Yamaha MODX+

[Jim Alfredson]

I love Yamaha but I have to say... the organ sound in this video is laughably bad.
 

 

[MotiDave]

The “throbbing” is synched to the time signature of the Performance.  Its not merely a random meaningless gratuitous throb, you wankers!  

 

I turned the throb off immediately as its just all too much for me - but I could see the use of having a visual indicator of the song meter for some situations for some players.  My problem is I just don’t know how to program it very well - i use it very little because I’m lazy and uneducated. 

[HammondDave]

21 hours ago, Jim Alfredson said:

I love Yamaha but I have to say... the organ sound in this video is laughably bad.
 

What is it with Yamaha and B3 sounds?  Do you think they will get it right before I die?

What is it with Yamaha and B3 sounds?  Do you think they will get it right before I die?

[AnotherScott]

28 minutes ago, HammondDave said:

What is it with Yamaha and B3 sounds?  Do you think they will get it right before I die?

 

I think their organ-specific YC61/73/88 are quite strong on organ. At least when it comes to boards that are not dedicated clonewheels, I think they are the best except for Hammond SK Pro line. Better than any of the current Roland, Korg/Vox, Kurzweil, Nord, Dexibell... did I forget anyone? I also like it better than the earlier (VASE) SK models from Hammond.

 

But as for the MODX, coincidentally just posted in a Casio thread... MODX has, IMO, probably the best organ sounds of any keyboard that doesn't have an actual legit organ engine in it. Check these two short videos. The first shows a patch that permits live drawbar manipulation; the second shows some of the preset patches in the board (of varying qualities). These are from the original MODX, but all the same MODX patches and capabilities are also in the MODX+.

 

 

 

  

 

[Stokely]

23 hours ago, Jim Alfredson said:

I love Yamaha but I have to say... the organ sound in this video is laughably bad.
 

 

It is definitely not great, somewhat of an improvement on what was on my original Motif but that's not saying a ton.

I bought my MODX knowing it had easy IOS integration, and in part thanks to your excellent demonstration of B3X, I've been using it for many gigs now    Works like a champ and feels like part of the machine.   I think of it as a second organ-dedicated touchscreen, it's velcroed in the empty space to the right.

I've A/Bed some of my favorite IOS synths against my Modx programmed patches and there's not enough of a difference to make me switch.  Keeping the ipad dedicated to organ (well, and a lyrics app and mixer control app) means I don't need anything like mainstage, B3X just sits there responding to channel 10 (to get it out of the way of the Modx zone defaults.)  My main organ patch has one zone set to transmit on 10, and bam.

For some songs with a minor part and splits with other sound--New Kid in Town by the Eagles for example--I just use the internal organ and it works ok if I don't employ the leslie.

[AnotherScott]

1 hour ago, Stokely said:

I bought my MODX knowing it had easy IOS integration, and in part thanks to your excellent demonstration of B3X, I've been using it for many gigs now    Works like a champ and feels like part of the machine.   I think of it as a second organ-dedicated touchscreen, it's velcroed in the empty space to the right.

That's an unheralded MODX/Montage strength. It's the best board for integrating internal and external sounds. Once you save a patch with an external sound, that sound becomes an always-selectable patch to use any way you want in the future... AFAIK, it's the only board where you can mix and match sounds, even on the fly, with no thought whatsoever as to whether the sound is internal or external (as long as the external device is actually connected, of course). External patches are recalled identically to internal ones... in fact, if you don't specifically name them as such (or use the Favorite mark, whatever), when you're searching for sounds to play (individually or as part of a combination), you actually can't even tell whether a sound is located internally or on some other device. Which is why you DO what to delineate them somehow, so you don't accidentally invoke one when the device isn't attached. ;-)

[Stokely]

It quite frankly kept my Modx in my rig, when I hadn't yet warmed up to it.  I'll admit I'm one of the people that really "bond" to a more quality build and feel, so the Modx is up against it a bit.  It quite literally feels like a child's toy.  That doesn't mean it's going to break more easily, just a feel thing.  Flip side, there's a lip and some holes on the underside, I can use a thumb and finger and literally lift the thing up and set it on its stand, which is pretty bonkers.  Flip flip side, one gig was so windy recently that I started worrying it would fly off my stand   

I've got the bug to get a real organ feel keyboard again...maybe a mojo 61.  If I do then the Modx becomes more "expendable" because right now it makes a pretty amazing organ keyboard, the light keys are really the next best thing to a real waterfall one.

The fact that I've been pretty happy with synth patches programmed from the elements on up has raised its value with me too.   I like the OS enough that I am considering a Montage if I see a deal on one, but because I know that white one exists it's going to be hard to find!  That thing looks fantastic.

[Stokely]

Piggybacking on this thread...

While I love the *idea* of the Scenes, I'm finding them flaky.   For some performances, they work reliably.   On others, they work after I set them up but then later don't work--I can see the scenes are there from the buttons, but hitting them changes nothing.  This happened to me yesterday at a gig.  I had test the new scenes for a couple performances earlier and they seemed fine.  Packed up, went to the gig and they did nothing.

To be fair even storing the scenes seemed inconsistent.  Sometimes it would "take", and sometimes I'd have to do it multiple times; I don't know if I needed to pre-select the scene number I was going to store or something like that.  In any case, I got them to work, switching in and out of patches from my live set to make sure they were saved--they were.  It sucks to then try them out hours later and...zippo.

To make it more confusing, the ones that worked before still work reliably.  It's almost as if some master "use scenes" toggle is being set/unset per performance, but that still doesn't explain how it worked after I saved the performances at home, but not at the gig.

 

[CyberGene]

^ I’ve had similar confusions with my MODX6 and decided I was not for it. I know people who can remember every single detail from reading manuals and then use that to take advantage of very complex and flexible keyboards but I’m not one of them unfortunately 😕 

[kalpajazz]

Scenes don't seem to work when the modx enters edit mode (for example, tap the screen to move a virtual volume fader) Once you exit it (click on the name of the performance) they work correctly.

 

[AnotherScott]

34 minutes ago, kalpajazz said:

Scenes don't seem to work when the modx enters edit mode (for example, tap the screen to move a virtual volume fader) Once you exit it (click on the name of the performance) they work correctly.

 

Hmmm... Scenes recall the saved states of various parameters... Maybe while you're in the edit screen, those parameters are in a theoretical state of flux and not locked in anymore? After all, if you went to that screen to change a level, and while on that screen, you selected a Scene that also had a memorized setting for that level, do you necessarily want it to throw out the change you just made? The situation you're creating might be a bit ambiguous.

[kalpajazz]

You are right, it is ambiguous. Actually I was referring to the "Kbd Ctrl" parameter, which is the one that stops working in edit mode.

[Jim Alfredson]

On 9/10/2022 at 1:25 PM, AnotherScott said:

That's an unheralded MODX/Montage strength. It's the best board for integrating internal and external sounds. Once you save a patch with an external sound, that sound becomes an always-selectable patch to use any way you want in the future... AFAIK, it's the only board where you can mix and match sounds, even on the fly, with no thought whatsoever as to whether the sound is internal or external (as long as the external device is actually connected, of course). External patches are recalled identically to internal ones... in fact, if you don't specifically name them as such (or use the Favorite mark, whatever), when you're searching for sounds to play (individually or as part of a combination), you actually can't even tell whether a sound is located internally or on some other device. Which is why you DO what to delineate them somehow, so you don't accidentally invoke one when the device isn't attached. 😉

You can do this on the current Kurzweil lineup in MULTI mode. Any of the 16 zones can be local, MIDI, USB, or any combination thereof. Handy for controlling external gear, sending program changes, CC, etc.

[AnotherScott]

8 hours ago, Jim Alfredson said:

You can do this on the current Kurzweil lineup in MULTI mode. Any of the 16 zones can be local, MIDI, USB, or any combination thereof. Handy for controlling external gear, sending program changes, CC, etc.

That's not the same thing. (And other boards from Kurzweil as as well as Korg, Roland, and Yamaha have long been able to do that kind of thing as well, if not always as many as 16 zones.)

 

On a Kurzweil, you create your Multi out of Programs. If you've got, say, a Kurz piano in part 1 of your Multi, and for part 2 you're looking for an organ sound, you can bring up a list and scroll through all the Organ Programs. But what if the organ sound you want to use is actually patch #2 on B3X running from an attached iPad/laptop on MIDI channel 15? Yes, you can define a MIDI zone in the Multi. But imagine instead that you could create a Program in Kurzweil's Organ category called "JA WhiterShade" that, instead of calling up a factory or user KB3/VAST organ sound, called up your favorite Procol Harum B3X sound with those specified parameters. Once you created that entry, you'd be able to call up that sound with literally no more effort than calling up a native Kurz organ sound, because that external organ sound would appear right in the same list as the internal organ sounds you can choose from. You could create Programs this way for all your favorite external sounds, and call them up (by themselves, or mixed-and-matched with native Kurz Programs) interchangeably with native sounds, no separate process needed, no need to re-specify any MIDI info or go to any other screens, That's essentially what the MODX/Montage lets you do.

 

Kurz does have one nice feature which gets you part way there... you can import a zone from one multi into another multi. So I think you could create a Multi that had your 16 Favorite external sounds, and whenever you wanted to use one of them in another Multi, you could import it so you wouldn't have to re-enter everything from scratch. But you're limited to 16, and it's a separate process from what you do to recall an internal sound, requiring additional time and complication, and also these sounds don't come up in a category search (or any kind of search, AFAIK). Which also means you have to remember, if you haven't played the song in a long time, whether your favorite "Whiter Shade" patch is a Program you need to locate, or is on the external device meaning you need to call up your multi full of external sounds to find it. (Though if you're limiting your external sounds to 16, it wouldn't be much to keep track of. The trade-off being, well, you effectively can only use 16 externals sounds this way.)

 

I'd love it if Kurz allowed you to define user Programs that consisted of nothing but a name, a category, and a MIDI Program Change to be sent on a particular channel. Then you could use internal and external sounds interchangeably as I'm describing. This kind of thing has been on my wish list for 10+ years. Yamaha is the only one to have essentially implemented it.

[CyberGene]

If we assume for a moment there won't be a VA engine added to the MODX+ is the Fantom-0 the better proposition?

[Stokely]

20 hours ago, kalpajazz said:

Scenes don't seem to work when the modx enters edit mode (for example, tap the screen to move a virtual volume fader) Once you exit it (click on the name of the performance) they work correctly.

 

I'm not entirely clear what "edit mode" is, unless hitting "performance home" (or whatever the main button is called, my modx is packed right now) after clicking it from the live grid...I wanted to make sure the scenes were working.  I didn't knowingly click anything after that, but does this main I may have entered "edit mode" and ironically stopped the scenes from working?  I'm almost certain I have done this before, mainly to watch the part levels change, so I don't think I caused it by doing so.

Edit:  I've gotten some good suggestions from the Modx facebook group where I posted this issue.  "Scene Memory" was mentioned, but the fact that I know the scenes worked at least once makes me think this wasn't it.

I think the smoking gun may be very similar/same to what kalpajazz posted: one person said that if a part was selected then the scenes wouldn't work.  I didn't knowingly select a part after loading the performance, but perhaps it auto-selected, or I had somehow saved the performance that way (?)  Anyway, I'll test later today.  This is the most likely explanation given the symptoms, so far at least.  I know the scenes saved, and they work sometimes, so it's not a question of some on/off setting I don't think.

[EscapeRocks]

When you're in EDIT mode, and are editing a part by selecting it, that temporarily override any Keyboard Ctrl or Scene Ctrl as the assumption is you're working on that one part that is part of the bigger picture (scene)

 

Further, If you are in Edit Mode in a Program that uses Scenes, first make sure the Scene you want as the default is selected, then before saving your edit, touch the name of the program up top, then "Store"

 

Every time you store a program, it stores the entire state of that program, including what Scene may be currently selected

 

If you do forget, and anytime you bring up that program, and the default Scene you want doesn't load, just select that scene, and Store the program.

[Jim Alfredson]

10 hours ago, AnotherScott said:

 

 

On a Kurzweil, you create your Multi out of Programs. If you've got, say, a Kurz piano in part 1 of your Multi, and for part 2 you're looking for an organ sound, you can bring up a list and scroll through all the Organ Programs. But what if the organ sound you want to use is actually patch #2 on B3X running from an attached iPad/laptop on MIDI channel 15? Yes, you can define a MIDI zone in the Multi. But imagine instead that you could create a Program in Kurzweil's Organ category called "JA WhiterShade" that, instead of calling up a factory or user KB3/VAST organ sound, called up your favorite Procol Harum B3X sound with those specified parameters. Once you created that entry, you'd be able to call up that sound with literally no more effort than calling up a native Kurz organ sound, because that external organ sound would appear right in the same list as the internal organ sounds you can choose from. You could create Programs this way for all your favorite external sounds, and call them up (by themselves, or mixed-and-matched with native Kurz Programs) interchangeably with native sounds, no separate process needed, no need to re-specify any MIDI info or go to any other screens, That's essentially what the MODX/Montage lets you do.

 

I see. But as you already said, you can import zones from other MULTIs. And you're not limited to 16. You could just create another MULTI and have 16 more. And you can assign MULTIs to Quick Access, meaning you can load them as quickly as any other sound (with the push of a single button). It seems like have a PROGRAM that's just a non-local pointer to an external source would be a waste a PROGRAM slot. Then again, these days most workstation keyboards don't have limited user program slots anymore. I think the K2700 has over 4000.

[Stokely]

11 hours ago, CyberGene said:

If we assume for a moment there won't be a VA engine added to the MODX+ is the Fantom-0 the better proposition?

Ironically I just checked out my buddy's Fantom-07 while also checking out his new Omega pro stand 2nd tier, which I've decided to get.

Anyway, I didn't spend tons of time on it and haven't programmed anything on it so I can't compare that aspect.  My feeling is that all keyboards take time to learn so I wouldn't be worried.   I've gotten on better with MODX than I have with either of the Kurzweils I owned from a programming perspective, so that's very subjective.

Physically:  The build quality of keys and chassis were a bit nicer than the MODX (IMO, I know Scott has mentioned he dislikes that the keys have more spring, and they do), and the wall wart is a better one.   The plastic seems sturdier and seems less likely to get scuffs (or show scuffs).

 

Sounds:
The organ is much better on the Roland being the same (to my ears) as what was in my VR-700.

Piano sounded very usable to me.  It certainly is not a "character piano" with lots of overtones, it's the type I'd use in a rock band.  If anything maybe it reminded me a bit of the old triple strike from my Kurzweil.

I suspect the synths would be better on the Roland right out of the gate, but I didn't spend much time with them.  That's always been a pretty strong Roland area.

MODX of course has FM, and has easy ipad integration.  These are the two biggest advantages for me over the Fantom-0.  Then again, as I use my ipad for organ, would I need it with the Fantom-0?  Good question, the ipad sounds better (B-3X) but not having to deal with it is simpler.

Speaking of ipad, and synths:  I compared some custom MODX synth performances to my best IOS ones and decided to stick with the MODX ones for convenience.  They were good enough, if not spectacular.   Organ was so much better on IOS that it was no question.

MODX also has a lot more library space, and I picked up Purgatory Creek to make the already good rhodes even better (and much better wurli and clav).

Bottom line, for me:   One is not so much better than the other that it would cause me to sell one and buy the other.    In fact I'm considering either the Fantom-0 or big Fantom as a companion to my Modx.  They'd both complement and back up each other quite well.

[ProfD]

7 minutes ago, Stokely said:

In fact I'm considering either the Fantom-0 or big Fantom as a companion to my Modx.  They'd both complement and back up each other quite well.

IMO, that would be an excellent KB rig. Best of both worlds.  Go for it. 😁😎

[AnotherScott]

4 hours ago, Jim Alfredson said:

 

I see. But as you already said, you can import zones from other MULTIs. And you're not limited to 16. You could just create another MULTI and have 16 more.

Well sure, but there's no facility for searching for zoned sounds within Multis, so too many could quickly get unwieldy. A single Multi of 16 is reasonable. Numerous Multis of 16 sounds each, where you have to know in advance which Multis have which sounds? You could be turning patch assembly into a scavenger hunt.

 

So okay, we need a more imaginative strategy. Let's create multis by category. "EXT BRASS" could have up to 16 external brass sounds, "EXT ORGAN" could have up to 16 external organ sounds, "EXT EPS" could have up to 16 external EP sounds, and so forth. But the Kurz has 10 categories to start with, and subcategories within some of those categories (which would need their own category if you wanted more than 16 of any "upper level" category). A similar number of categories for external sounds, each with bunches of non-searchable sounds, seems like a recipe for a lot of tedious scrolling. But could you assemble something useful with an approach like this? I'm sure you could. But on the Montage/MODX, this just works. You don't have to strategize to this extent about how to make it work, or logically group things into sets of no more than 16, or end up with a bunch of patches which won't show up in a search, or have to scroll through lists of categories, or have to perpetually use one procedure to call up an internal program and a different procedure to invoke an external one when assembling your sound combinations (also requiring you to remember which section a particular sound is in, or requiring you to check two places).

 

Kurz flexibility is great, it's remarkable how you can make it do things you might not expect, and how close it can get to doing what some other completely different kind of system can do, but that's still not the same as using a system that simply already does what you're looking for, and does it better.

 

If someone only needs up to 16 external sounds to easily access from the board, I think the import zone idea would be "good enough." If you're trying to integrate a whole bunch of external sounds--essentially using the Kurz as much as a controller as a sound source, where you might want to have access to maybe 100 or more external sounds--well, it may be workable, but it seriously lags MODX from a patch selection/integration standpoint. (As do the boards from everyone else, AFAIK.) PC4 is great (and om yje "post-covid era," I've gigged more with my PC4-7 than my MODX), but there are some things MODX just does better.

 

 

[AnotherScott]

16 hours ago, CyberGene said:

If we assume for a moment there won't be a VA engine added to the MODX+ is the Fantom-0 the better proposition?

 

It's not as good at analog-style synth sounds as boards with VA engines... a purist will definitely hit some walls, but I think people don't always realize how usable it can still be. Stock examples (all deeply editable themselves) at 

 

 (you'll probably want to have your mouse clicker ready to skip, he lingers too much on each one ;-) )

 

and if you're willing to consider 3rd-party add-on packs here's one of a number of packs available...

 

 

Certainly the MODX cannot duplicate all the sonic characteristics or all the behaviors of an analog (or VA) synth. But can you get close enough for a lot of it, and certainly the vast majority of what a cover band might need? I'd say yes.

 

Without diminishing the value of VA, I think that a lot of the hand-wringing about lack of VA on the MODX is based on it as a checklist item more than anything else. The percentage of VA-wishers who actually tried to get an analog-ish sound they needed out of a MODX and were frustrated by its lack of true VA sound generation (and were unable to get a sound good enough to gig with out of it) could easily be a distinct minority. And there are great nearly-free VAs you can easily integrate from an iPad/iPhone if needed, too. Yes, hard knobs are nice, but we knew from the leaked photos not to expect more knobbage on the plus, and it's not like Fantom-0 has a plethora of VA knobs, and Korg largely took them away when transitioning from Kronos to Nautilus, so I don't think that's the basis on which some people are saying Yamaha "needs" VA to compete, either.

 

So then back to the question of whether the lack of VA makes the Fantom-0 the better proposition, well, it depends how much you need that true VA synthesis, and how much you don't need Yamaha's true FM synthesis, among other things. (And maybe whether or not you happen to own an iPhone/iPad with its own strong VA capabilities that can integrate so easily with the MODX... though of course it's still more convenient to have it built in.) As expected, each board has its strengths and will be the better proposition, in different situations.

 

Personally, I found the biggest Roland advantages to be in user interface, rhythm pattern functions (for some "unplugged duo/trio" gigs where I may supplement with some rhythms along with LH bass), assignable outs, better organ (the control at least as much as the sound).

 

But, with some exceptions, I tend to prefer the Yamaha sounds, and I like that MODX has more expansion memory, has an available editor (John Melas), better integration of external sounds over MIDI, one-wire iPad integration, and (to me) better action.

 

And there are other differences, which didn't matter so much to me, but may be very important to someone else.

 

On a side note: Expansion memory has been unexpectedly complicated. I thought Roland had easy soundfont import (they make a free downloadable converter), but I discovered it only handles single-velocity soundfonts, plus you only have 256 mb available, which goes kind of quickly after you fill half of it up with some of the nice SRX-based expansions. PC4 soundfont conversion should be available through the Chicken Systems software, but my attempt with a multiple-velocity soundfont did not work (like Roland, only a single velocity worked), and they have not gotten back to me yet as to why it didn't work and whether I should expect it to, now or in the future. I haven't tried it yet on the MODX (using the John Melas wave editor software).

[AnotherScott]

6 hours ago, Stokely said:

I'm not entirely clear what "edit mode" is, unless hitting "performance home" (or whatever the main button is called, my modx is packed right now) after clicking it from the live grid...

You can get to the edit mode from some screens, but there's also always the button on the right...

 

 

2 hours ago, Stokely said:

I just checked out my buddy's Fantom-07...Piano sounded very usable to me.  It certainly is not a "character piano" with lots of overtones, it's the type I'd use in a rock band.  If anything maybe it reminded me a bit of the old triple strike from my Kurzweil.

 

Kind of a damning with faint praise there. Not that the triple strike doesn't remain a usable sound that some people still swear by, but this many years later, and with Roland touting their SuperNATURAL modeling, one would expect better. Picking up from my previous post, piano is another area where I think MODX beats Fantom-0. Between its pianos and EPs, I don't think I'd be very happy with a Fantom-0 as the "bottom board" of a pair.

 

 

2 hours ago, Stokely said:

Speaking of ipad, and synths:  I compared some custom MODX synth performances to my best IOS ones and decided to stick with the MODX ones for convenience.  They were good enough, if not spectacular.

 

That again gets back to my previous post... everyone clamors for VA from Yamaha, and while it would be nice, I wonder how many have actually seen what they can get out of the MODX as is, it's very usable for most of the typical stuff, IMO. Yeah, I prefer the Roland, largely because the user interface makes it more enticing to tweak, but I used Yamaha AWM-based synth sounds for years and never felt especially let down by them, for what I needed them for.

 

 

[jerrythek]

I guess I should be reminding you that I did a pretty deep dive on the MODX a while back. Maybe it will help some…

 

 

[Stokely]

Cool, thanks for the reminder on edit...I don't think I've ever actually hit that to edit a performance, only to edit live sets.  For performances, I just hit performance (home) and then make my edits on the touchscreen.

So I'm still not sure why my Scenes are behaving strangely some of the time,  since I hadn't actually hit "edit" nor moved any other control... I'll have some time tomorrow to mess around.

[AnotherScott]

Yes, sometimes the screens also show edit buttons...

 

[Jim Alfredson]

4 hours ago, AnotherScott said:

If someone only needs up to 16 external sounds to easily access from the board, I think the import zone idea would be "good enough." If you're trying to integrate a whole bunch of external sounds--essentially using the Kurz as much as a controller as a sound source, where you might want to have access to maybe 100 or more external sounds--well, it may be workable, but it seriously lags MODX from a patch selection/integration standpoint. (As do the boards from everyone else, AFAIK.) PC4 is great (and om yje "post-covid era," I've gigged more with my PC4-7 than my MODX), but there are some things MODX just does better.

I get that but a couple of things: 1) I can't imagine needing access to that many external sounds when you have basically every sound at your fingertips already and you can make any synth sound imaginable on the Kurzweil via VAST. The FM engine is great and can import DX7 sysex, the virtual analog oscillators are great and can emulate pretty much any analog sound you need, you can load in samples if you need to, etc. The only reason one would need external sounds (maybe) is to augment the KB3 engine and even then you can just put a Ventilator on the second pair of outputs and the KB3 engine would work for most organ needs. 2) If you need quick access to change internal and external sounds for the next song, the best way to do that is via a MULTI anyway, so while the feature seems cool, I don't think its necessarily better than the 'old' way of doing things. And finally 3) who would want to use the MODx (+ or not) as a master controller anyway? Ugh, that keybed is poop.  

 

If you're accessing "100 or more external sounds" then you need another keyboard.

 

[AnotherScott]

23 hours ago, Jim Alfredson said:

I get that but a couple of things: 1) I can't imagine needing access to that many external sounds when you have basically every sound at your fingertips already and you can make any synth sound imaginable on the Kurzweil via VAST.

 

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. The good news is, I really like a lot of Kurz sounds as is. And the board has lots of great features and flexibility for me (without ever having to program/edit individual sounds). And I really like the action. And the fact that it makes for a great MIDI controller with its programmable buttons/sliders/knobs, ribbon, aftertouch, and assorted other functionality means it IS easy to extend it, sonically (without even going near VAST programming if you don't want to). I'd say the only board with sounds that beats it as a controller is a Viscount Physis. But that's basically not available, and its internal sound library was lesser, and they didn't make a sub-20-lb version.

 

23 hours ago, Jim Alfredson said:

the virtual analog oscillators are great and can emulate pretty much any analog sound you need

again, if you can program it. So much easier with any of a ton of great VA apps on an iPad.

 

23 hours ago, Jim Alfredson said:

you can load in samples if you need to, etc.

and again, I'm not yet sure how easily. For single-velocity samples, Roland and Nord are easier. For multi-velocity samples, Sample Robot supports Yamaha and Korg natively. I bought Chicken Systems Kurzweil Creator to try to address this, but haven't yet gotten it to do what I want. At the moment, if I wanted to trigger sampled sounds from my PC4, I'd load a soundfont into an iPad app. You can probably see where this is going by now...

 

23 hours ago, Jim Alfredson said:

2) If you need quick access to change internal and external sounds for the next song, the best way to do that is via a MULTI anyway, so while the feature seems cool, I don't think its necessarily better than the 'old' way of doing things.

 

I didn't say anything about quick access to change internal and external sounds for the next song... while that's an interesting side thought, from a performance perspective, all I've been meaning to talk about so far was calling up Multis, as you suggest. I was comparing the ease of assembling those Multis in the first place (for subsequent recall in a performance). If those multis are a mix of internal and external sounds, and you re-use the same external sounds in different Multis for song performances, then it is quicker, easier, and simpler to assemble those multis if you can treat internal and external sounds identically, instead of going through one process to load your internal programs into your multi, and an entirely different and somewhat more convoluted and less flexible process to load your previously used external sounds into that same multi.

 

23 hours ago, Jim Alfredson said:

And finally 3) who would want to use the MODx (+ or not) as a master controller anyway? Ugh, that keybed is poop.  

 

If you're accessing "100 or more external sounds" then you need another keyboard.

 

Okay, so let's consider that last scenario. Let's say you love your various iPad/VST sounds, and all you want is a controller. Ideally, you'd like it to have its own sounds as well, as backup and for some simple gigs where that may be plenty sufficient and/or when fast setup is paramount. But either way, your main use is going to be your library of 100+ external sounds. You're saying I'd need another keyboard. But what keyboard should that be? Certainly with sounds, but even without sounds, what controller would you recommend for somebody who wants at least 7x nice feeling keys in a well-equipped controller that weighs under 20 lbs? What makes for a better MIDI controller than a PC4-7? What is that other keyboard I should buy? You see, that's the problem, the PC4 is arguably already the best you can get!  Its weakness is the ability to easily locate, re-use, and mix-and-match its external sounds. MODX has that, but yes, it lags PC4 as a controller in other ways. Action, aftertouch, ribbon, number of knobs/sliders/buttons and how programmable they are, and a couple of well-known MIDI limitations of its own. It's not bad, but the PC4 has it beat many ways.

 

Now I'll give you what is probably (unfortunately) the best answer. Don't use the Kurz for your internal+external program+multi management at all. Use the PC4-7 as the controller, but do the rest of that stuff externally (via Camelot Pro, KeyStage, Gig Performer, Mainstage, Cantabile, whatever you like). But if the Kurz had this one function I described (which the MODX basically has), you more likely wouldn't need to use that external sound management system. Not that there's anything wrong with those apps... they're great, and if you need some of the more advanced things they do, they can beat the Kurz anyway. But if your needs are relatively simple such that the Kurz is one MODX function away from being able to do what you need as easily and smoothly as you'd like to do it, there's something really appealing about using the keyboard's interface for this stuff. The screen is where you want it, instead of having to figure out where to place your tablet/laptop for convenient visual and possibly tactile access (especially if the Kurz is part of a pair). The interface you already know for your board's internal Multi operation is identical to the interface you use for your external or mixed ones. The various soft buttons and other controls always do just what you want and expect them to do, and what they always do, regardless of whether you're doing a gig with just internal sounds or doing one with your full external library. Basically what I'm saying is that, there's a lot to like about the way the Kurz is designed in terms of its existing basic functionalities, and if you're going to "offshore" control to an external device, you're going to lose some of that. So that's the "unfortunate" part, there is still a trade-off.

 

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

[EscapeRocks]

I was all ready to post some really good info about the new MODX+ , now that I’ve been programming it and my Fantom-08 to work with each other. 
The excellent controller capability of the Fantom combined with the deep editing available on the MODX+  has me getting more out of the MODX than I ever did before. 
 

Perhaps I’ll start a new thread and leave this to all the theoretical analysis 

[Al Coda]

1 hour ago, Jim Alfredson said:

you can make any synth sound imaginable on the Kurzweil via VAST. The FM engine is great and can import DX7 sysex, the virtual analog oscillators are great and can emulate pretty much any analog sound you need

 

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

 

I spent a lot of time programming VAST since about 2009 when I bought the PC361 by interest.

I still have and use it,- but the VAST engine´s envelopes are still too lame.

Over in the "Gear Lab" forum  Steven Fortner said Kurzweil R&D have it on the list since the new FPGA is a lot faster than the old Mara chip,- but it is not yet implemented in a better way.

You can achive vintage envelope shapes by using FUNs, but when you do, the envelope attack becomes even slower because of the calculation.

Means, you won´t get crisp percussive Minimoog D type synth patches out of VAST,- and my Oberheim Xpander, being considered as one of the Oberheims w/ lamer envelopes, is crisper than everything I can get from VAST algorithms.

 

So, for the time being, I´ll keep my Minimoog, Xpander etc..

 

The VA oscillators (each waveform is a different algorithm) alias.

The very few waveforms using 3 or more DSP blocks almost don´t, but all the others do significantly.

 

But,- it doesn´t mean Kurzweil´s VA doesn´t sound good,- the MOOG filter emulation is good and when you don´t need the "jan hammerish" percussive "clicky" leads, you can achive quality lead sounds as long as you avoid using VA´s aliasing PWM.

In fact the 3 DSP block sawtooth waveform is the most usable.

 

OSC sync is a different story,- most factory patches alias, but VAST offers possibilities to tame,- for the price you cannot treat OSC sync to an extreme like you can in analog world.

Modulate the slave OSCs pitch too much and you´l get tons of aliasing.

 

Sampled synth waveforms, also these from KORE 64, are usable to some extend,- to a degree, when taking care not to use ´em all across the keyrange,- otherwise they alias too.

 

IMO, the strength of the VAST engine is combining samples w/ VA, it´s modulation options and DSP mangling,- and I love Kurzweil´s onboard FX and the freely programmable insert FX chains in a program.

But shapers, warp and distortion DSP blocks alias,- I have to put 1 block LP filters into VAST algorithms to mask audio artefacts as much as possible.

 

IMO there´s everything on board you need to program patches which are different from other synths patches,- mimiking vintage analog ... not so much.

It works for pads and all slower attack patches,- but in your face crisp synthbass and lead,- not for me. YMMV.

 

I like VAST because there are a lot of possibilities to control the playability of a patch across the entire keyboard range much better than on any analog synth I know.

Means,- I NEED a Kurzweil in my arsenal just only because of the modularity of the VAST engine, the local controller routing, FUNs and it´s MIDI controller abilities.

 

I hope the LFOs in K2700 don´t alias like they do in a PC3 where everything beyond 6-7Hz LFO speed becomes almost unusable.

 

Finally, I don´t want talking about KB3 and it´s parameters again and FM patches are nothing new anyway.

Lots of FM gear in my house.

 

☺️

 

A.C.