YamahaSynth.com Forums

This is the place to talk about all things related to Yamaha Synthesizers!
  1. Rod
  2. Sherlock Holmes The Voice
  3. MONTAGE Series Synthesizers
  4. Saturday, 26 October 2019
Hello. Just wondering if there's any way of converting Preset Categories into Libraries? I'm tinkering with automated systems of creating 4 Part Pfs, and want to turn single Part Presets into Libraries that I can then merge into a new User Library for use with my experimental automix system. I know Montage was probably never intended to work like that, but is it possible? I could do it one by one, of course, but is there a better way?
Responses (9)
Accepted Answer Pending Moderation
It is not possible with Montage: the Libraries are read only. With Montage you can only export your user memory to a library that becomes read-only, and then you can upload up to 8 libraries.
You can use total librarian of John Melas to do everything faster
References
  1. http://www.jmelas.gr/montage/lib.php
  1. more than a month ago
  2. MONTAGE Series Synthesizers
  3. # 1
Accepted Answer Pending Moderation
Hello Benedetto, and thanks ... I was hoping Bad Mister would reveal the secret, but I guess there isn't one this time! I'm trying to use Montage without a computer - no DAW, no JM tools, just me and Montage. I can convert Presets to User one by one and create a Library that way, but it's kind of slow going! But if there's no other way then I'll get started. Now we have the ability to return to the screen we started from (Hallelujah!) I can rattle along at about 4 Presets a minute, so (say) 200 an hour allowing for the odd blooper here and there. 3 hours for one Library - that'll do to test my current automix system ,,, well, it keeps me off the streets ...
  1. more than a month ago
  2. MONTAGE Series Synthesizers
  3. # 2
Bad Mister
Yamaha
Accepted Answer Pending Moderation
I’m not sure what secret I am to reveal, nor am I sure why you would need to put 2707 Performances that are already installed permanently in the MONTAGE, into Libraries. Why is that a thing to do? What does it allow that is not already possible?
  1. more than a month ago
  2. MONTAGE Series Synthesizers
  3. # 3
Accepted Answer Pending Moderation
There's absolutely no way to do this if you don't want to use a computer. If willing to use a computer - you could automate the process somewhat. But it wouldn't be trivial to do.

If you want to save presets as Library (or User) files using only Montage and no external gear - you have to [STORE] one-by-one.

That's a lot of work for questionable gain.

I'm not sure how Library copies of presets allow for you to "automix" any more efficiently/better than just "automixing" the presets themselves. You may have something there - I just can't come up with anything.
  1. more than a month ago
  2. MONTAGE Series Synthesizers
  3. # 4
Accepted Answer Pending Moderation
Hello people - firstly, I only want the single Part Presets. That makes it less difficult. There are two ways of creating new mixes - basically stab about by instinct, or try logical progressions. I am working on the latter. All my mixes use 4 x single Parts (Scenes provide for 2 and 3 Part mixes within each 4 - there are 10 but I can only have 7 as Scene 1 is the full 4 Part mix).

There are 3 types of progression. Within each Category - cross-Category using 4 selected Categories - and random Category using any Category for each Part. It is this last that requires the single Part Presets to be made into a User Library.

There are 3 Sort filters - Default, Name, and Date. I only use the first two, Default and Name.

Montage 'Category Search' screen presents 16 Pfs arranged in a 4 x 4 grid. This perfectly suits my 4 single Part mixes, and I use the 4 Horizontal ranks, and the 4 Vertical files in each screen - thus each screen provides 8 x 4 Part mixes. Many other variations are possible, but I'm still at the KISS stage ... this also works using 4 different Categories, with each Category providing one Pf in turn, so the 4 x 16 Pfs provide 16 x 4Part mixes. Both single category and multi category results are doubled by using both Default and Name filters..

But 'random' requires the merging together of all single Part Presets into a homogenous whole - a Library which can then be employed in the same way to provide a completely different set of 4 Part mixes. Hence my query. Actually 2 Libraries as there are more than 640 single Part Pfs, which allows even more choice. But not all single Part Pfs are suitable in all Categories, so some filtering is required,

My naming system is more like Part Numbers that describe what is in use and where it came from. So I know what's been done. As I create each mix I only use volumes and release/reverb to give a pleasing sound. Beyond that is near infinite tweaking of each to taste or purpose ... I hope all this gives an idea of what I spend my time doing. It pleases me ...
  1. more than a month ago
  2. MONTAGE Series Synthesizers
  3. # 5
Accepted Answer Pending Moderation
A quick explanatory note - if you are wondering why I don't just use the 'Single Part Presets' (there are 1,592 of them) it's because so many of them are not suitable for merging - drum kits, for example, and unsuitable built-in programming - and for my automix system to work the Pfs must be contiguous. No gaps. This project is more about creating a system for creating sounds, than creating sounds per se. Well, somebody has to do it ...
  1. more than a month ago
  2. MONTAGE Series Synthesizers
  3. # 6
Bad Mister
Yamaha
Accepted Answer Pending Moderation
I have a suggestion... saying drums are unsuitable for merging is a strange thing to say. Of course, they are suitable for merging. They do not have to be used for their traditional role at all... not all merged Parts go directly to the Outputs, they can be used to add modulation to another Part.

Get into the spirit of sound designing by choosing sounds the old fashioned way... if you want to work on something useful, skip the selection of sounds (that’s the fun part for most people — picking sounds they play and finding they enjoy playing them) and spend your time learning to make Controller assignments. This will help you understand the programming. You seem to want to spend energy working around learning to actually use the engine.

Creating something that combines Single Parts without first allowing the user to hear them... why?
How many different combination are there? How many will be useful?
  1. more than a month ago
  2. MONTAGE Series Synthesizers
  3. # 7
Accepted Answer Pending Moderation
My current system to create sounds is to search for the category of target sound I'm looking for and perhaps filter by single-PART if that's what I'm after. I do not really need to see all of the sounds on the same page. I'm usually going after a specific sound either in my head or replicating someone else's "sound" - so it's a process of hunting one-by-one for best-in-the-ballpark PART(s) then refining if necessary.

That doesn't describe every possibility of use - but what I sense is the middle-of-the-road approach used by many.

Sometimes if you're on the outskirts - you have to build the well and power plant yourself (solar or wind these days).

Not employing a computer gives you a spoon to do all this building with. A nice sturdy metal one. But still, just a spoon.
  1. more than a month ago
  2. MONTAGE Series Synthesizers
  3. # 8
Accepted Answer Pending Moderation
Hello BM - I didn't say 'drums' aren't suitable - most are, and in unexpected ways - but 'drum kits' which are useless for merging. Or at least, so far as I have found. It's another little 'thing' I have is that sounds must be playable - these are not soundscapes or atmospheres (I like them too, but I'm not working on them at the moment) - but intended to play actual melodies with, rather than house or hip-hop or garage. Right now I'm out of selection by instinct or experience, and looking at selection by mathematical progression from a set database. Sounds very dry and boring, and some of the results are, but surprisingly often you hit a promising combination you wouldn't have come up with in a lifetime of instinctive selections. So for this exercise, control assignments, motion sequence, and arps are not required.

Given a good database of at least 3000 sounds (Elements are perfect) and the nature of mathematical progression, there are millions of potential sounds. At a guess, 1 in 3 is useful, maybe 2 in 5. And each of those is capable of further interpretation depending on the melody being played. Virtual infinity. But I'm interested in the Single Part Pfs, and am currently filtering those - a very much smaller database, but possibly more rewarding even than the Elements. I do hear the sounds the progression comes up with, and I decide what to do with them as the combination builds, so the human element prevails ...

Montage is a masterpiece. It does not need a computer to do what I want it to do. Sometime it can't, but more often it can.

Hello Jason too - you work in a totally different but at least equally valid way, to produce different results. I occasionally chase a particular sound too. But not being a musician, and especially not a techno musician, I have no use for the bells and whistles a computer can produce. I'm not interested in stringing sounds together other than the odd burst of self indulgence! No computer on Earth could make that sound good! I'm after the unexpected mostly, rather than an aiming point. But that's this week. Next week I may have dreamed something else up. Hardly consistent. But Montage copes with pretty well anything - just wish it had a lot more single Part base sounds to play about with ... and I am in effect building a windmill, rather than a nuclear power station - can I have a knife as well as a spoon? I do use USB a lot ...
  1. more than a month ago
  2. MONTAGE Series Synthesizers
  3. # 9
  • Page :
  • 1


There are no replies made for this post yet.
Be one of the first to reply to this post!
2021 © Yamaha Corporation of America and Yamaha Corporation. All rights reserved.