This may sounds like a daft question but..

is it not possible to do everything that is possible in performance mode in song mode? The only difference being that performance mode is limited to 4 parts whereas song/pattern mode provides up to 16.

I get that performances are meant to be used as a tool to help with song writing but wouldn’t be a whole lot easier if all the performance data was initially stored to song mode (say for each performance) then you wouldn’t need to to spend time doing direct performance recording - you’d just have everything there in song mode ready to start recording or performing.

In fact storing the performances in this way is much better for seamless switching between performances. For example, I’ve copied all the midi and mixing data for my 2 favourite orchestral performances, each consisting of 4 parts in to a single song and utilise midi channel 1 for performance 1 (parts 1-4) and midi channel 2 for performance 2 - parts 5-8, and switching between them is seamless rather than switching between two separate performances in master mode.

Unless I’ve missed something obvious here could yamaha do away with a separate a performance mode and just provide users with say 128 mixing templates, some with performance data, some empty and some with song data?

You forget that some of us just want to play “live"… not a prerecorded song every time we play.

cassdad - 14 March 2013 12:25 AM

You forget that some of us just want to play “live"… not a prerecorded song every time we play.

Song and Pattern Modes are not just for recording!  In fact, using a Mixing in Song or Pattern Mode is one of the best ways to organize and access VOICES live...and seamlessly...as per This Article.

Patterns, yes, used in the Performance mode, are great for live performing.  The song mode is not any where near as useful for “performing” as is the “performance” mode.  Go figure.  Particularly if one wants to play “ad hoc”, “on the fly” = “Performance” mode is it.

is it not possible to do everything that is possible in performance mode in song mode? The only difference being that performance mode is limited to 4 parts whereas song/pattern mode provides up to 16.

Not a true statement - perhaps from your perspective you see this as the only difference, it is not. And that is why you drew the incorrect conclusion.

Performances are single timbral (believe it or not), the PARTS are addressed on a single MIDI Channel.  PERFORMANCES are recallable via Bank Select and Program Change. SONG/PATTERN mode"s MIXING program cannot be recalled by Bank Select and Program Change.

on the XS there are 384 PERFORMANCES, only 64 Songs, and only 64 Patterns
on the XF there are 512 PERFORMANCES, only 64 Songs, and only 64 Patterns

_ [PERFORMANCE CONTROL] function for real time access to PART SELECT / ARP HOLD / PART MUTE / ARP ON/OFF - available only in PERFORMANCE mode.
_ Selectable PART for AS1 and AS2 Control - this is disabled when you place a PERFORMANCE in a MIXING setup.
_ Individual CONTROL SLIDER for each PART when accessing a PERFORMANCE in PERFORMANCE mode - ths is not available when accessing multiple PARTS on the same MIDI channel as in MIXING modes - all PARTS respond to one CS (Huge)
_ While in PERFORMANCE mode I can play all four PARTS of the PERFORMANCE internally and transmit OUT on any of 16 MIDI channels to an external device - when accessing four PARTS via SONG/PATTERN I must transmit on the MIDI channel to access the internal PARTS and my external MIDI transmit is fixed to that same channel.

They are similar - not the same.

I get that performances are meant to be used as a tool to help with song writing but wouldn’t be a whole lot easier if all the performance data was initially stored to song mode (say for each performance) then you wouldn’t need to to spend time doing direct performance recording - you’d just have everything there in song mode ready to start recording or performing.

And here you have hit on the biggest difference. No you don’t “get” this! And no, it “wouldn’t be a whole lot easier” !!!

Please attempt to RECORD all FOUR PARTS of your PERFORMANCE after you have transferred them to a SONG/PATTERN MIXING setup… the biggest difference will become apparent - please post us your results!!!

:-)

If you attempt this - you will learn a real big reason why DIRECT PERFORMANCE RECORD exists. Until you try it, you might think that a PERFORMANCE in PERFORMANCE mode is actually the same as a PERFORMANCE in MIXING mode… you will learn, hear, (but perhaps not get at first) WHY? they are NOT the Same.

Let us know. Ha! Glad you posted this portion - have you tried it?

A sequencer is called a sequencer because you record one track at a time, in sequence, one after the other. Recording multiple tracks simultaneously (as in Direct Performance Record) is unique. you can’t do it from Song/Pattern MIXING mode… you simply cannot… not like you can from the PERFORMANCE mode.

cassdad - 14 March 2013 02:49 AM

Patterns, yes, used in the Performance mode, are great for live performing.  The song mode is not any where near as useful for “performing” as is the “performance” mode.  Go figure.  Particularly if one wants to play “ad hoc”, “on the fly” = “Performance” mode is it.

Alright cassdad, I’m going to put you down for not buying the whole Using a [MIXING] setup for multiple sounds “live” idea!

But it does work great for a lot of us!

EDIT:  Just so you don’t misunderstand my intent here, when I say “put you down”, I am meaning “count your vote” or “note your preference”, not any actual “put-down”!.  I’m sorry if that wasn’t stated clearly!

Ok I see your point re the live performance controls I’m just throwing this into the mix to see whether yamaha could have put multiple functionality into a single solution, so expand the capability of either song or performance mode into one single multi-timbral mode that does everything? Maybe not.

Please don’t mix up playing “live” and “recording.

Using MIXING mode for playing “live” works for most people, if however, you need more than sixteen different instruments during one composition, of course, it will not work for you. But I think it is safe to assume that most keyboard players, if and when they find themselves playing 16 different roles in the band on any one composition would opt to have the band hire a second keyboard player.

Setting up multiple sounds to play at once, is no doubt, optimized in PERFORMANCE mode. You have a control panel that allows you to navigate and perform the four recalled PARTS.

Again this works well for the majority. If you find yourself actually wanting to play more than four sounds simultaneously, you might be a candidate for an Arranger keyboard where you are in control of an 8 piece backing band and have 3 Right Hand Voices, a Left Hand Voice, plus 4 arpeggio-like Multi Pads. (That’s 16, and you can simultaneously “play” them all).

While the MOX and Motif-series RECORD via a Sequencer (basically one track after the other, except for the aforementioned Direct Performance Record), you cannot record multiple Parts to independent tracks while playing the keyboard… Not successfully anyway…

... The arranger workstations like the PSR-E series and the Tyros are designed to record all sixteen Tracks discreetly and simultaneously - it is the principal design concept. Thus it is not called a Sequencer, but a Song Recorder… (now none of this is absolute, you can record one track at a time on the arrangers, don’t misunderstand me… It is just where the primary focus of the product lie.

The arpeggios of the synth workstations lend themselves to the music composer
The styles of the arranger workstations lend themselves to the one-man band performer

The one at a time record paradigm is optimized in the synth workstations
The all at once record paradigm is optimized in the arranger workstations.

Direct Performance Record was developed to give the synth workstation customer an opportunity to gain the inspiration of playing within a rhythm section ... Instead of with just a barren tick-tick-tick of the typical workstation metronome.

When discussing the development of the Motif-series breaking a condition called “Writer’s Block” was a constant theme. Years of working with sequencers, it gets really old when every composition starts with an uninspiring click of the metronome. Some times adjusting the real time PLAY FX of one of the 1900 drum grooves actually does inspire the start of a composition.

Again most of the target audience finds comfort in playing along with a drum groove, whether they create it themselves or they borrow one of he hundreds provided. The Guitar and Bass arps are just icing on the rhythm section idea…

Just FYI the MX has just PERFORMANCE mode. So the implementation of the streamlined mode is already here. But one important difference (if you understand this discussion), the MX does not have a built-in sequencer - so recording to an internal recorder is not an issue. So having a single mode that always recalls sixteen Voices for live play is the paradigm in the new MX. If you are doing any sequencing with the MX it is via the USB MIDI /AUDIO connection to your computer. And at that time you can setup and record whatever you require.

The MX can play one Part at a time, you can Layer, you can Split, and with the Editor you can setup multiple complex split/layers

Bad_Mister - 14 March 2013 05:04 AM

_ Individual CONTROL SLIDER for each PART when accessing a PERFORMANCE in PERFORMANCE mode - ths is not available when accessing multiple PARTS on the same MIDI channel as in MIXING modes - all PARTS respond to one CS (Huge)

I don’t understand this statement because in mixing mode I use sliders perfectly fine for each of 16 parts and they work same as they would in performance mode.

I don’t understand this statement because in mixing mode I use sliders perfectly fine for each of 16 parts and they work same as they would in performance mode.

What you are missing or choosing not to understand here is, in order to play a PERFORMANCE transferred to a MIXING setup, is you need to place all four PARTS on the same MIDI channel.

Try it, then tell me you have a Control Slider for each Part. :-)

Here’s what is going on. In VOICE mode the CS (Control Sliders) send System Exclusive messages that control Indicidual Element Level for Element 1-8
In PERFORMANCE mode the the CS send System Exclusive messages to control Part Volume.

In MIXING mode, however, each CS sends Control Change 007 (cc007) which is Main Channel Volume, all Parts assigned to the MIDI channel will be forced to the same Volume controlled by one CS.normally this if fine… Like you say, each Part has is own CS.

Here’s how to understand what we are taking about in this thread. You are thinking the normal one Voice in one Part, each Part on a separate MIDI channel. The discussion here is about ... What if you copy a Performance to a MIXING setup. This will reassign the MIDI RECEIVE CHANNEL so that all can be triggered together.

Call up a blank SONG or PATTERN
Press [MIXING]
Press [JOB]
Press [F3] COPY
Select PERF
Select a Performance you know and are familiar with, mark the attributes you which to copy, Reverb, Chorus, Insert Effects, etc, etc., etc.
Target PARTs 1-4 as the destination. All items you mark will be copied to the MIXING Program, the TEMPO will automatically match the Tempo as set in the Song or Pattern.

Press ENTER to execute.
Now when you return to the main SONG or PATTERN screen you will see the Voice in PART 1 listed but blanks listed for Parts 2, 3, and 4 because nothing is assigned to MIDI Channles 2, 3, or 4. (and there is not enough room to show all four PARTS in slot 1.

When you select [1] you will hear all four PARTs because they are all assigned to MIDI Channel 1
Press [MIXING
Press [EDIT]
Press PART [1] to view PART parameters
Press [F1] VOICE
Press [SF1] VOICE
See how PARTS 1, 2, 3 and 4 are all assigned To Channel 1. Basic MIDI, this is how you can play them all simultaneously. When you adjust CS1 all four PARTS respond to the cc007 message you are sending. This is what we are talking about here in this thread. And you cannot record to the sequencer like this because (although you can play them all together, you cannot record the MIDI data because when you go to play it back.... the data for the drums will trigger all four Parts, the data for the bass will trigger all our Parts, the data for all Parts are all generated on the same channel… Chaos!!!

If you want individual control over Volumes with four separate CS you have to use PERFORMANCE mode, trust me, or prove it to yourself. Sure you could transmit on four separate MIDI channels from Master mode but this does not makes a whole lot of sense when Performance mode already solves the issue of playing multiple sounds with individual volume and controller control.

Long story short, Performance does have a reason to exist!

Hope that helps.

My 2 cents....
Most of my live work is done with the interfacing of the S90 XS and the Motif ES6 (still having fun with the XS6 at home and setting it up for live....I digress). I have to have the weighted keys of the S90 XS for comfort and I operate in Performance mode there. But I also use Performance mode with the ES 6.

I have a few songs I my presentation that I have set in a Pattern Mix. Like the ‘Bad 1’ has stated, I have two Performances in that Pattern Mix. One that is on the same MIDI channel as the S90 XS, but the other is on another MIDI Channel which forces me to put my ‘hands’ on the ES 6.

MIDI channel 1 has my Bass and in one case, my Clavinets and Fusion for ‘Superstition’. When I want the ‘Horns’, I have to put my hands on the ES 6 because they are on another MIDI channel (5 It’s progressive with itself). For ‘me’ it works.

I think the point that you are missing with Performance Mode is the flexibility of it. I work alone and with two keyboards. The benefits are immeasurable. In area I work in, there is a ‘blind spot’ from the dining room, and I can’t tell you how many times people have come from that blind spot to see ‘one person’ standing there when they thought there was two or three. That’s because Performance Mode affords you the ability to ‘fade in or out’ additional Voices like Strings (I use often) or solo instruments ( a luxury with two keyboards) etc. I even have some with the Drums in the Performance, though I also work with separate Drum Machines.

Then again it comes down to the way you want to work. The Motif Family of workstations offer options, depending on model, that are varied,flexible and convenient depending on your ‘comfort zone’ performing by design. Performance Mode is an option worth exploring and getting your hands a little dirt with the detailing.

Again....I do have a few songs that ‘need’ to be in Pattern Mix Mode, but for the most part, Performance Mode on both and with a little ‘razzle dazzle’ with Master Mode, and practice....transitions can go quite seamlessly.
Just a thought..............

Bad_Mister - 14 March 2013 05:04 AM

A sequencer is called a sequencer because you record one track at a time, in sequence, one after the other.

Well, when it comes to the vernacular, a sequencer is something that lets you program a sequence of events. It can be just one track. In fact, the earliest sequencers were single track devices, triggering monophonic synthesizers!

But more to the point at hand…

Bad_Mister - 17 March 2013 04:48 AM

If you want individual control over Volumes with four separate CS you have to use PERFORMANCE mode, trust me, or prove it to yourself. Sure you could transmit on four separate MIDI channels from Master mode but this does not makes a whole lot of sense when Performance mode already solves the issue of playing multiple sounds with individual volume and controller control.

I think it actually does make sense to use Master mode (in conjunction with a Mix) rather than Performance mode for this application, because sounds won’t cut off when you switch from one to another. No? For live performance, a Mix brought into a Master might give you the best combination of functionality. It doesn’t seem like you lose much compared to Performance mode strictly for live performance, and you get the advantage of no sound cutoffs.

To get back to vernacular then, it’s funny that, in a sense, it seems to me that Song/Pattern (Mix) mode is better for live performance than Performance mode, and Performance mode—with its arp controls and DIrect Performance Record—is better for song composition than Song mode! (Though I understand that Song mode is also for crafting multitrack sequences.)

I think it is a case of use case… And what most people do. While it is trendy and popular to think you need seamless access to tons of sounds. But in reality most keyboard players still start and finish the song with one sound, probably in second place would be those using two or three sounds…

So if you are one that needs to seamlessly switch between 8 or 10 or even 16 sounds in a single composition, you have a way to go for it (MIXING). But for the regular folk, probably Performance mode’s four is two or three more Voices than most people need. In reality…

And while I fully understand those that demand having seamless access to 8 or even more sounds, I hardly think they are the majority. Just my opinion, based on talking with literally hundreds and hundreds of synth workstation users. (not just based on what I would do, personally).

And we try to offer solutions for even the very demanding, solutions that work. If Performance mode works for you, use it. If MIXING mode works for you, use it. If associating a MIXING program, with a Master Zone program is what works for you, by all means, it is within the scope and concept of the design.

The XF just added a new Master mode feature/function giving real time Zone ON/OFF switches for the 8 internal and 8 external Zones, this allow for some new exciting possibilities for on stage control… Find what works for you and use it.

Bad_Mister - 18 March 2013 01:03 PM

in reality most keyboard players still start and finish the song with one sound, probably in second place would be those using two or three sounds

I agree, many (and perhaps, as you say, most) players start and finish a song with one sound. Heck, all they need is Voice mode! For second place, people switching among two or three sounds during a song, they may not realize the nicety of having no sounds cut off until they have it. The funny thing is, it wasn’t even a feature I was looking for when I bought my first Yamaha (an S30), because it didn’t occur to me that it wouldn’t have it! Just by luck, the other boards I had been using at the time happened to work that way, and I didn’t realize it was any kind of “special feature.” So when I got that Yamaha, I had to learn to time my patch changes so that my left hand sound wouldn’t glitch when I went to change the right hand sound. (I was changing from one programmed split to another, but the LH voice was the same for both.) Maybe there was a better workaround at the time that I didn’t discover.

Bad_Mister - 18 March 2013 01:03 PM

And while I fully understand those that demand having seamless access to 8 or even more sounds, I hardly think they are the majority. Just my opinion, based on talking with literally hundreds and hundreds of synth workstation users.

You may be right. Though another thought I’ll toss out there is, those hundreds and hundreds of workstation users you’ve spoken with have probably disproportionately been Yamaha-oriented users (people attending your workshops and such). People who knew they needed this feature may have looked elsewhere to begin with, so your sample may be naturally skewed toward people who did not consider this to be an important feature. (Or they could not have even been aware that this was a feature that distinguished some models from others.)

Regardless, for live performance, I think it is at least as useful a feature as any of the ones you listed as advantages that Performance mode has over Mix. That is, for many (most?) players, probably none are essential, but every one of those features probably has users who find them crucial! I am probably more skewed toward Mix/Master because I learned the modern Yamaha architecture on a MOX, and one of your key listed advantages of Performance mode, the CS control of the four voices, doesn’t exist on the MOX, and in fact, the closest you can get to that on a MOX is to create your 4-Voice setup as a Mix and bring it into a Master! This is actually the reason I started to explore Mix mode in the first place.

Bad_Mister - 18 March 2013 01:03 PM

The XF just added a new Master mode feature/function giving real time Zone ON/OFF switches for the 8 internal and 8 external Zones, this allow for some new exciting possibilities for on stage control…

That is very cool, having buttons to instantly mix and match any which way from a set of internal and external sounds. Will the MOX be able to do this (albeit with just its 4 external zones)?

in most rock bands we see usually 3 or 4 musicians so setting to 4 parts performance mode seems right decision by yamaha.

tDogg - 13 March 2013 08:42 PM

is it not possible to do everything that is possible in performance mode in song mode? The only difference being that performance mode is limited to 4 parts whereas song/pattern mode provides up to 16.

In addition to the other distinctions that have been discussed here, one other difference I’ve run into is that, in Voice mode and in Performance mode--at least on a MOX (I don’t have an XS)--you can hit the Group button (A through H), and see a list of what sounds are assigned to the 16 buttons. That function is not available in Song mode.

I understand how/why that distinction happened… the architecture is such that the A through H buttons don’t have the “patch select” function in Song mode that they do in the other modes. (In fact, they have no function at all.)

That said, it is very nice to be in Voice or Performance mode, hit A (or whatever letter), and see a nice display of what sounds are assigned to the 16 buttons (I wish that display would not necessarily disappear after you make a selection, but that’s another topic). Since that button does nothing at all in Song mode, I wish they had set it up with that “extra function” so that it would give you the names of the sounds assigned to the 16 channels, so you would have an at-a-glance reference for what sounds are currently assigned to the 16 buttons, for those of us who are using that mode for live performance (and there seem to be a good number of us interested in using it that way, with the advantages well discussed in the article that cmayhle referenced above).

Might there be some other way to accomplish this function that I missed? I haven’t found it on the MOX. Maybe there’s something on the XS/XF (with their bigger screens) that will list out the sounds assigned to the track buttons, that you can reference while playing?

(Edit: I realize that this is also complicated by the fact that you don’t have to necessarily set up a Mix with each sound on its own channel (and therefore activated with its own button)… you could have multiple sounds assigned to a single channel/button, and then other channels/buttons with no sound assigned at all.)