Dromeus - 11 December 2013 02:33 PM

MOXF, MOTU 828mk3 Interface, 44.1kHz 16bit

Thank you.

In the SMF I originally posted, I used an XF demo Song and added Program Change events at the beginning of each track. That worked well when the SMF was used on my XS and XF.

The WAV recordings of “XS’d Up” using MOXFs that have been posted so far are “interesting”. In two of the three cases, there are errors in the Voices for some Parts. It might be that the MOXF is having a bit of difficulty with the amount of data at the start of the first measure.

I’ve therefore added a measure to the beginning of the SMF, and significantly spread out the Program Changes at various beats of the first three measures (but before any other events, of course). I’m certain that’s much more time than needed, but just to be sure…

I’ve attached the new version of the SMF, so if anyone else would like to post a WAV, please use this one.

Xs'd Up PC2.zip  (File Size: 23KB - Downloads: 604)

5pinDIN - 13 December 2013 07:52 AM

In the SMF I originally posted, I used an XF demo Song and added Program Change events at the beginning of each track. That worked well when the SMF was used on my XS and XF.

The WAV recordings of “XS’d Up” using MOXFs that have been posted so far are “interesting”. In two of the three cases, there are errors in the Voices for some Parts. It might be that the MOXF is having a bit of difficulty with the amount of data at the start of the first measure.

I’ve therefore added a measure to the beginning of the SMF, and significantly spread out the Program Changes at various beats of the first three measures (but before any other events, of course). I’m certain that’s much more time than needed, but just to be sure…

I’ve attached the new version of the SMF, so if anyone else would like to post a WAV, please use this one.

5pin, I suspect these are being caused by the moxf’s being used not being in “factory setup state” If it is an XF demo song and nto one of yours, that could explain it.

Can you provide a list of the patches used and I can check this against those on the MOXf...as far as I can tell apart from the user1/Pre9 swap all the rest seem to be in the same slots.

I do doubt that there is “too much data” at the start, glitches can occur if there a large streams of SYSEX to get through, however if it is normal bank/patch volume and other settings this should not make much of a difference.

Just had a look at the “new” version and I note that tracks 13 thru 16 still have no bank/patch data in the header, but have embedded bank/patch in the track.

Below is the tracks with bank/patch data in the track itself. In some cases it is in the header as well, in the case of 13-16 it is not.

And having had a closer look at the data, it is not the cause for the voices to show errors, unless (as I wrote above) it is because the ‘boards being used are not factory standard. The original file being a demo song would be based on a “factory standard” MoXF

Guys,

What are you trying to accomplish with this Topic?

Are you going to use a computer to analyze waveforms, do mathematical equations, measure conductivity, do chart comparisons, etc :-)

OR

Do you want to ask someone (me, who has both units) a question and will more than glad to help?

jerrydpi - 13 December 2013 09:40 AM

Guys,

What are you trying to accomplish with this Topic?

Are you going to use a computer to analyze waveforms, do mathematical equations, measure conductivity, do chart comparisons, etc :-)

OR

Do you want to ask someone (me, who has both units) a question and will more than glad to help?

GUYS??

It is 5pins baby not mine - I (and others) am just trying to help him out with doing this recording on a MOXF that he does not own.

Personally, having owned an XF in the past (albeit for a short time) and relying on my memory (Ha HA) they sound very similar if not the same.

However if 5pin wants to try and create something definitive (even though not very scientific) who are we to say nay? Let him have at it, if that’s what he wants to do. No skin off my nose :-)

pax_eterna - 13 December 2013 09:19 AM

5pin, I suspect these are being caused by the moxf’s being used not being in “factory setup state” If it is an XF demo song and nto one of yours, that could explain it.

Can you provide a list of the patches used and I can check this against those on the MOXf...as far as I can tell apart from the user1/Pre9 swap all the rest seem to be in the same slots.

I do doubt that there is “too much data” at the start, glitches can occur if there a large streams of SYSEX to get through, however if it is normal bank/patch volume and other settings this should not make much of a difference.

Thanks for the reply - I appreciate the feedback.

“Xs’d Up” is an XF factory demo. An “all song” file would have been sufficient, if there was compatibility between the XF and MOXF sequencers. Since there isn’t, I added the necessary Program Change messages to the demo Song, and saved the SMF that way.

It would seem that loading the SMF to an available Song location in the MOXF should be sufficient. Could you explain what type of change to “factory setup state” might cause a problem? I could understand that being an issue if the sequence relied on User Voices, etc., but all Parts use factory presets. I also verified, via the XF and MOXF Data Lists, that the Voice locations are exactly the same for anything used in the sequence. The second WAV you posted sounded correct, by the way.

I don’t know specifically what to attribute the apparent Part parameter changes to, which is why I used (and emphasized) the word “might” in my previous post. Neither my XS nor my XF are set up as they came from the factory, and the setup is different in each. Both performed as expected with the original SMF. I agree that the PC events shouldn’t be an excessive burden, but something is going on - so as I said, the newer SMF is “just to be sure”.

Parts in the sequence:
01 PRE4 107 Soft Brass & Sax
02 PRE2 093 Dual Coil Slap Vel
03 PRE1 035 Contempo
04 PRE6 125 Virtuoso Sequencia
05 PRE1 009 Old and Squashed
06 PRE3 079 West Coast
07 PRE3 006 HIP Mute
08 PRE2 075 Jazzy Pick
09 PRE4 069 Beauty Harp
10 PDR 12 Hip Hop Kit 3
11 PDR 26 Analog T8 Kit
12 PRE5 124 Xtreme Sweep
13 PRE7 002 Percussive Sequence
14 PRE4 020 Full Chamber
15 PRE4 016 Quick Bows
16 PRE3 097 Dark Comp AF1&2;

Thx 5pin - yep they all tally (one way or another) either in the header or in the track..although you will note from my pic above part 13 has no patch name, just some bank data, whereas in your list it is noted as “Percussive Sequence” ? Probs nothing but worth mentioning. It is bank 8070 (Pre 7) which is an SE/ME bank

FWIW - the patch list tallies with the XS’d up 1.

Okay so as you confirmed it is all factory patch banks used, and as my second file with the octave shift altered is the result you were expecting, this leads me to a possible conclusion that the other files you have received were perhaps recorded by using a song slot not initialised?

If my second one sounded as it should then I probs don’t need to to another one :-)

pax_eterna - 13 December 2013 10:21 AM

jerrydpi - 13 December 2013 09:40 AM

Guys,

What are you trying to accomplish with this Topic?

Are you going to use a computer to analyze waveforms, do mathematical equations, measure conductivity, do chart comparisons, etc :-)

OR

Do you want to ask someone (me, who has both units) a question and will more than glad to help?

GUYS??

It is 5pins baby not mine - I (and others) am just trying to help him out with doing this recording on a MOXF that he does not own.

Personally, having owned an XF in the past (albeit for a short time) and relying on my memory (Ha HA) they sound very similar if not the same.

However if 5pin wants to try and create something definitive (even though not very scientific) who are we to say nay? Let him have at it, if that’s what he wants to do. No skin off my nose :-)

p_e,

That’s what I’m asking :-)

Exactly WHAT is that “something” that my buddy 5 pin trying to create definitively?

Jerry

I dunno - as I said to me they sound the same, but I think he wants to create something a bit more tangible than subjective opinion :-) and existing data (specs) available from Yamaha of course.

AS he wrote in the OP:  “I’d like to make a somewhat detailed comparison between MOXF and XF (soundwise).”

pax_eterna - 13 December 2013 09:30 AM

Just had a look at the “new” version and I note that tracks 13 thru 16 still have no bank/patch data in the header, but have embedded bank/patch in the track.

Below is the tracks with bank/patch data in the track itself. In some cases it is in the header as well, in the case of 13-16 it is not.

And having had a closer look at the data, it is not the cause for the voices to show errors, unless (as I wrote above) it is because the ‘boards being used are not factory standard. The original file being a demo song would be based on a “factory standard” MoXF

Thanks again for replying.

All of the tracks (not just the ten your attachment shows) have “bank/patch” PC events early in the track. In the “newer” file, tracks 7, 9, 11, and 12 are in the first measure, while 1 and 2 are in the second measure at beat #1. I wasn’t too concerned about header content - I concentrated on each track having the data.

By the way, from what program is your attachment captured?

I solemnly swear that:

1) As my favorite mentor (Bad_Mister) has stated, in a blindfold test, you can not tell the difference between the two.

2) They sound identical to me as well and I don’t have to be blindfolded (but that reminds me of something I want my wife to do tonight :-).

3) If Bad_Mister and I (as well as you) have all lost our hearing, I’ll bet that when you put a MOTIF XF and a MOXF in a musical context (mixed in with a band/other instruments on a recording), they will be impossible to tell apart.

I find the experiments and comments interesting :)

My science side always enjoys such experiments even if it’s impossible to control/eliminate every variable.

If someone wants to spend some time on this, why not.  It’s a better use of time than say, getting drunk :)

Making music is fun too of course :)

jerrydpi - 13 December 2013 11:22 AM

I solemnly swear that:

1) As my favorite mentor (Bad_Mister) has stated, in a blindfold test, you can not tell the difference between the two.

2) They sound identical to me as well and I don’t have to be blindfolded (but that reminds me of something I want my wife to do tonight :-).

3) If Bad_Mister and I (as well as you) have all lost our hearing, I’ll bet that when you put a MOTIF XF and a MOXF in a musical context (mixed in with a band/other instruments on a recording), they will be impossible to tell apart.

If you remember, I’ve been saying (including in reply to some of your questions) that the XF and MOXF should sound about the same. However, given the persistent comments from various people that they hear significant differences, I wanted to try to determine if there was any validity to those claims.

Thanks to those willing to participate, and I’m sorry if my curiosity is annoying/boring any of you. All I’ll say at this moment is that there do appear to be some differences, but they probably aren’t audible to most people who have typical human hearing. (Was that cryptic enough?  :-)  )

5pinDIN - 13 December 2013 11:19 AM

pax_eterna - 13 December 2013 09:30 AM

Just had a look at the “new” version and I note that tracks 13 thru 16 still have no bank/patch data in the header, but have embedded bank/patch in the track.

Below is the tracks with bank/patch data in the track itself. In some cases it is in the header as well, in the case of 13-16 it is not.

And having had a closer look at the data, it is not the cause for the voices to show errors, unless (as I wrote above) it is because the ‘boards being used are not factory standard. The original file being a demo song would be based on a “factory standard” MoXF

Thanks again for replying.

All of the tracks (not just the ten your attachment shows) have “bank/patch” PC events early in the track. In the “newer” file, tracks 7, 9, 11, and 12 are in the first measure, while 1 and 2 are in the second measure at beat #1. I wasn’t too concerned about header content - I concentrated on each track having the data.

By the way, from what program is your attachment captured?

5pin if you read my post (at 10.59) you will find I went into greater detail :-)

I used Sonar X3.