YAMAHA's New Synth to be introduced in NAMM 07...
- Thread starter joel68
- Start date
Cheez
Moderator
That's something I never understand about Yamaha. They use so many elements to try to create realism in one patch instead of improving on the raw wav sound itself. Although this will greatly reduce the memory of each sound, it is also limiting. The site says "up to 8 elements per sound". The XS has 128 polyphony, and at 8 elements per note, it will give us only 16 notes polyphony. There goes multi-timbrality and sequencing multiple tracks.
They are really trying to emulate softsamplers by using key-switching of articulations. Yes, I applaud them trying to do that. Multi-articulations are mainly for realism of acoustic instruments. Doing that, they have to battle against memory space and polyphony. Can't have best of everything. It's better to leave realsim to software while hardware concentrate on sound synthesis and synth soiunds, where hardware can really shine. Unless synths come up with huge memory (1GB minimum) and an internal HD, they will always face this problem.
They are really trying to emulate softsamplers by using key-switching of articulations. Yes, I applaud them trying to do that. Multi-articulations are mainly for realism of acoustic instruments. Doing that, they have to battle against memory space and polyphony. Can't have best of everything. It's better to leave realsim to software while hardware concentrate on sound synthesis and synth soiunds, where hardware can really shine. Unless synths come up with huge memory (1GB minimum) and an internal HD, they will always face this problem.
bongman
New member
hey, I found out that the XS series don't support PLG cards
check out the new www.motifator.com site:
http://www.motifator.com/motifxs/motifxs.php
http://www.motifator.com/mm6/mm6.php
check out the new www.motifator.com site:
http://www.motifator.com/motifxs/motifxs.php
http://www.motifator.com/mm6/mm6.php
Cheez
Moderator
This is terrible. Not only it is not expandable, existing PLG card owners is going to make some noise - since they cannot use their cards if they want to get the XS.
Bongman, in your other post, you mention about the FM card. Well, you can get pretty good DX FM sounds straight from the keyboard itself with it's existing FM synthesis. With some programming, you can come up with some nice sounds.
Bongman, in your other post, you mention about the FM card. Well, you can get pretty good DX FM sounds straight from the keyboard itself with it's existing FM synthesis. With some programming, you can come up with some nice sounds.
bongman
New member
is that so?
but menioned the tone generator is only AWM2 with Expanded Articulation ?
http://www.motifator.com/motifxs/motifxs-spec.php
nevermind es rack still in production
or get used gear
but menioned the tone generator is only AWM2 with Expanded Articulation ?
http://www.motifator.com/motifxs/motifxs-spec.php
nevermind es rack still in production
or get used gear
bongman
New member
ever since after the EX series in the late 90s,
Yamaha stopped producing synthesis engine.
myself uses the EX5, some of the sounds downloaded
from the internet sounds better than the presets.
nowadays all are wabetable and sampling,
gone are the programmer days.
anyway as keyboardist we shld spend more time on music
than programming patches.
Motif XS:
after hearing the XS demo from the motificator site,
looks like the ES has a warmer sound and XS with its new engine
has brighter tones maybe targets to sound realistic to real instruments.
heard some Taiwan dance music lately,
realised a lot of the music uses the Motif.
guess Yamaha very welcome on Asia
Yamaha stopped producing synthesis engine.
myself uses the EX5, some of the sounds downloaded
from the internet sounds better than the presets.
nowadays all are wabetable and sampling,
gone are the programmer days.
anyway as keyboardist we shld spend more time on music
than programming patches.
Motif XS:
after hearing the XS demo from the motificator site,
looks like the ES has a warmer sound and XS with its new engine
has brighter tones maybe targets to sound realistic to real instruments.
heard some Taiwan dance music lately,
realised a lot of the music uses the Motif.
guess Yamaha very welcome on Asia
Cheez
Moderator
Cheez
Moderator
This is going to be an interesting debate! Again, it depends on personal preference.
The thing between Roland and Yamaha is (I find) the raw sample they recorded. Yamaha tends to use multiple elements to "build" the acoustic instruments, but the raw waveform is still bad. It's chopped and cut to, I believe, reduce memory. It is evident once you break down the patches to listen to the individual elements. Roland on the other hand, uses better raw waveforms and less elements per patch. That's why their old JV orchestral instruments (now being put into the newer SRX series) is still very good.
However, the interesting development of employing different articulations took a turn for reaslism, previously only done for samplers. The Motif XS has done it. But Roland, interestingly, developed this technology only it their V-synth GT and not the Fantom series. Since the V-synth is focused more on electronic music, acoustic emulations is possible but we can only see how good their acoustic emulations is after we get our hands on it.
So yes, The XS moved Yamaha up one notch. If they have done the same kind of articulations for their XS like for their Tyros2, then it will really be impressive. But it shouldn't take Roland long to upgrade all their Fantom series with multiple-articulations.
The M3 appear to be able to do it as well with their expanded Combi mode, by layering different performances and using velocity swtiches +/- cross-fading switches which is very similar to softsamplers and gives more expressive power. But I don't know if they have actually recorded more articulations for acoustic instruments to use the full power of this mode. Without recording more raw waveforms of insrtruments in their different articulations, you won't be able to improve the acoustic instrument beyond what it is at the moment. It appears to be mainly for electronic music - which is not a bad thing at all.
Oh, and the Motif ES is nowhere close to even the old JV of Roland in terms of acoustic sounds. Nowhere close at all...
The thing between Roland and Yamaha is (I find) the raw sample they recorded. Yamaha tends to use multiple elements to "build" the acoustic instruments, but the raw waveform is still bad. It's chopped and cut to, I believe, reduce memory. It is evident once you break down the patches to listen to the individual elements. Roland on the other hand, uses better raw waveforms and less elements per patch. That's why their old JV orchestral instruments (now being put into the newer SRX series) is still very good.
However, the interesting development of employing different articulations took a turn for reaslism, previously only done for samplers. The Motif XS has done it. But Roland, interestingly, developed this technology only it their V-synth GT and not the Fantom series. Since the V-synth is focused more on electronic music, acoustic emulations is possible but we can only see how good their acoustic emulations is after we get our hands on it.
So yes, The XS moved Yamaha up one notch. If they have done the same kind of articulations for their XS like for their Tyros2, then it will really be impressive. But it shouldn't take Roland long to upgrade all their Fantom series with multiple-articulations.
The M3 appear to be able to do it as well with their expanded Combi mode, by layering different performances and using velocity swtiches +/- cross-fading switches which is very similar to softsamplers and gives more expressive power. But I don't know if they have actually recorded more articulations for acoustic instruments to use the full power of this mode. Without recording more raw waveforms of insrtruments in their different articulations, you won't be able to improve the acoustic instrument beyond what it is at the moment. It appears to be mainly for electronic music - which is not a bad thing at all.
Oh, and the Motif ES is nowhere close to even the old JV of Roland in terms of acoustic sounds. Nowhere close at all...
Cheez
Moderator
OK then, maybe some explanations into the terms will help people understand.
Multiple-articulations is something that's very commonly used in the sampling world. Previous synth concept - acoustic instruments uses heavy programming to make it usable for most situations.
But in real acoustic instruments, different articulations exist for one instrument that cannot be done with only one patch. Example - I have at least 8 patches for 1 (one) violin sample in my softsampler - marcato, legato, spiccato, pizzicato, tremelo, trills (tone and semi-tone), scalic runs (in major and minor scales), expressivo. Each style of playing requires a different recording. Obviously, using only one patch to attempt to play all these different styles will limit realiity.
Woodwind instruments is another good example. When you play the first note, it is tongued (you get a sudden start of the note). Further legato notes played does not have tonguing (the transition becomes smooth). This requires 2 different sets of recordings and waveforms. Not to mention that playing pp and ff are different - not just in volume but in tone. Samplers can do this latter thing by easily sampling the instrument at least 4 times (p, mp, mf, f) or more. Synth can do that using programming and filters to change the tones. But to get different articulations, there's no short-cut except to record different articulations.
Next, this need to be made in a way that's playable. For softsamplers, it's easy since it is sequenced. My standard pallete has 40-50 tracks. Softsamplers can also employ cross-fading or key-switches to do it. For example, one (1) of my violin patch - if I hit C1, all notes are marcato; C#1 triggers legato; C2 triggers spiccato, C#2 triggers expressivo etc etc. So one patch can have many "articulations". Another example is cross-fading: with my mod wheel at zero position, it is playing legato; as I move my mod wheel up, it slowly changes into tremelo by fading slowly between the 2 articulations. You can see this makes the instrument extremely expressive.
What the Yamaha XS and the Roland V-Synth GT is doing is exactly that. They may not use key-switches, but they have selected buttons to trigger alternative articulations. This will make acoustic instruments more realistic and expressive.
Multiple-articulations is something that's very commonly used in the sampling world. Previous synth concept - acoustic instruments uses heavy programming to make it usable for most situations.
But in real acoustic instruments, different articulations exist for one instrument that cannot be done with only one patch. Example - I have at least 8 patches for 1 (one) violin sample in my softsampler - marcato, legato, spiccato, pizzicato, tremelo, trills (tone and semi-tone), scalic runs (in major and minor scales), expressivo. Each style of playing requires a different recording. Obviously, using only one patch to attempt to play all these different styles will limit realiity.
Woodwind instruments is another good example. When you play the first note, it is tongued (you get a sudden start of the note). Further legato notes played does not have tonguing (the transition becomes smooth). This requires 2 different sets of recordings and waveforms. Not to mention that playing pp and ff are different - not just in volume but in tone. Samplers can do this latter thing by easily sampling the instrument at least 4 times (p, mp, mf, f) or more. Synth can do that using programming and filters to change the tones. But to get different articulations, there's no short-cut except to record different articulations.
Next, this need to be made in a way that's playable. For softsamplers, it's easy since it is sequenced. My standard pallete has 40-50 tracks. Softsamplers can also employ cross-fading or key-switches to do it. For example, one (1) of my violin patch - if I hit C1, all notes are marcato; C#1 triggers legato; C2 triggers spiccato, C#2 triggers expressivo etc etc. So one patch can have many "articulations". Another example is cross-fading: with my mod wheel at zero position, it is playing legato; as I move my mod wheel up, it slowly changes into tremelo by fading slowly between the 2 articulations. You can see this makes the instrument extremely expressive.
What the Yamaha XS and the Roland V-Synth GT is doing is exactly that. They may not use key-switches, but they have selected buttons to trigger alternative articulations. This will make acoustic instruments more realistic and expressive.
bongman
New member
WHY NO PLG EXPANSION BOARDS?
INDUSTRY INSIDER
WHY NO PLG EXPANSION BOARDS?
There’s no question that some fans of Yamaha keyboards are going to feel left out in the cold by the fact that the Motif XS series does not accept Yamaha’s line of PLG sound expansion boards. These were the cornerstone of what Yamaha called the “Modular Synthesis Plug-in System” introduced with the S80 and continued through the S90, S90ES, Motif “Classic,” and Motif ES. The idea was that you could turn one of these instruments into any kind of synthesizer you needed by installing up to three of the desired boards.
Okay, so with 1GB of sample RAM in the XS, plus how easy Yamaha makes it to store sample-based user Voices on a USB drive or Ethernet-connected computer, we likely won’t miss the ROMpler-type expansions. But there were also boards that added genuine virtual analog, FM synthesis, vocal harmony, and even the acoustic modeling pioneered by Yamaha’s VL synths — ask any horn player with a wind controller, and he or she will tell you that to this day, nobody else gets this right.
We asked Yamaha’s Avery Burdette, a senior product manager who’s been with the company for over 20 years, what’s up with this, and got a candid reply.
“When the new chip was developed for the XS, it was deemed to be a significant improvement in sound quality, so much that the sample-based PLG expansion boards were no longer appropriate,” he explains, “As far as the boards based on genuine alternate synth technologies are concerned — the analog and VL boards, for example — frankly, we realize that there is a group of very passionate users of the alternative technology PLG boards out there, but if the demand for them had been as strong as that passion, we would be having a very different discussion.”
“As it stands, we do make other products for musicians who want those technologies. The S90ES and Motif Rack ES take PLG boards, and the VL70-m sound module is where our acoustic modeling lives. The PLG technology was developed quite a while ago, and to bring it up to the level of XS will require us to completely rethink the entire concept. We hope that the suggestions and requests become so numerous that we have no choice but to do so!”
INDUSTRY INSIDER
WHY NO PLG EXPANSION BOARDS?
There’s no question that some fans of Yamaha keyboards are going to feel left out in the cold by the fact that the Motif XS series does not accept Yamaha’s line of PLG sound expansion boards. These were the cornerstone of what Yamaha called the “Modular Synthesis Plug-in System” introduced with the S80 and continued through the S90, S90ES, Motif “Classic,” and Motif ES. The idea was that you could turn one of these instruments into any kind of synthesizer you needed by installing up to three of the desired boards.
Okay, so with 1GB of sample RAM in the XS, plus how easy Yamaha makes it to store sample-based user Voices on a USB drive or Ethernet-connected computer, we likely won’t miss the ROMpler-type expansions. But there were also boards that added genuine virtual analog, FM synthesis, vocal harmony, and even the acoustic modeling pioneered by Yamaha’s VL synths — ask any horn player with a wind controller, and he or she will tell you that to this day, nobody else gets this right.
We asked Yamaha’s Avery Burdette, a senior product manager who’s been with the company for over 20 years, what’s up with this, and got a candid reply.
“When the new chip was developed for the XS, it was deemed to be a significant improvement in sound quality, so much that the sample-based PLG expansion boards were no longer appropriate,” he explains, “As far as the boards based on genuine alternate synth technologies are concerned — the analog and VL boards, for example — frankly, we realize that there is a group of very passionate users of the alternative technology PLG boards out there, but if the demand for them had been as strong as that passion, we would be having a very different discussion.”
“As it stands, we do make other products for musicians who want those technologies. The S90ES and Motif Rack ES take PLG boards, and the VL70-m sound module is where our acoustic modeling lives. The PLG technology was developed quite a while ago, and to bring it up to the level of XS will require us to completely rethink the entire concept. We hope that the suggestions and requests become so numerous that we have no choice but to do so!”
