5pinDIN - 07 November 2013 09:30 AM

jerrydpi - 07 November 2013 09:15 AM

If one keeps both the XF and MOXF in the Digital Domain (not using the Analog Outs of either unit), should they sound the same (just like a XS and XF sounded the same coming out the FW16E)?

As you undoubtedly know, Yamaha claims the MOXF sound engine is the same as that in the XF.

5PD,

When the MOX was introduced, it was said to be “based upon” the XS Sound Engine, but the consensus was that it didn’t sound as good as the XS.

I take it that this time the MOXF is not “based upon” the XF, but is the same Sound Engine as the XF and should sound as good as the XF using the Analog Outputs of both units?

jerrydpi - 07 November 2013 09:40 AM

When the MOX was introduced, it was said to be “based upon” the XS Sound Engine, but the consensus was that it didn’t sound as good as the XS.

I take it that this time the MOXF is not “based upon” the XF, but is the same Sound Engine as the XF and should sound as good as the XF using the Analog Outputs of both units?

Yamaha USA says, on their website:
The new MOXF series combines a MOTIF XF sound engine and Flash memory expandability, ...

The MOXF Owner’s manual states:
MOTIF XF Sound Engine feature
The wide range of dynamic and authentic MOTIF XF waveforms (such as the realistic sounds of acoustic piano, electric piano, synthesizer, strings, wind instruments, drums) are all included in this instrument. The sophisticated XA (Expanded Articulation) function has also been included, providing greater performance flexibility and acoustic realism. It allows you to more effectively recreate realistic sound and natural performance techniques—such as legato and trills—and provides other unique modes for random and alternate sound changes as you play. Moreover, the instrument features new Arpeggio types for Drum Voices, as well as the existing MOTIF XF Arpeggio types, plus an extensive effect system—including VCM (Virtual Circuitry Modeling) Effects, Master Effect, and Master EQ. In a wide variety of ways, the MOXF6/MOXF8 truly enhances your music performance and creation.

I’ll let you interpret those statements…

Thank you.

How about my answer to your question when you asked me:

Your question was “Which outputs, connected to what, would you use to make the comparison?”.

I answered:

The FW16E outputs on the XF and the Audio/MIDI USB Port on the MOXF, connected to a MacBook Pro, going to high quality Mackie Powered Studio Monitors.

jerrydpi - 07 November 2013 08:57 AM

It looks like my Topic has gone off course a little.

I was never asking if the MOXF sounder better than the MOX.

I’m comparing the MOXF to the MOTIF XF.

I know… I was making the point that, even if people hear a difference there or between any two Motif XS/XF based boards), it could be attributable to the different keyboards, as opposed to different DACs or other things people have theorized about.

jerrydpi - 07 November 2013 09:40 AM

When the MOX was introduced, it was said to be “based upon” the XS Sound Engine, but the consensus was that it didn’t sound as good as the XS.

I’m not sure that’s consensus, though some people did report that. I remember at the time, responding to someone who had tried them side-by-side at a store, that it would be worth trying again using a MIDI cable to trigger both boards from the XS keyboard, to help see if there really was any difference in the sound engine even to someone who reported hearing it, or it it was in fact a matter of the sound reacting differently to the different velocity responses of the two different actions. Unfortunately, there was no response to that. Though again, it’s kind of academic in most instances… if you buy a MOX and bring it to a gig, it’s unlikely that you’re also bringing an XS action to trigger it from. ;-) Still, there are people who do things like, for example, bringing some other 88 with their 61 Motif/Mox, and triggering those Yamaha piano sounds from their other board. In that case, if the controller really is the source of the differences people have mentioned, there could be no difference if you’d be driving either one from the same other-controller.

5pinDIN - 07 November 2013 09:02 AM

I think that the only way to determine if there’s a real difference in sound quality between the XF and MOXF is to run them both into the same sound system, feed both simultaneously from an external sequencer, and carefully balance the output levels (a very small difference in level gives an advantage to the slightly louder unit). Then make it a double-blind experiment as well. Otherwise, various prejudices will creep in.

And even then, based on my keyboard theory, that may tell you that the two instruments sound identical when triggered from a sequencer, but that doesn’t mean that the two will necessarily produce the same results when you actually play them from their own actions.

jerrydpi - 07 November 2013 10:12 AM

Thank you.

How about my answer to your question when you asked me:

Your question was “Which outputs, connected to what, would you use to make the comparison?”.

I answered:

The FW16E outputs on the XF and the Audio/MIDI USB Port on the MOXF, connected to a MacBook Pro, going to high quality Mackie Powered Studio Monitors.

Sorry, I missed your reply.

The MOXF’s USB port will output at 44.1kHz/24-bit. The FW16E can do the same, or be clocked at higher speeds from an external source - it will undergo sample rate conversion. Assuming the same sample rate and bit depth (44.1kHz/24-bit), and that the D/A conversion in the Mac is handled correctly from the two ports, I don’t see a reason why the MOXF and XF shouldn’t sound the same.

anotherscott - 07 November 2013 10:31 AM

5pinDIN - 07 November 2013 09:02 AM

I think that the only way to determine if there’s a real difference in sound quality between the XF and MOXF is to run them both into the same sound system, feed both simultaneously from an external sequencer, and carefully balance the output levels (a very small difference in level gives an advantage to the slightly louder unit). Then make it a double-blind experiment as well. Otherwise, various prejudices will creep in.

And even then, based on my keyboard theory, that may tell you that the two instruments sound identical when triggered from a sequencer, but that doesn’t mean that the two will necessarily produce the same results when you actually play them from their own actions.

I got your point, and I’m not dismissing it. However, I suggested an approach that left the key feel and velocity response out, since the discussion seems to be primarily about whether the sound engines are the same.

The only way you could make a comparison between the XF and MO XF would be
to have both connected to the same hi-quality mixer or interface, routed to the same set of hi-quality monitors (sorry, a guitar amp or even a keyboard “cube” amp won’t do), in a quiet room with no excessive reflections or “slap-back” echoes, the same exact voice selected on both, and levels of both keyboards matched as close to exactly the same as possible.

Then, you’d have to decide for yourself, based on your own listening test.

DavePolich - 07 November 2013 04:06 PM

The only way you could make a comparison between the XF and MO XF would be
to have both connected to the same hi-quality mixer or interface, routed to the same set of hi-quality monitors (sorry, a guitar amp or even a keyboard “cube” amp won’t do), in a quiet room with no excessive reflections or “slap-back” echoes, the same exact voice selected on both, and levels of both keyboards matched as close to exactly the same as possible.

Then, you’d have to decide for yourself, based on your own listening test.

+1

DavePolich - 07 November 2013 04:06 PM

The only way you could make a comparison between the XF and MO XF would be
to have both connected to the same hi-quality mixer or interface, routed to the same set of hi-quality monitors (sorry, a guitar amp or even a keyboard “cube” amp won’t do), in a quiet room with no excessive reflections or “slap-back” echoes, the same exact voice selected on both, and levels of both keyboards matched as close to exactly the same as possible.

Then, you’d have to decide for yourself, based on your own listening test.

Hi Dave!

I know you thought the XF sounded better than the XS, but would you be surprised if the MOXF sounded equal to the XF?

jerrydpi - 07 November 2013 06:14 PM

DavePolich - 07 November 2013 04:06 PM

The only way you could make a comparison between the XF and MO XF would be
to have both connected to the same hi-quality mixer or interface, routed to the same set of hi-quality monitors (sorry, a guitar amp or even a keyboard “cube” amp won’t do), in a quiet room with no excessive reflections or “slap-back” echoes, the same exact voice selected on both, and levels of both keyboards matched as close to exactly the same as possible.

Then, you’d have to decide for yourself, based on your own listening test.

Hi Dave!

I know you thought the XF sounded better than the XS, but would you be surprised if the MOXF sounded equal to the XF?

I don’t have a MO XF. Can’t comment.

Dave,

I wasn’t asking you if you thought the MOXF sounded better that the XF :-)

I’m asking if you would be surprised (based upon your past experience/opinion of the XS not sounding equal to the XF) if the MOXF sounded equal to the XF.

Thanks my friend (and it’s always great to hear from you)!

jerrydpi - 08 November 2013 09:32 AM

Dave,

I wasn’t asking you if you thought the MOXF sounded better that the XF :-)

I’m asking if you would be surprised (based upon your past experience/opinion of the XS not sounding equal to the XS) if the MOXF sounded equal to the XF.

Thanks my friend (and it’s always great to hear from you)!

I’m taking the fifth on this one. Just as I
never posted an opinion on the sound
quality of the MO X, I wont be commenting
on the sound quality of the MO XF.

That is for you all to decide.

The Defense rests their case!

(But thanks for your honesty).

Same quality. Just that there are other differences that may affect how you perceive the sounds.  But if you were to do a blindfolded test, I doubt you can tell the difference by just hearing the sounds, without touching the keys.

I upgraded from the MOXF6 which i have owned for several months to the Motif XF6.  My intuition said that something must be inside that extra grand than what is being compared to with the MOXF6.  I spent frustrating months with my MOXF6 researching all types of outboard gear, interfaces, etc...you name it...to get the sound that i was looking for and finally basically gave up and decided to buy the Motif XF.  Yes, it blew a hole in my pocket but i was absolutely blown away by how much better the XF sounds than the MOXF sounds.  The only person who would conclude that the two sound the same is the person who never owned an XF...lush, warm, analog feel, vintage, etc etc etc....all that i have been searching for.  What a bunch of nonsense...no they do not sound the same and the advertising is deceiving.  Save the extra cash and buy the real deal...the XF is the best sounding Yamaha has and there is no comparison with the MOXF.  You DO get what you pay for out there, folks.  Damn, i learned the hard way.