Talk:Yamaha SMAF

Phone list
I think it would be a good idea if we could split the model list based on MA chip, rather than one excessively large list of phones that used them.

Here's my proposal on the table's format as an example:

YMU762C
Granted, doing this will be time consuming. If anyone else supports the idea and wants to help out, please do. WindowsAesthetics (talk) 13:07, 15 June 2023 (UTC)

That makes sense to me and looks far more organized in my eyes. I believe the same format could be carried out to other similar pages (e.g. MTK SoCs). Dumbphonepreservation (talk) 14:08, 15 June 2023 (UTC)

Looks good to me. My only concern is brands that have something like 40 phones with the same chip (for example DBTEL) but I think the much improved clarity will make up for the increased length of the list. --GtrxAC (talk) 18:27, 15 June 2023 (UTC)


 * Yeah, I noticed that. I'd say for now this idea would work, even if the chip lists would get pretty big. I'm also thinking of making the Beatnik pages more organized; not sure about splitting lists based on bank, but I think the banks would warrant their own pages with instrument documentation and other development info when possible. WindowsAesthetics (talk) 11:42, 16 June 2023 (UTC)

We probably want to have links to each device page in the tables, but that would mean repeating the brand and writing the model twice, like OT-556, which will get annoying when adding lots of phones with long model names. Are we willing to go with this inconvenience, or not have device links at all, or have any other ideas? I agree about making separate pages for the Beatnik soundbanks though. --GtrxAC (talk) 18:45, 16 June 2023 (UTC)


 * Well the brand could span the amount of rows of their models (see my example), which would be more convenient. In terms of model links, unfortunately I don't see any other way around this, but copying and pasting would definitely speed things up a bit. WindowsAesthetics (talk) 11:40, 19 June 2023 (UTC)


 * One solution to this model linking problem could be to make a module and template similar to this and this, which I even used a bit on this page. Something like and it would automatically create the links according to the format. --GtrxAC (talk) 23:30, 20 June 2023 (UTC)


 * I did a little bit of planning to start using this new format on this page, including that template mentioned above, I converted part of the list to the new format just to see what it looks like (didn't publish yet), I still have a couple of questions:
 * * Do we really need the release year column? I can see it having some use, but at least right now, no one has the time to find the year for all the hundreds of models listed on this page, so it'll just be a whole bunch of question marks with a few filled in values here and there. Seems a bit redundant to me anyway.
 * * As part of this overhaul, should we separate this page into multiple pages? This page would still cover the basics and info about the file format itself, but info about the MA-1 generation of chips and a list of phones using it would have a separate page, and same for MA-2 and all the other generations. --GtrxAC (talk) 22:00, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Yeah the years could make things more cluttered. I suppose the MA-x models could be split off into a subpage of Yamaha SMAF, and depending on how tedious it'd be, a "Phones that use MA-x" category could be made? Dumbphonepreservation (talk) 05:07, 10 July 2023 (UTC)
 * About the years, the reason why I wanted to document those is to keep track of the period each chip was used for, but it's true that finding the years for all models would take a lot of time (and in many cases, info on that is simply gone). Also yes, it would be a nice idea to have a page for each chip. I'd also like to document more info from the site, or even development/staff info if we can find any. WindowsAesthetics (talk) 15:13, 10 July 2023 (UTC)
 * About the years, the reason why I wanted to document those is to keep track of the period each chip was used for, but it's true that finding the years for all models would take a lot of time (and in many cases, info on that is simply gone). Also yes, it would be a nice idea to have a page for each chip. I'd also like to document more info from the site, or even development/staff info if we can find any. WindowsAesthetics (talk) 15:13, 10 July 2023 (UTC)