new Yamaha Motif XS workstation

[Enigmatic]

Originally posted by Diametro Yamaha Motif XS6 Profile: -- 61-touch sensitive keys -- New UI with large color LCD and 8 knobs and sliders -- Xpanded Articulation Synth engine with 355MB of WAVE ROM -- Studio-style mixing environment with Virtual Circuitry Modeling effects -- 4 intelligent arpeggiators with instant Performance Recording -- Integrated Sampling Sequencer with 1GB of optional memory Total Computer Integration and Cubase AI software included "The Yamaha Motif XS6 synthesizer features Xpanded Articulation sounds that will inspire your creativity, and Performance Recording with 4 intelligent arpeggiators instantly captures your ideas. The new large color LCD is an attractive addition to the Yamaha Motif series. The Motif XS6 also has an Integrated Sampling Sequencer with studio-style mixing and VCM effects that let you create complete MIDI/audio productions. With computer connectivity and Cubase AI software you can expand your musical possibilities. " .. . . .. The expanded controls are welcome, but it's not exactly the "next generation" workstation many had hoped for ... just enough, I suppose, for Yamaha to stay competitive in the current field. (I think the Big Three coordinate the release of their workstations; or it sure seems like it ... ) Next up, Korg ...

 

 

Thanks for this great news. I love my Motif unlike anything, but i always found it a bit tedious to scroll through the small LED screen. The Motif XS should make my life a lot easier.

 

Now all i have to do is wait a few months for the price to drop a little...

[malfunkt]

I think Audacity Works put it well.

 

very few musicians are thinking along the lines off...

 

"hmmm... piano sound? Well I better get running that through a spectral delay in 1024 bands.. yup.. going to be up ALL night routing each one of those bands through its own signal path, automated to LFOs that control pan, filter and volume depth and clocked independently to different time codes. That will sound great, while my granular-formant-additive-doppler time device will make it seem as if you are falling forward 'through' the composition, while each pulse of the beat surges you forward with timed inertia."

 

nope. I think most musicians are thinking:

 

"hmmm.. piano sound? that would work well with those moody strings and upright bass."

 

For the warped and twisted, there are massive analogue modulars, computers, C++, peyote, String Theory, and other fun activities.

 

For the rest of us - there is XS.

 

[so should read the Yamaha Motif ad this spring]

 

 

 

 

 

all instruments are good instruments.

[mildbill]

real musicians would use a real piano, real strings and a real upright bass.

[asynchro_nous]

Originally posted by malfunkt "hmmm... piano sound? Well I better get running that through a spectral delay in 1024 bands.. yup.. going to be up ALL night routing each one of those bands through its own signal path, automated to LFOs that control pan, filter and volume depth and clocked independently to different time codes. That will sound great, while my granular-formant-additive-doppler time device will make it seem as if you are falling forward 'through' the composition, while each pulse of the beat surges you forward with timed inertia."

 

Get out of my head!!!

 

[MartinHines]

 

Originally posted by Mike51 If that's the case, why isn't Cubase 5000$? Or Reaktor 5?

 

 

With PC/Mac software, your primary cost is software development; the actual "manufacturing costs" (creating disks, manuals, and boxes) are trivial. After you create the product, your per unit manufacturing cost is (being generous) $25. For the sake of argument, if you assume a 3x markup for the new Motif XS8 (at $4,000) one could assume the Yamaha actual per unit manufacturing cost is $4,000/3 = $1,300. That is STILL $1250 more than the per unit cost of Cubase or Reaktor. Then, of course you would need to add on the cost of product support, including establishing and maintaining a service network and the cost of maintaining parts inventory for 10 years.

 

Most software companies have terrible support. Have you ever tried to get support from Native Instruments or Steinberg? If you have a tough problem, many times software companies will play the "blame game" -- blame your PC maker, your computer peripherals, your audio interface, anything but actually helping you solve your problem. In comparison, MI hardware companies provide great support given they "own" the entire product and take responsibility for it. Well, that support costs money (which is why many software companies and even PC makers try to avoid it).

 

Also, your software development process is more straightforward since you are supporting software execution on a "widely known" platform (e.g. a PC running Win XP or Mac running OSX). Hardware manufacturers have proprietary or customized platforms to worry about.

 

You also have the GIGANTIC personal computer industry to help subsidize your "hardware costs". Today, you can by an off-the-shelf PC, buy an audio interface, and install driver software and music application software with a minimum amount of cost and effort. Contrast that with a workstation from the big three that requires a lot of internal cost and effort to build. Even if they use some PC parts (like a motherboard and hard drive) there are still TONS of additional hardware/software integration costs (e.g. how do you get all of those sliders, buttons and switches to all work?).

 

The bottom line is there are big costs that must be recovered when you are a MI industry hardware manufacturer.

 

A perfect "software comparison" example would be Korg's release of the Korg Legacy Collection ($400) and the Korg Legacy Collection Digital Edition ($150). As I understand it, the KLC-DE is a huge hit, and very profitable for Korg. These two products allow Korg to have the same "software only" advantages as other software developers have. As you can see, these two products definitely don't sell "for $5,000".

[XorAxAx]

 

Originally posted by The Audacity Works But but but but but...! Yamaha should give us 256 voices anyway and VA synthesis and FM synthesis, and physical modeling, and sixteen motorized faders, and analog filter section, and a huge color touch screen and ADAT lightpipe out and wordclock in and VST plugin support and realtime disk streaming and 200GB of samples and free in-house training AND a full lifetime replacement guarantee!

 

Hmmm. I don't see any mention of two DVI ports for extension monitors, nor do I see wavetable synthesis in there. You were so close to the perfect machine. Better luck next time.

[The Audacity Works]

Originally posted by XorAxAx You were so close to the perfect machine. Better luck next time.

Did I forget to mention the included fellatio from twin supermodels?

[XorAxAx]

Originally posted by The Audacity Works Did I forget to mention the included fellatio from twin supermodels?

Hmm... If they're Japanese, count me in.

[Mike51]

 

Originally posted by Diametro One could argue we're lucky to have workstations at all these days (if you're a fan of workstations, that is).

 

 

I am a fan of workstations. And the reason I bought one was because it was in fact cutting edge and unique. It was the Korg Triton. You had the first real fast songwriting workstation in terms of workflow(the touch screen interface and the instant to SEQ multitrack layering is phenomenal). You also had the first polyphonic excellent physical modelling option *and* sampling. This is why it became such a legend in the hip hop world (and still is). It's also an incredible live synth due to it's interface and combinations.

 

Now Yamaha decides to go backwards and it just doesn't make sense. Workstations have the potential to *smoke* any other setup out there and be the incredible all in one systems. Unfortunately, the big three are no longer pushing the boundaries.

[Mike51]

 

 

Have you ever tried Roland's support? I have had no problem with support from software companies.

 

 

Also, your software development process is more straightforward since you are supporting software execution on a "widely known" platform (e.g. a PC running Win XP or Mac running OSX). Hardware manufacturers have proprietary or customized platforms to worry about.

 

Martin, the Oasys runs on a 2.8 Intel CPU and Linux. Your comments do not apply.

 

 

You also have the GIGANTIC personal computer industry to help subsidize your "hardware costs". Today, you can by an off-the-shelf PC, buy an audio interface, and install driver software and music application software with a minimum amount of cost and effort. Contrast that with a workstation from the big three that requires a lot of internal cost and effort to build. Even if they use some PC parts (like a motherboard and hard drive) there are still TONS of additional hardware/software integration costs (e.g. how do you get all of those sliders, buttons and switches to all work?). The bottom line is there are big costs that must be recovered when you are a MI industry hardware manufacturer.

 

Not enough to justify the current prices of workstations. Time has moved on, but the big three's pricing scheme for workstations has not. Even the VA makers have adjusted.

 

 

A perfect "software comparison" example would be Korg's release of the Korg Legacy Collection ($400) and the Korg Legacy Collection Digital Edition ($150). As I understand it, the KLC-DE is a huge hit, and very profitable for Korg. These two products allow Korg to have the same "software only" advantages as other software developers have. As you can see, these two products definitely don't sell "for $5,000".

 

 

All you are doing is proving my point. As of 2007, the workstation market is not a value, and the big three have not adjusted to changing markets while they recycle 10 + years of the parts bin.

[Mike51]

 

Originally posted by malfunkt I think Audacity Works put it well. all instruments are good instruments.

 

 

 

Hey , we have the editor of Keyboard magazine posting here.

[MartinHines]

 

Originally posted by Mike51 Have you ever tried Roland's support? I have had no problem with support from software companies.

 

 

I still contend that MI hardware manufacturers have tremendously higher support costs than music software companies. All of those costs must eventually be recovered.

 

 

Originally posted by Mike51 Martin, the Oasys runs on a 2.8 Intel CPU and Linux. Your comments do not apply.

 

Sure they do. The OASYS platform is a highly customized Linux platform. Designing the OASYS software is definitely not as easy as building an application to run on Windows XP.

 

 

Originally posted by Mike51 Time has moved on, but the big three's pricing scheme for workstations has not. Even the VA makers have adjusted.

 

The "big three" still have to cover ALL of their costs, and make a reasonable profit. You may not think the products they create provide enough VALUE to get you to buy, but I am confident their prices are rooted in the reality of the MI hardware industry cost structure.

 

 

 

Originally posted by Mike51 All you are doing is proving my point. As of 2007, the workstation market is not a value, and the big three have not adjusted to changing markets while they recycle 10 + years of the parts bin.

 

You don't seem to understand the economic realities of producing and supporting MI hardware. My example of Korg's KLC and KLC-DE is still valid. When you do an "apples to apples" comparison (i.e. comparing Korg developing and selling "pure" PC/Mac application software to other software companies like Steinberg and Native Instruments) the products are priced similarly.

 

Your argument seems to be "MI hardware manufacturers are ripping people off since their products cost so much more than PC/Mac software products". If that were true, how do you explain the fact that Yamaha workstation prices appear to be at the same level AFTER they purchased Steinberg as BEFORE?

 

If the software companies had some "magical" way of helping to reduce MI hardware costs (both intial and long-term support), wouldn't Yamaha have taken advantage of this?

 

Believe it or not, there IS competition between the "big three". Finally, if these companies were making excessive, ripoff profits on their MI hardware, why wouldn't some of these pure software companies start making hardware and rake in the profits?

 

I think The Audacity Works summed it up nicely:

 

Originally posted by The Audacity Works The other thing that irks me are all the people who are obviously not engineers or even software developers, yet insist they know how much it *should* cost to research, conceive, design, program, manage, build, test, manufacture, insure, test, distribute, market, and support hardware synthesizers across the entire globe. To be frank, they're absolutely, positively clueless.

 

[Mike51]

 

Sure they do. The OASYS platform is a highly customized Linux platform. Designing the OASYS software is definitely not as easy as building an application to run on Windows XP.

 

 

Sure it is.

 

 

 

The "big three" still have to cover ALL of their costs, and make a reasonable profit. You may not think the products they create provide enough VALUE to get you to buy, but I am confident their prices are rooted in the reality of the MI hardware industry cost structure.

 

 

 

This is true, but I would bet they are still using a 90's model, which proves my point.

 

 

 

 

You don't seem to understand the economic realities of producing and supporting MI hardware. My example of Korg's KLC and KLC-DE is still valid. When you do an "apples to apples" comparison (i.e. comparing Korg developing and selling "pure" PC/Mac application software to other software companies like Steinberg and Native Instruments) the products are priced similarly.

 

 

Not really.

 

 

 

Your argument seems to be "MI hardware manufacturers are ripping people off since their products cost so much more than PC/Mac software products". If that were true, how do you explain the fact that Yamaha workstation prices appear to be at the same level AFTER they purchased Steinberg as BEFORE?

 

 

This makes no sense at all.

 

 

 

If the software companies had some "magical" way of helping to reduce MI hardware costs (both intial and long-term support), wouldn't Yamaha have taken advantage of this?

 

 

 

Why would they? People will still buy their price gouged workstations. It's 2007. The world has changed. The workstation industry hasn't budged. Something has to give,and it will, soon.

 

 

 

Believe it or not, there IS competition between the "big three". Finally, if these companies were making excessive, ripoff profits on their MI hardware, why wouldn't some of these pure software companies start making hardware and rake in the profits?

 

 

 

Why would they? Not everyone goes into business to make as much money as possible. Some people want to make a comfortable living while providing a quality product while keeping the business in the family. Not everyone wants to be Walmart or Mcdonalds. If you are a cutting edge software company right now, you are sitting pretty.

 

You can get a nice 88 key controller for 600$ bucks. A p4 2.8 costs aroud 100$ these days.A touchscreen? Probably around 500$ at bulk. Then you add in a sequencer design that has been used for 12 year by Korg, an ok effects unit , recycled triton sound samples,add a few new samples, reused karma patterns, old Triton buttons and knobs and sliders. Finally you add in a nice new softsynth like the AL-1. A hard drive is around 60$. A cd burner is 10$.

 

How does that add up to $8000, even when you factor in software R and D? The hardware R and D is just not there because almost all of the parts were recycled. The touch srceen is bought from another company. The sequencer is the same one in the Triton and Trinity. The keybed is a Triton keybed. So your R and D comes into the form of a new larger casing to hold a motherboard and 2.8 cpu, and your new software GUI and engines.

[malfunkt]

 

Originally posted by Mike51 Hey , we have the editor of Keyboard magazine posting here.

 

 

Dear Mike51,

 

We could suggest that you write long, tediously long, letters to all the 'three major' corporations telling them how disappointed and how upset you are.

 

We could also suggest putting your computer knowledge to use, especially of the Linux platform, to spur a hardware synth that puts Korg's technology to shame and comes under $2000USD.

 

But then the staff here at Keyboard came up with an even better idea...

 

 

Buy what you want!

 

 

 

In all seriousness, the best vote we can give these companies is with our wallet.

 

 

Yay for Capitalism!

 

 

[Mike51]

 

Originally posted by malfunkt Dear Mike51, We could suggest that you write long, tediously long, letters to all the 'three major' corporations telling them h ow disappointed and how upset you are.

 

 

 

I'm not upset. I'm just entertaining myself by engaging in this ridiculous debate. This is all good times.

 

 

 

We could also suggest putting your computer knowledge to use, especially of the Linux platform, to spur a hardware synth that puts Korg's technology to shame and comes under $2000USD.

 

 

 

I have no interest to start a hardware synth company in a dying market.

[malfunkt]

I changed my post!!

 

Was too harsh.

 

I agree, t is pretty entertaining... I was just throwing some bait out is all.

 

Bottom line for me - I can't afford a new XS or OASYS right now. but if I could, I might consider them (more the OASYS as it isn't just a Rompler).

 

the workstation market is going to have to change sooner or later... I'm thinking it will take some innovation and guts to put something different out.

 

 

Honestly, would like to see some Apple OS X computer/workstation hybrid.

 

Essentially it would be 'docking station' for my MacBookPro. The docking station controller would come in different key configurations, and some models could contain their own ROM and modelling synths for live PA. It interfaces directly with Logic, Reason, Reaktor, and Digital Performer. It has a black, minimal display that is used for patch selection and simple configuration. It can also connect to any other Mac or PC.

 

[sprech_stimme]

 

Originally posted by Mike51 recycled triton sound samples,add a few new samples

 

 

Original Triton samples: 32 MB

Triton extreme samples: 160 MB

OASYS preload samples (not including EXs2 piano): 628 MB

 

 

Originally posted by Mike51 How does that add up to $8000, even when you factor in software R and D?

 

 

Parts cost multiplied by around 4 or 5. Same formula used by Roland, Clavia, Access, Waldorf, Yamaha, etc.

 

 

Originally posted by Mike51 The hardware R and D is just not there because almost all of the parts were recycled.

 

 

I don't know that hardware "R&D" is an important factor in most cost computations, though good hardware design always costs money. But, looking at the Triton vs. the OASYS, other than the keybed (a Yamaha part) and the joystick/ribbon assembly, it's difficult to find much that is the same. Someone posted photos and descriptions of the OASYS internals a while ago. It looked like all of the internal boards are different (there are many boards in the OASYS other than the motherboard). A/D and D/A are different. Power supply is different. Front panels are different. Etc.

[Mike51]

 

Originally posted by sprech_stimme Original Triton samples: 32 MB Triton extreme samples: 160 MB OASYS preload samples (not including EXs2 piano): 628 MB

 

 

The Extreme is primarily all the EXB samples that were available for the Triton Classic. Most of the Oasys preload sample memory is from the piano sounds( which no one likes that much).

 

 

 

Parts cost multiplied by around 4 or 5. Same formula used by Roland, Clavia, Access, Waldorf, Yamaha, etc.

 

 

Which parts? If you buy CPU's in bulk, you get them much cheaper.

 

 

 

I don't know that hardware "R&D" is an important factor in most cost computations, though good hardware design always costs money. But, looking at the Triton vs. the OASYS, other than the keybed (a Yamaha part) and the joystick/ribbon assembly, it's difficult to find much that is the same. All of the internal boards are different (and there are many boards in the OASYS other than the motherboard). A/D and D/A are different. Power supply is different. Front panels are different. Etc.

 

 

buttons/knobs/sliders are the same, sequencer is the same, keybed is the same, sampling rate is the same, etc etc.

[MartinHines]

 

Originally posted by Mike51 You can get a nice 88 key controller for 600$ bucks. A p4 2.8 costs aroud 100$ these days.A touchscreen? Probably around 500$ at bulk. Then you add in a sequencer design that has been used for 12 year by Korg, an ok effects unit , recycled triton sound samples,add a few new samples, reused karma patterns, old Triton buttons and knobs and sliders. Finally you add in a nice new softsynth like the AL-1. A hard drive is around 60$. A cd burner is 10$. How does that add up to $8000, even when you factor in software R and D? The hardware R and D is just not there because almost all of the parts were recycled. The touch srceen is bought from another company. The sequencer is the same one in the Triton and Trinity. The keybed is a Triton keybed. So your R and D comes into the form of a new larger casing to hold a motherboard and 2.8 cpu, and your new software GUI and engines.

 

 

Mike,

 

With this "superior knowledge" you have presented above, you obviously are capable of producing a superior workstation at an extremely low cost that will outshine anything from Korg, Roland, and Yamaha.

 

Given your statements above, you are implying that YOU could create the equivalent of the OASYS for $1270 RETAIL (if I added correctly).

 

I say "go for it"! Prove to the world that you are right and the big three are wrong (i.e. charging the prices they do).

 

Heck, given this is a Motif XS thread, start small and create your own version of the Motif XS8 and start selling it on the market. If you can create it and sell it to me for $1,200, I will be your first customer!!

 

 

Originally posted by Mike51 I have no interest to start a hardware synth company in a dying market.

 

This is just an excuse.

 

The reality is the MI hardware prices being charged are realistic given all of the costs involved. You might not feel they are worth that amount of money to you, but that doesn't negate the fact that MI hardware is expensive to design, manufacture, and support.

 

I think starting your own hardware synth company would be a great idea. Even if you just did enough research to be able to generate a business plan to secure financing, it would be a great "learning lesson" for you.

[The Audacity Works]

Originally posted by Mike51 You also had the first polyphonic excellent physical modelling option *and* sampling. This is why [the Triton] became such a legend in the hip hop world (and still is).

Wrong. The Triton became huge in the hip hop world because it looked cool, had a touch screen, and because certain famous producers used it. A large majority of Triton (and Fantom and Motif) users never once touch the sampling engine, and almost none of them care about the MOSS board

[Diametro]

workstations = support for George W. Bush?

[Diametro]

.unitended post.sorry.

[malfunkt]

Originally posted by Diametro The Chinese people will have to do that for themsleves ... which judging by their history, will be in about 50-200 years ...

 

huh?

 

what are you talking about?

 

 

 

[removed my post because it was just OT]

 

as is this one.

 

For those wondering I was trying to weave in the relationship between George Bush, the Carlyle Group, Black Helicopters, the Chinese Military Industrial Complex, Chia Pets, and the Motif XS. It didn't work.

 

 

Workstation good?

[Diametro]

It was a response to your deleted post.

 

Trust me, I see what you mean ...

[The Audacity Works]

Originally posted by Diametro workstations = support for George W. Bush?

Whatever it takes to get through to Mike.