Yamaha MODX+

[Jim Alfredson]

9 minutes ago, Al Coda said:

 

Yeah, that´s why you have a room full of vintage gear and just bought a OB8X.

 

 

I use the Kurzweil live. The vintage analog stuff and the new Oberheim will most likely never leave my home. There's no need. I'm not performing music that requires the last 10-15% of realism that a true analog brings to the table. I also don't have roadies, so I have to carry and set up my own stuff when I perform. That's why I use the Hammond XK5 or SK Pro for organ instead of a real B3 and the Kurzweil instead of a Rhodes, CP70, Minimoog, Prophet 5, etc. With just two boards I can do everything I need, from straight jazz organ trio gigs to covering every keyboard part and triggering samples in the Pink Floyd tribute act and everything in between. I could actually do the Pink Floyd gig with just the Kurzweil (I do use KB3 on a couple of multis where I'm layering acoustic piano and organ) but I like having the SK Pro there to wail on when the moment is right.

 

I assume that's what we're talking about here. Why else would you need to trigger an iPad from a keyboard if not for live stuff?

 

 

 

 

[CyberGene]

Is the UI of MODX+ snappier than that of MODX? When I had the MODX6 I thought the UI felt quite sluggish.

[Jim Alfredson]

3 hours ago, AnotherScott said:

 

Devil's advocate here, but only a little... but basically, I can't make a single sound in VAST. For me, Kurz is essentially a preset machine, when it comes to individual sounds, because I find programming it impenetrable. Okay, I haven't committed the time and energy to even begin to grasp it. But I am not motivated to, because I have too many other boards where I am able to edit sounds with relative ease, whereas my minimal attempts on the Kurz were fruitless.

Thanks for the long explanation. I still maintain that doing what you're talking about in a MULTI would be just fine but whatever is easiest for you. VAST isn't too difficult once you wrap your brain around it. I've programmed about 80% of the sounds for the Pink Floyd tribute either from scratch or using a preset as a springboard on the Forte7, which was my first experience with VAST. It took awhile to figure out and I am nowhere near an expert, but it's worth digging into, imo.

Funny that Yamaha, who has always been known for their cryptic UI, is the winner here.

[nadroj]

2 hours ago, CyberGene said:

Is the UI of MODX+ snappier than that of MODX? When I had the MODX6 I thought the UI felt quite sluggish.

By default the MODX has some kind of subtle blur animation when switching screens - this does indeed make it feel sluggish, almost laggy.  
 

If you go into the settings and turn off “Motion Blur” it suddenly becomes a lot snappier and the sluggishness goes. 

[Al Coda]

5 hours ago, Jim Alfredson said:

 

I use the Kurzweil live. The vintage analog stuff and the new Oberheim will most likely never leave my home. There's no need. I'm not performing music that requires the last 10-15% of realism that a true analog brings to the table. I also don't have roadies, so I have to carry and set up my own stuff when I perform. That's why I use the Hammond XK5 or SK Pro for organ instead of a real B3 and the Kurzweil instead of a Rhodes, CP70, Minimoog, Prophet 5, etc. With just two boards I can do everything I need, from straight jazz organ trio gigs to covering every keyboard part and triggering samples in the Pink Floyd tribute act and everything in between. I could actually do the Pink Floyd gig with just the Kurzweil (I do use KB3 on a couple of multis where I'm layering acoustic piano and organ) but I like having the SK Pro there to wail on when the moment is right.

 

I assume that's what we're talking about here. Why else would you need to trigger an iPad from a keyboard if not for live stuff?

 

 

 

 

 

Jim,- you wrote "the virtual analog oscillators are great and can emulate pretty much any analog sound you need"  but you didn´t write "for life gigging (only)".

 

You might have recognized I´m not a Kurzweil VAST hater and I recogognize it´s advantages very well.

The line in your former post above implies,- accurately emulating every analog synthesis sound is possible w/ Kurz VAST and VA,- but it´s unfortunately not.

But I´m sure, w/ improvements like faster envelopes and LFOs as also overhauled (or new) VA waveforms and some improved DSP modifiers,- it would be possible,- and there´s hope we might get it some day.

In regards to KB3 I wished it had a more simplyfied UI for rotary speaker tweaks.

Not all the parameters are understandable for the average user,- so it´s trial ´n error.

I got better leslies than stock, but they aren´t perfect enough.

It´s almost impossible getting rid of the pitchiness and regardless what you do, it´s still there to some unwanted degree.

 

I want a K2700,- as a replacement for my PC361 it´s on my list since it was announced.

I´m waiting a bit for more updates and in the hope we´ll see a 76 (or 61) diving board version in future.

 

I agree VAST is not that difficult to learn and Kurzweil´s UI was never a problem for me even on a PC3 version,- and yes, Yamaha UIs can drive you nuts.

 

I dislike he actions of MODX (+), so no option for me.

I wished they make a MODX+ 1HU rack (which I´d use w/ the Kurzweil´s controller options by nature)

 

☺️

 

A.C.

[Stokely]

A rack, or tabletop (or both!) version of the Modx, especially if it retained the audio interface, would be incredible.   

I've owned two Kurzweils and find them pretty difficult as well.  One of the things that makes them a bit more difficult to learn is the much smaller community of people using them, compared to something like the Modx, and correspondingly smaller number of instructional sites and vids.   My forte 7 does sound pretty amazing in the synth dept, I just wish I was better at tweaking the patches.  I go in and see like 14 layers on a simple sound and don't even know where to begin.   

My other issue with both Kurzweils has been reliability, though to be fair both mine were bought used and the Forte's one issue may have been power related (it hasn't had an issue since).    My Modx behaved strangely at one gig due to power so that can happen.
 

[stoken6]

31 minutes ago, Al Coda said:

I want a K2700,- as a replacement for my PC361 it´s on my list since it was announced.

I´m waiting a bit for more updates and in the hope we´ll see a 76 (or 61) diving board version in future.

This. Kurzweil, are you listening?

 

Cheers, Mike

[EscapeRocks]

8 hours ago, CyberGene said:

Is the UI of MODX+ snappier than that of MODX? When I had the MODX6 I thought the UI felt quite sluggish.

Make sure you calibrate it.  Both my original MODX, and the MODX+ screens felt, and feel 'snappy' to me.

When programming, I use a capacitive stylus.

[AnotherScott]

10 hours ago, Jim Alfredson said:

I could actually do the Pink Floyd gig with just the Kurzweil (I do use KB3 on a couple of multis where I'm layering acoustic piano and organ) but I like having the SK Pro there to wail on when the moment is right.

 

For layering a piano and an organ, it sounds like you had to make a choice: Use the Kurz organ and Kurz piano from the Kurz action, or use the Hammond organ and the Hammond piano from the Hammond action. But MIDI could have allowed you to layer the  better sounding Hammond organ and the better sounding Kurz piano, from either action (since the Hammond and Kurz both have good MIDI functionality for this purpose). Both boards even have assignable outs so you could keep the "remotely driven" sound independent from any other sound you may simultaneously need to be playing from that board's own keyboard. Why not? I'm guessing probably because you felt it wasn't worth the effort. Which I am mentioning to reinforce something I was trying to say about it not necessarily being enough to say that, with some effort and creativity, you could kind of get board X to do something close to something that board Y already easily does. Because it often doesn't take a whole lot of friction for someone to decide something isn't worth the effort.

 

10 hours ago, Jim Alfredson said:

I assume that's what we're talking about here. Why else would you need to trigger an iPad from a keyboard if not for live stuff?

 

Yes, I was talking about live. Though certainly, there are times you might want to record with an iPad sound, and you still need a keyboard to play it from. Maybe you're saying that, if you're recording rather than playing live, you might as well use a VST which will probably sound better. But some iPad stuff does sound just as good as any VST, and for the purposes at hand, its interface may be preferable. Or the iPad may just already have all the sounds you want set up in it, maybe because you do use them live as well, and finding/setting up new, comparable VST sounds isn't worth the possible expense/time/effort. So yeah, I see benefits to integrating an iPad for non-live use as well.

 

9 hours ago, Jim Alfredson said:

Funny that Yamaha, who has always been known for their cryptic UI, is the winner here.

4 hours ago, Al Coda said:

I agree VAST is not that difficult to learn and Kurzweil´s UI was never a problem for me even on a PC3 version,- and yes, Yamaha UIs can drive you nuts.

 

I found the MOX/MOXF interface tricky, though simpler than the PC361 (another example of damning with faint praise, I suppose). But the MODX improvements, including the large touchscreen, made it much better, even though much of the architecture was the same. 

 

4 hours ago, Al Coda said:

I wished they make a MODX+ 1HU rack (which I´d use w/ the Kurzweil´s controller options by nature)

 

 

But to me, a good deal of the MODX appeal, believe it or not, IS in that touchscreen interface, which you'd lose in the 1HU rack. I guess if you're just lusting after the factory sounds, it's a solution. But then you're right back to the Kurzweil's limitations in recalling external sounds in combinations of your choosing. Routinely creating splits and layers incorporating your favorite external Yamaha sounds in different combinations as needed would be awkward, as I've been talking about; but the prospect of creating them on a Yamaha box-'o-sounds that didn't have that touchscreen is not very appealing either. (Maybe a computer/iPad editor would be the solution?)

[Jim Alfredson]

39 minutes ago, AnotherScott said:

 

For layering a piano and an organ, it sounds like you had to make a choice: Use the Kurz organ and Kurz piano from the Kurz action, or use the Hammond organ and the Hammond piano from the Hammond action. But MIDI could have allowed you to layer the  better sounding Hammond organ and the better sounding Kurz piano...

 

That's what I'm doing right now. The Kurzweil MULTI for those particular songs has a zone that just sends MIDI to the SK Pro, so I can play piano and organ layered together. The only reason for that is because the SK Pro is a better sounding organ (duh) and it's already there. I'm just saying that I could do the entire gig on the Kurzweil and it would be fine. 

I am still using the Kurzweil KB3 and the SK Pro together for one song; Pigs. Gotta play that dual manual line and the Kurzweil serves as the bottom manual plus I add the Solina strings in with the sustain pedal.

 

 

39 minutes ago, AnotherScott said:

 

Yes, I was talking about live. Though certainly, there are times you might want to record with an iPad sound, and you still need a keyboard to play it from. Maybe you're saying that, if you're recording rather than playing live, you might as well use a VST which will probably sound better. But some iPad stuff does sound just as good as any VST, and for the purposes at hand, its interface may be preferable. Or the iPad may just already have all the sounds you want set up in it, maybe because you do use them live as well, and finding/setting up new, comparable VST sounds isn't worth the possible expense/time/effort. So yeah, I see benefits to integrating an iPad for non-live use as well.

 

 

My iPad is relegated to lyrics, charts, and if needed emergency sound generation (IK B-3X on it in case the backline at a gig totally sucks).

 

[AnotherScott]

19 minutes ago, Jim Alfredson said:

My iPad is relegated to lyrics, charts, and if needed emergency sound generation (IK B-3X on it in case the backline at a gig totally sucks).

Though if you didn't have the luxury of that SK Pro at your disposal, I bet it would be awfully tempting to use that iPad's B3X as your Kurzweil's organ...

[Delaware Dave]

13 hours ago, AnotherScott said:

 

Devil's advocate here, but only a little... but basically, I can't make a single sound in VAST.

 

🤣

[Al Coda]

6 hours ago, AnotherScott said:

the 1HU rack. I guess if you're just lusting after the factory sounds, it's a solution. But then you're right back to the Kurzweil's limitations in recalling external sounds in combinations of your choosing.

 

I don´t see limitations when recalling ext. sounds from a Kurzweil setup / multi.

I think, everyone has it´s own workflow w/ his gear.

P.ex.,- I give a s##t on categorized sounds and such,- just because I use mainly my own patches and ignore the factory patches as they are,- and WHEN I use factory patches, these are tweaked for my needs and get different names etc..

I memorize where I stored ´em ... almost.

For gigs, I´d still use Miditemp PMM88E and recall patches for the entire rig by typing a number and pressing the [Enter] button on the PMM´s remote control unit.

I make a layout for every song, then program the PMM88E which also recalls the related setups from PC361.

It´s basicaly similar to programming a setlist and when I know the related number for each tune, I´d never have to re-organize setlists at all.

And I write the correct number on top of my sheets,- done.

The true limitation of Kurzweil MIDI is 16 MIDI channels max. which equals 1 MIDI port only.

 

Touch screen ...

My old eyes are bad now and I need glasses and magnifiers.

Bigger knobs and buttons I can feel are welcome.

 

☺️

 

A.C.

[AnotherScott]

2 hours ago, Al Coda said:

I don´t see limitations when recalling ext. sounds from a Kurzweil setup / multi.

I was surprised to read this, at least in the context of what I described as wanting to do in terms of routinely re-using various internal and external sounds in different combinations, but then I read this...

 

2 hours ago, Al Coda said:

I´d still use Miditemp PMM88E

That could be used for some of the same tasks as my alternate suggestion of using an app (e.g. Camelot Pro, KeyStage, Gig Performer, Mainstage, Cantabile). 

 

The moral may be, if you're willing to add external gear, there's always a way... ;-)

[HammondDave]

21 hours ago, AnotherScott said:

 

 

Bottom line: The Kurz is great. But it isn't perfect. And there are some things MODX does better.

 

Or go my route... Launchkey 88 MKIII for the controller, then into your iPad.  The Launchkey has everything except after-touch and an expression pedal.  The semi-weighted keyboard is the best one I have played for under $1200.  9 Faders/Drawbars, Transport controls (for DAWs), Nice (much better than MODX) pitch/mod wheels, weighs 18lbs, and all for under $400.  

[AnotherScott]

13 minutes ago, HammondDave said:

 

Or go my route... Launchkey 88 MKIII for the controller, then into your iPad.  The Launchkey has everything except after-touch and an expression pedal.  The semi-weighted keyboard is the best one I have played for under $1200.  9 Faders/Drawbars, Transport controls (for DAWs), Nice (much better than MODX) pitch/mod wheels, weighs 18lbs, and all for under $400.  

 That does seem like a nice option, if you don't care about having internal sounds at all. And you can't beat the price! There are some trade-offs, but at least some can be worked around. On the Kurz, during performance, I live off the display that always tells me what sounds are currently under my 10 patch select buttons. In this case, I guess you'd sit your iPad on one side or the other and use an app for touchscreen patch selection (e.g. the aforementioned Camelot Pro or KeyStage). An Audiofront adapter could give you the expression pedal input. There is a bit of a leap of faith (e.g. in terms of rock-solid reliability) still required to go with a rig that is 100% iPad, though, as well as a bit of a paradigm shift required to go from a dedicated interface where every control's function is integrated into the operation of the unit, vs. a more generic control surface that you have to adapt to and/or program for your purposes.

[Al Coda]

8 hours ago, AnotherScott said:

I was surprised to read this, at least in the context of what I described as wanting to do in terms of routinely re-using various internal and external sounds in different combinations, but then I read this...

 

 

No, the difference is,- you said you´re a preset jockey and want categorized sounds to find ´em faster and when you create something, you´d want to merge it into the categorization etc. ...

And you want to do what Kurzweil does in a multi in a program already,- lookin´ at the setup/ multi mode as kind of setlist where you organize your songs picking the patches, may it be singles or multis, from program mode.

But that´s not how a Kurzweil works.

The main mode is setup/multi mode and when you want kind of setlist feature,- you use Quick Access mode.

 

Now,- I myself, I never used Quick Access mode ever,- just because it´s not my only keyboard in the rig.

I also never had a live and home (studio) rig because I´ve found that much too costly.

I prefered using components I´m able to combine in different ways quickly while all can be studio- and live- gear.

The PMM88E is in use because I own and it works ´til the cows come home since I bought it.

It works extremely reliable and never fails w/ all it´s complex MIDI features you don´t find in ANY application being offered for smartphones or iPads.

I don´t even use a smartphone and have absolutely no need for an iPad.

A good iPad cost a grand and they I have that piece of consumer electronics w/ no real buttons and have to learn apps and s##t to be disappointed at the end of the day.

 

It´s all the same reason why Rick Wakemen is still using his Syco Systems Sycologic MIDI matrix switchers.

 

We don´t need tiny touch screens w/ incredibly tiny graphic elements for our stubby fingers and old eyes, you know.

And we aren´t preset jockeys !

 

So, to each it´s own.

 

☺️

 

A.C.

[AnotherScott]

3 hours ago, Al Coda said:

No, the difference is,- you said you´re a preset jockey and want categorized sounds to find ´em faster and when you create something, you´d want to merge it into the categorization etc. ...

To clarify, I'm a preset jockey when it comes to the internal sounds. On external sounds, I'm more inclined to tweak to taste, depending on the app.

 

3 hours ago, Al Coda said:

And you want to do what Kurzweil does in a multi in a program already,- lookin´ at the setup/ multi mode as kind of setlist where you organize your songs picking the patches, may it be singles or multis, from program mode.

But that´s not how a Kurzweil works.

I think you misunderstood, this isn't about Programs vs. Multis, or trying to do something in Program mode that should be done in Multi mode. Rather, it's about being able to routinely re-use external sounds in a multi as easily as one can routinely re-use internal sounds.

 

 

[Al Coda]

12 hours ago, AnotherScott said:

Rather, it's about being able to routinely re-use external sounds in a multi as easily as one can routinely re-use internal sounds.

 

The only MIDI keyboard controller managing this is the discontinued Viscount Physis PIano K4 (K5).

Naming a MIDI zone and treat it as a instrument together w/ zone copy, import and export functionality was the trick.

There were patches w/ 4 nested "scenes" and "instruments".

 

OTOH,- when you have p.ex. a rack full of MIDI expanders and/or some additional keyboards,- all listening to MIDI on their individual MIDI channels, it´s pretty easy programming a setup / multi template w/ zones transmitting on these MIDI channels and sending a "default" program change and some MIDI CC assignments and offsets for each device connected.

That would also work w/ a MIDI multitimbral device like Roland Integra 7 or such.

 

For more flexibility, a new "object" needs to be introduced in the file structure,- maybe .zn (for Zone),- so it would be able to name, rename and store into onboard flash memory and export from / import into setup/multi.

 

☺️

 

A.C.

 

[AnotherScott]

57 minutes ago, Al Coda said:

The only MIDI keyboard controller managing this is the discontinued Viscount Physis PIano K4 (K5).

Yup, I mentioned that as possibly the only MIDI controller that beats the PC4. But while Montage/MODX lags the Viscount and Kurz in total MIDI functionality, it does manage this particular trick.

 

57 minutes ago, Al Coda said:

Naming a MIDI zone and treat it as a instrument together w/ zone copy, import and export functionality was the trick.

The way Yamaha does it is that each selectable Part (kind of Kurzweil Program) can be an internal sound OR it can be an external zone. (Technically it can be both, but it's usually better not to do that.) So when you assemble the Parts into a Performance (Multi,  for the purposes of this analogy), internal and external sounds can be searched for and selected interchangeably, there's no distinction. So yes, similarly to what you're describing, a MIDI zone can be treated as an instrument, and yes, you can also copy/import these zone-parts from one Performance/Multi to another.

 

57 minutes ago, Al Coda said:

For more flexibility, a new "object" needs to be introduced in the file structure,- maybe .zn (for Zone),- so it would be able to name, rename and store into onboard flash memory and export from / import into setup/multi.

I think that's essentially what I was suggesting when I talked about wishing for user Programs that consisted of nothing but a name, a category, and a MIDI Program Change to be sent on a particular channel. They could have a new name and new extension... or not. But for those external sound to come up in the same lists as internal sounds, they'd have to be seen as Programs, at least from the user's perspective.

[Delaware Dave]

13 hours ago, Al Coda said:

 

The only MIDI keyboard controller managing this is the discontinued Viscount Physis PIano K4 (K5).

 

 

???

I so this with my PC3 calling gemini programs and PC3 programs in the same setup (Multi).  Perhaps the approach is easier on the Physis but I'm blending pianos/strings/brass from both the PC3 and the external Gemini module in a setup.  Granted I can't create a program using the gemini as a source but what I've done is create a bunch of presets for the dozen or so gemini presets I use so as an example, i have a setup for strings, if I want to add piano from the PC3 I simply edit the preset and add a piano zone.  The physis might do this better/faster but I have it down so that I can almost do it on the fly in real time and quite quickly between songs.

[ElmerJFudd]

8 hours ago, Delaware Dave said:

 

???

I so this with my PC3 calling gemini programs and PC3 programs in the same setup (Multi).  Perhaps the approach is easier on the Physis but I'm blending pianos/strings/brass from both the PC3 and the external Gemini module in a setup.  Granted I can't create a program using the gemini as a source but what I've done is create a bunch of presets for the dozen or so gemini presets I use so as an example, i have a setup for strings, if I want to add piano from the PC3 I simply edit the preset and add a piano zone.  The physis might do this better/faster but I have it down so that I can almost do it on the fly in real time and quite quickly between songs.

Maybe he means device solely sold as a controller.  Lots of workstation and more current models have similar feature.  But keyboard controllers - tons of them these days are intended to USB to a computer and control software.  

[AnotherScott]

On 9/14/2022 at 9:55 AM, AnotherScott said:

it's about being able to routinely re-use external sounds in a multi as easily as one can routinely re-use internal sounds.

On 9/14/2022 at 10:46 PM, Al Coda said:

The only MIDI keyboard controller managing this is the discontinued Viscount Physis PIano K4 (K5).

On 9/15/2022 at 8:54 AM, Delaware Dave said:

???

I {do} this with my PC3 calling gemini programs and PC3 programs in the same setup (Multi).  Perhaps the approach is easier on the Physis but I'm blending pianos/strings/brass from both the PC3 and the external Gemini module in a setup.  Granted I can't create a program using the gemini as a source but what I've done is create a bunch of presets for the dozen or so gemini presets I use so as an example, i have a setup for strings, if I want to add piano from the PC3 I simply edit the preset and add a piano zone.  The physis might do this better/faster but I have it down so that I can almost do it on the fly in real time and quite quickly between songs.

 

Tons of boards let you save combinations of internal and external sounds. This is about, again, "being able to routinely re-use external sounds in a multi as easily as one can routinely re-use internal sounds." (Described in much greater detail in other posts.) Setting up Multis that consist of nothing but single external sounds (i.e. "for the dozen or so gemini presets I use") is a nice idea, it allows you to re-use those external sounds in new Multis more easily than by having to use the Import Zone function. And it is something you could also do on those other boards that let you save combinations of internal and external sounds (e.g. any Korg workstation, Roland Fantoms), good tip.

 

It's not quite the same as what I was talking about, though, because those sounds don't come up in their categories when you are searching through your Programs (the Programs still only include internal sounds); and because when you want to create that Multi that has both internal and external sounds, you have to choose your external sound first; and because the approach's benefit no longer applies if you want to add a second external sound to that same Multi. Again, it's still a useful idea, but it isn't doing quite the same thing as what we're talking about doing o the MODX and (apparently) Physis.

 

I'm not saying you can't achieve the same results. The MODX implementation I initially described does not let you create a combination that you could not create on a PC3/PC4, Fantom, Kross/Krome/Nautilus... but if you do repeatedly use the same external sounds, it's simply easier and faster to do so on MODX, where you can locate and add a previously used external sound to your performance as easily as you can locate and add a previously used  internal sound, with no differentiation whatsoever in terms of the steps involved.

[ElmerJFudd]

 

[jlr55nj]

On 9/1/2022 at 8:29 AM, HammondDave said:

Big yawn here… the deal killer is the toy synth keybed on the 6 and 7. Makes Yamaha look cheap. They need to learn a lesson from the Italians.

I've been playing piano for 60 years and am pretty used to a weighted keyboard. Switched from S70 XS to MODX7+. So much for semi-weighted. Now, I also have an MX61 so I'm used to synth keyboards, but rarely used them for piano parts. Took me about 2 months to get used to the MODX7+, but I'd rather gig with a 17 pound keyboard than a 45 pound one. One thing I found is that the MODX7+ has a wider dynamic range than either or my older Yamahas, which is helpful.

[Jose EB5AGV]

Now that this thread is resurrected 😬... I bought a MODX6+ about a year ago (December 2022) and, after playing my Montage 6 on my first gigs, I thought of it as just a rehearsal instrument. But, on last gigs, I have been lazy and have used the MODX6+. That, added to the weekly band rehearsal, has given me plenty of experience of that lousy keybed. And, while I still prefer by quite a big margin, the Montage FSX, I now can play decently on the MODX+ one so, if the gig is not an special one, I guess I will keep playing the MODX+. Once you get used to it, is not that bad IMO

[HammondDave]

4 hours ago, Jose EB5AGV said:

Now that this thread is resurrected 😬... I bought a MODX6+ about a year ago (December 2022) and, after playing my Montage 6 on my first gigs, I thought of it as just a rehearsal instrument. But, on last gigs, I have been lazy and have used the MODX6+. That, added to the weekly band rehearsal, has given me plenty of experience of that lousy keybed. And, while I still prefer by quite a big margin, the Montage FSX, I now can play decently on the MODX+ one so, if the gig is not an special one, I guess I will keep playing the MODX+. Once you get used to it, is not that bad IMO

I totally agree.  You can’t beat 17 lbs… and I have also gotten used to it.