Have a look at the tone generation used in these 2 links
Bill
T5 Motif I quote from this post..
http://www.harmonycentral.com/forum/forum/Keyboards/acapella-18/341405- AWM and AWM2 are just marketing names - when Yamaha switched to 16-bit samples in 1992, they decided to increase the "version" at some point, but any other significant changes since then (such as introduction of sample compression in 1997 or 8 oscillators in 2007) went without such an increase. You can regard them as a collection of features like the number of oscillators/LFOs/EGs, the structure of the effect block etc. - I'm not even sure if these were changed in transition from AWM to AWM2.
At some point Yamaha started reffering to AWM2 as simply AWM. Therefore all today's AWM = AWM2
or in
this document from Yamaha itselves it says :
AWM2: AWM is Advanced Wave Memory
and is Yamaha’s proprietary method of
storing PCM sampled data. The latest
version is AWM2 – all references to AWM
are AWM2.
And this is old information advancement of the AWM synthesis standard advanced hugely under the hood... and currently all their instruments have their 8 oscilator(elements) voices inside the big difference between Motif and Tyros is how you edit them, and offcourse the much newer Tyros 5 got a lot of the advanced features not in the Motif XF, which still has the old AWM engine of the XS, which is over 8 years old now.
I allways held your opinions in high regards, but on this topic it seems your "Anti Yamaha vision" has blinded you so much that you are proclaiming nonsense about the Tyros 5 AWM engine.
AWM is currently one of the most advanced sound engines availalbe in hardware with only Roland and Wersi OAX(which actually is VST technollogy as we both know) rivalling it. We have to see where the PA4xs EDS engine ends. it seems more advanced then the HD engine in teh Kronos. (the Kronos however has 9 engines to make up for that, which makes it still the most advanced instrument)
Not at all, 99% of arranger players (Including I suspect most on here) have no interest in the sound engine, they just reference to what they see in the spec sheets, which is the way I approached it. (It’s the way most people see it therefore is the most logical to use)
It has always been the case that the sound engine in a manufactures pro keyboards has been more advanced than the arranger side, which has concentrated on the easy play side of things, (Styles etc.) which most home hobby players want.
What the Yamaha arranger designers did however (This goes way back to the Tyros 2 days) was to take the (So called) inferior arranger sound engine and utilised it in a way that allowed an OOTB experience that quite literally shocked the pro side designers, (And Yamahas pro side has been playing catch up ever since) hence it became a very popular instrument.
The problem with the Yamaha approach however, is that it is very hard work to make it sound individual, (Listen to pretty much all Yamaha arranger players and they all sound the same) which is not what everybody wants as it’s the equivalent of having an elephant around your neck, (This is why I would never consider a Yamaha arranger for my own personal use) as you hear the technology not the player.
As I have always said, it is a personal experience, and only by playing the instrument yourself will you know if it is for you or not. In addition if you check my posts I have always taken my hat off to the Yamaha Arranger designers for what they have achieved with limited resources.
Since Yamaha bought Steinberg a number of years ago, I am surprised they have not incorporated a lot of Steinberg know how in their keyboard products, as when Steinberg bought out their Halion Sonic VST (Which replaced their previous Hypersonic VST (The sound engine now used for sound production in all Wersi instruments since 2005) which is an advanced sound engine in itself) most of the new sounds were programmed by the Motif designers. (Perhaps the Motif replacements will now get the Steinberg technology incorporated into them)
Hope this clarifies my position
Bill