Finally sold my Fusion... now what? MOX6? Juno GI?

[wheresgrant3]

Finally sold my Fusion today after three years and very little effort. I had it listed in my sig here for years but never actively created a listing for it elsewhere. A friend of a friend in a local band was looking to upgrade his MM6. I paid $550 in 2007 and he offered me $500. In 24 hours it was packed and picked up.

 

So now I'm looking to replace it with a new synth/rompler that's light wieght with good performance features and a good soundset. My current rig consists of a Triton Extreme, Roland XP 30 and MicroX. I'm looking to retire the Triton (it's too heavy and bulky to transport) and possibly the XP30 (buttons have been flaking as of late). I'm not looking for a fullfledged workstation, just a 2nd tier board with decent acoustic and modern synth sounds, easy to use, great onboard UI (key transpose, octave +/-, category banks and favorites all at my fingertips). We play a lot of modern dance which the Micro X and Triton Extreme fit well in the mix covering it. I also plan on getting a Kronos later this year... although I don't plan to gig with it... at least initially.

 

I've looked at the following synths and I'm wondering if people can chime in with their opinions.

 

Yamaha MOX6- Three cheers for Yamaha for coming out with an affordable synth that is packed with features and doesn't suck in build quality (Triton LE this is not). I'm pretty impressed with this synth, I like many of the sounds, and the build quality seems better than most in that $1000 range. I had thought about buying a Motif rack once. The only thing holding me back is that I am completely ignorant of Yamaha's programming architecture. I'm always up for a challenge but my programming time is also extreme limited. This is still my #1 choice. Anyone know how this stacks against the previous MO6? Pros and cons?

 

Roland GI- I've seen quite a few people on this board that have shot some praise in favor of this board... and I'm intrigued. However I do have some upfront apprehension. For instance wasn't there issues with the build quality on the previous Roland Juno G? (buttons flaking, displays failing) I remember hearing that it wasn't road worthy in the slightest. I had a bad experience out of the box with the Triton LE (lasted less than 3 years)... compare that to the used XP30 that's been in my rig almost 10 years. It's built like a tank. I haven't had a chance to demo it... but how do they sound. I'm not a fan of Rolands SRX series (Fantom S, X soundset) at all. The synth waveforms and patches bore me to tears. Is this a new soundset and engine or just a repackaged Fantom X6?

 

Korg m50- Not even a consideration. I already own a Triton, MicroX a Microstation and as I said I plan on getting a Kronos. I'm completely Korged out! No doubt it's a great board for it's features and price, I'm just not impressed with the soundset. The entire M series is a skip for me.

 

Kurzweil PC3LE- I've seen in the store, I've rolled through some patches and frankly I need more time to make a better decision.

 

My real requirements are $1000 or less... 15lbs or less. Prefer internal power supply versus DC transformer/wall wart. Decent key action and solid build (not frail and plasticky) Of course Piano, brass, ep's are important, but I have some of those sounds covered in the Micro X (which I can Midi up if need be). Where I could really use some help is on the synth side-leads, pads, supersaws, stabs, stacks, white noise, subdrops... stuff to layer while covering modern Top 40 (LMFAO, Lady Gaga, David Guetta, Kayne...etc). The other keys player is using a Virus C and Korg M3. So I want something that can compliment, not compete and still be a decent all around board (not just a VA).

[zzzxtreme]

MOX is really an XS without sampling, and less powerful processor, hence the 64 polyphony. As ex owner of the XS, I can tell you all the sounds are professionally programmed. Many sounds are spot on. Articulation is lovely. Select the sound you want, and record, or gig. No inconsistent volume / noise problem. on XS you can have 16part master mode, where you can split/layer 16 programs, just like Korg's Combi mode. On MOX, I believe , there's only 4 part performance mode. MOX features VCM effects just like XS. MO6 is inferior in many ways. I'm not too sure about MOX's user interface, but XS's user interface is a giant leap compared to ES and original Motif. No more cryptic for new user!

 

If you're not fan of Roland soundset, you better avoid it.

 

You won't get good brass with Kurz. but it excels on synth side, offers aftertouch, full VAST, VA programming, and it is great value, though IMO it sucks when it comes to woodwinds. I believe PC361 is just $100-200 pricier than PC3LE6. I sold my PC3LE6 because I'm too used to Korg sounds, and i thought there's way too many strings and mellotron sounds

[DJ RAZZ]

The new MOX and slightly older MO6 are both good pieces if you like the Motif sound. I love my Roland Juno Gi however, just personal preference.

[cyberpunx]

Why did you sell it? I've been thinking of getting one and would appreciate the pros and cons. Thanks!

Mike

[wheresgrant3]

 

Why did you sell it? I've been thinking of getting one and would appreciate the pros and cons. Thanks! Mike

 

 

I've posted here before about it and some avid users like Christian Rock can chime in. It's a wonderful synth and really for the money you can snag these (I saw an 8HD local for $550... for the controller features along that's a terrific buy) they are a steal. Alas for me I just could not wrap my head around the UI. The manual is thick and requires reading. I don't mind digging through a book but I like the user experience to be a bit intuiative... this for me was not. It was alot of button pushing and menu diving. Coming from a Triton as my main axe it was hard to not use a touch screen. That being said I have no problems editing and programming my XP-30 or previous synths I've owned without touchscreens. To me the Micron was a breeze to program. Let's just say the Fusion didn't speak to me.

 

In addition I really dislike the soundset. It's well documented that the soundset that shipped with the Fusion was 'light' on excitement. There was nothing to my ears that really stood out... leads, pads, brass, etc. The synth sounds seemed like a weak attempt to capture the proggy feel of older analog, and while the filters were excellent and there were plenty of base sounds to choose from I really didn't have a ton of time to reinvent the wheel. People got excited over the Hollow Sun Freepacks.... for me, meh... Interesting to have some of those classic samples and emulations on hand but honestly... where would I use them? That said this is a powerful synth with an excellent VA engine (FM, physical modeling) but it needs to be tweaked. A great project from someone with a ton of time on their hands. Since I gig, work, eat, sleep I just didn't have the free time to dig under the hood much. Give me a Triton and I'll have some complex pads created in a combi bank in a few minutes. The Alesis was much more 'work' to achieve what I wanted to acheive on other boards.

 

The guy who bought this was hamstrung by the MM6 limitations. This should seem like a rocket ship interms of capability.

[wheresgrant3]

 

The new MOX and slightly older MO6 are both good pieces if you like the Motif sound. I love my Roland Juno Gi however, just personal preference.

 

 

I haven't really tested the Gi to make a decision. Just curious what you like about it. I'll tell you what I didn't like about the 1st, 2nd gen Fantoms... Brass-ok, organs excellent, piano and ep suitable.... but when it came to synth oriented sounds they were the typical Roland, pumped to perfection patches that were seemingly unsuable in most recording and gig situations. Seriously Roland, is it necesarry to have 25 patches that all contain some unusable DJ 'loop' that was 5 years dated when the board was released. Other sounds like clanking pipes, tinkling bells... just lots of movement that isn't even arpeggio driven. In my opinion it was a real weak spot for the Fantom series. To be honest, I liked the SRJV Techno Collection much better than any of the stock SRX synth based sounds. They were compressed and dark, but at least they could stand alone and compliment a mix. Fantom S, SRX Ultimate keys are light on significant sounding saw, square, res-like tones and heavy on a lot of noise. I've heard some people compliment the Gi soundset. Just wondering what sounds you use (favorites) and how you use them?

[DJ RAZZ]

The Gi is a new soundset, based more upon the Fantom G, and some things just unique to it. It also has a new way of layering and splitting sounds, a very easy internal editing structure for effects and synth stuff, and finally Boss effects that xan be used both internally and externally.

[wheresgrant3]

 

The Gi is a new soundset, based more upon the Fantom G, and some things just unique to it. It also has a new way of layering and splitting sounds, a very easy internal editing structure for effects and synth stuff, and finally Boss effects that xan be used both internally and externally.

 

Thanks... it's really neck and neck with the MOX6 for me.

[NuSkoolTone]

Congrats on the sale Grant!

 

Of course I'm biased, but I would go with the MOX by a long shot. Basically because I don't think the Juno series compares sound wise.

 

To be honest, I was torn to sell my XS and get a MOX to keep my current sounds if they make (Made? Haven't followed it's development) a converter from XS->MoX due to the weight now that I have a Kronos. However having the extra real estate on a 2nd board (76 keys) is nice and I'm soon to be gigging with my new setup. Also grabbed a Spider Pro stand to handle it.

 

So here's some reasons I'd get the MoX if I were you:

1.) If you're getting a Kronos, the soundsets compliment each other VERY well.

2.) I'm under the impression the MoX has the same presets as the XS. Though it's annoying that you can't overwrite the preset banks (Though you get some user banks), they are EXCELLENT. Best presets I've ever heard in a workstation BAR NONE. Lots of variety, and actually USEFUL! I'm not kidding when I say the Motif XS is top 40 radio sounds in a box. Sure, minor tweaks are needed, but performance mode lets you make tweaks to the filter, envelopes, and EQ of each sound. Plus they keep their insert effects, at least on the XS. It's probable that they do on the MoX as well, but I would double check.

3.) The XS's vocoder is in there. It's a one trick pony but it's useful. I use it when we do "Funkytown" and it's spot on. You might not use it much, but it's nice to have.

4.) The board is Light. My M50 is light like that. Gonna miss it!

5.) Dedicated Octave AND Transpose buttons. Handy!

6.) Tap Tempo which means you can use arps with a live drummer and no click.

 

Here are the caveats I see:

1.) Can't load samples. I use this for some brass sounds and intros etc... Though not the end of the world.

2.) No Faders for the sounds in a Performance it seems. That could be a PITA. There's "Performance Mode" that lets you turn sounds on and off, but it could make adjusting sound levels within a patch tedious. Not sure how MoX handles this.

3.) The MIDI implementation straight up SUCKS (At least on the Motif, I assume the MoX is the same). In Performance mode, all the sounds are on the global MIDI channel and there's no choice in the matter. In "Master Mode" you can assign MIDI channels, even get sounds from voice mode, the sequencer etc... BUT "Master Mode" can't receive program changes! WAY TO GO YAMAHA! And, there's only 128 of "Master Mode", which if you use a lot of patches like me, is insufficient. It's where they tried to reinvent the wheel and should have left it the hell alone!

 

So check it out: In Performance mode if you want to layer something from your master board with the Motif, you can BUT all the Motif's sounds are restricted to the same MIDI channel. What this does is limit what you can do with the Motif's keyboard. If you want to play something on the Motif in the same spot using a different sound, you can't. Now you can Map it into zones/layers but there's ANOTHER limitation. You can only transpose the sounds +/- 2 octaves. Sometimes in order to get the proper octave to line up, you need to make a compromise. So it's difficult to use the Motif as a tone generator AND a controller at the same time.

 

What I mean by this is if the Motif could receive different MIDI channels in performance mode, you could layer using the same channel as your main board and then you could control a lead sound on your main board by playing it on the Motif with nothing else to do. But since it's restricted to one MIDI channel, if you want to layer and control your lead sound, the only choice is to TURN OFF THE VOLUME on the Motif for your lead! (Otherwise you'll hear the Motif's Layer sound and the Lead at the same time.) You can get around this with Master Mode, but there's only 128 slots and it won't receive program changes so you'd have to change patches manually.

 

Going the other direction, Performance Mode can't send MIDI patch changes on a different channel to another board. So you can't really use it as a Master Controller in this regard. I know it's going to be a "2nd" for you, but just putting it out there.

 

This whole thing is why I've been using the Motif "Old School" without MIDI to do patch changes in one shot. Now if you're managing patches "Old School" (Everything manually) and use each board on its own, then none of the above matters.

 

4.) You can only split/Layer 4 sounds on the Motif in Performance mode (Master Mode, just takes Performance mode and gives you MIDI channel capability). You can use a song with 16 sounds, but that's a bit of work IMO. Now to be honest, MOST of the time the 4 sounds is fine. Though if you want to take a brass patch and double it with an octave per say it can be a frustrating limitation. That said, because the Voice architecture has up to 8 osc per voice, many don't need "Beefing up".

5.) Pitch wheel. I'm a joystick fan, but that's me. The Mod wheel has it's pros and cons with the Y axis of the joystick though.

6.) No Ribbon. Not a deal breaker, but I'm used to having a ribbon on the Motif. I don't use it THAT much, but it's nice to have.

 

So with all that said I still recommend the Motif/MoX because the sounds really are just great out of the box, and getting sounds close to the records is usually a trivial affair IME. So if you're short on time, it's a godsend. While there's more power in the Kronos, I find the presets are not NEARLY as varied and close to the radio. It's a different beast, though a beautiful one (At least forgetting KARMA for a moment. HATE IT!)

 

Depending on how Yamaha deals with adjusting sound levels in performance mode between parts, the MoX might just be one of the nicest little gig boards ever made IMO. Only you can know by how you work if it's right for you, but overall I've been very happy with the Motif warts and all.

 

Good Luck!

[wheresgrant3]

Wes,

 

That is an awesome summary. The truth is I've always liked the 'Motif' sound starting with the first rack unit. I can only imagine it being better with the latest generation. It's not that I don't value deep programming in a board... but I have other synths dedicated toward that effort... I just want more of a lightweight, plug n play board that can be at my gigs. I do plan on getting a Kronos down the road, but not really to gig with (at least with NUTS). Still I think it's ironic that you are the 3rd or 4th person that has said to me the Kronos needed some heavy tweaking before taking out to shows... almost in an effort to re engineer the complexity of it's combi's and patches where as I was out the door in 15 minutes, editing on stage on the fly with the Triton Extreme. I had a similar experience with the M3 which is why I sold mine... fantastic board, but it needed some heavy tweakage to ground I had covered with other synths. And KARMA was always the culprit.

 

Thanks for this write up.

[NuSkoolTone]

*SNIP* It's not that I don't value deep programming in a board... but I have other synths dedicated toward that effort... I just want more of a lightweight, plug n play board that can be at my gigs. *SNIP* Thanks for this write up.

 

Hey no problem man.

 

If I made it sound like the Motif is hard to hit the ground running with, not at all. You just have to do a little planning if you want to use MIDI IMO. I just wanted to illustrate the full gamut of what you might encounter so there were no surprises.

 

I'd say for what we do, the Motif series is about as "Plug n Play" as it gets.

[Conbrio]

 

People got excited over the Hollow Sun Freepacks.... for me, meh... Interesting to have some of those classic samples and emulations on hand but honestly... where would I use them?

 

 

From what I'd read, I thought the Hollow Sun sounds really made the Fusion into a whole new synth. Did they just give you a boatload of raw samples, or brand new programs for the Fusion as well?

[DJ RAZZ]

Thanks... it's really neck and neck with the MOX6 for me.

 

Your welcome. But be advised, I am a Roland/Boss fanboy and I have owned more Roland products than I can recall. I am sure in the commercial sense the MOX is the superior choice. I just love the synth sounds on the Gi and there has not been any sound via acoustic, organ, or synthwise, that I have not been able to get close enough for my taste and for the taste of our live performance cover band.

Plus the build quality has been solid for me; one year of gigging and counting.

 

I just prefer the sound of Roland products over Yamaha.

[zzzxtreme]

yup dj razz, both are good, but very different. I have always loved roland's sakuhachi and mercato patch, and yamaha has its own strenghts

[Bernard]

To me the Micron was a breeze to program. Let's just say the Fusion didn't speak to me.

 

What's the verdict on sound between the Micron and the Fusion. Also which works out the most flexible sound engine, if the Fusion then it seems let down by the IF as you say you needed to get rid...

 

Good luck with your final chioce BTW

[wheresgrant3]

 

From what I'd read, I thought the Hollow Sun sounds really made the Fusion into a whole new synth. Did they just give you a boatload of raw samples, or brand new programs for the Fusion as well?

 

 

No brand new programs.... there were a bunch of Synclaver and Fairlight samples... most of which were more interesting than the stock Alesis sounds, but not groundbreaking by any means. Think about it... they were samples from the mid 80's. The other day I pulled a few of them up, tinked around a little bit. I'm sure a Fairlight sample of glass blowing was quite amazing in 1986. In 2011, not so much.

[wheresgrant3]

What's the verdict on sound between the Micron and the Fusion. Also which works out the most flexible sound engine, if the Fusion then it seems let down by the IF as you say you needed to get rid... Good luck with your final chioce BTW

 

The VA was excellent... perhaps the best thing about the Fusion. Very programmable... but again for me I was exhausted with the entire menu system. I don't know how really to compare the Micron and the Fusion in terms of sound however. On paper and in my head the Fusion was way more powerful than the Micron... however the Micron (to my ears) sounded better. In fairness the Micron had a better soundset, plenty of Reverb and fx over it's patches. Even though it had a small editing screen and minimal amount of buttons, it was much less distracting. The Fusion had side menu buttons, a nav wheel. Sometimes, something as simple as scrolling through some categories banks and patches could stop you direct in your tracks trying to remember.... is it 'next/back' or 'inc/dec' that will advance through the patches.

 

My endorsement is... if you can find a Fusion for $400-500, have some time to spare and an interest in digging into a deep synth the Fusion will hardly disappoint. However if you are looking for something to edit on the fly, quickly build, layers and splits, and be able to easily navigate between categories banks and patches I'd suggest looking elsewhere.

[Bernard]

The VA was excellent... perhaps the best thing about the Fusion. Very programmable... but again for me I was exhausted with the entire menu system. I don't know how really to compare the Micron and the Fusion in terms of sound however. On paper and in my head the Fusion was way more powerful than the Micron... however the Micron (to my ears) sounded better. In fairness the Micron had a better soundset, plenty of Reverb and fx over it's patches. Even though it had a small editing screen and minimal amount of buttons, it was much less distracting. The Fusion had side menu buttons, a nav wheel. Sometimes, something as simple as scrolling through some categories banks and patches could stop you direct in your tracks trying to remember.... is it 'next/back' or 'inc/dec' that will advance through the patches. My endorsement is... if you can find a Fusion for $400-500, have some time to spare and an interest in digging into a deep synth the Fusion will hardly disappoint. However if you are looking for something to edit on the fly, quickly build, layers and splits, and be able to easily navigate between categories banks and patches I'd suggest looking elsewhere.

 

 

I looked at getting one when they first came out. Your comments make me feel much better as I know it can sound good but everyone had a similar rection and it seems there is only a small hard core willing to suffer it...

[Conbrio]

So with all that said I still recommend the Motif/MoX because the sounds really are just great out of the box, and getting sounds close to the records is usually a trivial affair IME. So if you're short on time, it's a godsend. While there's more power in the Kronos, I find the presets are not NEARLY as varied and close to the radio. It's a different beast, though a beautiful one (At least forgetting KARMA for a moment. HATE IT!)

 

It's a good thing that Motif/MoX keyboards sound good out of the box, because their OS and user interface aren't easy to use "out of the box." You can read about that on various forums, including Motifator.

 

Regarding Korg's Karma features, from what I hear, it takes time to understand because it's so deep. A friend of mine has a Korg M3 and hears people criticize Karma simply because they don't take time to get past the presets. He's come up with some amazing combination sounds with it, and that's without the additional software.

[zzzxtreme]

before XS, the UI on SY, EX and ealier motif series were cryptic. XS with its big screen, totally designed from ground up (using linux) is surprisingly user friendly

[NuSkoolTone]

It's a good thing that Motif/MoX keyboards sound good out of the box, because their OS and user interface aren't easy to use "out of the box." You can read about that on various forums, including Motifator. Regarding Korg's Karma features, from what I hear, it takes time to understand because it's so deep. A friend of mine has a Korg M3 and hears people criticize Karma simply because they don't take time to get past the presets. He's come up with some amazing combination sounds with it, and that's without the additional software.

 

See what's funny is I have no problems whatsoever with the Motif OS or interface. Honestly, I don't see what's so hard about it?

 

Yes Karma's a real bitch, though not for the reason you'd think. It's because to do anything ORIGINAL or USEFUL with it you have to spend $179 on the software and use a computer.

Otherwise it's a glorified preset machine AKAIK, and that effing sucks.

[wheresgrant3]

It's a good thing that Motif/MoX keyboards sound good out of the box, because their OS and user interface aren't easy to use "out of the box." You can read about that on various forums, including Motifator. Regarding Korg's Karma features, from what I hear, it takes time to understand because it's so deep. A friend of mine has a Korg M3 and hears people criticize Karma simply because they don't take time to get past the presets. He's come up with some amazing combination sounds with it, and that's without the additional software.

 

I have the original KARMA workstation and it is a very cool feature. The problem is that it's not a straight up arpeggiator... it's a 'generated effect' basically sequences that are run on algorithms. That's great for creation... not necessarily for cover performances. Not sure in the Kronos whether they include both KARMA and the Triton Dual arppegio... but that was one of the things I missed on the M3.

[Conbrio]

 

See what's funny is I have no problems whatsoever with the Motif OS or interface. Honestly, I don't see what's so hard about it?

 

 

I agree the XS/XF is more intuitive than the MO series. The screens on the Mo and MoX are much too small. I'm just used to the touch screens that Korg offers (have one on my Triton). Korg's user interface is much more intuitive for me. It's all what you're used to.

[MikeyParent]

So Grant, any decisions?

 

I am sorta considering ditching everything and going to one of those two boards (or a Kurz PC361LE).

[ChristianRock]

I was away on vacation for a month when this thread originally came up, so I didn't respond...

 

I currently don't have a Fusion but I'm pretty sure I will have one again in the future. I will get another one at some point (preferrably an 8HD), but due to having to buy a computer and an interface, I had to sell a whole bunch of stuff and my 6HD had to go, along with the SH201 and a whole lot of stuff...

 

The Hollow sun sounds are not just 80s sounds, by the way. It's got a whole bunch of original sounds (mostly pads), and things from the 90s and even hip hop/drum and bass sounds as well.

 

I guess if I gigged a lot I'd have to suck it up and spend a lot more money on something like a Motif XF or even a Kronos (it would imply that I'd be making money, so the investment would make sense).