Members ChipCurtis Posted December 3, 2004 Members Share Posted December 3, 2004 Okay, as promised, here are some mp3's I just made of some DW-8000 sounds. There are six of them, with descriptions, below. All of the real-time control is being done with my Kentron Control Freak: ...which I programmed specifically for the DW-8000 (beats the single data-slider interface!). Also, all of the patches are original except for one (which is noted). Here they are: Classic Synth Brass Playing a part from the Bruford album "One of a Kind" (Dave Stewart rules!). No Prophet 5 or OBXa, but hey, pretty ballsy for a hybrid synth. Rez Bass With some realtime control (from the Control Freak), morphing into some experimenting with sub bass tones and self-osc filter. ELP Moog Lead Classic sound of Keith Emerson (I'm playing the theme from AquaTarkus), also with some self-osc experimentation toward the end. Ambient Drone Using different LFO waveforms (switching between them in real time with the Control Freak), also realtime filter sweeps, portamento, and LFO frequency speedup/slowdown (although the initial patch here is a preset). Sine Wave Whistle Classic sound of Lyle Mays (Pat Metheny Group) from his Oberheim 4-voice, I'm playing a line from a PMG song. Square Wave Lead Classic Wakeman "Excerpt from Six Wives" sound, with some joystick modulations toward the end. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members BillyWa Posted December 3, 2004 Members Share Posted December 3, 2004 Cool, I did not remember the DW8000 sounding that good. I'd like to get one of those control freaks! What is the story on that machine? Still have not gotten my DW out of the cellar... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Hell Bites Posted December 3, 2004 Members Share Posted December 3, 2004 Originally posted by ChipCurtis Okay, as promised, here are some mp3's I just made of some DW-8000 sounds. There are six of them, with descriptions, below. Woah! Thanks man, I really appreciate you posting those clips. That brass still sounded fat, I could definitely do Van Halen (along with all the other 80's hard rock and metal) with that. Overall, from the workshop sound clips and the ones you posted this Korg seems like a really winner. I'll definitely pick either the DW-8000 or the JX-10, whichever one pops up sooner and cheap, heh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members pighood Posted December 3, 2004 Members Share Posted December 3, 2004 The DW-8000 is one of those workhorse gems that just kinda hits the spot when you need it. CHEAP and great-sounding. Look out for a unit with the Angel City upgrade if you can find it...worth hunting down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members grumphh Posted December 3, 2004 Members Share Posted December 3, 2004 Originally posted by Hell Bites Woah! Thanks man, I really appreciate you posting those clips. That brass still sounded fat, I could definitely do Van Halen (along with all the other 80's hard rock and metal) with that. Overall, from the workshop sound clips and the ones you posted this Korg seems like a really winner. I'll definitely pick either the DW-8000 or the JX-10, whichever one pops up sooner and cheap, heh. As a result of the DW thread, i have been playing around with that synth and the JX-10 again, and find that the two actually are quite different, although on paper they seem to be somewhat similar. Very basically: The sounds of the JX are generally much nicer and sweeter, and due to the layering of patches you can get fairly complex and expansive sounds out of it, that always seem to have a rich quality about them - even without the built-in chorus (which for some reason i prefer not to use - i guess i feel that using the chorus is "cheating" ). What it does not do so well is dirtier sounds, i have a hard time getting it to sound really obnoxious, although it can do quite "electronic" tones. Adding the obvious: Get a programmer with that synth, otherwise you will miss out on many options due to the programming interface. The DW is not quite as "hi-fi" sounding as the JX, (in fact very little "hi-fi" sounding ) and has less programming depth - but has this great filter that adds a fair amount of grit. And it can do synth basses much better than the JX (i assume partly because of that filter), as well as some weirdly overtoned sounds, courtesy of the additional waveforms. Recommendation: If you can get the JX with a programmer - that would be the obvious choice because you can always "dirty up" a clean sound - but since the DW's tend to go cheaply (i got mine for under 100$) they definitely are a cost efficient alternative. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members ChipCurtis Posted December 3, 2004 Author Members Share Posted December 3, 2004 I own a JX-10 too - IMO the other "best bang for the buck" analog hybrid synth. For phatt synth brass and silky analog strings, the JX-10 will beat the crap out of the DW. Very rich, airy, breathy, and bright, like a Roland analog sound should be. Also there's a random (S&H) LFO waveform for some wicked electronic FX, and of course the osc sync and cross-mod sounds that the DW just won't do. The JX relies on cross-mod to get bells and percussive sounds (which is better and more flexible I think), whereas the DW relies on fixed waveforms. But for dark drones and very smooth, self-osc filter FX, the DW has it all over the JX. Also better at 'moogy' leads and basses IMO. That built-in DDL really helps in this area. The brighter sound of the JX I think is due to the DCOs (analog osc's with digital pitch control) instead of DOs (samples waveforms) in the DW, so the JX is a little more 'authentically analog' than the DW. But try to do a smooth filter sweep on the JX using the sliders on the PG-800, and you'll get nothing but stairstepping. You need to rely on the envelopes and LFO for smooth sweeps on the JX. The DW filter is amazingly smooth and non-steppy for a 64-step resolution filter cutoff, a very liquid sounding filter. The JX filter just sounds a little too harsh IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members protues9 Posted December 3, 2004 Members Share Posted December 3, 2004 Hey! I have a DW8000 and I have a Maudio UC16 I was going to sell cause I thought I had no use for it .. Can I program that to work on the DW8000 too ? Cause if so I want to shake your hand! And once I get back to my regular desk with the speakers I will listen to your demos.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members ChipCurtis Posted December 3, 2004 Author Members Share Posted December 3, 2004 Originally posted by protues9 Hey! I have a DW8000 and I have a Maudio UC16 I was going to sell cause I thought I had no use for it .. Can I program that to work on the DW8000 too ? Cause if so I want to shake your hand! Well, then extend your hand my friend..... because YOU CAN!!!! In fact, I was doing it this way before getting the Control Freak. There is only one catch: You must have a PC or laptop running Bome's MIDI Translator in between the UC16 and the synth. The UC won't talk directly to the DW. The benefit to using the CF is that it directly transmits MIDI sysex; the UC16 only transmits CC's. I have created a 16-knob profile for the UC16/DW8000 in Bome's MIDI Translator. It's on my PC at home. When I get home this evening, I'll send you the (tiny) software program with the embedded DW profile. Just unzip it into a folder on your hard disk, and fire it up (and set it up with your MIDI interface). You'll be in business. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members protues9 Posted December 3, 2004 Members Share Posted December 3, 2004 That would be quite excellent .. send to neur0l0gic@yahoo.com puhlease!! A more fluid interface is going to kick ass..! Know of a domestic retialer of the Kenton stuff? Those retro fit kits they have are great! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members BillyWa Posted December 3, 2004 Members Share Posted December 3, 2004 www.audiomidi.com seems to carry all the Kenton products. Not sure how their pricing compares. I just bought a Midistream wireless midi system for my AX-7 and WX-5 from audiomidi (they had great service). The wireless midi is incredible... http://www.audiomidi.com/manufacturer.cfm?mid=149 dont know how to post an active link.... :( Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members BillyWa Posted December 3, 2004 Members Share Posted December 3, 2004 dont know how to post an active link.... :( oops, now I do... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members ChipCurtis Posted December 3, 2004 Author Members Share Posted December 3, 2004 Originally posted by protues9 That would be quite excellent .. send to neur0l0gic@yahoo.com puhlease!! A more fluid interface is going to kick ass..! Instead of sending directly to you, I'll post here so others can use it too. Bome's MIDI Translator configured for Korg DW0000 The above link is Bome's version 1.2 along with the .ini file that contains the Korg DW8000 map that I created. The reason why I'm including the program as well as the settings file is that I was unable to get these settings to load into the newer version of Bome's (2.0 and above). The new version does not read directly from an .ini file, you have to import the .ini from an earlier version of Bome's. The DW8000 map contains a couple thousand lines of code that apparently wouldn't load into version 2.0. Besides, this older version is simpler to use and it's freeware (no nag screens, etc.). To save lots of time, I used a spreadsheet to create a map of the values, and then exported it as a text file (the .ini file), and I couldn't do this using version 2.0. Just unzip the archive into its own folder and start up the executable. Configure it for your MIDI interface. You will find DW-8000 under the presets drop-down list if it doesn't already load up as the default module. Another thing to take note of is that each and every outgoing parameter translation is hard-valued to MIDI channel 3, so you must make sure parameter #84 (MIDI channel) is set to 3 on your DW8000. Incoming translations are hard-valued to MIDI channel 1 with controller numbers set to 1 thru 16, so set your Evolution UC-16 to MIDI channel 1 for every knob, and set the controller assignments for the knobs to 1 thru 16 (just as the knobs are labelled on the front panel). The reason for so many lines of code is that the variable setting ("oo") caused my Evolution UC-16 (or probably any modern MIDI controller, which have knob resolutions of 128 steps) to reset a DW8000 parameter of 32 steps back to 0 when you reached value #33 on the knob. This meant that if you swept a knob from 0 to 127, you get a very rude "jump back to 0" on the DW8000 three times! So I had to create a single translation for every value step of the DW8000, rather than one translation per parameter with the variable "oo". This way, when you sweep the knob on a parameter like "Resonance" (32 steps on the DW8000), the minimum value will be 0 and the maximum value will be 31, just like it should be. The translations are (for 32 steps): every 4 steps on the controller equals one step on the DW8000. For Cutoff (64 steps), every 2 steps on the controller equals one step on the DW8000, and so on. Most parameters I have assigned are 32 steps. So, on to the actual parameters I have created translations for. Since the UC-16 has 16 knobs, I have created translations for the 16 most useful parameters for live control (in my opinion). I could have created more paramter maps (since the UC-16 lets you press a single button to move on to a different map that you can save in memory), but it was too time-consuming. Anyway, here are the parameters that I mapped, knobs 1 thru 16 respectively: 31 Cutoff 32 Resonance 35 EG Intensity 61 LFO Waveform 62 LFO Frequency 63 LFO Delay 64 LFO Oscillator 65 LFO Filter 51 VCA Attack 52 VCA Decay 55 VCA Sustain 56 VCA Release 41 VCF Attack 42 VCF Decay 45 VCF Sustain 46 VCF Release (Note, I like to use the term LFO instead of "MG" as Korg does, because it's terminology I'm more familiar with as regards to analog synths). Good luck. Let me know if you are having any problems using this. I'll check back on this thread from time to time. ... And long live the mighty DW-8000!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members protues9 Posted December 3, 2004 Members Share Posted December 3, 2004 Hey thanks alot for sharing.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members savante Posted December 4, 2004 Members Share Posted December 4, 2004 Very nice to see you all talking about the Korg DW8000. That was my first-ever synth, and I loved it. Unfortunately, it was sold long ago. It was only many years later, with another Korg synth (the Z1), that I found a synth I liked better than the DW. Wish I had that "metallic piano" patch on another synth though. Incredibly playable electric piano. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Hell Bites Posted December 7, 2004 Members Share Posted December 7, 2004 Originally posted by grumphh As a result of the DW thread, i have been playing around with that synth and the JX-10 again, and find that the two actually are quite different, although on paper they seem to be somewhat similar. Very basically: The sounds of the JX are generally much nicer and sweeter, and due to the layering of patches you can get fairly complex and expansive sounds out of it, that always seem to have a rich quality about them - even without the built-in chorus (which for some reason i prefer not to use - i guess i feel that using the chorus is "cheating" ). What it does not do so well is dirtier sounds, i have a hard time getting it to sound really obnoxious, although it can do quite "electronic" tones. Adding the obvious: Get a programmer with that synth, otherwise you will miss out on many options due to the programming interface. The DW is not quite as "hi-fi" sounding as the JX, (in fact very little "hi-fi" sounding ) and has less programming depth - but has this great filter that adds a fair amount of grit. And it can do synth basses much better than the JX (i assume partly because of that filter), as well as some weirdly overtoned sounds, courtesy of the additional waveforms. Recommendation: If you can get the JX with a programmer - that would be the obvious choice because you can always "dirty up" a clean sound - but since the DW's tend to go cheaply (i got mine for under 100$) they definitely are a cost efficient alternative. So if I can get it pretty cheap, the Roland JX-10 is a better sounding synth in general? I did really like the Korg DW-8000 clips that were posted and if the JX-10 could do that along with the JX-8 workshop clips (I hear the JX-10 is two JX-8s in one) that would be great... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members orangefunk Posted December 8, 2004 Members Share Posted December 8, 2004 I think the JX8P was much easier to use than the JX10, but the JX10 had a slightly better sound. I think the "synth bass/pad" split preset was just gorgeous... damn I hope I sampled it before I sold it on... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members TDman Posted December 8, 2004 Members Share Posted December 8, 2004 IIRC, Rogue Music sells Kenton products. I know they have the Control Freak. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members clusterchord Posted December 8, 2004 Members Share Posted December 8, 2004 JX8P and JX10 and MKS70 have exact same voice arhitecture and sound. with latter two having double voice boards for 12 voices, 24 osc, 24filters and 24envs. but not all electronic components used are exactly the same. I did a side-by-side, and JX8P has a much higher noise floor than JX or MKS70. so, i presume, these two might have better op amps on the outputs or something like that. also, we opened JX10 and MKS70 and the voice boards are almost identical - maybe a less important chip or two were different. i agree about the bass being better on DW, but not in any moog way. its envelope seems quicker than the notoriously sluggish one on JX10 - this makes DW more usable for punchy bass - but moogy it is not. about leads, when you play higher notes, the uniform character of a digital waveform and other harsh artifacts are more than obvious on the DW square wave example. JX can do better for 'classic' leads, no contest. filter when changed by PG800 is stepped that is true, but i use After Touch for this and draw it in Nuendo - much better results. altough i wouldn't call this filter harsh in any kind of way - this flter has such a soft and warm/wide quality overall - otherwise those fantastic strings, pads and brass wouldnt be possible. And this is a board 'known' for its paddage capabilities. for example it does mellow brass ( a la ToTo) better than almost any other analog Roland. ONly one that might be better at it is MKS80 Rev5 that uses the same filter but has VCOs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Hell Bites Posted December 8, 2004 Members Share Posted December 8, 2004 Originally posted by clusterchord JX8P and JX10 and MKS70 have exact same voice arhitecture and sound. with latter two having double voice boards for 12 voices, 24 osc, 24filters and 24envs.but not all electronic components used are exactly the same. I did a side-by-side, and JX8P has a much higher noise floor than JX or MKS70. so, i presume, these two might have better op amps on the outputs or something like that. also, we opened JX10 and MKS70 and the voice boards are almost identical - maybe a less important chip or two were different.i agree about the bass being better on DW, but not in any moog way. its envelope seems quicker than the notoriously sluggish one on JX10 - this makes DW more usable for punchy bass - but moogy it is not. about leads, when you play higher notes, the uniform character of a digital waveform and other harsh artifacts are more than obvious on the DW square wave example. JX can do better for 'classic' leads, no contest. Thanks for the useful information! Sorry to keep slugging the questions at you guys, but this is my first synth and I am really having a tough time deciding as I can't really try out the used synths and there are many on ebay going for good deals (but all seem to have some weakness). So for classic leads, synth brass, strings, pads (not too interested in bass....for now:D ) This would be a good ranking for what synth I should get: Roland JX-10 > Korg DW-8000 > Ensoniq ESQ-1 (or SQ-80) ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members ChipCurtis Posted December 8, 2004 Author Members Share Posted December 8, 2004 Originally posted by Hell Bites Thanks for the useful information! Sorry to keep slugging the questions at you guys, but this is my first synth and I am really having a tough time deciding as I can't really try out the used synths and there are many on ebay going for good deals (but all seem to have some weakness).So for classic leads, synth brass, strings, pads (not too interested in bass....for now:D ) This would be a good ranking for what synth I should get:Roland JX-10 > Korg DW-8000 > Ensoniq ESQ-1 (or SQ-80) ? That sounds like a good priority ranking. There are a few JX-10s on eBay currently for decent prices. I wouldn't pay more than $275 for one in good condition. If a key is intermittent or "not working" I wouldn't worry, cleaning the key contacts is a piece of cake on this machine. I got mine for $225 last year with two keys needing cleaning, and now it's in mint condition. I would stand by my comments about the DW leads sounding quite "moogy". A Sound-On-Sound review of the DW concurs with this opinion. I know this comment incurs the wrath of analog purists everywhere, but I am talking about basic ballpark character of the sound, not exact reproduction and sound quality of a Moog (of course not). It can do those very nasal, rounded tones ala Wakeman "Journey" and the vintage Emo sounds are quite convincing too. I did a solo concert to a room packed with early 70s prog freaks last year using the DW for those kinds of sounds, and at the end of the show people were going "what was that, a Moog?" The comparison is not for the analog freak/purist doing A/B comparisions of the synths in isolation. It was convicing enough in a general mix. Don't forget your sound system makes all the difference here: pump the DW thru 500 watts of Peavey power, Celestion 250 watt speakers, compressor, external delay and verb, etc. - it will sound convincing enough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members grumphh Posted December 8, 2004 Members Share Posted December 8, 2004 Originally posted by Hell Bites This would be a good ranking for what synth I should get: Roland JX-10 > Korg DW-8000 > Ensoniq ESQ-1 (or SQ-80) ? Yup, looks correct to me (although i have no experience with the ESQ) - but definitely the JX first. After all, when it came out (admittedly appr. 20 years ago ) it was the top of the line synth for Roland, so the sound quality reflects that, even to this day. What is annoying about the JX is, that often the programmer will cost as much as the board itself - but the programmer is quite essential if you really want to get into shaping your own sounds (which i believe you should), simply because it is much easier to experiment when you have direct access to the parameters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members clusterchord Posted December 8, 2004 Members Share Posted December 8, 2004 Originally posted by ChipCurtis I would stand by my comments about the DW leads sounding quite "moogy". A Sound-On-Sound review of the DW concurs with this opinion. I know this comment incurs the wrath of analog purists everywhere, but I am talking about basic ballpark character of the sound, not exact reproduction and sound quality of a Moog (of course not).. ..I did a solo concert to a room packed with early 70s prog freaks last year using the DW for those kinds of sounds, and at the end of the show people were going "what was that, a Moog?" The comparison is not for the analog freak/purist doing A/B comparisions of the synths in isolation. you can ALWAYS tell the difference. its a fundamental tone-generating hardware difference. One can debate about, for example, is JX or Matrix or some OB closer to moog sound or not. they are all-analog audio path synths. DW has a harsh 8-bit digital waveform thru an analog filter resulting in no smoothness or warmth, no organic variation. not even in the same ballpark. yeah alright, play a mono portamento lead on a Casio to anybody who doesnt know anything about synths, probably he'll say "Moog?". moog became a synonim for much more than moog sound. sort of like Xerox is for copying machine. anyways, i don't mind a difference of oppinion, but I'm just sick n tired of dissing using labels like "analog purist/analog freak"!! Look, just because you can't hear the difference, and think DW sounds 'moogy', doesnt mean others can't. have you even played a moog in real life? why do you think an array of real analog synths like moog, ob, roland, andromeda etc were/are used on tons of fantastic recordings? just because all people using them are just a bunch of "freaks"? pondering over them "in isolation" perhaps? gimme a break. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members AvS Posted December 8, 2004 Members Share Posted December 8, 2004 ChipCurtis>> Nice sounds. I really like the first one. How did you record these sounds? Is it the DW8000 that outputs that highfreq "beeeeeee" sound?And did you EQ them or does it really sound like that? Sound like its got i giant hole somewhere in the mid freqs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members J3RK Posted December 8, 2004 Members Share Posted December 8, 2004 Another DCO based synth in the lower price range is the Oberheim Matrix 6. I think the M6 sounds better than any of the other DCO synths of the time. That's open to debate/discussion, as it's just my opinion, but it seems to have a bolder sound overall than the Rolands to me. I also like the way the filters sound better. Tons of modulation options (envelopes, LFOs, mod-matrix to route them.) If I was getting a DCO synth, this would be the one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members setAI Posted December 8, 2004 Members Share Posted December 8, 2004 and now for something different: a 20 minute dronescape using only a DW 8000 and a Yamaha Reverb unit- gakidou mp3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.