Yamaha TX-802 / DX-7II / SY-77 Opinions?

[CoolColJ]

Originally Posted by Pro5

BTW I can hear straight away it's not the aliasing and 12 bit output that is the main difference in your patch comparison! it's the lack of EG/OP level coming through - that was probably due to not tweaking the rate scaling or offsets in the OP output levels (after the breakpoints) or it could be the velocity settings were too high (on the + side) which makes a key strike softer not just in volume but int modulator's effect on the carrier. If I converted that patch myself I could have it sound pretty much the same but withoutthe noise/bad aliasing (or less) the 'cutting' part of it isn't about the outputs. Have learned that myself with much trial and error.

I will have a go an my own SY solid bass again when I get chance. I hear a lot of (to me undesirable) noise and 'too much' aliasing, the desirable part of your DX sound is all about the extra edge coming through from the EGs/OP levels. Just needed tweaking to get it a lot closer. Having said this - it's far easier on DX7 mk2s to convert as they are much cleaner sounding (like the 77). I'm really not a fan of the early FM noise (had a TX81z and DX100 with plenty of that, it starts to annoy me when i require that noise to not be there - fine if you are always throwing bass into a full/noisy mix but sometimes you need things a bit cleaner).

Even if the patches are exactly the same, the Earlier DX/TX have a sheen to the sound which makes it poke out more, more 3D. Harmonic distortion coming from the convertors/analog stages etc. Perfection isn't always ideal...

I basically created the patches using the exact parameters from the original patch and converted them using a formula provided by someone else, since a lot of the parameters from the TX81Z don't have a 1:1 relationship with the DX7 and TG77 engines. I have a post I made somewhere detailing this, along with the patches themselves

TG77 just doesn't have that tone and bite in the sound, and I did fiddle with it a lot. It's just smoother and more refined.

[wildpaws]

Having used an SY77 since they came out in '89 (and an SY99 also for the last several years), I can safely say that I have never heard a DX7 sound that I could not duplicate on the SY77/99. When I bought my SY77, I already had a DX7IIFD, another DX7IIFD w/E!, a TX802, two TX81Zs and an assorment of other gear. I learned FM programming on 4op Yamaha gear in the mid '80s and then move to 6op, I taught myself how to convert DX7 patches manually to move patches over to my SY77 right after I bought it. Anyone that cannot recreate a DX7 sound on an SY77/99 simply has not learned all of the in and outs of doing so or is simply not taking enough time to perfect the conversion. I only kept one of my DX7IIFDs for nostalgia reasons, the rest of my 6op FM gear was quickly sold after being made redundant by my SY77. That said, we all have to make decisions about what works for our wants/needs, if someone would rather use a TX802 or a DX7IID than learn how to convert patches correctly to an SY77/99, then that's what they need to do. Myself, I can do all of my DX needs on the SY and the SY does so much more than the DX7 ever could hope to do. Go listen to some of the patches that the poster Himilaya created for the SY77 (and later updated for the SY99), there are some really awesome patches in his collection of sound banks. And for those of you that decide to go for an SY77/99, do drop in over at yamahaforumsUK where they have one of the most active SY forums on the net. So choose whichever synth you prefer, whatever you decide is right for you, but I'll stick with my SY77/99 because I know what they are capable of.
Clyde

[Pro5]

Originally Posted by CoolColJ

Even if the patches are exactly the same, the Earlier DX/TX have a sheen to the sound which makes it poke out more, more 3D. Harmonic distortion coming from the convertors/analog stages etc. Perfection isn't always ideal...

I basically created the patches using the exact parameters from the original patch and converted them using a formula provided by someone else, since a lot of the parameters from the TX81Z don't have a 1:1 relationship with the DX7 and TG77 engines. I have a post I made somewhere detailing this, along with the patches themselves

TG77 just doesn't have that tone and bite in the sound, and I did fiddle with it a lot. It's just smoother and more refined.

well for a start you can ditch that scaling chart further back - I tried that and it was way off.

Yes agreed the MK1 and EARLY fm synths have more noise, aliasing and that may be seen as 'sheen' or 'bite' by some (but not me), but in your bass example that is not why they sound THAT different. They simply are not the same sound underneath the noise/aliasing. Again it's the patch not converted properly. You can add harmonics, bite, noise, distortion (via outboard/effects/mixing) to the same timbre in later FM synths to get that sound (if for some reason you want it) but you can't so easily, if at all, remove it when you do not want it on your recording. I definitely prefer the MK2 DX7 to the Mk1 for that reason. The same 'great sounds' but without all that mess. It's not perfection, nor is the SY, they have some aliasing, and the usual hardware output noise but they are within a decent, professional tolerance, it doesn't ruin the sounds for a lot of types of music - maybe for a certain era of DX/FM style tunes you prefer the early fm dirt.

The thread is about the DX7 Mk2 vs SY77 and opinions and if one can do the other - and yes the '77 CAN do the Mk2 sounds, with very similar levels of noise, a touch less aliasing. I did say the Mk1 was different, though not better in my view. My examples kinda speak for themselves when it comes to those who say they can't reproduce the basic sound from the mk2 to the 77 - you can. The mk1 issue is slightly off topic I guess. Your converted patch could have been a lot closer, identical in all but noise, aliasing and output bit quality but your conversion is off, the timbre is different. So doesn't make for a fair comparison of which is to be prefered.

Back to mk2 v '77 - for the sounds the DX7 can make, neither is prefered (on sound) except in unison poly mode where the '77 can have more poly - or 4 layers in mono mode - which is quite massive. I'll post a 4 layer mono lead sound from '77 when i get chance - totally unable to do that on a Mk1 DX7!

And there is definitely a bias towards DX7 because of how it 'feels', looks, it's logo, it's name, it's place in synth history, it's simpler layout (no workstation), I get all of that and I like DX7s! If I get the sound identical (inc output noise - as I have pretty much with my two synths) it then comes down to psychological factors, I played the sy patch via the DX earlier (MIDI) and even knowing what I was doing it already felt more 'DX like' - the SY sound (being played via the DX7's keyboard) was identical, but... I was "playing" a DX7, which to a lot of us 80s kids is quite a nice feeling SY77 on the other hand, even with the aftermarket bright blue screen, funky 3 wheels and great build quality, does look more anoymous, it looks more powerful as it's large and expansive but it also looks less vintage, less fun - this plays a part - all I care about here is the sound, and the stuff the '77 does that the DX7 can't is the main reason I have any FM synth at all. If the '77 had not been invented though, I'd be more than happy with a DX7 S/MK2, and likewise if the MK2 hadn't been made I'd be happy enough with the Mk1 but, probably annoyed with it's noise now and then (and it's limitations).

Tomorrow I need to get back to the Polysix and JX-3P, been immersed in digital for too long and am starting to think in numbers! 8-)

[CoolColJ]

The 2nd clip I posted is about as close as the TG77 will get to the Solid bass sound. The first one sounds different because of the different envelope setting. Lately bass is pretty similar just more velocity sensitive, hence why I bundled both together into that 2nd sound clip

The TX816 can stack with the best of them and still retain 16 note poly
My unit is half of one, just 4 modules

[projectwoofer]

They certainly sound close enough.

Some points though: these are only 3 sounds, no one knows whether EVERY sound on the DX is achievable on the SY or not. Even if it is, not many ppl will have the time and patience to match the sounds by ear in such a lengthy process. The DX line is a classic and there's a huge library of sounds around, many ppl will want to immediately use them and this cannot be done with SY.

It's true the SY has some more capabilities such as more algorithms and more waveforms for its operators but speaking for myself now, I chose another synth to get access to some of these extra features: Casio VZ-10M. It's not the same as the SY of course but it can do all these things the DX7II can't and it's a different (but similar) approach to FM from another manufacturer which is the interesting part for me. It has 8 operators with flexible interconnections and 8 waveforms to choose from. And it looks like a proper vintage digital!

The VZ-10M and the TX802 are a very powerful combo which gives me everything I need FM-wise!

[wildpaws]

Originally Posted by projectwoofer

They certainly sound close enough.

Some points though: these are only 3 sounds, no one knows whether EVERY sound on the DX is achievable on the SY or not. Even if it is, not many ppl will have the time and patience to match the sounds by ear in such a lengthy process. The DX line is a classic and there's a huge library of sounds around, many ppl will want to immediately use them and this cannot be done with SY.

It's true the SY has some more capabilities such as more algorithms and more waveforms for its operators but speaking for myself now, I chose another synth to get access to some of these extra features: Casio VZ-10M. It's not the same as the SY of course but it can do all these things the DX7II can't and it's a different (but similar) approach to FM from another manufacturer which is the interesting part for me. It has 8 operators with flexible interconnections and 8 waveforms to choose from. And it looks like a proper vintage digital!

The VZ-10M and the TX802 are a very powerful combo which gives me everything I need FM-wise!

Regarding every sound being able to be done on the SY, as I said in my earlier post, in my 23 years of using the SY77 I have not heard a DX7 sound that I could not duplicate. Regarding the time to tweak the sounds to sound identical, it is like everything else in synth programming, harder to do and takes more time when you first try it, the more you do it the easier and quicker the process is. I suppose if someone is a "preset kind of guy" and just wants to load it up and go, then they might not want to take the time to get an SY77 to duplicate a DX7 patch, but then that is their loss as the SY77/99 is capable of so much more. And I'll say it again, if someone wants to take the DX7 route, then that is what they should do, I choose not to as I can have my cake and eat it too with the SY77/99.
Clyde

[Pro5]

I don't get why one synth, any synth is being said to be 'not as good' just because it doesn't come with sounds that instantly resemble another older synth? When the DX7 came out (presets not withstanding) did people dismiss it because it didn't sound instantly like - whatever custom sound they imagined? no, somebody had to program that DX7 and programming the SY77 to replicate a DX7 is just as easy if not easier than programming a DX7 to 'sound like' whatever is in your head! Both synths need programming, and the '77 isn't hard to program, easier in fact than the DX7 itself if you are limiting yourself to simpler FM sounds (not taking the extra features into account).



They are to all intents and purposes the SAME synth. Why are the DX7 original patches 'the holy grail' in these FM talks anyway? Aside from a handful of basses and an electric piano that the world has heard 6 million times, the other interesting sounds are custom and from my time with DX7s there's not a lot of great custom patches, a lot of patches but not a lot of great ones out there - most sound really kinda dated. This is why learning to program the DX (or SY) is a must.

As for available patches, man there are hundreds of 'disks' of SY77 patches out there for free. And believe me they are not filled with 'slight variations' on the same bass, piano, string and harmonica sound Some of the SY patches are close to analog emulations, some are like nothing I've heard before from any synth.

So again, if the SY CAN do a DX7 MK2 convincingly (which it can) and yet does all the extra stuff besides, and can have animated filters, segment loop points, different waveforms (not just sine, a feature often touted for the otherwise far inferior to DX7, DX11), RCM if you want it (I rarely use this), larger/easier screen, less (bad) noise, usually cheaper to buy (because misunderstood and not got the classic name), easier to program as it has not just the slider and up/down buttons like the DX72 but also the wheel and the direct input number keypad and function buttons under the screen... well I think it's burying heads in sand time to say a MKII DX7 is the obvious choice? It's just letting really good features and quality go for the sake of a logo, or a psychological preference, nothing to do with the sound at all. The sound IS there. And the other 75% of sounds the SY does easily, I've never heard on a DX (and I'm not talking about the AWM/PCM side).

I could spend a few more days converting any DX7 Mk2 Patch you care to throw at me (in single voice mode) and get it between 99%-100% there, it's pure science not magic. It's like computer programming (which I also do) when you write a function to do something, when it's done right the result will always be as expected (unless you have a bug) the bugs in this case come from overlooked settings, or no direct comparison tweaking with both synths in front of you.

The point of saying SY can do DXII exactly, or close enough to not matter, isn't because I feel there's a whole world of great sounds out there for the DX7! It was to prove to myself and show others that said it's impossible, personally now I have my handful of sounds off the DX7 that I like any future programming time spent on the SY will be programming the SY to it's full capabilities not restricting it to the DXs capabilities. All while knowing it can sound just as clangy, edgy, bassy, shrill and harsh as a DX7 Mk2.

And once more, vs the MK1 - I've said it's different due to the insane amount of artifacts chucked in with the sound on those dirty outputs. And again I say I have no desire for that sound esp as it also removes much of what I like about FM (no unison poly mode as on the DX7S, no layers as on the II-D/F-D and SY77). To me the mk1 DX7 is the worst of all words when comparing DX7 and SY77 - I don't even like it's buttons, it's a pig to program vs even a MK2, and I really do not care for that noise or excess aliasing. I'd use a DX100 or TX81z for that while the DX7 seems almost hampered by all that grot. I am certain Yamaha never intended to provide all that noise along with their "flagship" synthesizer of the time, hence the revisions. I know noise can be welcome, the D-50 sounds warm because it's old tech and hardly silent but to me and many others the MK1 just has too much noise (when a key is pressed not talking about it idle) which is fine for many styles of music but for many other styles it prevents using it in a subtle/classy way. That is why I'm not comparing to mk1 - you may as well compare SY to DX100 or something, but the MK2 and SY are basically the same sound engine just with different parameter ranges/scales on certain functions.

Ok have said enough on this My opinion has been given - and then some! Anyone who wants to believe the SY can not sound almost exactly like a MK2 DX7 is blind (Or deaf), you can't load up stock presets and compare, and you can't haphazardly 'convert' them and compare. That is no bad reflection on the SY. It just does it's own thing aswell as the DX sound. And there is no magic, no mojo in the DX7IIs outputs that add anything over the SY77s output. There are minimal differences that do not alter a sound in any meaningful musical manner! DX7 Mk2 and SY77 are closer in OUTPUT sound on the same patch than DX7mk2 vs Mk1 is!!

As for TX816? Am really only comparing DX7/SY77 here. And while it can layer and then some, it's still missing all the great bits of the '77.

Enjoy your FM!

[bluegreengold]

I'm pretty much in agreement with Pro5's voluminous sy77 posting.

I'd like to add though, that the multitimbral multi output models (tx816 and tx802) offer something in practical use that gives them advantages over the keyboards: 8 FM parts sent into a mixer for instant adjustment of level, eq fx, and panning, is incredibly useful for building deluxe fm patches.

If it was only about programming the patch -- I'd be content with just an sy77, but because FM layers so well, I wouldn't be happy without either a tx802 or tx816. Tg77 has the outputs too, but the way it does multi timbrality is not as immediate.

[Shy]

Originally Posted by CoolColJ

You can change feedback paths, but not create your own from scratch, even the guy behind SY Manager admitted that

See this on the left - algo built from scratch. Using the free algo, which on the TG77 will say on the display, can only be used via midi

This news is important enough to reply to this thread: SY Manager 3 now also has free-form algorithm editing for SY77, TG77 and SY99. Finally people can get get this feature in an available editor for Windows and not just SoundDiver which was discontinued ages ago or Synthworks SY77 (for Atari ST ).

[dionysiananarchy]

i am really getting into fm synths recently, my monomachine is great,

but the fb01 sounds really good, much heavier sound then the mm,

a music store near my place has the TX81Z and TX802, 150 each, i am going to try and get at least one, the 81z probably, i like the features,

[Yoozer]

For 150 the 802 is a better deal, 81Zs should do 100 at the very most.

[binman_uk]

Originally Posted by dionysiananarchy

i am really getting into fm synths recently, my monomachine is great,

but the fb01 sounds really good, much heavier sound then the mm,

a music store near my place has the TX81Z and TX802, 150 each, i am going to try and get at least one, the 81z probably, i like the features,

If they're the same price, go for the TX802. It's more flexible/powerful.

I managed to pick up a TX81Z for £49 ($75) which was a steal considering they go for 3 times that much these days.. the prices have gone up a lot recently.

[xanderbeanz]

I specifically bought the mk1 for it's noisy outputs and grungy converters, plus I really don't like the aesthetics of the two, it looks less friendly, and less retro. I guess it takes all sorts to make a world

[NoVi]

I have a TX802 and it's a wonderful machine, soundwise. But other than exporting midi banks (from my Mac) with patches I have no editor for it. And that's really a turn off, considering how easy it is these days to edit synth parameters (and it's something you definitely don't want to do through the TX802 menu buttons).

[dlmorley]

Originally Posted by dionysiananarchy

i am really getting into fm synths recently, my monomachine is great,

but the fb01 sounds really good, much heavier sound then the mm,

a music store near my place has the TX81Z and TX802, 150 each, i am going to try and get at least one, the 81z probably, i like the features,

The 81Z is neat and has a couple of classic presets But the 802 is way better

[percussion boy]

I own an 802 (which doesn't get used much nowadays) and used to own an 81z.

Re the recent posts about choosing between them for the same price:

- Trust your ears. You may find that the 81z is a little rougher and ruder, while the 802 is somewhat cleaner (which was much pricier when they were both new). Definitely go with the "flavor" you like, if you notice a difference, because you can't program around a difference in audio output hardware.

- I always found the 81z an absolute bitch to program, although other people have made great sounds on it. The 802 has certain features the 81z just doesn't, like a pitch envelope -- so on the 81z you have to cheat around what the machine won't do. For pads and other common sounds, probably won't matter.

- It may be easier to stumble on a good sound, especially a good aggressive sound, on the 81z, since you have a choice of waveforms and only 4 operators to use them with (vs. 6 operators of sine waves only on the 802, so that you have to use multiple operators to make sawtooth waves and such).

Hope this helps. Either machine is a step up from the FB.

[zxcvbnm]

Originally Posted by acreil

There's going to be some translation of parameters involved since there's not an exact correspondence between the DX7 and TG77 parameters. This might somewhat undermine the value of a direct comparison. As with FM8's patch conversions, you'll be hearing translation errors as well as a difference in sound quality.

Supposedly the SY99 has improved converters.
Do you know anything about the hardware (FM chipset, effects...)?

The TG77 is the cleanest sounding due to the vast number of separate DAC's
used, the more voices you spread out onto each DAC (multi timb mode)
the more dynamics and less of noise for those voices, like a LA highway with one or 10 lanes!

TG77 and SY77 i recall used SPX90II effects chip while SY99 used
the SPX900 a vast improvement..

TG/SY is a new generation of FM chips compared to previous DX's
and there is an awful lot of OPL,YM chips made for different product
segments.

Personally i love the CS70M!

Some say it sounds OLD! Nutting sounds old, only people
gets grumpy ,bored and old!

[acreil]

Originally Posted by zxcvbnm

TG77 and SY77 i recall used SPX90II effects chip while SY99 used
the SPX900 a vast improvement..

The TG77's effect processor chips (YM3413, YM3415B, 2 each) are a later generation than the SPX90 line (YM3804, YM3807). If anything, the algorithms in the TG77 are a good deal worse than the SPX90. I like the symphonic effect, the but the reverb really sucks.

[dionysiananarchy]

how does the Yamaha FS1R sound in comparison to the older fm synths

[audioconsult]

Originally Posted by depulse

+1 for the TG77, adding resonant filters to the DX gives so many more options for making pads, strings, analog-digital hybrid sounds, etc.

either one goes for the original od dx/tx7 modules.. in ideal in form of a tx816


or for the last gen tg-77 to sy-99 ..

all the others inbetween are low end poo

ok.. not serious.. allways liked the dx100 for some reasons that was more sexy than other cheapo yamahas.

[audioconsult]

Originally Posted by dionysiananarchy

how does the Yamaha FS1R sound in comparison to the older fm synths

good question.. because it was tiny, white and late nobody really took it serious as the final fm synth. Except some goa freaks whose taste in sound quality can be as much trusted as mc donalds taste in food quality... but..

just because them liked the presets dont says that there is not a lot more under the hood of this synth.

maybe it is better than it looks???

[xanderbeanz]

It's incredible, 8operators to the old stuff's 6, dormant synthesis, lots of modulation options, and the same clean 16bit sound of the later DXs.

[dlmorley]

The FVX1 is also 8 operator and really sounds lovely. 4 parts and each with 8 voices plus some nice effects. Minimal editing from the front panel, but just layering and a small amount of editing makes it interesting. Hard to find though.

[projectwoofer]

Originally Posted by xanderbeanz

It's incredible, 8operators to the old stuff's 6, dormant synthesis, lots of modulation options, and the same clean 16bit sound of the later DXs.

Totally different sound compared to DX7II/TX802...

[bluegreengold]

A little time saver for anybody with a TX802 and a Kenton Control Freak:

bluegreengold.net/tx802_controlfreak.zip

[sitter]

need active users of dx7 on this forum, I have a few questions about this synht.
pm please

[xanderbeanz]

I got a SY77 the other day, Holy F****** S***! It's the best synth i've ever played, period. It does the DX7 pretty well, but that's not the main reason i got it (I have a Mk1 DX7 I absolutely ADORE for the retro 12bit sound) it's just incredible at so many things.

It does really grungy bass well, that's due to the 3 feedback oscillators and it's very digital, nasty, distortion effect. It does warm analogue pads incredibly well, because you can have up to 4 elements (FM or PCM) and layer up something massive. By using the built in PCM synth waves, or by modulating the FM operators in the right way, you can get all your classic synth waves and these turn it into a powerful VA workhorse.

When you get into layering all these possibilities up, like, 2AFM 2AWM patches, with 6 envelopes for each element, 2 filters per element, a pitch env which can affect any or all of the elements you want, and then add some subtle chorus/reverb/delay (which have a very specific character and i actually like) you get MONSTROUS sounds. I mean MONSTROUS. I made this crazy orchestral brass meets wavestation lush pad that i simply adore.

I'll be doing some patch demos later this month, I think this thing is going to be able to eat a D50 or an M1 alive for breakfast, i even found some carbon copy clones of those 2 synth's famous patches on the internet (plus some wavestation-ish stuff) so I can tell this synth is two things, deep (when i loaded up sound diver's editing window for the SY, i was actually scared, it looked so complex), and incredibly flexible, ie, capable of sounding like anything you want.

Other notable patches i made include, "That DX1 sound from money for nothing" and a pretty damned realistic marcato string ensemble.

Buy one Ooh, and it has a cute floppy drive.

[teamsterjim]

DX/TX sounds are unique, but I grew weary of them once I got the FS1R.
To me this was the final Yamaha product that matured for years into the perfect FM synth.
I even brok down upon better judgement and got the FM7, hated it, upgrade it to FM8 as my firend swore it sounded better , so I upgrade, he was right, but it still is a WIndows synths any way you look at it.
You can get lots with FM synths from Yamaha, But you really needed the TX816 to get those immense Bells and Chaka Khan FM EPianos, or the skinny misleading looking FS1R.
Ome thing is certain though, this form of synthesis should be in every perfomrer/composers arsenal.

[mallarme]

No talk here at all of the TG33. How does it compare to the SY77/99? Can it read TG77 sounds?

[dlmorley]

The TG33 is very different. No reading of any TG77 patches.
I never liked it when I had one. Not great sounding.