![]() I'm probably not going to add too much of value here, as much as I'm an M8x owner, I don't tend to dive too much into the programming, though I agree the latest and first gen Montage have had the most difficult interfaces to learn of any keyboard I've had. The full Montage is partly a case of a synth that's peacockin'. Still, the MODX line seems a lot more pragmatic. Yamaha's instruments have always been full and crisp. The Montage will see its due as a solid pro instrument and a few folks will make part of their living programming it for pros. Its easier to keep track of what you're doing. I've always preferred the company's overall sound, but their UIs are the least abbreviated. Korg gets the golden spaghetti squash for being the alphanumeric champs. That respected, IMO, Yamaha is the most inscrutable, whereas Roland is convoluted but more consistent & ultimately comprehensible. There are synths for oscillator-heads and synths for neo-pianists who like synth sounds. Some softsynths are breezy and some are Dr. That's not to say that any given approach is "bad." Variety has several pluses. ![]() Those of us who are serious, furrowed-brow keyboard players take a more serious view of it. Far more people than not see a synth as another piece of consumer tech, whose job is to make fun noises. The statement was that Japanese people are highly fond of puzzles, which shows quite clearly in X number of hardware synth GUIs. I think the issue could be summed up by something I heard a short while ago. I may consider the 6 or 7 but as I've said before if I buy another keyboard I want one with Poly AT so Yamaha kind of did a swing and a miss there for me. I've always gotten on pretty well with the Yamaha OSes for some reason, going back to my Motif. I'd use it live except it's too big and heavy. Simply put, I wouldn't use the M8X at home other than as the world's most expensive controller (action is great). Now, I'm using a Nord Stage 3 compact in a single keyboard rig which might be just a tad too far the other way to the simplicity side (there are a few songs where I'd like more than two synth sounds for example) but overall it's a much closer fit for what I need live. The music I do just doesn't really call for it, like say modern pop might. Never have used the sequencers, the arps just once (for one song) and only rarely have imported any samples. I have absolutely no desire to ever work with a multitimbral device in a studio environment ever again, even if the screens are bigger than they used to be Live, I've used workstations simply for their ability to do splits and layers and have a nice all-round selection of sounds. It would certainly be overkill for me, as like you I use soft synths (at home). That may have just become as convoluted as the Yamaha interface and routing scheme. It really depends on the KB players' needs at this point in playing their music and the current state of technology (new and used). The higher price of the Nord can be rationalized when considering that it's three (3) tactile KBs in one box.įor most KB players, I believe a combination of digital piano and poly synth provides the best of all worlds (sounds, features and functionality).Ī digital piano and synth combo could cost less than a M8x or Nord. IMO, Nord provides the most immediate experience from a player perspective and real-time sound designer simultaneously. The M8x also has more sound design possibilities if/when there's a desire to deep dive into its less than immediate features. The M8x is cheaper than a Nord especially if it's just a matter of pulling up presets and creating splits and layers. The 1st question is does the M8x or Nord have the better FTEC (finger to ear connection) from a player perspective. Maybe I'm a Nord guy and I don't know it. It's about immediacy not some inter-dependent routing scheme for teutonic engineers.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |