Members gilwe Posted October 25, 2005 Members Share Posted October 25, 2005 What are the main advanteges of the DX7 over the DX9 ? Or does the DX9 have any features that DX7 lacks of ? I got a DX9 for about 50$ now, in almost perfect condition. First impression - it has killer filters, which sound almost analog !! Much better than FM7 soundwise... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members r33k Posted October 25, 2005 Members Share Posted October 25, 2005 Oh dear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members ChipCurtis Posted October 25, 2005 Members Share Posted October 25, 2005 Neither of these synths have filters. It is digital Frequency Modulation. Timbre is determined by algorithms of sine wave operators, there is no resonance/cutoff as in subtractive synthesis. The DX7 (6-op) is more capable than the DX9 (4-op). The 9 was released as a more affordable version of DX technology back in the day. The difference between this and FM7 might be in the output stages, which would have some noise and grunginess, and therefore more "warmth" to the sound than the computer-based FM7. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Tusks Posted October 25, 2005 Members Share Posted October 25, 2005 eRMM (cough) What Chip said. Jerry Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Umbra Posted October 25, 2005 Members Share Posted October 25, 2005 www.vintagesynth.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Roland Genske Posted October 25, 2005 Members Share Posted October 25, 2005 Had a DX9 in the 80s. All that's said above is true. Plus: The DX9 keybed is not velocity sensitive! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members gilwe Posted October 25, 2005 Author Members Share Posted October 25, 2005 OK I got your point But still, I think it has a very good sound, I tried some brass and piano patches - still as fas as it seems the DX7MKii should be the one to get when going FM... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members cheptronics Posted October 25, 2005 Members Share Posted October 25, 2005 don't worry about the 4 vs 6 operators, as even John Chowning said that 4 is fairly enough (6 is useful for split / dual modes though, as 3+3 or 2+4, etc) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Anonymous Posted October 25, 2005 Share Posted October 25, 2005 The DX9 has a lot more in common with the DX7 than any of the other 4 operator synths. Yamaha left off two operators rather than designing an whole new cheaper technology like they did with all the other 4 operator synths that followed. All these fm synths sound good today though, especially layered with analog synths. Just dont go expecting filter sweeps with any of these and youll have yourself a really powerful synth. These fm synths are wicked if used with fx units. If only we all knew how to program them I can sit for hours tweeking these though, very much hit and miss for me, but you can get some far out scifi stuff, they are bargains, especially the DX9, silly low prices today! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members elsongs Posted October 25, 2005 Members Share Posted October 25, 2005 The Yamaha DX9 is clearly one of the WORST synths ever made. Yes, it has 4 operators, but later on from the Yamaha DX21 on, the rest of the 4-op Yamaha synths had their own strengths. The DX9 is not velocity sensitive, and, despite having an LCD screen, you can't even name your own damn patches!Besides that, the only way to save patches is via CASSETTE and not cartridge like the DX7. $50 for a DX9 is too much. Those things are like worth $4.50. WORST SYNTH EVAR! If you want to get a Yamaha FM synth other than a DX7, try the DX21, DX27 or even the DX-100. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members rylos Posted October 25, 2005 Members Share Posted October 25, 2005 If only we all knew how to program them Takes about 15 minutes to get the general concept down, IF you use a good UI. I have a couple of DX7II, and a DX21. The 21 is not much fun at all. Hard to get those nuances I want with only 4 ops, and no velocity or aftertouch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members mrcpro Posted October 25, 2005 Members Share Posted October 25, 2005 If you really must do 4 op FM from the 1980s, don't go any lower than the DX11/ TX81Z. At least these guys have backlit displays and multiple waveforms, and the DX11 has a velocity sensitive keyboard. I mean, no matter how cheap a keyboard is, it's not worth it if all it does is waste your time. Life's too short... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members gilwe Posted October 25, 2005 Author Members Share Posted October 25, 2005 I really don't get you guys... Synths had no display and even no patches in the seventies... this doesn't make a crap of a Minimoog... DX100 looks like a mini keyboard to me... Do you really must have velocity to play a good sounding synth ?... Well Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members flat earth Posted October 25, 2005 Members Share Posted October 25, 2005 My friend had one + a JX3P+PG300 which i ended up buying. I remember the DX9 had a lovely gritty courseness to its bass sounds, something i felt was missing from a DX21 that i once owned. The DX9 was pretty limited in features but its dirty digital FM sounds were pure 80s classics. I also owned a DX7IID that i programmed to death, but as much as i loved it, the bass just didnt have that dirty edge. An interesting addition to your setup Gilwe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members ChipCurtis Posted October 25, 2005 Members Share Posted October 25, 2005 Originally posted by gilwe I really don't get you guys... Synths had no display and even no patches in the seventies... this doesn't make a crap of a Minimoog... DX100 looks like a mini keyboard to me... Do you really must have velocity to play a good sounding synth ?... Well I just think they were trying to give you good advice on best bang for the buck in FM synths with the most features. But you already have the DX9, so it's a done deal. Velocity or not, it prolly can make some nice sounds. Enjoy. I currently have no FM synths in my arsenal, but once owned a Yamaha YS-200. It was basically a keyboard version of the TX81Z with effects and onboard sequencer, and the most bizarre cheap plastic Fisher-Price build quality you ever saw. TQ5 was the tabletop version. You couldn't edit the FM synthesis from the front panel (remember 'easy-edit'?), but there was software like P-Farm and Syma that let you deep-edit the synth. Never managed to get any sounds that I really liked, so I sold it. Was never a big Yamaha FM fan myself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Anonymous Posted October 25, 2005 Share Posted October 25, 2005 Originally posted by elsongs The Yamaha DX9 is clearly one of the WORST synths ever made. Yes, it has 4 operators, but later on from the Yamaha DX21 on, the rest of the 4-op Yamaha synths had their own strengths. The DX9 is not velocity sensitive, and, despite having an LCD screen, you can't even name your own damn patches! Besides that, the only way to save patches is via CASSETTE and not cartridge like the DX7. $50 for a DX9 is too much. Those things are like worth $4.50. WORST SYNTH EVAR! If you want to get a Yamaha FM synth other than a DX7, try the DX21, DX27 or even the DX-100. Everyone has an opinion, i guess., but your post is extreme to say the least! All synths have there uses and we just happen to be talking about a yamaha here! I have sat and programmed some excellent sounds with the DX9. It may not be a DX7 for sure, but in my opinion it has a better sound than any of the other 4 operator fm synths and i have used most of them at some point, my personal favourites being the DX100, DX11 and the TX81Z. But id rather use the DX9 every single time for 4 operator sounds. Bass, cold sharp DX strings, marimba, koto and lots of over blown twangy sustain fm fx sounds which only fm synths can do and if i could have 2 DX9's for the price of one TX81Z, no prizes for guessing which id choose Its a little silly to totally dismiss a Yamaha synth, especially one that shares much of its design and sound with the DX7 and at times will sound almost identical to any DX7 using only 4 operators for a patch although there are differences with the amount of algorithms too. Real FM buffs will tell you, the DX7 and all the other 6 and 8 operator synths are way superior when it comes to richness and the quality of FM synthesis. Yamaha cut alot of corners when they made the later 4 operator synths including the DX21. DX27, DX100 and the many others. Even the inclusion of waves in the very last 4 operator synths never closed the quality gap on their 6 operator synths. The DX9 was not the result of yamaha looking to cut lots of corners, yamaha needed a synth to fill a gap in the market and at a certain price point. So they took away 2 operators, some algorithms and the touch sensitve keyboard but you can still hear the DX7 character to its sound. Yamaha had the synth market sussed back then with models for all potential customers. They had the entry level DX9, DX7, DX5 and the DX1. These early DX's were not cheap to make either, thats why yamaha designed the later 4 operator synths to save money, but later synths like the DX27 were poor relations to those early FM synths. In the right hands and right situation, there will always be a musician capable enough to make great music with any synth and the DX9 is a very capable synth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members mrcpro Posted October 25, 2005 Members Share Posted October 25, 2005 My apologies gilwe...I was trying to steer you in another direction and did not see that you already bought it. CC is right in some respects...it's only $50, it is a Yamaha, and if you like it then nothing else matters really... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members LesMizzell Posted October 25, 2005 Members Share Posted October 25, 2005 I would go for (in no particular order of choice) 1. Yamaha DX-7 II Centennial 76 Key Version with the gutz of 2 DX7 II's under the hood. There were only around 1000 of these made, so they're very rare. 2. DX-5 First Generation, but the same as 2 DX7's in a box. 76 keys here as well. 3. SY99 Things started getting interesting with the SY77 and 99. These included samples and filters, and you could use the samples as FM OPs! Very cool! Very powerful and very difficult to program at depth unless you're a tweak-head. 4. FS1R Probably the most powerful FM synth ever made - coupled with the world's worst interface. However, read up on this one. If you're a tweak-head, then this is hawg-heaven. Sounds amazing too. If you want mine, you'll have to kill me first. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Umbra Posted October 25, 2005 Members Share Posted October 25, 2005 I would go for (in no particular order of choice) I dunno.... I would go for below in the particular order for FM;) 1. G2 - ultra flexable fm2. FS1R - fm +3. Any 6 op yamaha dx synth - basic fm3. VZ10M - polite fm ala ring mod Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members gilwe Posted October 25, 2005 Author Members Share Posted October 25, 2005 Isn't FM7 supposed to be one of the most sophisticated FM synth available ? I just wonder. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Purity_Control Posted October 25, 2005 Members Share Posted October 25, 2005 Synths had no display and even no patches in the seventies... this doesn't make a crap of a Minimoog... DX100 looks like a mini keyboard to me... Do you really must have velocity to play a good sounding synth ?... Lack of patch memory is always a bit of a PITA unless you're particularly patient and/or you're using something with not so many things to tweak, but there was no need for screens on most of the early stuff 'cos all of the knobs for the parameters were there in front of you. When you're into digital with a minimalist front end, and a shed load of params, having a decent screen gives a much better idea of what you're doing. Velocity isn't essential but it's nice to have, it adds a lot of expression. If you really like the sound of a synth, you can always forgive the lack of it:) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members WhinyLittleRunt Posted October 25, 2005 Members Share Posted October 25, 2005 I got rid of my DX7 and I really regret it. I had a 1st generation from 1983 and it really sounded good. I just wanted to understand analog synthesis better so I traded it for a Roland. Stupid mistake. Man, have you seen the available sounds on the net for the Dx7?? You don't even have to program it, there are thousands of sounds available and some of them are true gems. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members gilwe Posted October 25, 2005 Author Members Share Posted October 25, 2005 It still depends on which Roland you traded it for Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members elsongs Posted October 25, 2005 Members Share Posted October 25, 2005 Originally posted by gilwe I really don't get you guys... Synths had no display and even no patches in the seventies... this doesn't make a crap of a Minimoog... DX100 looks like a mini keyboard to me... Do you really must have velocity to play a good sounding synth ?... Well But synths had displays and patches in the '80s, to that's no excuse Besides, the DX9's sounds (all 20 of 'em! Wheee!!) were downright wimpy and awful. If you disagree, then name ONE great DX9 sound...oh wait, the LCD doesn't have patch names, you you can't name em anyway!!! At least the newer 4-op synths (DX21/27/100) graced the world with the ubiquitous "LatelyBass" and the low-end of the click organ that was used in a million house records Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members BOBA JFET Posted October 25, 2005 Members Share Posted October 25, 2005 LatelyBass was actually a TX81z - but the DX100 (perhaps the 21/27 as well?) had Solid Bass which was also used quite a bit, most notably in Orbital's Halcyon+On+On. I'm not crazy about the DX9 either. The thing is that the operator scaling of the later 4ops yields more aggressive sounds which makes up for the simplicity of timbre. I like 'em, even though the EGs and LFOs have awful resolution, the noise floor is high, and they're not all that great for polyphonic sounds (except bizarre atmospherics) I think because the internal voice mixing is so nasty sounding, they're just so characterful. But the DX9 is kind of pointless - it doesn't have the bite that makes the other 4ops so great, yet it also lacks the finish that makes the DX7 so cool. It's not like DX7s cost a lot these days, I just don't see the point in bothering with a DX9. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.