5pinDIN - 18 October 2018 08:22 AM

I know for certain that the XS and XF have the Toshiba TX4939 processor running MontaVista Linux.
http://staging.mvista.com/download/case_study_MontaVista_Linux_and_Yamaha.pdf

I’ve read that the Montage has a Texas Instruments AM335x Cortex A8, also running MontaVista Linux. I’m not certain that it’s MontaVista, but TI indicates the processor supports high level operating systems - Linux and Android can be had from TI at no charge. See http://www.ti.com/lit/ds/symlink/am3358.pdf
Also note mention of MontaVista under “Available Tools” in http://processors.wiki.ti.com/index.php/Cortex-A8

As to other OS possibilities, for the Toshiba processor (Motif XS and XF) see the attachment. Apparently Windows CE.NET was an alternative.

Oh thank you so much for these references. I had not seen them b4. This increases my fan boy infatuation with my Motif for sure!  Thanx! 

But what makes me wonder about the Montage is the statement;

This product uses MontaVista Linux for the operating system. *Except MONTAGE

Especially the “*Except MONTAGE” from your earlier link.  That makes me think it might in fact be Windows CE.  Well that touch screen is very suspect at the least :-)

5pinDIN - 18 October 2018 08:22 AM

I know for certain that the XS and XF have the Toshiba TX4939 processor running MontaVista Linux.
http://staging.mvista.com/download/case_study_MontaVista_Linux_and_Yamaha.pdf

I’ve read that the Montage has a Texas Instruments AM335x Cortex A8, also running MontaVista Linux. I’m not certain that it’s MontaVista, but TI indicates the processor supports high level operating systems - Linux and Android can be had from TI at no charge. See http://www.ti.com/lit/ds/symlink/am3358.pdf
Also note mention of MontaVista under “Available Tools” in http://processors.wiki.ti.com/index.php/Cortex-A8

As to other OS possibilities, for the Toshiba processor (Motif XS and XF) see the attachment. Apparently Windows CE.NET was an alternative.

Wow the specs on these processors Motif vs Montage hmmm....

On first glance it looks like

Motif —Toshiba TX4939 64bit Risc?
Montage— Cortex-A8 32bit Risc?

Is that correct????

lastmonk - 18 October 2018 09:06 AM

But what makes me wonder about the Montage is the statement;

This product uses MontaVista Linux for the operating system. *Except MONTAGE

Especially the “*Except MONTAGE” from your earlier link.  That makes me think it might in fact be Windows CE.  Well that touch screen is very suspect at the least :-)

As I said, I’m not certain that the Montage runs MontaVista, but it’s apparently an embedded Linux - it might be whatever TI supplies. Since you run Linux, you could see the source code link I provided previously, download the Montage files, and examine them - I personally don’t have the time.

The Windows CE reference was to the Toshiba processor in the XS and XF, not to the Montage.

lastmonk - 18 October 2018 09:35 AM

Wow the specs on these processors Motif vs Montage hmmm....

On first glance it looks like

Motif —Toshiba TX4939 64bit Risc?
Montage— Cortex-A8 32bit Risc?

Is that correct????

It’s correct as far as it goes. I wouldn’t get too hung up on just one spec. For example, the Toshiba runs about half the speed of the TI. As far as I’m concerned, it doesn’t matter what’s “under the hood” if the performance of the overall product is adequate.

I’m not a Motif “fan boy” - I like certain aspects of them, and still can see flaws. I prefer the Motif XF over the Montage because the Montage doesn’t have some features that I want. For other people, those omissions may be inconsequential, and they may find other aspects of the Montage desirable. Neither model is “perfect” (whatever that might mean) - to each his own.

5pinDIN - 18 October 2018 10:07 AM

lastmonk - 18 October 2018 09:35 AM

Wow the specs on these processors Motif vs Montage hmmm....

On first glance it looks like

Motif —Toshiba TX4939 64bit Risc?
Montage— Cortex-A8 32bit Risc?

Is that correct????

It’s correct as far as it goes. I wouldn’t get too hung up on just one spec. For example, the Toshiba runs about half the speed of the TI. As far as I’m concerned, it doesn’t matter what’s “under the hood” if the performance of the overall product is adequate.

I’m not a Motif “fan boy” - I like certain aspects of them, and still can see flaws. I prefer the Motif XF over the Montage because the Montage doesn’t have some features that I want. For other people, those omissions may be inconsequential, and they may find other aspects of the Montage desirable. Neither model is “perfect” (whatever that might mean) - to each his own.

Wow., Understood!  Yes and the final throughput is the determining factor relative to processor speed specs.  But total address space counts for something 2^32 vs 2^64, and instruction set has a little impact too.  And yes overall performance, average case performance, worst case performance all are a factor when considering end user satisfaction understood and agreed!

For sure there will be folks that are totally happy with the Montage family and may even prefer it over Motif family.  That’s kewl and we can all get along.

But I have to chime in when someone wants to equate the Motif and the Montage.  Or when someone wants to say the Montage family is an ‘Upgrade’ from the Motif family.  In these instances features set comparisons, User Interface comparisons, Operating System comparisons, Processor comparisons, even marketing ‘name’ comparisons can be used to help clarify the real differences and whether the term ‘Upgrade’ is applicable.

Yes I am a true fanboy, but only after extremely close detailed , extensive looks at the competition.  Agreed Motif is certainly not perfect and has its cons, but based on ‘my checklist’ (emphasis on ‘my’) it is superior to the competition.

BTW in terms of processors:  I spend large parts of my day with Ultrasparc IIIs, Ultrasparc T1s & T2s on one end and ATmega328Ps at the other end.  So I definitely appreciate the differences between the TX 4939 and the Cortex A8 both are nice processors!

Cheers!  thanx again for all the good info and much appreciated insight!

Motif XF:Toshiba TX4939 64-bit Risc?
Montage: Cortex-A8 32-bit Risc?

I honestly don’t fret about differences in the host CPU as far as Yamaha is concerned. In Yamaha mid- to upper-range products, tone generation and effect processing is handled by proprietary silicon (an SWPxx integrated circuit). The host CPU in a Yamaha keyboard doesn’t carry much of a load and doesn’t access gobs of memory.

Yamaha designs its keyboards to run cool, and in the case of MOX/MOXF/MODX, to be light weight. In that design space, a musical instrument is more like a tablet than a personal computer (or even a thin and light laptop). No fans, no heat sinks, no chassis ventilation concerns, no internal power supply or an internal power supply of modest weight and dissipation.

The best current example of personal computer technology deployed in a musical instrument is Kronos:

http://sandsoftwaresound.net/innards-krome-kronos/

I don’t want to slag Kronos, but it is large, is heavy and has ventilation holes/fan (depending on version).

Yamaha draw on embedded systems technology more so than personal computer technology.

Hope this info helps. All the best —pj

P.S. I’ll take a screwdriver to the MODX someday. Too much fun playin’ :-)

Music technology blog: http://sandsoftwaresound.net/

pjd - 19 October 2018 01:38 PM

[...] I don’t want to slag Kronos, but it is large, is heavy and has ventilation holes/fan (depending on version). [...]

I made the point about heat, power consumption, and how the Motif XS/XF compared with the Kronos over seven years ago:
http://www.motifator.com/index.php/forum/viewthread/455307/

I’m not sure it affected many sales.  :-)

lastmonk - 15 October 2018 08:20 PM

@anotherscott I understand your pain.

You may have confused me with someone else, I feel no pain. ;-) I have happily moved to the MODX7.

lastmonk - 15 October 2018 08:20 PM

I am a gigging musician. I do happily gig with sampled FM.  Any real gigging musician knows how hard it is to cut through the mix with any clarity.  99.9999% of the audiences I play for couldn’t tell you the difference between the sound of ‘properly’ sampled FM vs realtime Analog FM if the prize was 100k. Most ordinary people can’t! Especially once the onstage mix get done with it.  Perhaps in a studio situation with highly experienced synth lovers.  But that’s not what’s going on in a live context.  So anotherscott your statement on sampled FM is on very shaky ground. Are you really familiar with how capable the Motif is with sampled sounds?  It’s a FN Beast.

I know there is a difference between sampled FM and not sampled FM.  The question is what is the practical difference.  Can that difference be discerned by the typical audience in a live situation.  Can you tell the difference in a live situation?  Unless you’re in a very freakish minority the answer is you can’t tell the difference!

The difference is huge. Because sampled FM are mostly just the overplayed FM sounds I never want to hear again, that’s what companies make available as samples. Real FM allows me to use FM for all kinds of cool stuff, not just that godawful 80s ep. ;-)

But also, I was talking about how a lot of nice FM stuff evolves over time, like you might have a timbral change that happens over many seconds, that cannot be duplicated by a filter envelope. These kinds of sounds don’t lend themselves well to sampling, at least not without very large file sizes.