How many sound sources/waveforms does it take?  This is not a rhetorical question.  I really want to know.  I mean really, C’mon man....  how many?

If I had a nickel for every time some keyboard player criticized the Motif for not having the fat sound that he/she was looking for, or for being delinquent because its ‘only a rompler’ I could probably buy Yamaha’s flagship performance synthesizer.

The amazing thing is that often these same folks romantically worship the analog synths, which tend to come stock with a two to three oscillators and for sound sources they might have:

Sine wave, square wave, pulse wave, and triangle wave, a LFO here or there and one or two filters.  And to be sure in the hands of a capable synth player, this setup can get the job done.

But at the end of the day, these synths only have a hand full of initial waveforms and some how they got the job done and created history in the process.

Now my Motif not only has that same set of basic(sine, square, pulse,etc) waveforms, but about 3,970 more waveforms/sound sources.  WTF?

Also we’re not stuck with 2 or 3 oscillators. On the Motif we have 8 oscillators per voice! We don’t have to make do with a couple of filters, We have 18 filters! 

In fact we can use any combination of the Motif’s 3,977 waveforms with its 8 oscillators.  Each Oscillator has its own LFO, Filter Envelop, Pitch Envelop, Amp Envelop, and envelop modulator, portamento,etc.  And as a bonus we have a user defined LFO!

If the sound you’re looking for is not already represented by one of the preset voices that comes stock with the Motif, its a good chance that one of those voices is close and all you have to do is tweak it here or there.  If you still really can’t find a match then Motif has 3,977 waveforms that can act as the raw ingredients for the 8 oscillators!  And I’m not even mentioning how the 60+ effects and gazllion user controllable parameters for those effects can be used to create your sound.

I mean really, C’mon man how many FN waveforms does it take to make your sound? 

How is it that the original synth players got it done with 3 or 4 waveforms a couple of oscillators and a filter or two?  Monophonic, or polyphonic up to 5 or so voices?  LOL

And here we are today with thousands of waveforms as input into a full blown subtractive synth scenario with 8 oscillators and we still can’t find our sound?  WTF?

I’m just sayin, what’s the number? How many waveforms is it gonna take?  If 4000 is not enough, what are we looking at 10,000, 100,000, maybe 1,000,000 waveforms?

All I can say is, that those who claim they can’t get their sound on the Motif, either must not understand sound design, the AWM2 engine, subtractive synthesis, voice layering DSP and effects, or they are unwilling, or not capable of putting in the effort to do so.  I’m just sayin..
Of course I’m biased!

And if we were only talking about Motif’s 3,977 waveforms that really should be overkill for any plausible music scenario.  But in the advent that somehow that’s not enough waveforms, Motif has a fully integrated Sampler, so you can sample virtually anything in the audible range.  I think Motif is capable of sampling sound a little beyond human audible range.  Allowing us to create unimaginable waveforms.

So what gives folks?  Really..  I mean really....  How many FN waveforms is it going to take?

Hi

It takes five IMHO.

1 - AWM2, well we don’t have to discuss this one since it appears we’re both fan-boys of it. ;-)
However, its 4k waveforms are static, so regardless of the quality of them and the patches available using them, there IS a limitation when it comes to PWM as an example.
2 - Virtual Analogue. Novation Mininova is a cheap complement to my MoXF, which covers my need for evolving waveforms with a ton of modulation sources.
3 - Wave tables, lucky for me, the Mininova covers this too.
4 - Sampler, well you have this in your Motif, but it is still outside of the 4k waveforms and their processing/design.  I have a Digitakt, to cover this one.
5 - FM, I’m personally not a massive fan of the DX7 and its FM sounds, but I have a Digitone which is a bit of a hybrid since it also has filters (yes, plural, there are two per voice) which can make some truly crazy stuff happen with its parameter locks and very advanced step sequencer.

I guess my 3 and 5 above can be considered optional, but I would replace any of my 4 synths if they kicked the bucket before considering getting anything else to replace them. Heck, I’ve contemplated getting a 2nd MoXF ‘just in case’…

This was my very personal answer to your question! ;-)

Cheers
zpink

Thanx zpink, I can see how you might come up with this list.  Especially based on how the Motif is marketed. Yamaha and its product specialists focused on The Music Production features of the Motif and spent little if any marketing on the actual synthesis capability of the Motif.  Sure there was marketing of performance mode, and all of the nice voices and arpeggios that Motif comes with out of the box.  But no real discussion about the true Synthesis capability of the Motif. My point on this is easily verified.

But here are the Facts. Lets talk a little synthesis.  AWM2 is not static sounds.  AWM2 synthesis engine supports full Subtractive Synthesis.  This is exactly the kind of Synthesis that Analog Synths use.  Except the Motif has this on steroids.  I don’t know what your background is, so I don’t want to insult you with definitions.  But if you aren’t already sure what subtractive synthesis is, please do a little research.  So Motif has a full subtractive synthesis model that can be applied to the 3,977 waveforms.  The basic types of synthesis as you probably already know are Subtractive Synthesis, FM Synthesis, Additive Synthesis, Granular Synthesis, and Physical Modeling Motif has support for two of these!

In addition to full blown Subtractive Synthesis Motif also supports AM Modulation (thru Auto Synth), FM Modulation (thru Tech Modulation), and Ring Modulation.  These are extremely powerful Modulation techniques that in some cases produce Sidebands somewhat akin to FM Synthesis techniques.

So Far we have the Motif AWM2 Synth Engine supports

Subtractive Synthesis
AM Modulation
FM Modulation (Filter Modulation)
Ring Modulation

But it goes further.  You stated that the Sampler is outside of the AWM2 Synthesis engine.  Not so my friend.  Look up the definition of Granular Synthesis and Then look closely at the feature set of Yamaha’s Integrated Sampler!  If you replace the word slices, for grains you’ll see that Motif offers a very basic but legitimate form of Granular Synthesis.  The idea is that you can use the Integrated Sampler to create ‘New Waveforms’ that can be used in conjunction with existing waveforms to create NEW Motif Voices.  So its not the case that the Motif’s integrated sampler is outside of Motif’s Synthesis Engine (Hence the moniker ‘Integrated’).

So ZPINK here is what you’re really dealing with when you talk about Motif Synthesis capability:

Full Subtractive Synthesis
AM Modulation
FM Modulation (Filter Modulation)
Ring Modulation
Primitive Granular Synthesis

Yamaha and the product specialists did not emphasize the ‘Synthesizer’ in Motif during the marketing of Motif , because at the time the hype in the market place was all about Music Production and Music Workstations.  Yamaha had to position the Motif relative to the attack of the DAW , Roland and Korg offerings.

But make no mistake about it., Motif in addition to being a beast of a music production workstation, it is a formidable synthesizer in its own right.  But Yamaha’s product literature is almost silent when it comes to Motif’s true Synthesis capability.

So I understand your list of 5, and why you might characterize AWM2 the way you did.  But have a look under the hood of a Motif voice.  Look at the Oscillators, Oscillator Parameters,Filters, Filter Envelope Generator, Pitch Envelope Generator, Amplitude Envelope Generator, the LFO’s, Portamento, Velocity Cross Fades, and the Ring Modulators, Tech Modulators,Dynamic Filters, and Auto Synch modulators that are grouped with the ‘Effects’ block it should become clear to you that Motif can hold its own against virtually any synthesizer out there.

And If all of that is not enough take the sounds created in any VST synth or any Omnisphere sound you can imagine, sample it, create a new waveform and add it to Motif’s other waveforms, thus giving you any sound that anybody is creating on any kind of synth.

I’m not saying you don’t need your other synths, because everybody brings something unique to the mix.  I am saying Motif is a fully functional, fully capable synthesizer that can handle the most demanding sound creation, music creation, and sound design scenarios.  Any other synthesizers you might have would just be icing on the cake.

Btw I totally dig Digitone and Digitakt they’re awesome!

Cheers!

Hi lastmonk

Admittedly, I’m in no stretch of the word an expert on MoXF sound design, but with the editor, I would claim I know my way around how to get the sounds I want. Also, most of the sounds I want to get out of it are ‘real instruments’ and those patches are already there to be used with a minimal amount of tweaks! :-)
But just for fun, I do sometimes create sounds from scratch too.

Since I have my Mininova for the ‘analogue’ synth sounds, I haven’t maybe tried hard enough and are therefore wrong in saying this, but I can’t see a way of getting a sweeping PWM out of the AWM2. As in, one where I can myself set a source changing the width. The same goes for a ‘super saw’ type of sound where the amount of saws, the spread etc. can be modulated.

Apart from the oscillators having a static shape, I agree, the rest is a very powerful implementation of subtractive synthesis!

One thing in which I believe that you are actually wrong though, is in that the Motif’s sampling capabilities are part of the AWM2 engine. The MoXF shares this engine (according to Yamaha), the MoXF can not sample, so how can this be? ;-)

I also see my MoXF as a ‘music production machine’ with no ambitions whatsoever to ever perform live with it, or even join a band (way too old for that), so I do very much appreciate the sequencer it has.

I don’t actually need the other synths, I don’t need the MoXF neither. This is a hobby and I’m not even very serious about it when compared to other enthusiasts! ;-) ($14.15 in my Distrokid account last time I checked hahaha)

I think that we mostly agree here though.

Cheers and take care
zpink

Okay zpink, now I see clearer where you’re at.  First let me recommend (from personal experience) Dave Polich’s DVD set on Motif synth engine, and a couple of reeeeally good book/DVD sets.

http://shop.motifator.com/index.php/dvds/downloadable-videos/sound-advice-download-only.html
https://www.robpapen.com/dvd-sound-design.html
https://www.halleonard.com/product/viewproduct.action?itemid=131064
https://global.oup.com/academic/product/creating-sounds-from-scratch-9780199921874?cc=us&lang=en&

You can absolute create your sweeps with Motif’s engine, even on your MOXF, I created my first sweep by mistake, I was staggering two oscillators.  I had their Filter envelopes staggered., and voila a sweep.  But since that time I’ve learned how to do all kinds of sweeps, using Motif’s dynamic filter, and various filter envelope programming.  Think of your super saw sweeps this way.

Assign a dynamic filter to multiple elements, as well as assigning the element level filter to those elements.  Associate the filter width, etc parameters to your choice in ctlset.  It can be done my friend., there’s always a way.  Requires a little ingenuity, and a serious commitment to the MOXF to persevere, but it can be done.  Yea, look at the FM Filter Modulation and Dynamic Filter and apply those as INSA, and INSB on 2 or more oscillators and then tie the whole thing to the mod wheel :-)

These synthesizer modulation techniques have been well documented in a few places.  They are not hard to learn, you just have to know what controls what.  The envelopes control signal level relative to time.  So properly designed filter, and amplitude envelopes can give you several kinds of big sweeps.  Look at that Dynamic Filter in the Effects block, associate it with the mod wheel, or one of the assignable knows, you can create filters dynamically., you can sweep your sweeps on your MOXF.

Rob Papen’s book, Jim Aiken’s book have excellent tutorials, and experiments , and lessons that walk you through step by step of some very famous synth programming techniques.  Dave Polich’s tutorial videos give you some of the basic vocabulary as it applies to AWM2.  Actually Simon Cann’s book:

https://www.oreilly.com/library/view/becoming-a-synthesizer/9781598635508/

Can also show you how to bring your MOXF under your complete control.

Sure you can trial and error and luck up on some of these techniques like I did for my very first Sweep.  But if you really want to know how to create these synth techniques deliberately, with understanding, and in a short amount of time, you need to really understand how filters, envelopes, modulators, and controllers work together to get you there.

Also, don’t underestimate the value of reverse engineering. Take any sound that you like on your MOXF and go into Voice mode, and just look at Filter settings , Envelope settings, Controller assignments and effects.  You can get a glimpse at the professional sound design that was done for your MOXF.

It really does take serious time and commitment to unleash the power in this AWM2 engine.  Yes, some synths will make some of the workflow easier, or more intuitive.  But in my situation I rely primarily on AWM2 Synth engine, and so far I’ve been able to get it all done.

BTW Motif has far more Sampling capability than the MOXF.  So my sampling discussion is exclusively Motif oriented.

I’m not saying that we don’t have very powerful filters, modulation options and such. However, I wasn’t referring to filter sweeps, I may have worded it badly but I was talking about the actual waveform changing over time, pulse width being the most obvious one, but also wavetables and various types of wave folding etc.
The only thing that really matters though is our personal preferences and if you can create any sound you want with AWM2 and your Motif’s sampling capabilities then that’s all good. I sure can’t make my MoXF make all the sounds I want to use.
For some sounds it may be possible to get close but some people may not want to use the editor, and me personally would never dream of doing any heavy editing on neither the MoXF nor the Mininova from the panel alone.
Some times it’s nice to just twist some knobs, and for me, it’s just a hobby which only purpose is to let me escape for a while. If that then ends up being something that someone else happens to approve of, that’s just a nice bonus!

Cheers
zpink

Understood. 

So its your preference not to use the MOXF for that kind of sound design, because you prefer knobs over panels for that kind of editing.

Fair enough as long as you realize it is possible to do that kind of sound design on the MOX-F (i.e. modulating the actual waveform over time)

Even if you are not talking about filter sweeps and the idea is you want to change the waveform over time. 

You can change the pitch of the waveform over time using the pitch envelope generator.

You can change the amplitude of the waveform over time using the amplitude envelope generator.

This change over time occurs between note on and note off.  If you want additional modulation of the actual waveform you can use MOXF’s Ring Modulator, AM and FM modulation capabilities.  In addition to these you could use the user defined LFO to really put a fine point on dynamically changing the waveform.  But of course all of this is from the MOXF’s point of view, which you really don’t want to do.  I’m just saying its possible.

Keep in mind that some of us cut our teeth on screen parameters and not knobs.  For me I’m comfortable with working with parameters on screens.  But even in that situation Motif/MOXF has assignable knobs that can be assigned to the very parameter you are talking about, so that if you wanted to modulate your waveform over time or turn knobs in realtime, you could assign a knob on Motif/MOXF to do exactly that.

As you said, we all have our preferences.  I tend to object when someone wants to relegate Motif to something less than a full blown synthesizer.  Because it is a Synth Powerhouse.  And it is capable of virtually anything other synthesizers are capable of, and usually more, much more.

Granted Motif’s workflow, or its placement and size of knobs and faders may not be for everyone.  But it does have knobs, it has faders, it has buttons, it has assignable knobs, it has assignable buttons.  Its not the case that it is only screens of parameters.  Those parameters can be assigned to knobs, buttons, wheels, pedals, a ribbon, and responsive faders.  The layout may not emulate old school analog synths, but its appropriate for the hundreds and hundreds of parameters that it controls.

But of course all of this is a matter of taste.  If the look and feel that you’re going for is classic analog, then Motif/MOXF will feel foreign and fall short. If you’re still convinced in 2019 that Analog synths produce sounds that digital synths just can’t produce then Motif/MOXF will never measure up.  But if its a matter of pure synth power, flexibility, polyphony, numbers of oscillators, numbers of filters, diversity of filters, numbers of source waveforms, envelope stages, reliability, modulation options, and effects, no old school analog synth could hope to compete.  Yea there are some new hybrid re-issues, but if you started measuring raw synth capability you would see that Motif is well beyond most of their feature sets.

I have observed with many synth players that the grass is always greener on the other side.  All they need is that one more ‘new voice’, they’re often chasing that one new controller that is going be the be-all-do-all controller (super knob?). Just one more oscillator, one more fat filter, just a few more notes of polyphony and that’ll do it.  LOL.  It some cases they don’t even know what they want more of they just want more.

Let me throw out a number.  Its the number of combination of Motif’s 3,977 waveforms with the Motif’s 8 oscillators. Its the number of unique raw voices you can create on a Motif.  Thats how many combination of 3,977 waveforms can you have taken 8 at a time.  Here’s the number: (calculator used TI-89, nCr())

1,541,220,005,837,171,254,382,425 raw voices

I believe that’s 1 septillion voices!!!!  And we’re not even talking about combining those with the countless possibilities for different envelopes and filter settings and modulation options. That would be somewhere in the neighborhood of trillions of duodecillions.  If you can’t find your sound among all of that, and you think you need another synthesizer, maybe you’re really not looking for a sound after all LOL.

I’m just sayin, maybe as synth players we should stop and smell the roses of the instruments we have. And really get to know them and their sound possibilities, sound idiosyncrasies.  Clearly we haven’t even scratched the surface of the Motif class synthesizer!!!

So what you are saying is that it is possible to change the pulse width on a square wave, for instance?
Morph between two waves in a table?

No need to list all the things that AWM2 can do, I already like this engine. Please just tell me how I can modulate the pulse width on a square and how to morph between two waves (not amplitude of two elements) and I will see if it can make the Mininova redundant.

zpink - 12 September 2019 02:44 PM

So what you are saying is that it is possible to change the pulse width on a square wave, for instance?
Morph between two waves in a table?

No need to list all the things that AWM2 can do, I already like this engine. Please just tell me how I can modulate the pulse width on a square and how to morph between two waves (not amplitude of two elements) and I will see if it can make the Mininova redundant.

If I understand what you’re saying , there are many ways to morph between two waves on Motif.  I’ll give you one example how to do it here, but if I tell you all of the ways or all of the ways I know, that would defeat the purpose of my original post!  As synth players we should get intimate with our instruments and become very familiar with their sonic capabilities.  To be certain, like any other musical instrument it could take years.  Especially on an instrument as comprehensive as the Motif.  There is an old saying give a man a fish and he’ll eat for a day, teach a man to fish and he’ll never go hungry.  That said., Depending on how dramatic you want the morph, here is one quick way:

Start with an init voice.

Assign two oscillators a different wave each.  While at the oscillator choice hit category search.  Based on your post the waveforms you’re interested in can probably be found in the range 1360 to 1389 (At least that’s where they are on the Motif, not sure about the MOXF).  Setup their envelopes so one waveform starts before the other.  Make sure their envelopes intersect.  Just as the first wave is decaying and about to release, the second waveform should be starting its attack.  Set Vel CrossFade according to your taste, rinse and repeat until you get the basic wave morphing effect that you want.  The key is to intersect at least the Amplitude Envelopes of the two waves to be morphed.  Depending on the effect you’re after, you can play a few games with overlapping the pitch envelope and filter envelopes as well.  Once you’ve got the basic morph in place between the two waveforms, assign the insA effect of one of the waves to AUTOSYNTH and assign insB effect of the other wave to TECH MODULATION.  Before you start playing with those parameters make sure either insA goes into InsB or InsB goes into InsA depending on what you’re going for.  Adjust the Cutoff Frequencies to your liking.  Ideally having the Cutoff Frequencies Merge or Intersect depending on what kind of morph your looking for.  Easy Peezy!

At that point you’re off to the races!  That’s a quick example of an Oscillator Morph, but obviously you could go up a level to the voice and setup your two waveforms as separate voices, put them both into a performance and morph from one to the other using the faders, assignable knobs, or expression pedal.

The point is zpink, if this is a hobby for you take the time out and simply experiment.  But you need to experiment intelligently.  That means at least understanding what all the parameters are on the oscillator screens.  Really understanding how the envelopes work on the Motif/MOXF.  And really getting a grip on what happens when you assign different filters to different oscillators, while setting their XAcontrol to wave cycle within the proper groupings.  In your case a negative envelope might be just what you’re looking for in terms of morphing oscillators.
And Synth Modulation operators found in the TEC category of the effects section are critical to the kinds of sounds you’ve been discussing.  Take your time and explore.

And its also the case that sometimes you can achieve the same sound going about it in a totally different way.  Maybe you don’t need to morph waveforms, maybe you just need to overlap their phases using LFOs.  There are lots of ways to skin a cat (so to speak) If you have some sonic goal in mind try to come up with different ways to achieve that same sonic goal and see which one is the most effective or flexible.  And the book references and video references that I gave earlier in this thread will be very very helpful in this regard.

Cheers!

This is leading nowhere, man!
You took the time to write a lengthy explanation of what I specifically said that I didn’t want, fade one wave in whilst another fades out. I guess this could be seen as a very primitive wave-table, albeit one which is rather cumbersome to control. Wave-tables usually would use up at least all 8 elements too. They also tend to have one control that can easily be modulated to morph between them.
PWM, since you haven’t yet mentioned this, I assume that you’re at least accepting that this isn’t something the Motif can do?

I quickly made a short video, that shows the 3 things I claim that the Motif can’t do.

Or we could just drop this and accept that you’re happy with only your Motif whilst I think that I need other gear...and live happily ever after!
If we keep going on like this, we may as well bring Purcell back! ;-)

Cheers
zpink

zpink,

I only used two oscillators just to keep things simple.  Also I thought I made it clear that I was going to give you a quick way to accomplish what I thought you were asking for.  And I recommended that you experiment with your MOXF to find the many other ways to accomplish that same thing.  And there are several that I can think of right off the top of my head.

Also a couple of times in this thread I made it clear that Motif’s workflow may not be for everyone.  Its not that Motif could not morph the two oscillators. Its that you didn’t like how they were morphed and you felt that it was cumbersome.  Well that my friend is simply a matter of opinion.  As I said there are several other methods.  And the intersection of the envelopes was only part of the solution, I don’t think you took the time to implement the rest of it or any of it for that matter.  In fact I’m sure you didn’t based on your response.

I’ve never said that you didn’t need the gear you’ve chosen.  I’ve only said that everything I needed the Motif to do it has been able to do.  I also started this thread with a question of “How many sound sources does it take?” The point of this question was to engage the community on why 4000 voices isn’t enough.

As far as things the Motif can’t do.  I can list lots of things the Motif can’t do. It does not do physical modeling synthesis.  It does not do additive synthesis.  It does not do FM synthesis.  It Does not have 256 note polyphony, it doesn’t have a touch screen, It doesn’t have S/PDIF In, It can’t apply more than 2 insert effects per voice, etc.  I could name things Motif doesn’t do all day.  The fact that you think you’ve discovered three things that the Motif can’t do and that somehow those three things are germane, misses the whole point of this thread.  If your other synthesizer can do three things Motif can’t, I can show you hundreds of things that Motif can do that your other Mininova can’t LOL.

The strength of a problem solving process is often measured by how well it works under constraints and limitations.  The real challenge is how to get to our sonic goals with the instruments we have given their limitations. That’s part of the fun and is ultimately a testament to our creativity and resourcefulness.  Hence my original question:  “How many sound sources does it take?” The insinuation was that if you could not find your sound between the 3977 wave forms and the synthesis capability of something like the Motif, that you’ll never find your sound or that maybe what you’re looking for is not really a sound.

After reading your latest response, I am convinced you really do need that other synthesizer.  Fortunately you have it and can accomplish those three things on it.

Its also clear to me from your responses that Motif/MOXF require far more energy and effort than you are prepared to give it. 

There are at least a couple of ways you could look at Motif.  Some see it as a tool, a device, a piece of technology that works until something better or more effective comes along. A workstation that serves a few specific functions relative to music production.  You know the ole ‘Use the best tool for the job’ paradigm.

Others see Motif as a musical instrument that requires commitment ,perseverance, sacrifice, and intimacy. A thing of beauty, an opportunity for endless expression. An instrument that gives you back the more you give to it.  Obviously I’m in this camp.

The three things you believe the Motif can’t do, suggests you’re in the first camp.  That’s why I’ve concluded you really do need that other synthesizer.  Its good you’ve got a setup that works for you.

But just to be clear my friend, you’re actually not in the position to demonstrate what the Motif can’t do.  First of all you don’t have one.  Second, its clear from your responses that you haven’t put in the quality time with the MOXF that you do have.  There’s just too much that you don’t understand about it.  Trying to do a meta analysis about what PCM is or is not capable of is not applicable to Motif because of its AWM2 synthesis engine and its Integrated Sampler, and its TEC section of Modulators.  zpink you can’t look at Motif on paper and correctly conclude what cannot be done with it.  There are no short cuts.  There are no magic bullets.  To really know what you’re doing with a Motif class synthesizer requires time, commitment, patience, practice, exploration and due diligence with one.  Its clear from your responses that you haven’t made that kind of investment in your MOXF.

I’m not trying to be rude here, but for you to conclude what a Motif or MOXF can’t do would be a bit premature on your part.  You just haven’t put in the time and effort.

But no worries, you have a MOXF and there’s no time like today.  Perhaps we can revisit this discussion after you’ve really given the MOXF the time and effort that it deserves and demands. 

I’ve heard nothing but good things about the Novation, and I know the digitone is really nice from first hand experience.  So you’ve got some nice gear. Only you know how much time and effort you can truly give to your instruments.  But whether its your Mininova, your Digitone, or your MOXF they all require a certain amount of attention and effort to get the most out of them.

When you add them all up you’ve got a nice rig, and it appears you have all the bases covered.  I would say you had it nailed at the MOXF, but that just my opinion.  The Mininova + Digitone + MOXF is a pretty comprehensive picture.

The real question: Is that enough?  Is that enough waveforms?  Are you tempted to get the Montage, or new Roland Fantom or the new HydraSynth?  Is there some sound that you’re looking for that you think you cannot make with your Minimova + Digitone + MOXF rig?  LOL

Cheers!

My answer to the original question is still the same, only using AWM2, I can’t have PWM, I wouldn’t have wave-tables (in an anywhere near manageable way) or any folding so the wave-forms themselves are static!

“The three things you believe the Motif can’t do, suggests you’re in the first camp.”
Yet another arrogant and lengthy reply which doesn’t actually answer anything, but yes, I’m a true believer in using the right tools for the job. The things I’ve tried to discuss here are clearly not the job for a Motif or MoXF.

This is now completely pointless and has reached purcell territory, I’m out.

Regards

zpink - 13 September 2019 02:52 AM

My answer to the original question is still the same, only using AWM2, I can’t have PWM, I wouldn’t have wave-tables (in an anywhere near manageable way) or any folding so the wave-forms themselves are static!

“The three things you believe the Motif can’t do, suggests you’re in the first camp.”
Yet another arrogant and lengthy reply which doesn’t actually answer anything, but yes, I’m a true believer in using the right tools for the job. The things I’ve tried to discuss here are clearly not the job for a Motif or MoXF.

This is now completely pointless and has reached purcell territory, I’m out.

Regards

Fair enough.  But I do have two questions for you.

Are you aware of the three Motif waveforms 1354,1355 and 1356?

If so what would call the effect of running those waveforms through the LFO?

To respond to the OP, in my mind we need FM, VA or real analog, sample-based synthesis, and the one that’s missed here, physical modelling, specifically where you can make things that don’t exist in real life. Sort of like the VL synthesis but modernized. Physical modelling can also work with organ so...then effects are next in importance.

Mighty Motif Max - 18 September 2019 01:23 PM

To respond to the OP, in my mind we need FM, VA or real analog, sample-based synthesis, and the one that’s missed here, physical modelling, specifically where you can make things that don’t exist in real life. Sort of like the VL synthesis but modernized. Physical modelling can also work with organ so...then effects are next in importance.

Ok, here is a clarification of the original question and point behind this post.

Motif has 3,977 waveforms.  Motif has 8 Oscillators(Elements).

How many ways can we combine those 3,977 waveforms with the 8 Oscillators to make a new voice?  If we do the math..

We get: 1,541,220,005,837,171,254,382,425 ways!!!

This means we can create: 1,541,220,005,837,171,254,382,425 new raw
voices on the Motif!!!

I think this number represents a septillion. To put a septillion in context, we count like this:

million, billion, trillion, quadrillion, quintillion, sextillion, then septillion.  So 1.5 Septillion is one helluva lot of voices/sounds!!!

The real question is how do we know that the sound, we’re looking for is not among the 1.5 septillion sounds?

Further, if by some extreme stretch of the imagination we feel that these 1.5 septillion sounds don’t contain the sound we’re looking for, how do we know that once we apply Motif filters, envelopes, portamento, LFOs, velocity programming, and effects programming to these

1,541,220,005,837,171,254,382,425 sounds, that we won’t find the sound we’re looking for LOL!

I really appreciate Virtual Analog, Real Analog, FM Synthesis, Physical Modeling Synthesis.  I really do! But I don’t think they are necessary if you have a Motif.  Because a Motif can create:

1,541,220,005,837,171,254,382,425 new raw voices. That can then be tweaked and customized with Filters, Envelopes, LFOs, Detunining, Portamento, Velocity programming, and effects programming. 

And even after all of this, the Motif can sample VA, Physical Modeling, FM Synthesis, and real analog sounds to be added to the:

1,541,220,005,837,171,254,382,425 sounds!!!!

Again, I’m just saying the Motif is up to the task.  I’m not saying the other Synthesizers or Synthesizer types aren’t nice, or kewl to have.  I’m just saying In my particular case they’re unnecessary.  I’m saying that with a little extra effort I can get the Motif to make any sound that any synthesizer can make.  Which makes the other synthesizers redundant or at the very least ancillary .

No offense meant to anyone, I’m just saying Motif can hold its own.