Yes, you can!

I’m using MMS with both the Yamaha PSR-E443 and PSR-S950 and I have written up a tutorial on making music with MMS on PSR/Tyros. This article concentrates on set-up, MIDI voice selection and MIDI file export which are aspects not covered by the MMS manual. The tutorial complements the many on-line videos that demonstrate composition and mix down. In particular, I show how to use the full 128 voice General MIDI voice set in the PSR, thereby expanding your sonic palette beyond the limited range of voices built into MMS.

Enjoy and keep on keepin’ on!

Scat voice expansion pack

I’m pleased to release version 1 of my jazz scat voice expansion pack for Yamaha PSR-S950 and PSR-S750 arranger workstations. The expansion pack has five PSR voices which let you create “Take 6” style, a cappella arrangements and other kinds of jazz voice performances. Give the MP3 demo a try!

Four of the PSR voices are individual syllables: DOO, DOT, BOP and DOW. The DOO syllable is looped and let’s you create sustained chords for backing. The DOT, BOP and DOW syllables are short and provide scat-like expression. All four syllables are combined into a velocity-switched voice where you select and play one of the syllables based on how hard you strike the keys (i.e., MIDI note velocity). You will need to adjust touch response (and practice!) to get the most playable and musical result.

Here is a link to the expansion pack file. You need to download and UNZIP this file, then install the YEP file by following the directions in the Yamaha PSR-S950/PSR-S750 Owner’s Manual. See the section titled “Expanding Voices”.

I am also releasing the multi-samples that I used to create the expansion pack in case you would like to create a scat voice for your own synthesizer or software instrument. If you are curious about how I created the expansion pack voices and the samples, please see this blog post.

Both the scat voice expansion pack and the scat voice samples are released under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Creative Commons License
ScatVoices and ScatVoice samples by Paul J. Drongowski are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

You are free to use the expansion pack voice or samples (even for commercial purposes) as long as you provide a link to http://sandsoftwaresound.net from your own web site AND/OR explicitly credit me in your creative work, e.g., “Scat samples/voice by Paul J. Drongowski”.

Vocaloid is not just for anime!

As I mentioned in my last post, I’m developing a new sample-based voice for the Yamaha PSR-S750/S950 arranger workstations. Roland is famous for its “jazz scat” voice which uses velocity-switching to trigger syllables like DOO, DAT, BOP and DOW at pitch. This synth voice is good for a cappella-like arrangements (think “Take 6”) or free melody lines. It’s a real boon for those of us with weak natural voices and technique.

The Roland scat voice incorporates samples from the Spectrasonics Vocal Planet library produced by Eric Persing and Roby Duke. Although these are great sounds/samples, I want to distribute both the workstation voice (as an expansion pack) and the samples within. I intend to make my work available under a Creative Commons attribution license. Thus, I want and need to produce fully original samples in order to avoid copyright and licensing issues.

The quest

These goals and desires launched a month-long quest for suitable “scat” samples. I decided to base the scat voice on the four syllables DOO, DOT, BOP and DOW where the DOOs are looped and the other syllables are one-shots. The DOOs are triggered at relatively low velocity and provide a pad-like bed while the DOTs, BOPs and DOWs provide short staccato accents/melody. The voice implementation requires a set of multi-samples for each syllable where the multi-samples are spread across the natural range of the human voice (F3 to F6 where C5 is middle C).

Freesound.org has a few individual sounds, but nothing in the way of multi-samples across a range of pitches. I next decided to try sampling my own voice. A few tentative attempts left me highly discouraged! I’m a baritone with a relatively small range — definitely not F3 to F6! Plus, I lack training and my technique is not particularly good.

I then began to experiment with vocoding. I was hoping to achieve loopable, pitch-accurate samples by using my voice as a formant and imposing my voice on a pitch accurate synth sound (the carrier). I experimented with the vocoders in the PSR-S950 and the Yamaha MOX6 workstation. The MOX6 vocoder is great at producing dance-floor sounds, but not so good at producing more natural vocal sounds suitable for jazz.

Not to be too cagey, I eventually found good use for the S950 vocoder and will describe this process in a separate post. Before I went in that direction, however, I discovered and tried Yamaha’s Vocaloid.

Vocaloid

Here is how Yamaha describes Vocaloid.

Vocaloid is a technology for singing voice synthesis developed by Yamaha, and the name of this software application. The software allows users to input melody and lyrics in order to synthesize singing. In other words, with this technology, singing can be produced without a singer. Singing voice synthesis is produced by using fragments of voices recorded from actual singers, called the Singer Library.

To a user, Vocaloid consists of two parts: the Vocaloid editor and one or more libraries. Generally, Yamaha does not provide the libraries and prefers to license the Vocaloid technology to third parties (like Zero-G) who develop libraries using their own artists.

Vocaloid has an active and enthusiastic on-line community among anime enthusiasts. There are Japanese and English singer libraries for various anime characters or personas. These singers are not appropriate for jazz! Fortunately, there are a few singer libraries for pop and classical vocals.

Mini-review

Vocaloid is not inexpensive. The full Vocaloid version 3 editor is about $160USD and individual Vocaloid 3 singer libraries are $150USD. Thus, it’s hard to take a casual drive by the latest Vocaloid technology and give it a try. Vocaloid 4 has just been announced along with Cyber Diva. Pricing, unfortunately, has not budged.

Luckily, Zero-G has a fire sale on a few individual Vocaloid 2 libraries which include the version 2 editor. I bought the Zero-G Tonio library for $50USD. This is a much smaller amount to gamble in order to get a taste.

Tonio is an opera singer. The Tonio demo is very good (it’s opera!) and after messing with Vocaloid and Tonio, someone sank a lot of work into that demo! You can get very nice results from Vocaloid if you are willing to spend countless hours tweezing a performance. I recommend the on-line Vocaloid reviews at Sound on Sound Magazine. The reviews are right on the money and provide useful information to help get you started with Vocaloid. (SOS is great that way.)

To make a long story very short, you edit the vocal performance in the editor by entering lyrics into a piano roll editor. You then change the attack, vibrato and other aspects of the vocal performance. These tweaks are essential for getting a good result.

Ultimately, Tonio is an opera singer and his vocal characteristics are a distinct part of the vocal samples that underlie the singer library. There ain’t no way to turn this nice Italian boy out and make him sing pop! He isn’t Bruno Mars. Please keep this in mind if you decide to try Vocaloid in a project of your own. Make sure that the voice library is a simpatico match with the target genre/style. This is why I moved on from Tonio and Vocaloid for the scat voice project.

The technology

Yamaha has invested heavily in the Vocaloid technology and have filed many patents. They are conducting joint research with The Music Technology Group (MTG) of the Universitat Pompeu Fabra in Barcelona. The MTG, by the way, are the people behind the Freesound.org web site.

Vocaloid does a lot of intense digital signal processing (DSP). It modifies and concatenates sound in the frequency domain. It performs a Fast Fourier Transform (FFT) to convert from the time domain to the frequency domain, modifies the spectral characteristics of the sound, and then performs an inverse FFT to return to the time domain. This is too much computation to perform in real-time. Thus, there is always a delay while Vocaloid renders a performance before playback.

Yamaha protects its intellectual property (IP) through patents and rarely publishes results in the scientific literature. Vocaloid is an exception, probably due to the partnership with MTG. Here is a short list of a few papers on Vocaloid and its technology.

  • Singing synthesis as a new musical instrument, Hideki Kenmochi, IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing, 2012 (ICASSP 2012).
  • Sample-based singing voice synthesizer by spectral concatenation, Jordi Bonada and Alex Loscos, Proceedings of the Stockholm Music Acoustics Conference, August 6-9, 2003 (SMAC 03).
  • VOCALOID – Commercial singing synthesizer based on sample concatenation, Hideki Kenmochi and Hayato Ohshita, International Speech Communication Association (ISCA), Interspeech 2007.

You don’t need to know all of this to use Vocaloid, but it’s good to know that there is cutting edge science behind the product.

I strongly recommend the developer interview with Michael Wilson which is published at the Vocaloid US web site. The interview gives insight into the incredible amount of work and detail behind the development of the latest library, Cyber Diva. This interview is extremely informative. Thanks, Michael. Articles such as this one bridge the gap between vacuous press releases and scientific papers giving everyone a greater appreciation for the technology behind a product.

It is also the best case to be made against software piracy. Innovation, research and development is fueled by money. Cheat developers out of their just payment only if you wish to kill off future innovation!

The Vocaloid technology reminds me a little bit of Super Articulation 2 (SArt2) on Tyros. SArt2 concatenates tones together to product realistic articulations such as legato and glissando. SArt2 works in the time domain and computes in real time although latency remains a very practical concern. (There are patents.) Perhaps someday when sufficient parallel processing resources are inexpensive, there will be an SArt3 that computes in the frequency domain.

PSR-E443: Snap review

Ah, it’s always fun to post a “first impressions” review of a new toy! In this case, the Yamaha PSR-E443 portable arranger.

I like to use a battery powered keyboard at rehearsals since an all-in-one sets up and tears down without a lot of work. Up to this point, I’ve been playing an old Yamaha PSR-273. The 273 first made the scene in 2003, so it was definitely time for an update.

The PSR-E443 is the top of the entry-level portable keyboards from Yamaha. It has 61 keys and a built-in stereo sound system comprising two woofers and two tweeters. The E443 is powered by either an AC adapter (PA-150) or six AA batteries. So far, I’ve only used an AC adapter and don’t have a feel for battery life. Fortunately, the MOX6 uses the same PS-150 adapter and I didn’t need to buy yet another adapter. (The E443 does not ship with an AC adapter.)

For the sake of review, I played similar styles and MIDI songs on the old PSR-273 and the more expensive PSR-S950 arranger workstation ($250 street for the E443 version $1,900 street for the S950). The E443 sells for about the same price as a mid-range “boutique” guitar pedal. Given that the E443 consists of a computer-based sound generator, analog-to-digital converter (ADC) for the auxiliary audio input,
LCD display, keyboard and media content (e.g., styles, DJ patterns, voices), it’s quite a manufacturing feat to deliver a fun, usable product at such an aggressive price point!

In terms of build quality, you definitely get what you pay for. The build quality of the old PSR-273 seems to be more robust than the E443. Yamaha definitely has taken cost of the E443 in order to sell it for a $250 street price. Although the E443 is a reasonable solid product for the home, it would definitely not hold up on the road. The push buttons do not have the same solid feel as the S950 (or the MOX synthesizer) and one needs (and should use) a gentle touch when pressing buttons. Cosmetically, the only really bothersome observation is the obvious difference between the top C key and the rest of the keys in the key bed. The top C is an add-on key which is not aligned evenly with the rest of the keys and which has a slightly different color (shade of white) than the other white keys. In comparison, the old 273 and the more expensive S950 have nice even keys and consistent key color.

The E443 has a somewhat “retro” sound set augmented by many additional voices that were added over the history of the E4xx series. The E443 and 273 share many of the same panel voices which is a little disappointing. These common voices sound somewhat better on the E443 due to better effects, equalization and sound system. However, with only a few exceptions, the panel voices in common share the same waveforms. One of the exceptions are the string voices. The E443 strings sound much better especially in the lower octaves.

The XG sound set is definitely a step up from the 273 although the S950 XG sound set is at a still higher quantum level in quality. I played the same commercial XG file (“Smooth Operator” by Sade) through all three instruments. The 273 is truly pathetic, the E443 is acceptable, and the S950 is not too bad at all. The E443 does not have the benefit of the XG variation (DSP) effects as available on the S950 and the solo sax sounded just a tad naff. However, I think a typical consumer would be happy with MIDI file playback through the E443; it definitely beats the Microsoft wavetable synthesizer!

Although it sounds a bit negative at this point in the review, the E443 definitely shines brighter than the 273 due to the additional, augmented panel voices. These voices include the several “Cool” and “Sweet” voices, three dynamic velocity-switched voices, a handful of newer voices like “Woodwind Section”, and the many “DJ” synthesizer voices that were added to implement the DJ patterns. There are also some wonderful world voices like Trumpeta Banda and Harmonium. The sound designers also added a few dozen dual (layered) voices. Even though the dual panel voices use the same waveforms as normal non-layered panel voices, many of these dual panel voices are fatter, very playable and usable. I’m looking forward to using these “newer” voices and the improved strings at rehearsals.

The area where the E443 shines brighter than the S950 (!) is the real-time tweaking provided by the two sound control knobs on the front panel. Even though I’m not a huge synth enthusiast, I used the knobs to tweeze voices like the dynamic overdriven guitar while jamming over a style. I’m now sold on having a few knobs around for real-time tweaking and would love to see a couple of knobs on the mid-range arranger workstations. Pressing up/down buttons in the S950 mixing console just doesn’t have the same feel or immediacy. Further, a quick check with MIDI-OX shows that the E443 sends MIDI CC messages for cut-off frequency, resonance, reverb level, chorus level, attack time and release time when the appropriate knob is twisted.

The E443 also has some advantages over the S650 (the next model up in the arranger family). The E443 supports limited voice programming and stores the same six voice parameters for the main and dual voice. These voice parameters are stored in registration memory. This makes the E443 voices tweakable. The S650 lacks even this rudimentary level of voice editing.

Like voices, the styles are a mix of old and new. The styles include many old chestnuts like “Cool8Beat.” The older styles sound better through the improved sound system, but they retain the same essential phrases. The newer styles, especially those in the “Dance” category create more excitement. There are also a few fun additions in the Latin and World categories. Each style has a “One Touch Setting” (OTS) voice that selects a voice that Yamaha deemed to be appropriate for the style. Of course, this is somewhat hit or miss as personal taste and preference varies. There are a few surprises like a very nice Sweet Flute and Piano layer.

The E443 is reasonably adept at playing commercial styles in the original (and older) Style File Format (also known as “SFF” or “SFF1”). I played the styles in the MIDI Spot Soul and Blues pack and got a fairly decent result. These styles were developed for the PSR-9000 (circa 2000). It goes to show that good programming and musicality trumps mere technology! I had more trouble getting the recent “HappyBeat” style to sound decent even though Musicsoft sells this style as “PSR-E443 compatible.” It isn’t just a difference in voicing — the actual harmony sounds off and discordant. I am increasingly disappointed in Musicsoft’s notion of “compatibility.”

I successfully played back the DJX II patterns which I have been converting for PSR. More about this in a future post.

Speaking of DJ patterns, we finally are getting to the E443 functionality that makes it unique in the current arranger product line! There are twenty EDM patterns. I don’t work in the genre, so I’m not really qualified to speak to their currency or quality. However, I do know that EDM styles change with lightning speed! I also know that you cannot load new (user) patterns into the E443. You have to be happy with what Yamaha have provided. Yamaha, even if you continue to keep the internal patterns locked up — a user cannot save or play the patterns to a MIDI file or data stream — please, please, please add the ability to load new patterns. This capability would really enhance the product and create a community of developers around the E4xx series. As Patti Smith said, “This is the era when everyone creates.”

I like the Old Skool and R&B Smooth patterns the best, but that’s just me. Old Skool immediately brings up memories of Grandmaster Flash and “The Message.” Each pattern seems to have an OTS voice (panel voice number 000). The R&B Smooth pattern’s OTS brings up a nice Sweet Flute and Voice Lead layer.

The E443 has 150 arpeggios (musical phrases) for additional instant, real-time fun. The arpeggios track and respond to notes played with the right hand. (BTW, with the main, dual and split voice capability, you can play a left hand bass along with a two-voice layer with your right hand.) Wisely, there are also forty arpeggios voices which automatically bring up a voice and an appropriate arp. This makes it easy to jump into arpeggios without having to do any configuration. Of course, you can change the arp type, voice, etc. to come up with new combinations.

Between the DJ patterns and arpeggios, the E443 approaches the capabilities of the MM6/MM8 “Mini Mo” workstation. The Mini Mo had DSP effects and a smattering of Motif voices, but the E443 has more voice editing and more user style locations — all at a much lower price. If you crave the old MM6/MM8 patterns, they are available through the Yamaha Mobile Music Sequencer (MMS), where Yamaha have re-purposed them. I tried MMS with the E443 and I’m happy to report that you can drive the E443 with MMS on iPad with a little knowledge and consideration of how MMS selects General MIDI voices and drum kits. This is a subject for another day.

The E443 has a pretty decent range of drum kits. Some of the kits have been around the loop once too often and lack punch. When I was experimenting with the DJX II patterns, I noticed that the E443 Dance Kit is the older version of the Dance Kit and has been assigned a different program change number (#113) than the most current kit on the S950. This may be an issue for content creators more so than regular players.

The E443 user interface is a significant refinement of the old PSR-273 era interface. The E443 provides many direct access buttons where you just need to hold a button for a little while in order to be taken to the appropriate editing screen. Further, Yamaha have made it much easier to navigate through the “Function” menu. In the 273 era, one had to repeatedly push the function button to step sequentially through the function menu. With the E443, you navigate through the function menu using the category buttons which do double duty as up and down. Another nice improvement is the transpose button on the front panel. On the 273, I would often skip past the transpose screen and have to circle all the way around the menu. This is a true pain at rehearsals as our music director will often call for a new key right on the spot.

Overall, the E443 is “something old, something new, something borrowed, something blue.” For the street price, it’s hard to find a better value in both sound quality and fun!

Mining the Yamaha DJX II

Update: Follow this link to download a free collection of PSR/Tyros DJX-II styles.

Time to party like it’s 1999!

The Yamaha DJX II was the second generation of Yamaha “DJ” keyboards that were targeted for musicians/producers working in “dance” styles (e.g., tekno, hip-hop, drum’n’bass, etc.) Thus, the DJX II uses loop-like “patterns” as its basic musical element instead of arranger styles. The DJX II is best remembered for its unusual keyboard; Some octaves had white whole note keys while other octaves used grey. That’s because different octaves controlled different functions like selecting a pattern to play or transposing a pattern.

The DJX II had a selection of fairly decent patterns in different dance-oriented genres. Although I’ve never heard a DJX, it’s sound was probably hobbled a little bit by the sound set. The DJX II had only 4MBytes of wave ROM! The internal and external patterns are available for download from the Yamaha support site. Seems like a place to find and mine some useable musical phrases, and naturally, I’m looking for the funk. The target keyboard is the PSR-S950 arranger workstation.

The ZIP files from Yamaha unpack into a bunch of standard MIDI files (SMF). Each SMF contains a group of ten, musically related patterns that form a construction set. The SMF has a small amount of set up information at the beginning: General MIDI reset, reverb type select and chorus type select messages. Each pattern within the SMF begins with a MIDI text marker from “1” to “10”. In order to convert the SMF for the PSR-S950, I changed these markers to arranger style markers (e.g., “Main A,” “Intro A,” etc.) and added “SFF1” and “SInt” markers to the first measure. The new marker name determines the method by which the arranger will play the pattern. More about this in a second.

As I mentioned above, the DJX patterns are assigned to keys such that a single key press plays a particular pattern. The patterns are laid out according to black and white keys as follows:

Pattern  Type  Key color
-------  ----  ---------
1        Main  White
2        Fill  Black
3        Main  White
4        Fill  Black
5        Main  White
6        Main  White
7        Fill  Black
8        Main  White
9        Fill  Black
10       Main  White

Main patterns are on the white keys and fill patterns are on the black keys. Fill patterns are not restricted to one measure; a pattern may be anywhere from 1 to 256 measures in length.

Given these considerations, you may need to be a bit creative when assigning a pattern to an arranger section. Please recall that arranger introduction, ending and main sections may be 1 to 256 measures in length. Fill-in and break sections are limited to one measure. A DJX “fill” pattern may be greater than one measure and cannot always be assigned to an arrange fill-in section. Further, you may not even want to assign the fill pattern this way, preferring to invoke the pattern from one of the section buttons instead. The three introduction buttons (sections) are good destinations for a “fill” pattern because the section acts like a manually controlled fill button. The arranger will play the fill pattern (introduction) and then automatically proceed to the selected main section.

Patterns assigned to arranger ending sections are a little problematic. An arranger ending will stop playback unless another section is selected. You’ll need to fast finger the arranger buttons when jamming.

Even though this seems complicated, it’s not really. The more difficult and time-consuming part is dealing with the drum sets and note mappings.

First, some background is needed. The DJX channel layout is very different than the arranger channel layout. Here is the layout for the 53_Soul pattern file, which is typical of all DJX II SMFs:

Channel  DJX PC#     DJX voice         S950 voice/kit
-------  ----------  ------------      --------------
9        126   0  3  BD Kit        --> Real Drums
10       126   0  4  SD Kit        --> Real Drums
11       126   0  1  B900 Kit      --> Hip Hop Kit
12       127   0  5  Analog Kit1   --> Analog Kit
13       0   112 34  Pick Bass     --> Pick Bass
14       0     0  1  Bright Piano  --> Bright Piano
15       0   112 17  Jazz Organ    --> Organ
16       0   113 27  60's Clean    --> Tremolo Guitar

Channels 9 to 12 are rhythm, channel 13 is bass, and channels 14 to 16 are phrases. By (un)convention, channel 9 is bass drum, channel 10 is snare drum, channel 11 is high hat and channel 12 is percussion. Channels 9 to 12 must be set up as drum parts:

F0 43 10 4C 08 08 07 01 F7
F0 43 10 4C 08 09 07 01 F7
F0 43 10 4C 08 0A 07 01 F7
F0 43 10 4C 08 0B 07 01 F7

These System Exclusive (SysEx) messages must be added to the initialization part of the SMF in order to select different drum kits independently under XG.

You’ll need to choose new drum kits for the rhythm channels since the DJX II has its own unique, non-standard kits. This part is totally creative. Who’s to say what the new style should sound like? If it moves your booty, then it’s a winner! Fortunately, the bass drum, snare drum and hi-hat channels seem to use these drum instruments exclusively. This narrows the re-mapping problem. I remapped the kick first just to get a listenable groove going and then tackled the snare followed by the hi-hat. The following chart lists the DJX II drum kits and the roughly equivalent S950 drum kit.

DJX II drum kit           S950 drum kit
------------------------  ------------------------
127 0  5 Analog Kit1      127 0  25 AnalogKit
                          126 0   8 AnalogSet     [GM]
127 0  8 Analog Kit2      127 0  58 AnalogT8Kit   [Major update]
127 0 10 Analog Kit3      127 0  59 AnalogT9Kit   [Major update]
127 0 13 Analog Kit1D     127 0  58 AnalogT8Kit   [Distorted version]
127 0 14 Analog Kit2D     127 0  59 AnalogT9Kit   [Distorted version]
127 0 12 RhBox Kit
127 0  9 Hard Kit
127 0 11 Break Kit        127 0  57 BreakKit
127 0  6 Dance Kit        127 0  27 DanceKit      [Major update]
127 0  4 Electronic Kit1  127 0  24 ElectroKit
                          126 0   3 ElectronicSet [GM]

126 0  0 Electronic Kit2
126 0  1 B900 Kit
126 0  2 DJX Kit                  HipHopKit?
126 0  3 BD Kit
126 0  4 SD Kit
126 0  5 HH Kit
126 0  6 Human Kit        
126 0  7 Scratch Kit

127 0  0 Standard Kit1    127 0  0 Standard Kit1  [Legacy]
127 0  1 Standard Kit2    127 0  1 Standard Kit2  [Legacy]
127 0  2 Room Kit         127 0  8 RoomKit
                          126 0  1 RoomSet        [GM]
127 0  3 Rock Kit         127 0 16 RockKit        [Legacy]
127 0  3 Rock Kit         127 0 90 RockKit2
127 0  7 Jazz Kit         127 0 32 JazzKit
                          126 0 35 JazzSet        [GM]

The DJX-specific kits (BD kit, SD kit, B900 kit, etc.) do not remotely follow General MIDI-ish conventions. It takes a lot of note mapping to get these drum patterns to play sensibly. I recommend playing back the SMF from a DAW (like Sonar) while tweaking the SMF. Do not attempt note remapping on the arranger — you’ll only drive yourself crazy!

Chord progressions are part of the patterns, so the melody/chord phrases need to be transposed like introductions and endings. Please review Note Transposition Rules (NTR) and Note Transposition Tables (NTT) before forging ahead. Since the channel layout is unconventional, the CASM information must be changed to be consistent with the MIDI channel data. Channels 9 to 12 are configured for rhythm NTT/NTR (root fixed, bypass) and the Channels 13 to 16 are configured for intro/ending NTT/NTR (root transpose, bypass). The chord root must be changed to match the phrases (53_Soul: Fm7, 59_ClubFunk: Dm7). You’ll need to identify the root (the musical key) either by ear or by analyzing the chord harmony.

Tool-wise, I did most of the editing in Sonar X3. I used Jørgen Sørensen’s CASM editor ( http://www.jososoft.dk/yamaha ) to create the CASM section for the style and to change the NTR, NTT and chord root information. Special thanks go to Jørgen for creating such great and helpful tools!

Oh, yeah, the final results. Here is a link to the ZIP file containing the 53_Soul and 59_ClubFunk styles. Enjoy!

SA and SA2: Is Motif up to the task?

Every now and again, the subject of Super Articulation and Super Articulation 2 voices come up on the Motifator site. Here are some rather lengthy comments that I posted in response to a recent inquiry.

First, here is some background information from the S950 and Tyros 5 manual. The descriptions of Super Articulation (SA) and Super Articulation 2 (SA2) are quoted from the Tyros 5 manual. The voice descriptions (e.g., JazzArtist guitar voice) are taken from the PSR-S950 itself — when you press [INFO] in the voice selection screen, the S950 displays a description of the selected voice. These descriptions show the kind of SA effects supported by the S950. The S950 does not have front panel articulation buttons; a foot pedal can be assigned to trigger SA effects.

The description of Articulation Element Modeling (AEM) is from the Tyros 5 manual. It is a pretty good concise description of what AEM (SA2) does, but is a gross simplification WRT Yamaha’s patents. AEM does a lot of cross-fading and sample whacking. Plus, the concise description downplays the timing analysis in order to avoid unwanted latency effects and to detect releases.

Super Articulation voices

These Voices provide many benefits with great playability and expressive control in real time. For example, with the Saxophone Voice, if you play a C and then a D in a very legato way, you will hear the note change seamlessly, as though a saxophone player played it in a single breath. Similarly with the Concert Guitar Voice and play the D note strongly, the D note would sound as a “hammer on,” without the string being plucked again. Depending on how you play, other effects such as “shaking” or breath noises (for the Trumpet Voice), or finger noises (for the Guitar Voice) are produced.

JazzArtist: Super Articulation provides realistic guitar phrasing: Legato notes played within an interval of a 4th sound as a hammer on, pull off or slide. The last note has a release noise. fret noise is added randomly and the Foot pedal 2 [controller] adds a cutting noise.

NylonGuitar: Play normally and the voice is expressive and dynamic. The Foot pedal 2 [controller] changes the sounds to harmonics.

SmoothBrass: When brass instruments play legato, there is no attack sound on the legato notes. Super Articulation recreates this. Play legato and the notes join together, changing with velocity.

ConcertStrings: Strings can play legato, where each phrase is one continuous sound. Play legato and Super Articulation strings work in the same way. There are also three dynamic levels.

TrumpetFall: Jazz Trumpeters often use a fall or doit. Super Articulation recreates this with a velocity switch: Play harder to create the effect, change between fall and doit with the Modulation wheel. (Pushing forward changes to a doit.) Use the Foot pedal 2 [controller] to add breath noise.

Super Articulation 2 voices

For wind instrument Voices and Violin Voices, a special technology called AEM (see below) has been used, which features detailed samples of special expressive techniques used on those specific instruments — to bend or slide into notes, to “join” different notes together, or to add expressive nuances at the end of a note, etc. You can add these articulations by playing legato or non-legato, or by jumping in pitch by around an octave. For example, using the Clarinet Voice, if you hold a C note and play the Bb above, you’ll hear a glissando up to the Bb. Some “note off” effects are also produced automatically when you hold a note for over a certain time. Each S.Art2! Voice has its own default vibrato setting, so that when you select a S.Art2! Voice, the appropriate vibrato is applied regardless of the Modulation wheel position. You can adjust the vibrato by moving the Modulation wheel.

AEM Technology

When you play the piano, pressing a “C” key produces a definite and relatively fixed C note. When you play a wind instrument, however, a single fingering may produce several different sounds depending on the breath strength, the note length, the adding of trills or bend effects, and other performance techniques. Also, when playing two notes continuously — for example “C” and “D” these two notes will be smoothly joined, and not sound independent as they would on a piano.

AEM (Articulation Element Modeling) is the technology for simulating this characteristic of instruments. During performance, the most appropriate sound samples are selected in sequence in real time, from huge quantities of sampled data. They are smoothly joined and sounded — as would naturally occur on an actual acoustic instrument.

This technology to smoothly join different samples enables the application of realistic vibrato. Conventionally on electronic musical instruments, vibrato is applied by moving the pitch periodically. AEM technology goes much further by analyzing and disaggregating the sampled vibrato waves, and smoothly joins the disaggregated data in real time during your performance. If you move the Modulation wheel when you play the S.Art2! Voice (using AEM technology), you can also control the depth of the vibrato, and still maintain remarkable realism.

Motif and MOX

Starting with the Motif XS, Yamaha added Expanded Articulation (XA). Without diving into too much detail, XA allows control over articulations using the assignable function buttons. XA also detects and triggers samples to handle legato technique. The Motif/MOX player has precise control over when an articulation is sounded and the Motif/MOX programmer can construct new voices using XA (or tweak existing voices).

The S950 (and Tyros) monitor and analyze the notes played by the musician. The Tyros, in addition, has two panel buttons to control articulation. The workstation software determines which articulation to sound and when based upon what the musician has played on the keyboard or (optional) controllers.

Both the S950 and Tyros implement Super Articulation (SA) voices. SA voices and XA voices use roughly comparable sample playback technology (AWM). New samples can only be installed onto an S950 through an expansion pack (proprietary format). Yamaha has not released an expansion pack editor. S950 voice editing is limited to “quick edit” envelope tweaks; you cannot get to the element level on the S950. Motif/MOX voice editing is vastly deeper.

Super Articulation 2 (SA2) voices on the Tyros are a whole other beast. SA2 uses Articulation Element Modeling (AEM) to “stitch” samples together in real-time in response to what the musician plays. The Motif XS (and later) do not have the software to analyze the musicians playing/gestures and it does not have the AEM sound engine. SA2 is not implemented on the S950. SA2 is a very complicated critter because it takes note timing into consideration. (See Yamaha’s patents on AEM.)

So, voices/samples cannot simply be ported from S950 (or Tyros) to Motif. You can, however, use XA to make your own SA-style voices without any of the front-end analysis of musical gestures/control.

Thoughts and speculation

Sometimes, I think SA is a different front-end for Mega Voices. A guitar Mega Voice, for example, uses velocity switching to trigger (one of) an open soft, open medium, open hard, dead soft, dead hard, hammer on or slide waveform for a given MIDI note played on the keyboard. Effects such as strum noise and fret noise are triggered by MIDI note numbers above C6 and c8, respectively.

An SA voice based upon the same waveforms might use velocity switching for open soft, open medium, open hard, dead soft and dead hard, while using legato notes within an interval of a fourth to trigger hammer on and slide. An articulation control button or pedal trigger strum noise. Fret noise is added randomly. Thus, the SA voice uses the same basic waveforms as the Mega Voice, but the SA voice uses different means and analysis to select, enable and render the waveforms.

Motif XS (and later) have Mega Voices. The MOX Mega Nylon voice, for example, uses seven elements:

       Elem#  Waveform                Low  High Velocity
       -----  ----------------------  ---  ---- --------
       Elem1  Nylon Open Sw St        C-2  B5   1-60
       Elem2  Nylon Dead Notes St     C-2  B5   61-75
       Elem3  Nylon Mute St           C-2  B5   76-90
       Elem4  Nylon Hammer St         C-2  B5   91-105
       Elem5  Nylon Slide St          C-2  B5   106-120
       Elem6  Nylon Harmonics St      C-2  B5   121-127
       Elem7  Nylon FX St             C6   G8   1-127

that select and play an internal waveform based upon MIDI note number and velocity. One could build a different voice that triggers the same waveforms under different conditions such as AF1 ON, AF2 ON, etc. Indeed, some of the other Mega Voices respond to AF1/2 and AS1/2. Thus, I believe that a stock Motif/MOX with XA could emulate an SA voice within certain limitations. Specific conditions like “legato within an interval of a fourth” are not supported in Motif/MOX. XA detects legato without regard for interval.

SA2 voices are based on AEM and I believe that the AWM tone generation model in the stock Motif/MOX is not enough. In AWM, each note is independent and follows the familiar attack, decay, sustain and release life-cycle. Legato based on XA merely changes the waveform that is used to render the attack of an independent note. An AEM note, on the other hand, evolves and morphs into the next note. The AEM tone generator behaves more like physical modeling than AWM’s ADSR note life-cycle. As mentioned in Yamaha’s description of AEM, the AEM tone generator does some fancy computation to correctly render vibrato through note transitions. Further, a stock Motif/MOX does not perform the timing analysis and control functions that drive AEM tone generation.

I would love to see Yamaha add AEM-based voices to future members of the Motif family!

Yamaha voice of the customer

The Yamaha synthesizer site has come to life, again. The site has resources for current Yamaha synthesizer products, blogs and a forum. One the forums is seeking input for future Yamaha synthesizer products. Here is my post to that forum. It’s kind of terse, but the Yamaha marketing people already have so many long messages to read through and analyze! On to the re-post…

Hi —

Thanks for listening to our feedback! To keep things short and specific, I’ve listed the likes and areas for improvement in my two current Yamaha keyboards. I understand that Tyros/PSR is made by a different product division.

My first Yamaha keyboard was a pre-MIDI CE-20, so I’ve been into electronic instruments for quite a while…

MOX6: 95% performance, 5% production
Likes:

  • + Great voices and performances in contemporary genres
  • + Deep editing everywhere
  • + 16 voices/performances/etc. available with one button push
  • + Ability to add new waveforms (MOXF)

Opportunities for improvement:

  • – Workflow
  • – Needs drawbar mode and improved rotary speaker effect
  • – SMF must be scrubbed clean in order to import without issue or error

PSR-S950: 70% production, 30% performance
Likes:

  • + Super Articulation sounds great and is intuitive to play live
  • + INFO button displays performance tips for voices including articulations
  • + Drawbar mode
  • + Reliably imports and plays SMF regardless of meta-events, etc.
  • + Immediate one-man-band playability; high fun factor

Opportunities for improvement:

  • – Voice editing is superficial
  • – Needs more contemporary content (my genres: funk, jazz, rock/pop)
  • – Effects lag synthesizer products (need VCM)
  • – Needs B-3 chorus/vibrato sim and improved rotary speaker effect
  • – Convert WAV to MP3
  • – New waveforms only through expansion pack; No expansion pack editor

Production vs. performance: MOX6 is my go-to ax for playing out. S950 is now mostly used to produce backing tracks/styles. S950 production/performance mix will shift toward performance.

Workflow: DAWs have many established, immediately visible UI metaphors (e.g., piano roll, staff view, waveform view). MOX6 has rows and rows of buttons with few cues about how to use them.

Superarticulation: Real-time note analysis triggers articulations. Don’t have to think about which button to push (MOX XA). SA 2 voices are terrific. I’ve been reading the Yamaha patents on AEM and realize that SA 2 is non-trivial.

Immediacy: People want immediate results. Turn a knob, get a response. That’s one reason why people are knocked out by SA/SA2. Nothing kills a buzz like waiting for your computer to boot or fixing a driver problem.

Content: MOX players want more arpeggios; S950 players want more styles. This is a fundamental human need. Need to be able to create or import own phrases/content. Be able to play and sync both audio and MIDI clips. Import and convert PSR styles to arpeggios?

Updates: Need to provide updates for mid-range products, too. Competitor is making “updatable OS” a sales point. Example: Update MOX to control element level through knobs (now a standard MOXF feature).

Community: Community is very important. Share riffs, voices, whatever. Community builds excitement and loyalty. Yamaha must participate. (Yamaha is already perceived as too aloof.) Publish specs for file formats and let open source development loose. Provide an open garden and let thousands of flowers bloom.

MOX internal architecture

Curiosity finally overcame inertia and I ordered the service manual for the Yamaha MOX6 and MOX8 workstations. (The Yamaha 24×7 part number is “S M MOX6/MOX8”.)

If you remember from my previous discussion about workstation internal architecture, the Motif XS synthesizer is Linux-based and has a 400MHz Toshiba TX4939 RISC CPU as its main processor. The TX4939 uses the MIPS instruction set and controls two SWP51L tone generator integrated circuits. Since the MOX is advertised as descendent of the Motif XS, I fully expected a MIPS architecture processor with only one SWP51L.

Check out the Yamaha MOX block diagram.

Surprise! The main processor in the MOX is the Yamaha SWX02 with an internal clock speed of 135.4725MHz. The SWX02 has an SH-2A CPU core and probably does not run Linux. The SWX02 is also used in the Yamaha PSR-S650 arranger workstation where it is clocked at the same rate. This processor seems to be Yamaha’s choice for cost-sensitive, mid-range products.

The MOX has one SWP51L tone generator IC clocked at 90.3168MHz. The SWP51L is fed by two 64MByte wave ROM ICs. The wave ROM components are Lapis Semiconductor MR26V51252R 512Mbit P2ROM devices in 32Mx16-bit configuration. One device provides a 16-bit high (H) channel and the other device provides a 16-bit low (L) channel into the SWP51L. The high and low wave ROMs communicate with the SWP51L over a 32-bit wave memory bus. The SWP51L has a separate 16MByte SDRAM on a dedicated interface to support digital signal processing (DSP). The DAC and ADC are also connected directly to the SWP51L.

The SWX02 functions primarily as a control processor. This is quite different from the PSR-S650 where the SWX02 performs tone generation as well as performing control duties. The SWX02 has its own wave memory interface and this interface is not used in the MOX. The S650 has a separate LCD controller IC. The MOX does not have a separate LCD controller and the LCD is connected to the SWX02 through its parallel general purpose I/O (GPIO) pins.

The MOX specifications describe the wave capacity as “355MB (when converted to 16-bit linear format)”. The physical wave ROM is 128MBytes total. Thus, Yamaha achieve overall wave compression of 2.78 to 1, or better.

The most interesting thing about the MOX is what it does not have. The MOX main logic board (DM) has unpopulated positions for:

  • A second SWP51L tone generator IC
  • Two additional wave ROM ICs (size unspecified) on the wave memory bus
  • An interface for a flash expansion module
  • A second WM8740 digital-to-analog converter (DAC)

Yep, Yamaha laid the ground for the MOXF. These positions are labeled “For future model” in the detailed circuit diagrams. One way to feel about that is cheated. A more rational way to view this situation is that Yamaha tries to lower cost through volume production (eventually) giving us more product for less money.

The MOX polyphony is 64 notes. The MOXF polyphony is 128 notes due, presumably, to a second SWP51L. A Motif/MOX note may use up to eight voice elements. Therefore, I infer that an SWP51L has a total tone generation capacity of 512 voice elements. Switching context to workstation arrangers for a momemnt, both the PSR-S950 and Tyros3 have 128 note polyphony. The S950 has one SWP51L and the Tyros3 has two SWP51B integrated circuits. I now believe that the S950 is a four element per voice synthesizer while the Tyros3 is known to be an eight element per voice synthesizer. (The S950 is voice compatible with the A2000, which is known to be four elements per voice.) Thus, I don’t think Super Articulation 2 (SA2) voices based on Articulation Element Modeling (AEM) technology are coming to the S950 or a new mid-range arranger workstation. Not without a second SWP51L, anyway. I’m guessing that AEM requires an eight element per voice engine.

It’s interesting to see how and where Yamaha shaved cost in order to produce a value-oriented mid-range product. It also provides geater justification for the higher cost in the upper end Motif and Tyros products.

See this article for an architectural overview of the Yamaha arranger product families.

Finally, Yamaha releases the source code for GPL’ed parts of the Motif XS, Motif XF, and S90 XS/S70 XS. See the Yamaha source code page. The MOX and MOXF are not mentioned on this page, giving further evidence that these products are not Linux-based.