Old Motifator threads are available in the Archive.
lordbachus
Total Posts: 85
Joined 08-28-2009 status: Experienced |
With the XF actually being an XS with more ROM memmory and the flash memmory, its an instrument that is over 7 years old… Its a sad thing a lot of great Yamaha technollogy created over the last 10 years still hasnt made its way to its major Keyboard workstation… Just look at a (simple) arranger like the Tyros5, or even the CVP 609 clavinova range, and you will find a lot of advancements that should be in the main workstation. SA2 voices are the best naturall acoustic sounds in the buiseness… and the ensemble feature also is awesome.. Special programs for organ sounds are there. and the quallity of the effects section of the latest Tyros added the same quallity of effects as the latest pro mixers have. Also the MOXF is almost identical to Motif XF at less then half the price.. My personal opinion is that Yamaha is upgrading from old technollogy to new technollogy… and that just takes time.. I think they planned to have a new shining instrument there at NAMM as star of the 40 year Yamaha instruments show.. However, the instrument might not have been ready yet.. (this is pure assumption of me)
You can not Compare the Motif XF to the Kronos.. they are two completely different instruments… Kronos is build around a multitude of synth engines combined with Karma in the core of its sound engines. But the workflow can be quite confusion and mostly only works for people that have been using Korg instruments for over a decade or so.
Anyway, currently all hardware Workstation instruments have been put to shame by software VST sounds and DAWS like live and bitwig that have been created for live playing. And no, the Motif is not a bad instrument. But all the above make clear that it is not even half of what Yamaha could offer based on the inhouse technollogy and software they have. If Yamaha aims to make a comeback to the professional workstation market, they need to take a huge step. Combining new technollogy with a brandnew interface and even more leaning on integration with software… My best bet is we will see a Montage workstation with Reface technollogy. I hope they will make the Musik Messe with this technollogy, but i highly doubt it.. |
dsetto
Total Posts: 434
Joined 01-24-2014 status: Enthusiast |
From what I’ve read on forums, 3 GB Ram can be installed & read by Kronos, and most of factory-shipped sounds can be dumped leaving ~2.6ish Gb available for user ram. It uses disk streaming. I prefer not to have the flange-range latency I experienced when playing the Berlin Grand on both Kronos 2-88 & 61. I suspect SSD-streamed user samples would have this similar flange-range latency. |
kb420
Total Posts: 726
Joined 04-11-2004 status: Guru |
Well, someone said earlier in this thread that they hoped that Yamaha would continue to use and develop the “Flash” memory technology. I really don’t think they would abandon it, but this “flange-range” latency that you said must by nature exist in all devices that use disc streaming. I primarily use a computer to do music with, and while no system, by nature, has absolutely 0 latency, I haven’t noticed any latency at all with my current computer. I have a 64 bit pc with 32GB of ram, so most of my samples actually load in to ram. Isn’t ram just as latency free as “flash” memory? |
DMLKeys
Total Posts: 23
Joined 03-13-2015 status: Regular |
Many Motif XF users are yet to dig in 20% into their instruments to really know how sophisticated this rompler is. The possibilities are endless. |
lordbachus
Total Posts: 85
Joined 08-28-2009 status: Experienced |
I can tell you why, because most people like creating music instead of rpogramming ... This is one of the things that needs to change… A new motif interface should be much much more intuitive… |
abdol
Total Posts: 318
Joined 05-30-2012 status: Enthusiast |
Sampler is sampler. How different Kronos is doing sampling from MOTIF XF? It plays samples in a different way???
|
dsetto
Total Posts: 434
Joined 01-24-2014 status: Enthusiast |
Yeah, that was me. And I hope they don’t because it’s how the Motif XF does 4GB of user multi-samples, with performance-instrument grade latency, and a reliable & quick performance-grade start up time. By “performance-instrument grade latency” I mean that I don’t sense any latency. By “reliable & quick performance-grade start up time”, I mean, I can turn on the power, and within a minute, I can rely that a very acceptable sound set is ready to go.
I don’t know. The Kronos is the 1st non stand-alone computer device that I’ve ever tried that employs disk streaming. It was my hypothesis that there may be a slight latency with the disk streaming, but I did my best to test it with an open mind. For if I found no perceptible latency with the Kronos pianos, then, a Kronos 2 88 would be incredibly appealing to me. My test simply consists of playing on it …deeply focusing in on a groove; on a rhythmically bendy groove. … what can be achieved on a guitar, or the Moog’s I’ve tried. On the Kronos, I “tested” the Berlin Piano, simple synth, Rhodes, B3 on both a K2 88 on one day, and a K2 61 within 2 weeks later. I only had 1 test session, in a store, on both. I found the “sound” of the Kronos to be great … the decay of the Berlin to be wonderful … the 9 drawbar-direction of the K’s B3 to be convenient. My test is highly subjective, and I could not eliminate “me” from the test. My test is not reliable. I have mentioned it here in this discussion because I did this test recently. And with the results of this test, I have a strong opinion of what I value in today’s Motif XF, and I do hope that Yamaha continue with this foundation. But, they’ll do what they think is best, as will we. Awesome! My attitude about software instruments was devised in an older generation. I haven’t tried to play a software instrument in too long. My attitude is very well antiquated. I did try an iOS Garageband EP off my iPad 2, triggered by the XF. I didn’t spend a long time on it; but I’ve labeled it in my memory as having flange-range latency. By the way, I say “flange-range” because it’s really, really low. Only perceptible if you’re hunting for it with an “auditory groove microscope”. I think so. But, in a computer based system, the audio interface & midi components have to be factored in. And, I’m in the dark on what a modern computer can do regarding VI’s. My attitude on this subject I’m talking about is not common. I figure it’s in the land of insignificant- especially to the majority. I brought it up, because it’s at the core of what I value in the XF7. And as I’ve decided to continue with the XF7 land, and it’s the only one that does what it does, how it does, I have a vested interest in the continued development of this approach. And, I want Yamaha to hear this voice, in the clamoring sea comparing the XF7 to a $500 computer or the Kronos.—The Kronos is amazing. It has a vast land of synthesis, clone-wheel, EP’s, with just under 3GB of available RAM for custom samples, fed by an in-board gigantic SSD. And, then, the streamed sounds can be incorporated as well. … And, even amidst that, I want my Motif XF7. |
dsetto
Total Posts: 434
Joined 01-24-2014 status: Enthusiast |
I don’t disagree with you in that it can be better. (I haven’t tried to think how.) I would at least like to mention the following things. Thank goodness, for the amazing support to help us with it. It’s a whole lot of function, with limited buttons & a wheel. I prefer to have the whole lot of function. And, I like banging on the buttons. I feel like it’s intelligently laid out. I’ve enjoyed learning it. I even enjoy the antiquated nature of it. And, I can do many things very fast … because of its interface. There are certain instances, where I prefer certain editing commands respond quicker. However, I would much rather certain editing commands have “latency” than when it’s functioning as an instrument. Sure, in computer-based editing, the CPU for the edits is fast, the screen(s) is large, the trackpad & qwerty keyboard can be fast. Sure. But, I like the combined instrument keyboard and editing buttons & screen right next to each other. So much so, I have yet to incorporate John Melas tools. (Only because I don’t have room for a computer along side my dual keyboard rig.) Yeah, I know, I’m coming across like a fanboy. I suppose I have become one. I do my best not to speak violently about other keyboards, nor unreasonably zealously over this one. I don’t think I engage in the ‘sports rivalry’ attitude with tools. |
lordbachus
Total Posts: 85
Joined 08-28-2009 status: Experienced |
Some remarks… About flash ram and SSD speed and lag..... Current day SSDs are in any aspect faster then the flash ram of Motif XF.. Its flash rum, that uses a very slow bus, much slower then todays pc technollogy And about comparing Kronos to Motif… If Kronos was only a sample engine, you could compare them.... But Kronos is so much more then just a sample engine it has 9 synth engines, from which only 2 are sample based.. On top of that, Karma is deeply embedded in the sound engines… |
abdol
Total Posts: 318
Joined 05-30-2012 status: Enthusiast |
Well you just answered it! “Kronos is so much more”!
|
5pinDIN
Total Posts: 11891
Joined 09-16-2010 status: Legend |
Flash memory is based on EEPROM (Electrically Erasable Programmable Read-Only Memory) technology. In read mode, NOR flash acts as a ROM.
Â
Q. How fast does the XF memory have to be?
The flash modules for the XF meet that requirement. It might not be the latest technology, but it gets the job done. If we were to reject musical instruments based on time of development, how many of them would still be used in an orchestra? I’ll consider my Motifs “out dated” when they stop being capable of making music. |
abdol
Total Posts: 318
Joined 05-30-2012 status: Enthusiast |
When I took my first course in computer hardware flash memories didn’t exist (at least commercially). And later we used different terms for each of them to avoid confusion and they operate DIFFERENTLY and are not identical. If they operate the same in the read mode wont make them identical. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EEPROM As for your Q/A, your answer is valid if it was 15 years ago. You can’t load Giga Bytes of data and talk about Kilo Byte transfer rate. If the technology for doing it is cheap and feasible it’s just absurd. |
5pinDIN
Total Posts: 11891
Joined 09-16-2010 status: Legend |
Whether you accept it or not, flash memory is a type of EEPROM, as stated in the Wikipedia article you linked to - thanks for making my point. I mentioned the read mode because speed in that mode is what matters when playing samples.
Â
Just because you think Yamaha should have already released a synth with different memory technology doesn’t mean the current model doesn’t work. My “answer” is valid today, since it concerns the way the XF functions today. |
stoneb3
Total Posts: 851
Joined 06-05-2011 status: Guru |
Time for the dying horse. |
5pinDIN
Total Posts: 11891
Joined 09-16-2010 status: Legend |
You’re right. Image Attachments
|