Re: [MoAccess] Motif vs Tyros - A Practical Example

  • From: D!J!X! <megamansuperior@xxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: <MoAccess@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Sat, 22 Sep 2012 09:28:30 -0400

Wow, Michael is still around! That's cool... Haven't spoken to him in years.
Glad to hear he's still actively developing software for the pssr/tyros
line. When I get a s910 or whatever is out now I'll have to hunt him down.
Vince, has he been able to get accessibility into his tools?
Back in the day we were working with java and some other sdk's that made it
a task to get things working, not to mention jaws was behind the times (the
days of 4.1/4.2).


-----Original Message-----
From: moaccess-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:moaccess-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Vince Mistretta
Sent: Saturday, September 22, 2012 6:46 AM
To: MoAccess@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [MoAccess] Motif vs Tyros - A Practical Example

All of that is only accessed through Sysex controls.  If you remember, back
a few years ago on the T3 forum we had Michael Bedison who is one of the
biggest contributers on PSRTutorials come on and answer many questions.  I
had asked him if he could modify his Music Finder View application to take
that information from a selected song entry and send it to the T3.  After a
few months of testing it was done.  He said he had wanted to do it and was
getting held up with some area but found that those areas - tempo especially
was changed via PCCC00,c32 and PC controls.  The styles, variations, intros
and all that other good stuff was only addressable through Sysex.

The feature is still available in the program to this date.  There is no
documentation on this in any of the manuals for either the Tyros line or PSR
line.  I'm thinking he was able to capture this info through his MIDI out. 
All the messages are standard over both series; just the  id for the board
and model is different.

I sold my T3 off about two months ago.
From: "Steve Matzura" <number6@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Friday, September 21, 2012 11:13 PM
To: <MoAccess@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [MoAccess] Motif vs Tyros - A Practical Example

> My big complaint about the Tyros, and, I suspect, any arranger, is the 
> lack of addressability via MIDI of certain features. I owned a T3 for 
> about a year, and for the life of me, I could never figure out how to 
> select styles or fills or breaks via MIDI. My goal in purchasing the 
> thing was to do all that setup stuff with Sonar, record a song's 
> backing track, then play over it with both hands. Ha, I remember as a 
> kid I had this chord organ, and the first thing I learned to do with 
> it was disable the chord functions so I could have a fuller keyboard 
> and play my own chords! But what the Tyros offered in the way of 
> arranger tools was so good, it drew me in, only to spit me out again 
> when I found out I couldn't fire them via MIDI. If that capability 
> exists there, I'd sure love to know how it's supposed to be done.
> On Sat, 07 Jul 2012 23:43:55 -0400, you wrote:
>>What a great explanation.
>>So I had always figured my Tyros was a good choice for the realistic 
>>instruments.  And when I wanted to compose a song with multiple 
>>tracks, instruments, and effects, then I figured Sonar was my friend.
>>However, I now appreciate the headwind in getting a DAW with Sonar and 
>>all the supporting peripherals and wiring working.
>>Just understanding tracks, channels, busses, banks, patches, sends, 
>>all that termonology and the routing is enough to drive any newcomer 
>>I can appreciate that it's all pre-packaged in the Motif.  But still, 
>>Motif doesn't talk, so perhaps the memorization necessary to master 
>>Motif's workstation features is roughly equivalent to mastering 
>>playing Tyros + Sonar + Cake Talking.
>>Now if Motif talked, or we could link up Motif screens to an OCR 
>>engine and have them spoken, that would be the ultimate, wouldn't it?
>>Thanks again for your detailed explanation,
>>At 08:31 PM 7/7/2012, you wrote:
>>>OK. This can get complicated, but here is the nut shell.
>>>An arranger keyboard solves a problem for a few types of musicians.
>>>If you gig by yourself, you have a virtual backup band that can play 
>>>along with you. You select a musical style on the arranger, play the 
>>>main keyboard part, and the band follows along. The instrument sounds 
>>>on a good arranger keyboard are going to sound way better than some 
>>>cheap general MIDI module or canned backing tracks. The keyboard also 
>>>reacts to you, so if you stretch out with additional choruses, or if 
>>>you want to throw in a break or solo, you can do that in the moment.
>>>The other big problem arrangers solve is they help someone that 
>>>doesn't know how to play keyboard sound like a full band. I don't 
>>>mean that the musician can't play keys, but playing keyboard is 
>>>different from playing piano. Keyboard players learn how to spread 
>>>out with wide two-handed chords to play more realistic guitar parts, 
>>>how to play the correct intervals for instruments like harmonica, 
>>>etc. If you play piano well, but don't know how to change your 
>>>technique for those other instruments, then an arranger helps you.
>>>You basically play in the piano part, or else record in a few tracks 
>>>that serve as guides, pick a style, and the arranger plays all of the 
>>>other instruments for you. You can write this way, but you focus on 
>>>the chords and melody, rather than playing each part. The styles are 
>>>also useful for letting you hear how your chord progression and 
>>>melody will sound when performed different ways. You focus on the big 
>>>picture, and let the arranger worry about the details.
>>>A workstation keyboard is meant to be a self-contained instrument for 
>>>composition/production of an entire song. It is supposed to be 
>>>something like a scaled down studio or DAW. Motif has lots of 
>>>ready-to-go instrument sounds, both a 16 track linear (tape recorder 
>>>style), and a 16 track pattern (drum machine style) sequencer, a 
>>>sampler that can be used to import loops, make new instruments, 
>>>record vocals, etc, and, finally, Motif has a mixing/mastering system 
>>>for getting the sound right. You might have a megabucks computer with 
>>>a mountain of softsynths, but a workstation is a boiled down version 
>>>of that for getting the tech out of your way so you can write. You 
>>>turn on the Motif, and it is all there: no updates, drivers, viruses, 
>>>etc. You perform your parts in to the sequencer on the Motif, mix it 
>>>on the Motif, and can record your file directly to a USB flash drive. 
>>>The idea is that you sit down, turn on the Motif, quickly play in 
>>>your idea, quickly mix it, and get up with a recorded song. The 
>>>computer has more synths, more and better effects, etc etc. If you 
>>>want to demo a song idea, though, you can throw something together in 
>>>a short time on the Motif that sounds good, rather than spend hours 
>>>working through the infinite possibilities on the computer. If you 
>>>end up loving your demo, you can jump on the computer with a better 
>>>idea of where you're going.
>>>A workstation is also different from an arranger in that it lets you 
>>>control just about everything. You can record and edit on all 16 
>>>tracks, instead of a few on an arranger. You have more performance 
>>>controls that affect the tone of the instrument voice, where an 
>>>arranger has mostly performance controls that affect the virtual 
>>>band. You can also tweak the sound of any of your instruments:
>>>change the effects, edit the filters, envelopes, LFOs and other mod 
>>>sources, all the way down to the individual samples, where an 
>>>arranger doesn't go as deep with control of the instrument sounds.
>>>Arps or arpeggios get their name from history. On an instrument, you 
>>>play an arpeggio by playing the notes of a chord individually in a 
>>>pattern. In the ancient days, synthesizers had devices called 
>>>arpeggiators that did this for you. You'd hold down a C major chord, 
>>>and they'd play c, e, g, e, c, e, g, etc. You could change the 
>>>pattern, so they'd play c, e, g, c, e, g, or g, e, c, g, e, c, but 
>>>that was about it. On the Motif, an arpeggio is a bit like that in 
>>>the sense that you can play a chord, but what comes out is a 
>>>realistic sounding riff. For example, say you don't know how to play 
>>>good guitar parts. You can pick a guitar sound for a track, select 
>>>one of the guitar arpeggios, and just play the chords. The Motif will 
>>>generate notes that sound like you're strumming, muting, tapping the 
>>>guitar body for rhythm, etc. The arps on the Motif aren't as smart as 
>>>the styles on the Tyros, but they try to help in the same way. You 
>>>can also play them in to the sequencer one at a time, which gives you 
>>>more control than you get on a Tyros. The Motif has a performance 
>>>mode, where you can use up to 4 parts at once under arpeggiator 
>>>control. People commonly make performances that include drums, bass, 
>>>guitar, and keys. The result is something that sounds similar to a 
>>>Tyros style, but with fewer parts.
>>>You can always hammer in a nail with a screw driver, but it isn't 
>>>necessarily easy. That's why it's better to get the keyboard that is 
>>>laid out to best handle the problems that you encounter the most in 
>>>your work.
>>>On Jul 3, 2012, at 11:10 AM, Ben Humphreys wrote:
>>>>Thanks Bryan,  I liked your summary: "The Tyros is a great arranger 
>>>>with some workstation features. The Motif is a great workstation 
>>>>with some arranger features."
>>>>Unfortunately, I don't yet have a grasp for what "arranger" and 
>>>>"workstation" mean specifically.  However, an example might help 
>>>>clarify the situation for me.
>>>>Let's say I have a 4-handed piano piece, such as "Heart and Soul."
>>>>I want to make a first pass with the left handed part, a repeating 
>>>>Then a second pass with the right handed part.
>>>>I understand how I might do this with Sonar, recording the left 
>>>>hands part on a track, and then looping it over and over.  Then 
>>>>putting the right hands part on its own track.
>>>>How might I accomplish this with Motif and/or Tyros?
>>>>Is this where arpeggios on Motif  come in? Is this where styles on 
>>>>Tyros come in?
>>>>  Without regard to using Sonar, how would this be accomplished on a 
>>>>Motif vs. Tyros?
>>>>Obviously, I'm confused about a lot of terms: workstation, arranger, 
>>>>arpeggios, styles and how they might apply to various situations, 
>>>>and in particular the one I have described.
>>>>I'd be grateful to anyone who can set me straight :)
>>>>At 04:07 PM 7/1/2012, you wrote:
>>>>>There are a good many blind Tyros users out there. Most of these 
>>>>>people are using the Tyros for doing one-man shows: weddings, small 
>>>>>parties, etc. It is incredibly realistic at being a backing band 
>>>>>while you play. The styles, harmonizer, and so forth aren't really 
>>>>>useful if you're playing with a full band. Ensemble keyboard 
>>>>>players would do better with a workstation, where they can 
>>>>>split/layer voices as much as they want, as well as build their own 
>>>>>from scratch. I know a few blind people that have the Tyros as a 
>>>>>studio sound module, but is very expensive for that approach.
>>>>>The Tyros is a great arranger with some workstation features. The 
>>>>>Motif is a great workstation with some arranger features. My 
>>>>>personal opinion is that the Tyros is the superior live keyboard, 
>>>>>and the Motif is the superior studio piece, but they both can do 
>>>>>either things to some degree.
>>>>>Anyway, there isn't a blind Tyros users list, as far as I know, but 
>>>>>lots of them are on MIDI-Mag. At one point, there were panel 
>>>>>descriptions, menu descriptions, and so on floating around for at 
>>>>>least the Tyros 3.
>>>>>I suggest to ask on MIDI-Mag. Go to 
>>>>>On Jun 29, 2012, at 4:51 PM, D!J!X! wrote:
>>>>>>The motif is different in the layout and navigation than the tyros 
>>>>>>and the top line psr.  The tyros and psr are aranger keyboards, 
>>>>>>with the styles and are geared more toward quick composition and 
>>>>>>perfomance like that. You can use it with a sequencer with no 
>>>>>>problem, and for quick recordings. Not sure what it has in terms 
>>>>>>of sampling capabilities, but the motif is more of a workstation, 
>>>>>>you can make more customized full songs on there, they have 
>>>>>>pattern mode for quick loop based music creation, and it's more of 
>>>>>>an overall perfoming workstation, with separate channels and 
>>>>>>assignable parts and such for performing, the tyros and psr just 
>>>>>>have the main voice, 1 or 2 layers that you can add, and a left 
>>>>>>hand split along with the styles.
>>>>>>The motif for example can have 4 separate keyboard zones or 4 
>>>>>>layers (probably more in the xf and xs), you can use arps with the 
>>>>>>voices (short musical loops), and you can even use the pattern 
>>>>>>mode to create a 16 track part or such to use in performances. It 
>>>>>>also has many more effects than the tyros and more advanced 
>>>>>>routing, as it's meant for the studio musician and the live 
>>>>>>gigging musician as well.
>>>>>>But if you're using the tyros in studio or for small performances, 
>>>>>>the tyros should be fine, though because of it's different layout 
>>>>>>and such it'll be harder to get help, since most people on this 
>>>>>>list at least use the motif line. The good thing about the tyros 
>>>>>>and psr navigation system is that it stays constant and once you 
>>>>>>learn it you can get around most of those keyboards.
>>>>>>HTH, D!J!X!
>>>>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>>>>On Behalf Of Ben Humphreys
>>>>>>Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2012 9:52 PM
>>>>>>Subject: [MoAccess] Motif vs Tyros
>>>>>>Hi folks,
>>>>>>I have a question relating to accessability of the Motif vs the Tyros.
>>>>>>I've heard it consistently stated that Motif is one of the best 
>>>>>>workstations for a blind musician, presumably because so many 
>>>>>>functions are accessible from dedicated buttons and the screen 
>>>>>>interface is button-based, not touch-based.
>>>>>>However, when I went to purchase a Motif, I was so enamored with 
>>>>>>the even more beautiful sounds of the Tyros that I ended up 
>>>>>>getting a Tyros 4 instead.
>>>>>>I figured the Yamaha Tyros interface was similar enough to Motif 
>>>>>>that I wouldn't be at any disadvantage to a Motif user.  Tyros has 
>>>>>>lots of buttons I can label in Braille, and screen has 10 buttons, 
>>>>>>A through J, tab keys, and 1 through 8 up / down buttons.  I'm 
>>>>>>assuming Motif is very similar.
>>>>>>Of course, there is no ty-access mailing list, and certain apps, 
>>>>>>such as those from John Melas, won't work with Tyros.
>>>>>>But I'm using Sonar with Cake Talking, same as I would with Motif.  
>>>>>>And I've found a Tyros 4 Instrument Definition File so presumably 
>>>>>>can select instruments easily using Sonar.
>>>>>>Which leads to my question:
>>>>>>Is the Motif preferred among the blind community over the Tyros 
>>>>>>primarily because the Motif is somehow more accessable?  Or is it 
>>>>>>perhaps that the Tyros is a bit on the expensive side?
>>>>>>Is there some compelling reason I'd want to sell my Tyros and get 
>>>>>>a Motif instead?
>>>>>>Thanks for your help,
>>>>>>You received this message because you're subscribed to the 
>>>>>>MoAccess e-mail list.
>>>>>>To unsubscribe, change your list options, or view archives for the 
>>>>>>MoAccess list, please use the FreeLists page.
>>>>>>You received this message because you're subscribed to the 
>>>>>>MoAccess e-mail list.
>>>>>>To unsubscribe, change your list options, or view archives for the 
>>>>>>MoAccess list, please use the FreeLists page.
>>>>You received this message because you're subscribed to the MoAccess 
>>>>e-mail list.
>>>>To unsubscribe, change your list options, or view archives for the 
>>>>MoAccess list, please use the FreeLists page.
> --
> You received this message because you're subscribed to the MoAccess 
> e-mail list.
> To unsubscribe, change your list options, or view archives for the 
> MoAccess list, please use the FreeLists page.

You received this message because you're subscribed to the MoAccess e-mail
To unsubscribe, change your list options, or view archives for the MoAccess
list, please use the FreeLists page.

You received this message because you're subscribed to the MoAccess e-mail list.
To unsubscribe, change your list options, or view archives for the MoAccess 
list, please use the FreeLists page.

Other related posts: