Members pighood Posted March 16, 2007 Members Share Posted March 16, 2007 To all those DX vets out there: what, if anything is missing from the software emulations? Are there any of those "yum-yums" at the bottom of the pan (as Emeril calls them) of a genuine DX that are compromised? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Cloacal-X Posted March 16, 2007 Members Share Posted March 16, 2007 My DX100 has really heavily quantized modulators (or maybe it's just that their destinations have a really limited index resolution), software doesn't capture that at all. Also, 4-ops scale the modulation index differently and can achieve a greater level of modulation than can the 6-ops, this is generally not reflected in software. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members pighood Posted March 16, 2007 Author Members Share Posted March 16, 2007 Once upon a time, I owned a TX-81Z with the planet's QUIETEST output volume. I knew nothing about FM at the time, but the salesman said it didn't sound quite as rich as a 6-op but had the additional waveforms which sort of made up for it. I would have gotten more use out of it if I'd been able to boost its anemic volume. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Tony Scharf Posted March 16, 2007 Members Share Posted March 16, 2007 Once upon a time, I owned a TX-81Z with the planet's QUIETEST output volume. I knew nothing about FM at the time, but the salesman said it didn't sound quite as rich as a 6-op but had the additional waveforms which sort of made up for it. I would have gotten more use out of it if I'd been able to boost its anemic volume. sounds like you had a bad TX81z. the one wasnt the hottest thing in my studio, but it was definitely not quiet... In my opinion, the extra waves did make up for the lack of a third set of ops. I think its wrong to judge an FM syn by the number of ops anyway - you can do *so much* with just two or three... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members pighood Posted March 17, 2007 Author Members Share Posted March 17, 2007 Right now I'm fiddling in the software realm...Reaktor's SY100. All KINDS of delicious alias artifacts & digital yammering....plus morphing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members mildbill Posted March 17, 2007 Members Share Posted March 17, 2007 Editing FM hardware synths was a real pain. That's one of the biggest advantages of FM software for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members pighood Posted March 17, 2007 Author Members Share Posted March 17, 2007 I noticed that...you don't need an advanced degree to tweak FM8 et al. Even I, who knows nothing regarding carriers and modulators theory, can get rich, interesting & rewarding sounds with plenty of luscious crunchy bits. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members pogo97 Posted March 17, 2007 Members Share Posted March 17, 2007 with plenty of luscious crunchy bits. You think with your tongue, don't you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members The Severalist Posted March 17, 2007 Members Share Posted March 17, 2007 Editing FM hardware synths was a real pain. That's one of the biggest advantages of FM software for me. Very true. I'll gladly take software FM or additive over (the existing) hardware FM and additive synths. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members pighood Posted March 17, 2007 Author Members Share Posted March 17, 2007 You think with your tongue, don't you? ...and my tummy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members MFenkner Posted March 17, 2007 Members Share Posted March 17, 2007 I used to own a Yamaha B200.. Has anyone seen one before? It's engine was a TX81Z, but it also had effects, an 8 track sequencer, and internal speakers which sounded surprisingly good. I got a lot of good use out of that synth. Mark Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members pighood Posted March 17, 2007 Author Members Share Posted March 17, 2007 NOSTALGIA ALERT... I remember the B200 from the late '80's... Even then it looked like an alien blobbo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Paolo Di Nicolantonio Posted March 17, 2007 Members Share Posted March 17, 2007 I sold the DX7 after getting FM7. I did a side to side comparison loading patches on both - the sound was 99% there. Plus, you get marvelous filters to play with, on the software versions. HOwever, I might buy another "real" DX7 (and D-50, and M1) for nostalgia and gearsluttiness reasons. Maybe the rack versions, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members ElectricPuppy Posted March 17, 2007 Members Share Posted March 17, 2007 Skip the rack DX7 (TX816). Noisy, noisy, noisy, and a space heater to boot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members pighood Posted March 17, 2007 Author Members Share Posted March 17, 2007 The DX-7IIFD is absolutely stunning to look at...in the top 10 most beautiful synths ever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Markyboard Posted March 17, 2007 Members Share Posted March 17, 2007 I spent a few days mapping controllers to FM-7 from my recently purchased Novation Remote 25SL. This is very cool being able to tweak most fm parameters from knobs. Kind of disappointed with FM-8 in this regard (used the demo). Hope they fix the missing on/off operators and such. I've got 2 FS1Rs on the shelf and had a DX7, DX7IIFD and TX802. Don't miss the hardware at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members ew_ Posted March 17, 2007 Members Share Posted March 17, 2007 Right now I'm fiddling in the software realm...Reaktor's SY100. All KINDS of delicious alias artifacts & digital yammering....plus morphing. Yeah, Jonathan did a nice job on that one. ew Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Awake77 Posted March 17, 2007 Members Share Posted March 17, 2007 I used to own a Yamaha B200.. Has anyone seen one before? It's engine was a TX81Z, but it also had effects, an 8 track sequencer, and internal speakers which sounded surprisingly good. I got a lot of good use out of that synth. Mark Oh I want that!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members ew_ Posted March 17, 2007 Members Share Posted March 17, 2007 I used to own a Yamaha B200.. Has anyone seen one before? It's engine was a TX81Z, but it also had effects, an 8 track sequencer, and internal speakers which sounded surprisingly good. I got a lot of good use out of that synth. Mark I had a desktop module with the same engine (but no speakers); it was called the TQ5 or something like that. The LCD display also worked as a clock if I remember... ew Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Don Solaris Posted March 17, 2007 Members Share Posted March 17, 2007 I used to own a Yamaha B200.. Has anyone seen one before? It is a Yamaha YS-200 with speakers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Don Solaris Posted March 17, 2007 Members Share Posted March 17, 2007 To all those DX vets out there: what, if anything is missing from the software emulations? Haha... Piggaah. Finally you ask a question. Ok. Lest see first what i have from FM toys (images included!!!): Yamaha SY-77 holds two DX-7's inside + another synth. When compared to FM 7, they are pretty close, sometimes identical. Of course, FM 7 can't do other stuff SY-77 can, that's why i'm not selling it (i recently installed new backlight and the infamous display is far better now). Yamaha TG-33 is a 2 OP synth. Again FM 7 in 2 op mode comes close. BTW as a complete synth (not just FM) TG-33 is one of my favorite, but that's another story. Yamaha YS-200. 4 OP synth. This thing is a sick {censored}! FM 7 just can't emulate this thing right. Even when i transmit patches to FM 7, and try to "align" settings, they sound different. This synth is compatible with TX-81Z. I love its design and that green backlight LCD (aaaaaah!). BTW I'm a big fan of Solid bass and Lately Bass. It can make them, and it offers real time control (an "easy edit" function) that lets you morph this bass into something totally sick using few different functions. Unfortunately you can't edit YS-200 patches from the panel - you need an editor. Since there is no PC editor, i use prehistoric editor from Atari (aaack!). I run it in the Atari Emulator on a PC. In short: about 70% of patches sound identical in FM-7, but about 30% of them sound different and not good as in YS-200. Yamaha SY-35 a 2OP FM synth + vectors. I actually just use it as a master controller. It has that Joystick - the main tool to control vectors of TG-33 and Wavestation A/D. Its FM section is as clean as TG-33, doesn't have that "dirt" the YS-200 has. Now, punk!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members syncretism Posted March 17, 2007 Members Share Posted March 17, 2007 Right now I'm fiddling in the software realm...Reaktor's SY100. All KINDS of delicious alias artifacts & digital yammering....plus morphing. I know the author well. He'll be happy to see your comments! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members brzilian Posted March 17, 2007 Members Share Posted March 17, 2007 I used to own a Yamaha B200.. Has anyone seen one before? It's engine was a TX81Z, but it also had effects, an 8 track sequencer, and internal speakers which sounded surprisingly good. I got a lot of good use out of that synth. Mark It is the exact same thing as the YS200, but with speakers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members brzilian Posted March 17, 2007 Members Share Posted March 17, 2007 Yamaha YS-200. 4 OP synth. This thing is a sick {censored}! FM 7 just can't emulate this thing right. Even when i transmit patches to FM 7, and try to "align" settings, they sound different. This synth is compatible with TX-81Z. I love its design and that green backlight LCD (aaaaaah!). BTW I'm a big fan of Solid bass and Lately Bass. It can make them, and it offers real time control (an "easy edit" function) that lets you morph this bass into something totally sick using few different functions. Unfortunately you can't edit YS-200 patches from the panel - you need an editor. Since there is no PC editor, i use prehistoric editor from Atari (aaack!). I run it in the Atari Emulator on a PC. In short: about 70% of patches sound identical in FM-7, but about 30% of them sound different and not good as in YS-200. I know exactly what you mean. I found the factory banks for the DS55 I owned back in the 90s (it was the YS200/100's little brother) and quite a few patches just didn't sound right even after tweaking around in FM7. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members pighood Posted March 17, 2007 Author Members Share Posted March 17, 2007 Solaris, you are TRULY demonitric, and I'm proud to be known as one of your goons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.