A MODX+ curiosity

[Jose EB5AGV]

Back in December last year I bought a MODX6+ to be used mainly as a rehearsal keyboard, so the Montage would be only used (and moved) for gigs.

 

I have noticed an interesting thing: the paper manuals which came with the MODX6+ have a copyright dated 2021... For a unit which was launched in 9/2022 it is a relevant mismatch. For sure a pandemic related delay.

 

I guess a similar thing could happen with the Montage+, which should be presented on NAMM in few days. We will know soon!

 

Jose

[DeltaJockey]

It could be just something as simple as the document template they've used to update the manual, being the original MODX and amending for the +, they may have forgotten to update the dating info. I've seen that quite often in all sorts of updated docs.

[Jose EB5AGV]

18 minutes ago, DeltaJockey said:

It could be just something as simple as the document template they've used to update the manual, being the original MODX and amending for the +, they may have forgotten to update the dating info. I've seen that quite often in all sorts of updated docs.

 

Maybe... but I think this is not the case. The original MODX is older than that. And if you check the original MODX manuals (even the downloadable ones), they are dated on same rear cover at 2018. I have checked my Genos manual. Also dated 2017 for an October 2017 release... Also, the Montage manual is dated 2016. They seem to keep the original year they launch the unit, regardless of new manual versions

 

All in all, is just a trivia question. But I think it was intresting to share.

 

Jose

[DeltaJockey]

Yes, but it still could be even a template when they started writing the MODX+ manual then, and didn't update the final date?

[Jose EB5AGV]

7 minutes ago, DeltaJockey said:

Yes, but it still could be even a template when they started writing the MODX+ manual then, and didn't update the final date?

 

Yes, maybe... Or just a one digit error, who knows!

 

But that same 2021 date is on ALL printed manuals which came with my MODX+ 🤔

[o0Ampy0o]

The date most likely reflects the date the product was registered. You don’t have to register the item for it to be copyrighted but given it is the manual for a musical instrument it would definitely be registered.

[Jose EB5AGV]

41 minutes ago, o0Ampy0o said:

The date most likely reflects the date the product was registered. You don’t have to register the item for it to be copyrighted but given it is the manual for a musical instrument it would definitely be registered.

 

All in all, if you see the dates from other Yamaha instruments launches and manuals, as I commented before, it would seem there was some extra delay with the MODX+, which was my point 😉

 

I would say the chip shortage could be a factor.

 

Just trivia, I know! 🙏🏻

 

Jose

[o0Ampy0o]

I think you are probably correct about Covid delaying the release. My point is that the copyright date of documentation for a musical instrument coincides with a legal transaction and isn’t simply a matter of updating something like a blog post. Delayed or just taking time the date reflects the registration not the beginning or completion of the documentation. Granted there is a chance a template date was not edited as someone suggested.

[pjd]

I always believed that the dates on Yamaha MIDI implementation charts are near the "freeze date" for the software. 

 

Yamaha's annual report (you do read those, right? 🙂 ) freely owns up to Pandemic-induced supply chain problems and delays. They also anticipate a bump to the bottom-line as the backlog of new products are released. The PSR-E473 and CKs were delayed and perhaps the Montage unicorn.

 

Yamaha were (are) heavily dependent on Asahi Kasei Microdevices (AKM) ADCs and DACs. The AKM factory was down for well-over a year due to a fire. Fire, water, smoke are simply catastrophic for a semiconductor plant. 😒

 

-- pj

 

[Docbop]

Working on big teams you see stuff like that happen work is passed around between people writing, updating, proofing something like a copyright notice is just assumed to be right and final proofreader just missed it.     If if like places I worked it will be put in the bug database as a documentation bug and maybe someday will be corrected before a reprint.   Because the people who worked on that have probably been on two other project teams already.   

[o0Ampy0o]

19 minutes ago, Docbop said:

Working on big teams you see stuff like that happen work is passed around between people writing, updating, proofing something like a copyright notice is just assumed to be right and final proofreader just missed it.     If if like places I worked it will be put in the bug database as a documentation bug and maybe someday will be corrected before a reprint.   Because the people who worked on that have probably been on two other project teams already.   

 

That fits a software company I deal with. They get enough of it right but they are also terrible at every level, you name it they blow part of it. They are the big show in the industry short of going proprietary. You have to accept their mistakes or you would go crazy. 

[Jose EB5AGV]

Sorry, but based on these proofs, I don't buy the mistake theory 😉

 

Proof #1:

Three different MODX+ documents, all dated 12/2021 (December 2021):

 

 

Proof #2:

And then the definitive one...the only document which is dated 2022, is dated January 2022 and is this sheet:

 

 

So for me this clearly shows the MODX+ was intended to be released before it was.

 

Hope this closes my argument by proofing it 🤣🤣🤣

 

Jose

 

PS: I hope you understand this is just kind of a funny challenge for me