Yamaha MX61 annoying vibrato and panning

[g.smith]

i bought a Yamaha MX61 a few months ago, and while a number of
the presets are quite acceptable, many of the orchestral voices have,
regrettably, been sampled with (what i consider to be) an excessive
amount of vibrato which cannot be overridden . additionally, i've been
both perplexed and frustrated by some of the stereo/panning schemes
assigned to some of the instruments, especially when i want to use,
for example, a cello melody and it jumps back and forth
from left to right. in spite of a panning control, this issue cannot be corrected
…just moves everything further left or right together.
i'm considering the Kurzweil PCK36 because of its longstanding reputation
for quality orchestral voices, but i'm hoping to determine whether it
would afford the flexibility/adjustability to avoid the above described
issues i've experienced with the Yamaha.
any pertinent info. anyone could provide would be much appreciated!

 

[happyrat1]

PC3K has understated effects if anything and as far as programming it goes, EVERYTHING is configurable.

Excuse me for asking this but I have to anyway. Is your Modulation wheel set properly on your Yamaha?

 

[g.smith]

PC3K has understated effects if anything and as far as programming it goes, EVERYTHING is configurable.
Excuse me for asking this but I have to anyway. Is your Modulation wheel set properly on your Yamaha?

thanks for your reply! the parameters one can affect with the mod wheel, particularly vibrato, are generally only speed and, in some cases, intensity, but it never allows one to remove the vibrato entirely.
i suspect this is likely because the original sample(s) were taken with
a strong vibrato, hence it is unremovable.

as far as the panning/stereo image issue, the mod wheel is entirely ineffective, and, as i previously mentioned, even the panning adjustment dial is ineffective in creating a logical sequence of single notes in a (for example: cello) melody that don't bounce irrationally from left< >right. i honestly don't know what they were thinking when they set up some of these voices.

additionally, i am curious as to whether the PC3LE series would be sufficiently configurable to avoid these issues.

 

[happyrat1]

Well I've owned a PC3K for just under a year now and I still consider myself a novice at programming it.

If you're looking for some expert, albeit biased opinions on Kurzweils I'd suggest visiting these forums as well.

http://www.cunka.com/forum//index.php

http://www.ksetlist.com/

Gary

 

[g.smith]

thanks, so much, Gary!

 

[happyrat1]

You're very welcome

Gary

 

[SeaGtGruff]

Yamaha has some voices that use what they call "KSP"-- I think it stands for "Key Scale Panning," but the "K" may also stand for "Keyboard," and the "S" may stand for "Script" or "Stereo." In any case, when you select a KSP voice the voice will sound like it's coming from the left or right depending on which key you're playing-- e.g., C1 is toward the left and C6 is toward the right. The KSP voices are XG voices that use BSMSB 0 and BSLSB 1.

However, I'm looking at the manuals and data list for the MX61, but I don't see any voices that use BSMSB 0 and BSLSB 1. Furthermore, I don't see any KSP voices for string instruments in the XG documentation. So the problem you're having might not have anything to do with "KSP" voices.

Nevertheless, I see that a lot of voices on the MX61 do use BSLSB 1 (but not with BSMSB 0). So if you're using a DAW and MIDI to select voices, you might double-check to make sure you aren't somehow sending PC numbers without also sending both BS bytes first. And you might try some of the other voices to see if they're the same way-- e.g., if STR 005 ("Cello Solo") has the panning problem, try switching to STR 012 ("Cello") to see if it does, too.

 

[g.smith]

thanks, so much, for your consideration! i'm working only with the keyboard…no DAW or MIDI. regrettably, i fear the vexing issues i've encountered are incurable as the adjustability offered on the MX61 is severely limited indeed. the stereo images they (Yamaha) have programmed, particularly for the orchestral samples, are, for the most part, somewhat more acceptable for the larger and full ensemble voices when they are played polyphonically, but why they chose a panning scheme for a solo performance that moves back and forth left< >right as one plays through a chromatic scale baffles me!
i've read other complaints regarding the relentless vibrato problem, and it, too, it would appear is incurable…oh well.

 

[mark urquhart]

In some ways I am hesitant to notch an opinion here as I am considering MX61 but I only had it for a few days loaned to me so I ran through things quickly in a few hours. I currently have a Kurzweil PC361 SO that was my comparison and reason for chiming in, so not sure if that is helpful to you. These are my OPINIONS only and not meant to dig the MX61 for those that like its sound and it does have some good ones. I know little of programming.

I can say in general that I thought the strings and even more the brass are much more lifelike/rich sounding on PC361 than the MX61. I also recall running into the vibrato issue on the strings (violin/cello?) and thought that I used the Mod wheel to cut back on it; that did work some but was not happy with the lack of control when playing note to note. My PC361 easily controlled the vibrato by playing technique from flat to lifelike the duration being almost like playing a violin - and sounded more organic. I think because I was not impressed with the MX strings in general I moved on figuring that vibrato would be something I could figure out on programming if I buy the MX61 - and I might just use the PC361 for that.

I am not a Kurzweil fan for the sake of the name (or any brand) and it is complicated and a matter of taste when comparing brand sounds but in general I was quite disappointed in the MX sounds for orchestral and drums - comparison to PC361 - in general. For my rock cover work I compared sax and feel MX barely usable and PC361 decent compare to real thing (other MX brass sounded a bit artificial also IMO).

I have almost no experience with Yamaha other than jamming on a friends years ago and felt that his board's pianos were more melodic/musical sounding and suited to classical than my PC361. Surprised that the MX61 did not impress me that way in head to head over headphones and polk stereo speakers (rather than my KC550 keyboard amp which cannot do justice). My wife agreed. I was excited about getting "motif" sounds in 61 - but did note from demo on utube it sounded to me like the 61 comes close in some areas to motif but not all - noticeable difference in orchestral. -- So you might want to consider comparing Kurzweil (or I suppose other). I was surprised that the MX drums sounded almost a bit like electric drums compared to PC361, especially for some cymbals (If that is important to you).

That being said I will probably buy the MX61. For the money I like the live controls, weight, and want to learn programming and recording - and weight . I see it live as backup and bringing some new sounds. The PC361 EPs are fatter but limited and MX has a lot (although had some weird panning stuff also). Guitars are much better than PC361 and love the range of acoustics and even electric. Nicer array of world instruments. Organ is important to me and assume that MX key click can be heavily controlled with YC-B3 but - that MX61 chorus is rubbish and have heard same about YC-B3). MX adds a couple beautiful "glassy" organ sounds that the PC361 does not have - even though IMO PC361 emulates real B3 better..(MX distortion organ is trash but hope/assume that overdrive in YC-B3 module will sound rich not buzzy).

Sorry if this turned long, into a review - guess I am still trying to decide myself on the sounds of MX.

 

[glen smith]

Thanks to all ! : )
i wound up with a PC361 ..by far the best array of strings & orchestral voices i've heard. no problem with vibrato ..it's not there unless you put it there ..the way it should be!
my only issue (there's always something) is that even with the mod wheel @ zero, many, if not most, of the strings, both solo and ensemble, are set up with a great deal of "swell" (at least amongst the presets) when notes are held ..don't know why they programmed them this way, as it is not realistic (or, for my purposes) desirable for a held note to get louder and louder. in fact, if any kind of finish for held notes were appropriate, a slight decay would be more natural.
seems to me that as the mod wheel is typically assigned to control the degree of swell in most of these instances, it's parameters should be set to implement zero swell - maximum swell, but sadly that's not the case.
i've had limited success in working with the attack and decay envelopes to reduce the swell, but i still have to spend a lot of time in post recording editing to attenuate or eliminate the unwanted swell.

 

[HRF]

i bought a Yamaha MX61 a few months ago, and while a number of
the presets are quite acceptable, many of the orchestral voices have,
regrettably, been sampled with (what i consider to be) an excessive
amount of vibrato which cannot be overridden . additionally, i've been
both perplexed and frustrated by some of the stereo/panning schemes
assigned to some of the instruments, especially when i want to use,
for example, a cello melody and it jumps back and forth
from left to right. in spite of a panning control, this issue cannot be corrected
…just moves everything further left or right together.
i'm considering the Kurzweil PCK36 because of its longstanding reputation
for quality orchestral voices, but i'm hoping to determine whether it
would afford the flexibility/adjustability to avoid the above described
issues i've experienced with the Yamaha.
any pertinent info. anyone could provide would be much appreciated!

I came across a function by accident while trying to cut some of the stereo panning that is - in my opinion - way too much on the Classic 74 Electric piano Rhodes patch. Using the Knob Function Button, toggle down to the bottom row of selections labeled" Volume - Pan - Assignment 1 - Assignment 2". By turning the assignment knobs I was able to manipulate the panning.