Hi Guys,

I have been thinking of selling my XF6 for the new MOX. It seems yamaha arent really thinking about improvments / upgrades to the OS of the XF. The MOX is way better integrated with cubase (AI knob etc, remote mode), the sequencer seems more direct and less of a hassle. Built in usb audio card. Using the MOX at the GC it just feels overall more snappy /faster, its hard to explain. Maybe the CPU is newer / faster or because of the smaller screen there is less processing to do i dont know.

I would be just losing Flash RAM & Sampling which for the cost of the XF compared to the MOX is sad. I know technology moves fast an all but the flagship keyboard seems to be lagging behind the cheaper one in features. 

Has anyone else thought about doing this or have already? If so do you miss your XF.

It’s more than just losing sampling, you get fewer insert FX, only half the polyphony and an external power supply (I really hate those).

The screen of the MOX is like that of the Classic, ES and MO. Both the XS and XF have slower screen response by comparison.

Guess it depends on what’s important to you.

1. XF sounds better than the MOX.

2. You do give up sampling capability and opportunity to load any third-party libraries that contain new samples.

3. You give up the option of keeping samples stored on a flashboard and
available when you power down and then power back up.

4. XF has a bigger LCD with much more detail.

5. XF performances allow all 4 parts to have insert effects switched on.
MO X performances allow for maximum of 3 parts with insert effects on (4th part cannot have its insert effects turned on).

6. The MOX may “seem snappier and faster” because the CPU has less to do. If more integration with Cubase is important to you, fine...it isn’t to people who use other DAW’s. USB audio card - nice, but there are certainly other USB audio interfaces available.

Would I say you’re crazy to sell your XF for a MOX? Well, maybe not textbook insane, but you’ll certainly miss how good the XF sounds, and I think you will come to regret not having access to the sampling/loading new samples.

As the OP says, MOX has some features which indeed are superior compared with Motif XF, righ out of the box. Check this thread:

MOX8 to XF8 - Not sure that was a great idea!

yes

Re: hi to all

I think you were right.

The XF6 WITHOUT option is 2,5 more expensive than a Mox6 in europe !!!
I dont think the creativity is 2.5 bridled with a Mox.

I think we have to consider that yamaha have to respond to the Korg’s Kronos flagship. It make sense to sell the XF6 before its release. In comparison, the Motif XS are almost unsealable today.

Then you have time to master the MOX and the Yamaha philosophy.
With the anticipated money back, you will be able to buy the Yamaha new flagship.

Otherwise, if the money is not a problem, upgrade your XF6.

My humble opinion.

Thanks for the replies people…

Im still scratching my head about this decision.. The XF could be so much better with a few new features from the MOX OS. I mean how about real time punch in in pattern mode, how hard would that be to add. How about a UNDO button next to the erase button when in record mode so you dont have to stop the seq and dig into menus.. Im trying hard to keep the XF because i do love the sounds but it seems that its dead to yamaha becuase they are probably creating some new workstation to compete with the kronos..

I think you are not crazy .For example MOX is much much faster compared to XF. I think that XF uses a processor that is not really adequate

And I thought the MOX was slow in store function ( a progression bar and a metronome are displayed for 3 long seconds ...)

Those who remember (or even just know) why the word “patch” used to be applied to what we now call a “program”, “voice”, etc. (depending on manufacturer), raise your hands.

How long did it take to “save” the patch? How long did it take to change patches? How many patches could be played at once? :-)

It amazes me, no matter what advancements are made (often at a lower cost to the user than the previous technology), that satisfaction seemingly lasts for a shorter and shorter time.

Try making music - it will distract you from thinking about the “inadequacies” of your gear.

5pinDin, I am 100% with you on this one

We are in the 21th GHz century.

In the industry, it is generaly admitted that a human who is waiting more than one second before an display interface ( which costs here near 1000 € !!! ) is too much time , and less for my personal music time.

I respect your choices. I m so sorry. I dislike waiting in my hobbies.
If you have time and are nostalgic of the necessary ancient time, play with your patchs and use a cycle to have electricity.
Your condescension make me smile.

Swikkythorn - 07 January 2012 06:39 PM

We are in the 21th GHz century.

In the industry, it is generaly admitted that a human who is waiting more than one second before an display interface ( which costs here near 1000 € !!! ) is too much time , and less for my personal music time.

Proving my point that we’re never satisfied.
.

Swikkythorn -

I respect your choices. I m so sorry. I dislike waiting in my hobbies.
If you have time and are nostalgic of the necessary ancient time, play with your patchs and use a cycle to have electricity.

Oh, I appreciate fast interfaces and other rapid operation. I just don’t concentrate on speed to the exclusion of other considerations.

Swikkythorn -

Your condescension make me smile.

I don’t feel superior to you, I’m just apparently more patient. :-)

Proving my point that we’re never satisfied
=> You did rightly proved that Yamaha dont respect this general rule which is not from 2011. A client is satisfied below 1 sec otherwise he lose his one’s patience. Your are then a best good client for Yamaha than me.

I just don’t concentrate on speed to the exclusion of other considerations
=> As you was be able to read in my firt post, I consider the Mox the BEST tool for money. I didn’t know that a XF could be consider slower by users, then my light 3 s comment who waked you.
When a costly machine is low I notice you prefer say “don’t concentrate on speed to the exclusion of other considerations”.

I’m just apparently more patient. :-)
=> I m as patient as you because i use my MOX6. But the difference, I dont consider it is normal for a 2011 commercial product.
My 10 years old XV-5080 was faster. I m agree it is a minor disconvenient before the quality of the product ( even for a > 2500 € XF6, XF7/8).

We are then almost agree.
Do you have rather a comment for the original topic of colonyrecords ?

Thanks. Happy New Year and good music for all!

Swikkythorn - 07 January 2012 08:23 PM

You did rightly proved that Yamaha dont respect this general rule which is not from 2011. A client is satisfied below 1 sec otherwise he lose his one’s patience. Your are then a best good client for Yamaha than me.

Anyone who has read my posts over a period of time knows that I don’t blindly support everything Yamaha does. If Yamaha doesn’t “respect this general rule”, then a potential buyer who cares about it should probably purchase a brand which does “respect” it. If purchase of a Yamaha is made, then evidently this “rule” wasn’t the primary buying consideration.
.

Swikkythorn -

As you was be able to read in my firt post, I consider the Mox the BEST tool for money. I didn’t know that a XF could be consider slower by users, then my light 3 s comment who waked you.
When a costly machine is low I notice you prefer say “don’t concentrate on speed to the exclusion of other considerations”.

You took what I said out of context, making it seem like I’m telling others what to do. What I said (emphasis added) was “Oh, I appreciate fast interfaces and other rapid operation. I just don’t concentrate on speed to the exclusion of other considerations.” Anyone should feel free to make speed their purchase criterion if that’s their choice.
.

Swikkythorn -

I m as patient as you because i use my MOX6. But the difference, I dont consider it is normal for a 2011 commercial product.
My 10 years old XV-5080 was faster. I m agree it is a minor disconvenient before the quality of the product ( even for a > 2500 € XF6, XF7/8).

We are then almost agree.

Whether “normal for a 2011 commercial product” or not, the MOX and XF are what they are. The next “flagship” model may well be faster or have more desirable features, but the current models didn’t get slower or lose features after they were purchased.
.

Swikkythorn -

Do you have rather a comment for the original topic of colonyrecords ?

I suspect that by now my feelings don’t need further expression. The OP needs to determine what things are most critical.