(List continued from last post)

10. The vocoder: in my opinion, the vocoder is a cool feature with lots of potential, but it takes too long to set up to be used spontaneously. Instead of having to manually route the A/D input through ‘ins L’ (which carefully hides down there at the bottom of the option list), couldn’t there be a quicker way to enable the vocoder at the press of a button or two, at least in ‘Voice’ mode ?

11. Is there a way to see all file names (of all types) at once in ‘File mode’ ? This is especially useful for locating files on a USB stick when a computer is not around.

12. While attempting to load a single voice from files including several voice banks (such as the ‘Inspiration in a Flash’ file), selecting a particular user bank is done by pressing the ‘User bank’ buttons. This is difficult to find out because there’s no on-screen indication of the currently displayed voice bank and no indication of which buttons to use. The only clue is that the LED indicator on one ‘User bank’ button lights up. Furthermore, navigating out of the single ‘User bank’ display to the file name and back sometimes causes the whole file to be scanned from scratch, causing quite a long delay. Couldn’t the file’s voice index be cached while it is being browsed ?

13. Allowing to save a single song to a file: if I understand correctly, the most compact way to save a song to a file is by using the ‘AllSong’ format. However, this format would include all stored songs in the file, which is great as a backup methodology, but it can become quite cumbersome when several songs are stored this way, and each song is stored in a different song index. Why wouldn’t the Motif allow us to save a single song to a file, regardless of its index ?

14. Song storing/saving logic: let’s say we edited a song with ‘mix voices’ (no samples involved). Which of the following is the correct procedure for making sure all the information is stored on a file ?
a. ‘Store’ each of the ‘mix voices’, then ‘store’ the song, then save the song (in ‘AllSong’ format).
b. ‘Store’ the song and save it. All ‘mix voices’ data is stored automatically.
c. Just save the song. All the non-stored data along with the ‘mix voices’ is stored automatically.

15. Typing a name for a voice or a song (without a USB keyboard):
Motif has about 6 times as many buttons as a cell-phone, but still typing takes longer, since most of the buttons are unused in the process:
a. The program/track buttons could be used for letters.
b. A ‘shift’ button would be much more helpful than the current ‘double case’ line.
c. The right arrow key could also be used for inserting spaces: it’s not that bad if a file name would have trailing spaces. In case it’s a problem, why not trim them automatically ?
d. The ‘All Clear’ button must have a confirmation dialog: it takes quite a long time to type in a name, and the F6 button has a moderate chance of being pressed by mistake throughout.

16. Velocity curves: this one was already requested by many people. Since some voice presets were designed with XF6/7 in mind, and some with XF8’s weighted action keyboard, it would make sense to allow more flexibility in the global velocity curve settings, especially being able to manually control the curve’s slant and offset.

Dear Portamento,
I’m very happy to read that somebody is really interested in usability issues, and spends some time in listing the Motif XF usability problems.

I bought this workstation one week ago so I’m in the best situation for an early evaluation.

I’ve already experienced many of the problems in your list (just to recall one of the most naive: setting a song name… fantastic!). But in my opinion what makes things even worse is the user manual. Why for the hell there is not a what-if section?

For example:

Scenario: live concert tonight
Needs: playing a 40-song list, together with my band
Requirements: 20 different voices, more or less, some with a couple of arpeggios to choose between, organized as effectively as possible.

Answer?

I bet that 10 readings of the manual, in its current structure, are not enough to be able to set a reasonable answer. After a week I’ve no idea if in my case it would be better to organize the voices in a couple of songs, in 40 performances, by using the master function, or what else.

What do you think about it?

Maybe the simplest answer is: there are the user presets just for this reason! Ok but… reading the manual… it seems that the saving and loading of single items is not allowed, so a newbie like me is not so ready to risk the factory voices currently stored in the user presets (not to mention that the newest ones, the s6 piano for example, are just there!). What a mess…

Loading of single items is allowed and possible on the entire Motif and S- family.

And, I wonder if it’s wise to use different voices for every song.
The pro’s that you cover had their typical own sound, even when
THEY covered.
Having 1000 Voices under the hood doesn’t mean you must use them all.
Example: Keith Emerson used only a handful of Hammond sounds
and, as far as I could hear, only 3 or 4 Moog sounds.
The rest is his playing skills.

;JOOP!

P.S.: and his grand had only one (1).

I’m quite sure that the most of my doubts come from the fact that I’m a Motif XF newbie. But this is exactly the point. I’m trying to understand how much usability complexity must be related to functional issues (the Motif XF, as a music workstation, is with no doubt a very complex system), and how much can be attributed to poor design (and, for this reason, could be eventually avoided).

40 years ago, when I went to one of the largest cinema’s in Amsterdam,
they had a huge concert-organ with hundreds of switches,
for any thinkable sound.
At that time they sold an electronic house organ (Sony?)
with only 8 ‘voices’.

Nowadays we have the first one at home to the price of the latter.
So, everything we dreamed of is available, but ......
..... (there’s always a ‘but’) not everything at the same time.

To deploy a nowadays synth is a skill by itself; not for everybody.
This is also true for Korg, Roland, Nord, Moog ...........

;JOOP!

Portamento - 06 May 2011 10:39 AM

Song storing/saving logic: let’s say we edited a song with ‘mix voices’ (no samples involved). Which of the following is the correct procedure for making sure all the information is stored on a file ?

a. ‘Store’ each of the ‘mix voices’, then ‘store’ the song, then save the song (in ‘AllSong’ format).

First, let me thank all of you that purchase, use and then share your experience with your Yamaha product. This information is always valuable - particularly when offered in a constructive manner. Many of the things (believe it or not) are discussed by those of us who work at Yamaha (and have been discussed long before the product hits the streets). Some things are no-brainer things and others are items that takes quite a bit to ‘fix’/’solve’ and still others have very viable workarounds (we’ll get to those in a minute). Hopefully, you took advantage of the opportunity to fill out the Survey posted here a week or two ago - we get lots of interesting feedback.

One thing that looking at all that data does is really show what the majority of folks are thinking. Even though we all have individual likes and dislikes, and our own personal wish list like a “what if?” section in a manual (yikes)… not sure how that would work. We participate daily in a forum like this to deal with the WHAT IF’s - and that seems to be working for many folks.

As the price increases on products you can get a lot more functionality, but there is an inverse curve at work here. At a particular point the price precludes many of the targeted audience from purchasing the product. Until you sit in a meeting and brainstorm about what would make a really cool product, and then have the disappointment when you realize what all that cool stuff would cost.

Every now and again Yamaha will build the product - if only as a CONCEPT product… such as the VP1 (wow, was that something)…

The Motif XF is a mature product (means it has benefitted from lots of customer feedback) and many new exciting features/functions to come. I, literally, have to go run catch an airplane now (any one now how long it takes to get from security to Concourse D in Cleveland Ohio?), but if you owned your XF for only a few weeks, give yourself a little more time before you conclude that something is “poor design”.

And to the original poster, thank you for taking the time to write down your thoughts. As there were no real questions, I do not have anything to really address. But wanted to hope that you filled out the survey _ and thanks to all you have!!!

Portamento - 06 May 2011 10:39 AM

11. Is there a way to see all file names (of all types) at once in ‘File mode’ ? This is especially useful for locating files on a USB stick when a computer is not around.

One man’s feature is another man’s nuisance.

The Motif series has always had context-sensitive menus. That means when you look at files on a storage devices it shows them by type of file. Only files that are sensible for the operation are visible to keep the display uncluttered.

The shortest way I can think of to see all the files on your drive is to keep the hierarchy flat (i.e. don’t nest them into folders). Select Load and choose a type that spans multiple file formats. For example, selecting Sample Voice will display any All, All Song and All Pattern files. Selecting Voice will display only All and All Voice files. Selecting Song will display All, All Songs and MIDI files. Etc.

Portamento - 06 May 2011 10:39 AM

Allowing to save a single song to a file: if I understand correctly, the most compact way to save a song to a file is by using the ‘AllSong’ format. However, this format would include all stored songs in the file, which is great as a backup methodology, but it can become quite cumbersome when several songs are stored this way, and each song is stored in a different song index. Why wouldn’t the Motif allow us to save a single song to a file, regardless of its index ?

Again, this just follows the way all Motifs have worked. Saving is always to an All or All “Something” file. This is a convenience to most users, especially the All file since[b] any type of information can be reloaded individually from one.

There are workarounds of course. If I save All Songs when only one song is in the machine then I get a file with only one song in it. For Motifs prior to the XS, this worked well by default since sequence memory was cleared on power down.

Now that the XS and XF have non-volatile sequencer storage you would have to save All Songs as a backup, manually clear all the songs from the machine except the one you wanted to save, save All Songs (to a new file) then reload All Songs from the backup.

Yep, that sure is a pain in the butt ;) so I never bother. What I do is name the All Songs file after the song of interest. That way even if I have saved more than one song, I can still identify which file has the song I’m interested in.

My advice is to make your peace with the file system and develop your own pet methods for quick navigation.

I’m an interaction design scientist, and I have to apologize because sometimes the terms we use to qualify systems or characterize situations could be misunderstood. The XF is definitely NOT a bad product (would I have bought it in that case?). On the other hand, I completely agree, it is clearly a mature project.
I bought it mainly because of sound quality and for its immense music composing power. Now both these aspects haven’t disappointed me at all. Sounds are great and I start to discover the fantastic world of composing music thanks to performances, patterns, songs, etc.
But what I was expecting, maybe, shoud have to be a better affordance because, as I said in a previous post, I’m not so sure that the quite scarce level of it (for a newbie, of course) can be completely imputable to the inner functional complexity of the Motif.

I was only wondering that maybe, just because the Motif project is mature, there could be the need/chance of a radical change. The Motif could be the past, while the future would start from scratch. Only users’ needs from one side, without concerns about implementations, only product functions on the other hand, without concerns about implementations, again.

Implementations… come afterwards. There is much to do before, the mapping between needs and functions for example. Or, in other words, the interaction design concern. Here the what-if I referred before would have the major role, and would be crucial.
As a newbie, I cannot spend a week on the manual to understand how to use the Motif for the show tonight with my band. The “show tonight with a band” should be one of the scenarios directly available on the control panel of the motif-to-be. What happens in the motif-to-be when this scenario is selected? Who cares. But all the stuff regarding composing, etc., should disappear. What I mean could be translated in widening the concept of “local menu”, cited by meatballfulton. But there is a deeper study of interaction design behind.

This is the 1% of what I think about the Motif. And I’d like to go ahead discussing about it. Better would be to find a more structured way to develop the topics.
Bye.

Why is everybody always spitting at the manual?

I bought a new Windows7 PC in January.
There is no manual, although you can spend your weight in gold
on books.
I’m still struggling with the goodies of Windows7:
- why can’t I put a file there,
- why can’t I delete that other (.bak) file,
- why can’t my program access something,
- why is my computer using 1500Mb (!!!) after start up only.

I could understand my Motif ES8 within a few months,
and I understand the manual better each time I browse it.
So, why complain.
Could it all be Motifs ..............................

;JOOP!

Having been tempted more than once to “spit” at my ES7 manual I think I can answer this one!

If you ever get the chance, sit down with an Ensoniq TS-10 or TS-12 and the manual. Well written, logical, in plain english, examples and step by step instructions, no assumption of previous knowledge (like Windows!).

I have to say, I was spoiled. My TS was the only synth I’d ever owned. When I got my ES I just assumed it would be the same scenario. Sadly, I was mistaken. It’s fortunate that the Motif sounded so good.... kept me from throwing it out onto my driveway.. :)

Don’t get me wrong, not a basher here. I’m thiiiis close to taking the XF plunge as we speak. But if the manual hasn’t improved since the ES? Then yeah, it kinda blows.

gutterspunk - 11 May 2011 01:14 AM

Having been tempted more than once to “spit” at my ES7 manual I think I can answer this one!

If you ever get the chance, sit down with an Ensoniq TS-10 or TS-12 and the manual. Well written, logical, in plain english, examples and step by step instructions, no assumption of previous knowledge (like Windows!).

I have to say, I was spoiled. My TS was the only synth I’d ever owned. When I got my ES I just assumed it would be the same scenario. Sadly, I was mistaken. It’s fortunate that the Motif sounded so good.... kept me from throwing it out onto my driveway.. :)

Don’t get me wrong, not a basher here. I’m thiiiis close to taking the XF plunge as we speak. But if the manual hasn’t improved since the ES? Then yeah, it kinda blows.

Yes, you and I were spoiled. I have an ASR-10 at the house and for it to not have a large color screen, who would ever have thought that it was the easiest keyboard/synth to figure out ever. Ensoniq’s were notorious for user friendliness and without a touch screen or all the knobs....Amazing!

gutterspunk - 11 May 2011 01:14 AM

Having been tempted more than once to “spit” at my ES7 manual I think I can answer this one!

If you ever get the chance, sit down with an Ensoniq TS-10 or TS-12 and the manual. Well written, logical, in plain english, examples and step by step instructions, no assumption of previous knowledge (like Windows!).

I have to say, I was spoiled. My TS was the only synth I’d ever owned. When I got my ES I just assumed it would be the same scenario. Sadly, I was mistaken. It’s fortunate that the Motif sounded so good.... kept me from throwing it out onto my driveway.. :)

Don’t get me wrong, not a basher here. I’m thiiiis close to taking the XF plunge as we speak. But if the manual hasn’t improved since the ES? Then yeah, it kinda blows.

You got the point. In other words, the ensoniq manual was written using your language, the user’s one, and not the developers’. But this is a common mistake for technology manufacturers.

Yesterday evening I went some deeper into the reference manual. It starts with a very good list of “functions”, all of them linked to the following pages as an hypertext. Good effort, with no doubt.

Then? Where is the rest?

What is missing, unfortunately, is the mapping between our (users’) needs and that fantastic bunch of functions! Manufacturers can’t ask the users for doing this mapping by themselves, simply because it’s impossible to conceptualize the product starting from a manual shaped like the current one.

In my opinion, the missing part of the manual is just the “what-if” section. Exactly the mapping between users’ needs and functions. This for now would be enough. Next generation of Motif… maybe will be developed in an extreme top-down way, keeping in mind interaction issues since the beginning or, even better, starting exactly from them.

Thank you for the comments so far.

Bad Mister, per your request I filled out the survey, but it seems to be aimed at future products, while my concerns are for current usability issues which may be fixed for the Motif XF/XS via small updates to the OS. So, I’m most interested to know whether anyone at Yamaha is taking our comments into consideration while planning future OS updates.

Regarding product maturity, it is interesting to note that although the XF/XS are technologically much more powerful than their predecessors, some usability aspects seem to have degraded. Obvious examples are the response time, boot time and slider navigation. Here’s a short and easy test: how much time does it take to select one of the guitar instruments by category and to increase its default reverb on an ES vs. an XF/XS ?

Regarding Ozio’s comment about the manual: I think good documentation is an excellent resource for discovering what a product can do, but if a reference is used too often, it might be an indication of poor usability. (How often do you consult your car’s manual ?) In any case, problems related to the initial learning curve are less persistent than the usability issues I’ve listed. While learning can be fun, reiterating is both tedious and time-consuming.

Bad Mister, per your request I filled out the survey, but it seems to be aimed at future products, while my concerns are for current usability issues which may be fixed for the Motif XF/XS via small updates to the OS. So, I’m most interested to know whether anyone at Yamaha is taking our comments into consideration while planning future OS updates.

Not sure you can know what it is aimed at. And to think we at Yamaha are not always looking to improve current product is to indicate you must be new to Yamaha products and to Motifator.com (it is the reason we participate here and has been the source of much valuable feedback - for some 10 years now!!!!). I cannot ensure you of anything concerning future updates or our discussions - that is not my role in this whole thing - I don’t know who is reading this (as in the competition) - besides “specifications subject to change” works in two directions. We never want to promise something that is total vapor-ware. So as with all updates and future things - you will just have to wait and see.

I do disagree with many of the points but that is neither here nor there.

Boot time: Non-issue. I certainly don’t want to go back to my TRS80 Radio Shack Color Computer because it booted immediately. I’ll trade the current computer power for the “boot-time” wait, anytime, every time.

How often do I consult the manual of my car??? You’re kidding right? Never, for how to drive because that information is not in that manual. How to fix something or operate a feature I’m unfamiliar with _ every single time. truly.

When it comes to the XF I never (ever) consult the manual for information on how to drive, er, how to play it, because that information is simply not in that manual… How to operate a feature I’m unfamiliar with _ every single time. Truly… and I know it better than most (forgive me, but I do) and it makes me smile when when I’m talking with a customer and they tell me they “finished reading the manual...” Depending on their current level of frustration (which I try not to make worse)… I’ll may tell them the fact that I never ‘finish’ reading a manual. It is a reference book.

I’ve learned from interaction with (literally) thousands of musicians, that there are many things that would never have occurred to me to try, but it is exactly what they want to do. Some are very legitimate things, others are fanciful (wish-list type things), others down right ‘not possible’, but I try and investigate them as fully as I can - and try and offer a method to proceed.

Often with a combination of features and functions, it can be done. This ain’t no car, and we know it is far from perfect, but it is ‘state-of-the-art’ and does a serious amount of musically relevant things for those not intimidated by learning. And there is no one way to work (as in older gear that was supposedly easy-to-work - where are those companies today????) - someone once said how easy it was to program a MiniMoog, well, with 30 or 40 parameters, no kiddin’ - try a few hundred, try a thousand parameters… yikes. 

The manual is not complete: If it were you couldn’t pick it up. Take just one item… the FLANGER effects. Originally, and I’m talking back in the day (1970’s) the flanger “effect” took two 2-track tape recorders playing the same material simultaneously… by the time EVENTIDE (I believe it was them) came out with a rack mount Flanger at about $1100, it was seen as a bargain by the industry. I remember when the studio I was working at got one and I sat with that manual and attempted to absorb its contents.  Now a Flanger is in everything and no one pays it any mind. But it was a separate device with a separate manual and everything… now multiply this by all the units and instruments (for that matter) that the XF includes and their manuals… just how many devices, instruments and processes does the XF include??? anyone want to venture a guess?

And, by the way, it takes the same amount of time to select a guitar by category and increase its default reverb on the Motif, Motif ES, Motif XS, or Motif XF… (really) am I missing something???