It's not bad to advertise other keyboards in non-related topic areas - but I would think it would be better, if cross-pollination was part of the goal, to have this posted in BOTH the CP88/CP73 area and Montage - rather than just Montage. With this post in the Montage area exclusively, it feels like the wrong area. Should, at least, be in the CP88/CP73 area. There have been many posts that seem similarly mis-categorized. Great information - would prefer to see the right audience benefiting without having to rummage through every category.
I honestly prefer the Physical Modelling sound type of the CP4, both pianos sound VERY different. The CP88 is very similar if not identical to the Montage pianos, that are good for a synth but not for a dedicated instrument.
When Yamaha asked my opinion, I told that was very important to return to the vintage design of "one button/knob or slider for each function", but clearly explaining that I was referring mainly to the MIDI controller side.
Also there should be no differences in the form in which the internal sound generator and any external sound generator are controlled, both with the same MIDI open protocol, that must be public and standarized.
I will never undestand why is not possible to put an alphanumeric keypad with a small screen and an enter button for entering and sending directly MIDI values for controlling specific functions to internal or external sound generators.
This that is nothing new, was one of the more practical devices that had the vintage synth designs.
Of course vintage designs have a pre requirement: the users should think and know what they are doing.
Since this is in the wrong category - and physical modeling was mentioned - I'll run with it in the context of the Montage platform.
It'd be fairly killer to have physical modeling - and its parameters you can tweak (great modeling would be deep in the number of parameters you can tweak -- like, for piano, the felt material including glass and strange stuff, string lengths -- not affecting pitch but maybe the intonation and string "tightness" -- etc). Combine that with adding these parameters to Montage's source->destination modulation matrix and, in this imaginary keyboard, you could come up with pretty wicked instruments. Combine with motion sequence and you can do some really interesting things over time (introduce randomness, etc). It's just a different world of things you could real-time control. It'd be real-time real-life control. Instead of real-time more-esoteric control. This is because physical modeling tends to have parameters that are more "real-life" things than the parameters of sample playback or FM.