new Yamaha Motif XS workstation

[The Audacity Works]

Originally posted by Mike51 Almost all the hip hop writers I have conversed with used the Triton because of it's workflow and GUI feel.

There is no one here who knows more hip hop guys (both in the industry and out) than I do. Many hundred at the very least. And before that, I sold Tritons to hip hop guys. Believe me, they don't give a rat's ass about MOSS. They just don't. And they sample with MPCs. As far as hip hop is concerned, the Triton's been relegated to controller/sound module with local control off. So has the Fantom and Motif.

Then why do the big three keep marketing the workstations as not for the bread and butter masses?

Huh? Who's marketing the Motif, Fantom, or Triton as some hardcore Reaktor or DAW killer? They're ROMpler workstations; no one's calling them anything otherwise.

I just think it's sad to see the lack of innovation, yet still have the same prices.

If I were to create a new workstation manufacturer that aspired to create innovations that Mike51 loved, my company would go under, because no one else would care. If I were to create a new workstation manufacturer that aspired to create something that costs what Mike51 expects, my company would go under, because the cost Mike51 expects is astoundingly unrealistic.

Good luck. I've had smoking hot Ukraine women lose that battle, lol.

Pictures, man!

[Mike51]

Originally posted by orangefunk Why does every thread end up talking about the OASYS? Its really disappointing to read the same conversations over and over and over again.

You mean like Mac versus PC, analog versus digital, workstations versus VA, Cubase versus Logic, "Which synth should I get" and so forth? I don't see you complaining about those tired subjects. Show some consistency.

[Tony Scharf]

Originally posted by MartinHines I am trying to talk about the MI hardware industry in general, not about the OASYS at all.

 

 

whatever it is your talking about, at this point you are just talking to a wall....

[Mike Conway]

Originally posted by Mike51 I really like workstations. I own one. I enjoy the hell out of it. I just think they can be made much better. Workstations IMHO are a necessity. Why? Because they are a songwriting environment away from Gates and Jobs and the distractions of the internet. They serve a puspose. I just think it's sad to see the lack of innovation, yet still have the same prices.

 

 

I have to agree with the bulk of this. I understand the comments about "what the masses want." But, whether they use it or not, people like to know that the latest product includes something innovative.

 

Like Mike's example about the Triton - most people will buy it to play the presets, sure. But, it also gains a rep for appealing to the niche people, ie the serous synth lovers, who post on forums like this - because of the MOSS. That MOSS is a big reason why people like me plopped down for 2 Tritons and an OASYS. Do we not account for part of the market?

 

Funny thing is, I was researching the expensive OASYS and decided I could only afford a Yamaha Motif or the Triton Extreme. I already had the filters of the Yamaha A5000, so I passed on the Motif, because of its small screen and bought the Extreme (A year later, I sold it and bought the OASYS, anyway!). That was a huge thing for Yamaha to finally overcome and I'm glad to see that it has come to pass with the Motif XS.

 

 

 

So, back to Mike's point of innovation. No one can tell me that after years of analogue that the Yamaha DX7 or Roland D-50 didn't set the world on fire, when they came out. When the Korg M1 came out, the ROMpler workstation was the innovative thing, which is now the standard of the masses.

 

(Guess what? Analogue became vogue, again. What comes around goes around.)

 

Back around 1992, Roland had its LA synthesizers, which were losing fire. The Korg O1W, The Yamaha SY99 and the Kurzweil K2000 were out. Yes, ROMplers get the lionshare, as I believe the O1W did, but that didn't mean that there wasn't an audience for the Kurzweil, which spawned many sequels.

 

I bought the SY99, because Korg didn't even have resonant filters or alternate synthesis on their offering and the K2000 didn't have much in the FM area. Though it was Yamaha's most powerful synth, the $3,995 price tag led to the half priced O1W and slaying the market share.

 

Whatever sells, you have to thank the niche markets, for coming up with innovative products, be it a Wave Station, V-Synth, a Z1, K5000W or VL1.

 

Yes, the new Motif has done the "popular" thing. I think Realtime Dynamic Articulation is a very important step towards expressive sounds. (Yes, the 128 poly could be more of a factor with 8 part patches.) I think the filters on the Motifs are awesomely meaty and lend well to synth sounds. Significantly larger wave ROM is the direction that workstations have to go toward. 355megs is great, but if Yamaha put a gigs worth in there, it would have surely blown the doors off. It seems like the effects processing technology has made some intriguing strides.

 

But, let's not forget that people like to see something new, even if it means coining a new acronym like FDSP (Formulated Digital Sound Processing), like on the Yamaha EX5, which had a lot of other technologies. Surely, it must have sold better than the ROMpler W5/W7 series. People rarely mention the latter.

 

As far as prices, I don't get on workstations about that. Roland spoiled everybody when the released the $1,495 XP-50. Alesis did too, with their QS series synths, but they didn't have a resonant filter. (like the early Korg workstations) For all the bells and whistles, you are going to pay more. I think a lot of the top Flagships have offered enough to warrant paying a difference. Just ask a Kurzweil owner.

 

Niche people aren't the majority, but they are a market.

[Mike51]

Originally posted by The Audacity Works There is no one here who knows more hip hop guys (both in the industry and out) than I do. Many hundred at the very least. And before that, I sold Tritons to hip hop guys. Believe me, they don't give a rat's ass about MOSS. They just don't. And they sample with MPCs.

Hey I don't doubt your comments from your experience. But a hell of alot of records were mad ewith a Triton using MOSS and samples so I think that speaks for itself. Also, in the underground rap world there is a high emphasis placed on killer melodic backing tracks, and stuff like the MOSS is looked upon highly for unique sounds.

Huh? Who's marketing the Motif, Fantom, or Triton as some hardcore Reaktor or DAW killer?

Uh...Roland, Yamaha and Korg?

They're ROMpler workstations; no one's calling them anything otherwise.

Sure they are.

If I were to create a new workstation manufacturer that aspired to create innovations that Mike51 loved, my company would go under, because no one else would care. If I were to create a new workstation manufacturer that aspired to create something that costs what Mike51 expects, my company would go under, because the cost Mike51 expects is astoundingly unrealistic.Pictures, man!

Designing a new open source Reaktor built into a keyboard with custom sample sets for sale in that native format for creating your own customized hardware synth would be too expensive? No internal CD -rom drive(USB 2.0 external option). Large X-Y control pad, 24 knobs, 5 sliders. color screen. Surely that would be no more expensive than these new Yamaha romplers, and you could build the synth you wanted. An online user community where you can share you own custom synths with others. And if that isn't your thing, the company can sell specific sample sets for your taste in music to be loaded into a rompler style.



You are operating in a mindset of stacking antiquated hardware on antiquated hardware. I'm in the mindset of stacking software options and configuring the thing to exactly how you want it.

Including something like R5 and a rompler softsynth in a hardware keyboard would not be more expensive than the stuff being presented to us now. The only thing holding these companies back is fear of open source. The Oasys is an 8000$ "flexible" synth that 200 people own, lol. What a complete waste, and what a giant step back(and I don't mean to offend Oasys owners who like their synths - I'm just talking from an innovation and "moving forward "standpoint).

[The Audacity Works]

Originally posted by Mike51 Uh...Roland, Yamaha and Korg?

Roland, Korg, or Yamaha have called the Fantom, Triton, or Motif a Reaktor or DAW killer? When and where?

The only thing holding these companies back is fear of open source.

Open source hardware workstation from the big three? Really? You and I well know that will never happen. Apart from the glaringly obvious reasons, maybe 2% of the people who'd buy it would care. I'd really be interested in the percentage of Reaktor buyers who've finished building a single module.

 

Open source is what'd make you happy? Right on. Know what'd make me happy? Detroit releasing $6,000 flying cars piloted by dinosaurs.

[donaldcrunk]

Originally posted by The Audacity Works Open source is what'd make you happy? Right on. Know what'd make me happy? Detroit releasing $6,000 flying cars piloted by dinosaurs.

 

 

open source dinosaurs?

 

but for heaven's sakes. even MY limited experience with one of my synth friends building FAR SIMPLER marketable equipment lets me know that it's HILARIOUSLY more complicated than mr. 51 makes it seem.

 

not to mention more expensive.

 

therfore, i call bull{censored}.

[MartinHines]

Originally posted by Diametro BTW, speculation is that Mercedes could be phasing out Maybach since sales have been much lower than promised. The fact is ... Maybach sucks! http://www.autoweek.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061227/FREE/61226004/1024/LATESTNEWS

I have never even seen a Maybach in person, let alone drive one. But if it's good enough for Madonna, it's good enough for me.

I noticed in that article the yearly sales target for Maybach in the U.S was 500 cars, and they only sold around 130 each year. That is one low volume car!!

If DaimlerChrysler really wanted the Maybach to be successful, they should have given a free one to Snoop Dogg.

[Mike51]

Originally posted by The Audacity Works Roland, Korg, or Yamaha have called the Fantom, Triton, or Motif a Reaktor or DAW killer? When and where?

 

 

 

Are you pulling my leg? Ads like "the greatest musical revelaton of all time" or "this changes everything" for every workstation they release?

 

Do you actually read the ads for these workstations?

 

 

 

Open source hardware workstation from the big three? Really? You and I well know that will never happen. Apart from the glaringly obvious reasons, maybe 2% of the people who'd buy it would care. I'd really be interested in the percentage of Reaktor buyers who've finished building a single module.

 

 

One of the biggest selling points of R5 is that user library. Tons of people make ensembles.

 

 

 

Open source is what'd make you happy? Right on. Know what'd make me happy? Detroit releasing $6,000 flying cars piloted by dinosaurs.

 

 

No, open source within their own software parameters. like Reaktor 5.

 

Your analogy is pretty lame and far fetched. Equating producing an open system with flying cars piloted by dinosaurs is ridiculous since open systems are already on the market.

[MartinHines]

Originally posted by Mike51 Designing a new open source Reaktor built into a keyboard with custom sample sets for sale in that native format for creating your own customized hardware synth would be too expensive? No internal CD -rom drive(USB 2.0 external option). Large X-Y control pad, 24 knobs, 5 sliders. color screen. Surely that would be no more expensive than these new Yamaha romplers, and you could build the synth you wanted. An online user community where you can share you own custom synths with others. And if that isn't your thing, the company can sell specific sample sets for your taste in music to be loaded into a rompler style.

 

Go for it Mike!! Native Instruments seems to be willing to sell hardware (at least inexpensive hardware), so perhaps you can sell them on your idea.

 

Of course, Native Instruments would have to change their support model from "everything out of Germany" to a distributed one where they had (and trained) service technicians to repair their hardware throughout the world. And then there would be those sticky issues of establishing a materials procurement process, engineering, manufacturing, and maintaining parts inventory. Currently I think Native Instruments only has about 200 employees. They are definitely going to have to ramp up that number quite a bit.

 

On further thought, it would appear that NI could at best sell one keyboard to a customer, since all of the instruments (and probably samples) would be created by the community; therefore no one would ever need more than one keyboard. "Only buy one keyboard from us and you're done for life" doesn't sound too profitable to me.

 

 

 

Originally posted by Mike51 The Oasys is an 8000$ "flexible" synth that 200 people own, lol.

 

Funny statistic since I can easily prove that Korg Japan has manufactured AT LEAST 2,300 OASYS keyboards (and the number could be alot higher). I guess the Korg warehouse must be full with those "extra" 2,100 units!! Given Korg's 40 years of manufacturing experience, I would have assumed that if they only sold 200 units, they would have stopped production a long time ago.

 

http://www.karma-lab.com/forum/showthread.php?threadid=6456

[The Audacity Works]

Originally posted by Mike51 Are you pulling my leg? Ads like "the greatest musical revelaton of all time" or "this changes everything" for every workstation they release? Do you actually read the ads for these workstations?

Don't remember seeing the 'greatest musical revelation of all time' one. As for the other slogan, would you prefer "This changes everything... for our target market, which is quite OBVIOUSLY not Mike51?" I don't know how well that'd work, considering how members of a ROMpler workstation's target market have no idea who Mike51 is.

 

Maybe MTV's new slogan should be "This changes everything... for our target market, which is quite obviously not Audacity Works".

Your analogy is pretty lame and far fetched. Equating producing an open system with flying cars piloted by dinosaurs is ridiculous since open systems are already on the market.

Uh, no... You thinking that Roland, Korg, or Yamaha would ever put open-source code within a mass-market keyboard workstation is far-fetched. Expecting it is asinine.

 

The same reason I don't expect Detroit to release flying cars with dinosaur pilots. Because it's really, really ludicrous.

 

Actually, to be perfectly honest, discussing large-scale business models with members of the open-source community is kinda like discussing the evolutionary process with Southern Baptists.

[Mike51]

Originally posted by The Audacity Works Don't remember seeing the 'greatest musical revelation of all time' one. As for the other slogan, would you prefer "This changes everything... for our target market, which is quite OBVIOUSLY not Mike51?" I don't know how well that'd work, considering how members of a ROMpler workstation's target market have no idea who Mike51 is.

 

 

 

So you admit you were wrong and the marketing is geared towards the "best ever" realm?

 

 

 

Maybe MTV's new slogan should be "This changes everything... for our target market, which is quite obviously not Audacity Works".Uh, no ... You thinking that Roland, Korg, or Yamaha would ever put open-source code within a mass-market keyboard workstation is far-fetched. Expecting it is asinine.

 

 

 

Hey, R5 has it. It's a popular item. Say, how's the workstation business these days? Sales down? Yep. Interest down? Yep.

 

 

 

Actually, to be perfectly honest, discussing large-scale business models with members of the open-source community is kinda like discussing the evolutionary process with Southern Baptists.

 

 

And discussing innovation with workstation "big three" is like discussing global warming with Fox News.

[The Audacity Works]

Originally posted by Mike51 So you admit you were wrong and the marketing is geared towards the "best ever" realm?

HUH? What does that have to do with you claiming the big three advertising their workstations as Reaktor/DAW killers?

Hey, R5 has it. It's a popular item. Say, how's the workstation business these days? Sales down? Yep. Interest down? Yep.

And... You're saying that if Korg put a Reaktoresque engine in their next workstation that sales would skyrocket? Uh, no. The people who buy workstations don't care about Reaktoresque features. They simply don't. Tattoo that on your forehead if you must.

And discussing innovation with workstation "big three" is like discussing global warming with Fox News.

And discussing cost of manufacturing, market research, or anything MI industry-related with Mike51 must obviously be like discussing string theory with a sorority girl.

[Yoozer]

And discussing cost of manufacturing, market research, or anything MI industry-related with Mike51 must obviously be like discussing string theory with a sorority girl.

Sorority girls are great in string theory You've got black ones when you feel randy, white ones if you do fitness, and pink ones for hitting the club.

Hey, I didn't say it was a complicated theory.

[Mike51]

Originally posted by The Audacity Works HUH? What does that have to do with you claiming the big three advertising their workstations as Reaktor/DAW killers?

You don't think advertising them as "the next revolution" or "the revolution will be televised" or "this changes instruments forever" infer that they are be-all-end-all machines?

What are you freaking smoking?

And... You're saying that if Korg put a Reaktoresque engine in their next workstation that sales would skyrocket? Uh, no. The people who buy workstations don't care about Reaktoresque features. They simply don't.

Innovation serves a couple purposes. One, it excites the hard core base, and two, it keeps things from getting stale.

Say, how's the workstation market? Sales down? Yep. Interest down? Yep.

Tattoo that on your forehead if you must.And discussing cost of manufacturing, market research, or anything MI industry-related with Mike51 must obviously be like discussing string theory with a sorority girl.

You keep saying this, yet you really have never gotten into any specifics, nor made a single informative comment on this.

Strange.

[XorAxAx]

Originally posted by MartinHines On further thought, it would appear that NI could at best sell one keyboard to a customer, since all of the instruments (and probably samples) would be created by the community; therefore no one would ever need more than one keyboard. "Only buy one keyboard from us and you're done for life" doesn't sound too profitable to me.

 

You've forgotten the following:

-- People want multiple manuals.

-- People want multiple form factors.

-- Some people will buy the LE model and upgrade to Standard or Ultra later.

-- More powerful models released every year (by Moore's law).

-- Lucrative market for upgrades to give some of the newer models' power to the older models.

-- Increases demand for the software products.

 

Sounds quite profitable to me... Locks in the customer and keeps them on an upgrade treadmill.

[The Audacity Works]

Originally posted by Mike51 You don't think advertising them as "the next revolution" or "the revolution will be televised" or "this changes instruments forever" infer that they are be-all-end-all machines?

"Be-all-end-all?" You mean as in "You'll never need another machine ever?" Well, let's see:

 

"The next revolution" = "You'll never need another machine ever."

 

Nope.

 

"The revolution will be televised" = "You'll never need another machine ever."

 

Nope.

 

"This changes instruments forever" = "You'll never need another machine ever."

 

Huh... That doesn't quite equate either. I mean, you and I would probably agree that the DX7 and M1 changed instruments forever, and Yamaha and Korg certainly weren't claiming no one would ever need another instrument after them.

 

Are the ads a bit over the top? Well of course, they're ads. What ad isn't over the top? Let's try this one, though:

 

"The next revolution" = "This thing has Reaktoresque/DAW features."

 

Nope.

 

"The revolution will be televised" = "This thing has Reaktoresque/DAW features."

 

Nope.

 

"This changes instruments forever" = "Now open-source!"

 

"McDonald's... I'm lovin' it" = "Ultra-fresh sashimi from world-class sushi chefs."

 

"I want my MTV" = "We're gonna play Wilco and Band of Horses all day."

 

"The revolution will be televised" = "We're gonna placate Mike51's personal tastes in our next workstation, to the detriment of everyone else who buys workstations."

 

For you personally, Mike, a new workstation would have to feature very un-workstation-like features for you to stop complaining about new workstations. But they're *workstations*, designed *specifically* for hip hop dudes, new age yuppies, sixteen-year-old kids who wanna make phAt bEeTs, and luddites who can't use a computer. If they were what you, Mike51 wanted, they wouldn't be workstations, and they'd alienate their target market. In other words, you'd buy it, a few others might as well, and no one else would. Because the people who buy workstations don't care about what you or I care about. You should be happy about that! Celebrate that you're not the status quo!

 

The fact that you happen to like workstations won't change anything. I may like arrangers, but that doesn't mean I should think (or even more ridiculous, expect) the big three add Reaktor/DAW features to those karaoke beasts. I may like floorboard guitar processors, but that doesn't mean I should expect Reaktor-style effects manipulation in them.

 

They're floorboard guitar processors.

 

They're arrangers.

 

They're workstations.

Innovation serves a couple purposes. One, it excites the hard core base...

Sure, I'd agree with that. But the hard core base's idea of innovation when it comes to workstations is different than yours. You're not the hardcore base. You're quite past that.

...and two, it keeps things from getting stale.

And I'd agree with that as well. But I'll tell you this: Roland received way more complaints that the Fantom couldn't play XP-series patches than they ever did for not including analog modeling or whatever. By and large, workstation users are a conservative bunch. You don't want to smack them upside the head with innovation

[swardle]

It never fails. People bitch and moan about Yamaha keyboards when announcements are made. I remember when everybody thought Yamaha was insane when the original Motif was announced. The cry back then was "ugh, not another rompler. Why isn't AN, VL, FM included like on the EX series". But it went on to become the greatest selling pro synth in Yamaha's history.

You watch. The XS will catch on and it will sonically trump the Korgs and Rolands out there.

[MartinHines]

Originally posted by XorAxAx You've forgotten the following: -- People want multiple form factors. -- Some people will buy the LE model and upgrade to Standard or Ultra later. -- More powerful models released every year (by Moore's law). -- Increases demand for the software products. Sounds quite profitable to me... Locks in the customer and keeps them on an upgrade treadmill.

 

 

Hey, if you think it works, you and Mike can take the idea to Native Instruments. I wouldn't expect much of a response, however.

 

LE/Standard/Ultra

Given Mike was talking about creation of a truly open source platform (where users would create new instruments), I am not sure what the differences between an "LE/Standard/Ultra" keyboard are. Those designations normally relate to closed systems where there are real functional differences between the products. With Mike's "one platform for all" I don't see the ability to create different featured products.

 

Multiple Form Factors

There may be a possibility to create different sized versions of the same product (like a 49, 61, 76, and 88 key version) but:

-- once you start creating separate products, your design, engineering, manufacturing, and support costs start to rise

-- users might not be that willing to buy products that are IDENTICAL except for the number of keys. As an example, I don't see too many people buying a Triton Extreme 88 then following that purchase up with a Triton Extreme 61. Most people would buy a product from a different manufacturer for the second keyboard to get different sounds and capabilities. Given we are talking about a "the single keyboard that does it all, running the truly open source instrument platform", you might have more difficulty selling additional keyboards to customers than you think

 

More powerful models each year

Again, if you create a new hardware model each year, you are going to incur yearly new (and incremental) R&D, design, engineering, and manufacturing costs. Then you would have to deal with hesitant buyers who might be "gun shy" if they knew a new model would appear each year. Also, many people might not want to buy a new model if all of the instruments are being created on the current platform by "the masses".

 

Computer manufacturers (a high volume industry) can create new models each year (realistically new models monthly) since the market is so big. Did you ever stop and think about WHY it is the big three only release new workstations about every three years or so (longer if you are talking about re-designs versus enhancements)? It is all about cost and profitability in a low-volume industry.

 

Increases demand for the software products

I am not sure building new keyboard hardware would really drive demand for new software products. With NI's current "software only" model, they CAN create new products that require new PC/Mac hardware, and leave it up to the customer to upgrade. Of course, since these current upgraders are upgrading a very high volume/low cost item (PCs) they can do it at a reasonable price. If NI tried to release a new version of their "reaktor hardware keyboard" each year, it would cost them a significantly larger amount of money to do so.

 

Also, if you look closely at new software products developed, you would notice that these products can usually run on a wide-range of existing computer setups. If NI were to release a brand new software product tomorrow that required Window Vista with a dual-core..blah-blah-blah chip, and 4 GB of RAM, their product wouldn't sell that well.

 

 

For some reason, I get the impression some people think the "big three" are idiots, evidenced by comments like "why don't they do this", or "why can't they sell me my 'everything's included' 88-key keyboard product for $1,500?"

 

The truth is, there are some very smart people working for these companies, and they think about "what can we make that will be successful" as a full-time job, and they have a lot more knowledge than a few "armchair quarterbacks" do about what is actually involved in creating MI hardware and maintain profitability.

[MartinHines]

Originally posted by swardle It never fails. People bitch and moan about Yamaha keyboards when announcements are made.

 

 

Given my experiences on this forum over the last two years, there are people who will complain about the cost of ANY Keyboard product if it costs over $1,000.

 

Then, when a keyboard is released that costs $ 1,000 or less, those same people complain about how the keyboard is "crappy" or has "such poor build quality".

 

I suppose it is human nature to "want everything, but want to pay practically nothing for it".

[The Audacity Works]

Originally posted by Mike Conway Like Mike's example about the Triton - most people will buy it to play the presets, sure. But, it also gains a rep for appealing to the niche people, ie the serous synth lovers, who post on forums like this - because of the MOSS. That MOSS is a big reason why people like me plopped down for 2 Tritons and an OASYS. Do we not account for part of the market?

Absolutely. Except your part of the market doesn't care about *workstations* anymore. Sure, a few of you still do. But synth afficianados make up way less of a workstation's market than ever. Because they've nearly all moved to software. The big three fought the good fight for years, but it's simply impossible to compete with software (especially free/hacked software). So they do what any smart company would do

[swardle]

I suppose you're right MartinHines.

Until the XS is released and tried, I shouldn't be surprised by all of the bitching and moaning. I just wish some of these people would keep it short, or even better, keep it to themselves, if you know what I mean.

[MartinHines]

Originally posted by The Audacity Works Also consider how many more people are making music nowadays. Music technology is not only more accessible, but it has notably more exposure. More gear magazines, more interviews in studios, more musicians showing off their fancy synths on non-synth forums... What once used to be the realm of hardcore tweakers pushing the boundaries of their synths has now been relegated to a sea of hip hop dudes, thirteen-year-olds, and retirees who have no idea how basic signal flow works, much less MIDI, or God forbid, a mod matrix or wavetable synthesis. In my overly-biased and jaded opinion, real innovation is making workstation technology accessible to luddites. Because luddites won't be jumping to ProTools or Reaktor anytime soon.

Interesting point. I remember reading the Yamaha Annual Report (perhaps two years ago) where the CEO mentioned their strategic push toward "Instrument Usability".

Given pro musicians can probably figure out how to use any gear regardless of how complex the interface, I can only assume the Yammy CEO's comments were directed toward making music more accessible to the masses.

With products like GarageBand out there (which allows practically anybody to make music), and companies focusing on the "low end value buyer", it makes sense.

Originally posted by The Audacity Works Just be glad I don't design workstations, because all it'd have is a gigantic color touchscreen, a big "MAKE SICK-ASS BEAT" button, and one huge "SUCK LESS" knob in the middle.

Hey, if you really could create a product with a functional "Suck Less" knob, that baby would sell like hotcakes. I know I would buy it

And since you mentioned potential new product features, I would like to put in a request for a "create a hit song" button.

[MartinHines]

Originally posted by swardle Until the XS is released and tried, I shouldn't be surprised by all of the bitching and moaning.

 

 

On a positive note, since Yamaha is a world-wide company with a global distribution system, most people will be able to eventually demo a Motif XS in their local music store.

 

With many of the "boutique" keyboards and synths, it can be hard to find local stores that carry the product.

 

Of course, one of the downsides to the Internet and consumer awareness of trade shows like NAMM is the wait between when the product is announced and when it appears in stores.

 

In the "old days" (pre Internet), most people wouldn't find out about a product until it showed up in their stores. Now, we all find out about new products months before they are available to the public.

[MartinHines]

Originally posted by Mike51 You don't think advertising them as "the next revolution" or "the revolution will be televised" or "this changes instruments forever" infer that they are be-all-end-all machines?

 

 

Your statement about MI advertising that uses the term "revolutionary" got me thinking -- where have I heard that?

 

Then I remembered where -- NI's Kore!!

 

http://www.native-instruments.com/index.php?id=kore_us

 

If you listen to the very first video you hear the announcer say:

 

Introducing Kore, the first universal sound platform. Kore is a unique hardware and software system that will revolutionize the way you produce and perform with software instruments

 

 

I own Kore and I like it, but I would never say it is "revolutionary".

 

My point is that ALL companies use terms like "bold", "innovative" and "revolutionary" in their marketing materials. That is why they call it "Marketing" -- they are trying to get you to buy!!!