The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
Yamaha Dx7 (240€) or DX7 II FD (350€) wich one should i buy?
Old 8th February 2013
  #91
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by ViewportEight View Post
Brian Eno, Vangelis, Depeche Mode, Kraftwerk and many more significant acts didn't care for the "unique vintage character of the DX7" and they happily switched to the DX7II when it came out. And I know from my own experience that there's nothing to miss about the old one. I wouldn't be able to tell which one was used in the greatest music featuring Yamaha DX, how about you?

While playing my DX7II, I'm trying really hard to find what is missing in the old patches that I made on the DX7 Mk I. Is that little bit of background hiss really what you mean? Does it mean the DX7II sounds naked? I find this statement rather exaggereated.
Totally true and well said.
Old 8th February 2013
  #92
Lives for gear
 
omegaomega's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by audioconsult View Post
who is able to hear differences between old dx modules and new dx7II and later types?
i have a trackload of FM synths (and some that do FM like an Evolution EVS-1 and the Nord Lead 3) (and I still have even some old PC soundcards that use FM!) and I think the difference in sound character between the DX7 and the DX7 II is unquestionable.
No point in arguing about it really. I think anyone who has used or owned both knows that!
The II has more features for sure but it sounds quite different that the original. Which you prefer it is of course a matter of personal taste.
Layering is great and opens new horizons but I love the sound of the original.
If you want layering get the SY77 or the FS1r...
Old 9th February 2013
  #93
Gear Nut
 

I'm a big DX7 fan. I own both the original DX7 mk1 and the DX7S. Both are great synths but what I like about the DX7S/DX7II is the unison function which fattens the sounds and makes them sound beautiful. Unfortunately my DX7S is needing a new internal battery which is strange because the internal battery in my older DX7 mk1 still runs. Brian Eno used the DX7 mk1 alot on the Apollo album.
Old 9th February 2013
  #94
Lives for gear
 
Teknobeam's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by audioconsult View Post
:

using the tf-1 modules of the tx816 for that does such heavy sounds that it kicks the dx7 II and the sy-99 just out of the room..degrades them to little plastic entities..
Well...the TX816 fully loaded was something I always wanted.. But let's break it down to what it really is.. It's a bunch of DX7's or a bunch of TX7's.. i own a TX7,, a DX9, and an 802.. I had a 2FD,, and to say that the original DX reduces the 2FD to plastic is absurd.. They all sound somewhat different,, but the 2FD is far from plastic. you used the term "such heavy sounds" isn't that a tad bit subjective? I mean.. quantify that in some kind of measurable context. One persons "heavy" is another persons noisy...etc.... My DX9 does sounds that none of them can do..And none of them are slouches. including the DX7IIFD... All of them blow away any software offerings.
Old 9th February 2013
  #95
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Teknobeam View Post
Well...the TX816 fully loaded was something I always wanted.. But let's break it down to what it really is.. It's a bunch of DX7's or a bunch of TX7's.. i own a TX7,, a DX9, and an 802.. I had a 2FD,, and to say that the original DX reduces the 2FD to plastic is absurd.. They all sound somewhat different,, but the 2FD is far from plastic. you used the term "such heavy sounds" isn't that a tad bit subjective? I mean.. quantify that in some kind of measurable context. One persons "heavy" is another persons noisy...etc.... My DX9 does sounds that none of them can do..And none of them are slouches. including the DX7IIFD... All of them blow away any software offerings.
i never used more than 3 tf modules for the same sound.. the fx you find as unison in later models.. but.. over 3 symetrical good quality outs summed on a analog console gave a presence that rivaled my moogs or emulator II´s.. and the level of dynamic complexity when you edit the single modules.. 3 complete dx7 do a tad more than one dx voice in unison..

The SY-99 was a little "transparent" against that.. like a warm wind from the behind.. i replaced it with a prophet VS and all my synth voices was equaly strong..
Old 9th February 2013
  #96
Lives for gear
 
Teknobeam's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by audioconsult View Post
over 3 symetrical good quality outs summed on a analog console gave a presence that rivaled my moogs or emulator II´s.. and the level of dynamic complexity when you edit the single modules.. 3 complete dx7 do a tad more than one dx voice in unison..
I can appreciate that. This is where an 816 can excel over an 802 because of polyphony.. But you can still achieve that pof layering and panning of obscure sounds in a mix lens with an 80s .. For me,, layering DX sounds wasn't as powerful as layering them with analog and other sounds. Do you still have an E2?
Old 9th February 2013
  #97
Lives for gear
 
dlmorley's Avatar
For me the holy combination is a DX7 and a Prophet 5. Very nice combo.
Old 9th February 2013
  #98
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Teknobeam View Post
I can appreciate that. This is where an 816 can excel over an 802 because of polyphony.. But you can still achieve that pof layering and panning of obscure sounds in a mix lens with an 80s .. For me,, layering DX sounds wasn't as powerful as layering them with analog and other sounds. Do you still have an E2?
nope.. sold them booth.. but regret it somehow..onla sampler worth the hazzle.. i ve turned into a 100% synth guy.. or lets say 98%
Old 9th February 2013
  #99
Lives for gear
 
xanderbeanz's Avatar
I go away for 2 minutes and this thread has turned into a full on pissing match! At the end of the day, use your instruments, use your DX7 or DX7II, use your SY77 or SY99, heck, even use your FM7 or FM8, and you'll find that with a decent amount of programming and compositional talent you can make something great sounding and worthwhile.
Old 27th February 2019
  #100
Here for the gear
 
Yamahadx7's Avatar
 

The Yamaha DX7S is the greatest synthesizer in the known universe. I prefer it to everything that’s ever been made, I prefer it to a room full of Jupiter 8’s, Oberheim Matrix 12’s, OBXA’s, CS80’s etc

[mod delete]

Last edited by Bender412; 28th February 2019 at 04:06 PM.. Reason: Please see forum rules
Old 28th February 2019
  #101
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Yamahadx7 View Post
The Yamaha DX7S is the greatest synthesizer in the known universe. I prefer it to everything that’s ever been made, I prefer it to a room full of Jupiter 8’s, Oberheim Matrix 12’s, OBXA’s, CS80’s etc

[mod delete]
From what I gather, the Mk1 has the crunchier sound that is tougher for programs like Dexed to emulate.

What surprises me is the prices on these DX7s. Why are they up around 4-600 bucks? There's so many spot-on emulations.

I am waiting for a AWM-less MODX to come out that is fully programmable with knobs.

Last edited by Bender412; 28th February 2019 at 04:08 PM..
Old 28th February 2019
  #102
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Delmarva View Post
From what I gather, the Mk1 has the crunchier sound that is tougher for programs like Dexed to emulate.

What surprises me is the prices on these DX7s. Why are they up around 4-600 bucks? There's so many spot-on emulations.

I am waiting for a AWM-less MODX to come out that is fully programmable with knobs.
I dont understand why people care so much about knobs with FM programming. It wont make it any easier or more intuitive. You know how many parameters there are in a FMX patch? The best FM programming is done via a computer with a mouse, even more so for FMX and AFM

P.s. to continue the pissing match: SY77/99TG77 ftw over DX7. Same keybed, better velocity, more capable. Arguably only the DX7 mk1 has something unique sonically, but the rest of the Dx7s dont stack up againt SYs.

Also SY manager has recently been updated (february 2019!) Killer tool for SY/TG patch management and progamming.
Old 28th February 2019
  #103
Gear Guru
 
Yoozer's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by StupidDisco View Post
I dont understand why people care so much about knobs with FM programming. It wont make it any easier or more intuitive. You know how many parameters there are in a FMX patch? The best FM programming is done via a computer with a mouse, even more so for FMX and AFM.
There has not been an interface where FM programming has ever been done "right", except for perhaps the Nord G2, but that requires you to build your own "right" interface.

Like a mixing desk, every operator is identical. You can serve 6 operators fully with controls for only 2, and use a tab-like interface to group them and control operators simultaneously.

A lot of knobs on software FM synths are wasted on Yamaha's implementation of an enhanced ADSR envelope which has Rate/Level components. Those are not ideal to program with a mouse by any stretch of the imagination.

FM synthesis works best when you consider groups of 2 or 3 operators as individual components of a sound. Virtually no interface even remotely considers this.

FM8's macro sliders were a pretty great idea - so was the XY pad. However, FM8s interface got pretty long in the tooth as well. Its Absynth-based click-and-draw-envelopes are tedious compared to Massive's - lots of work to draw rhythmic patterns if you need those, and Stepper and Performer are so much better at that. Additionally, it would not have cost extra CPU power to be able to modulate the pitch of an operator individually as well.

I just hope NI doesn't pull an Arturia and makes everyone wait for a hi-res GUI for ages.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Yamahadx7 View Post
[mod delete]
Check the thread's last reply date and put your Youtube channel in your signature please.

Last edited by Bender412; 28th February 2019 at 04:10 PM..
Old 28th February 2019
  #104
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Yoozer View Post
There has not been an interface where FM programming has ever been done "right", except for perhaps the Nord G2, but that requires you to build your own "right" interface.

Like a mixing desk, every operator is identical. You can serve 6 operators fully with controls for only 2, and use a tab-like interface to group them and control operators simultaneously.

A lot of knobs on software FM synths are wasted on Yamaha's implementation of an enhanced ADSR envelope which has Rate/Level components. Those are not ideal to program with a mouse by any stretch of the imagination.

FM synthesis works best when you consider groups of 2 or 3 operators as individual components of a sound. Virtually no interface even remotely considers this.

FM8's macro sliders were a pretty great idea - so was the XY pad. However, FM8s interface got pretty long in the tooth as well. Its Absynth-based click-and-draw-envelopes are tedious compared to Massive's - lots of work to draw rhythmic patterns if you need those, and Stepper and Performer are so much better at that. Additionally, it would not have cost extra CPU power to be able to modulate the pitch of an operator individually as well.

I just hope NI doesn't pull an Arturia and makes everyone wait for a hi-res GUI for ages.



Check the thread's last reply date and put your Youtube channel in your signature please.
Thanks. Frankly I still dont see a good argument for a knobby fm programming interface. Good visual presentation / gui : of course, but knobs, no. The key thing here is that FM programming is just much less working towards a sweet spot based on turning knobs and more about having sort of a plan ahead where you want to go. In other words: having an understanding of FM is more important for getting good results with programming than it is for analog. Knobs do nothing to change that, and my suspicion is some people believe it does, giving fm more of a nice on the fly character, also sonically, which it doesnt.
Old 28th February 2019
  #105
Gear Guru
 
Yoozer's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by StupidDisco View Post
In other words: having an understanding of FM is more important for getting good results with programming than it is for analog.
That I agree with.

Quote:
Knobs do nothing to change that, and my suspicion is some people believe it does, giving fm more of a nice on the fly character, also sonically, which it doesnt.
But if you look at the way knobby FM was done, it was either:

- every parameter is equally important and gets its own uninspiring location in a grid (Jellinghaus)
- every parameter is equally important but we only have 8 knobs, so use paging and divide per operator or per category

Both of these approaches are far from optimal, but the flexibility of how FM can be used (with everything in series or everything in parallel as most extreme options and some form of layering as inbetween) should mean that you can go for a 2 or 3 "oscillator" approach. Brightness/inharmonicity is something that is imperfectly caught in an X/Y field, but making it linear is even worse.

To keep the UI as minimal as possible, you can make one primary layer, and have the interface of the secondary share space with the tertiary one. Then algorithm choice is also a matter of "how do you divide the operators over each layer", so choosing between operators becomes a much more intuitive process.

edit: talk is cheap, and a mockup would be preferable, so I'll see what I can do in that regard.
Old 28th February 2019
  #106
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Yoozer View Post
That I agree with.


But if you look at the way knobby FM was done, it was either:

- every parameter is equally important and gets its own uninspiring location in a grid (Jellinghaus)
- every parameter is equally important but we only have 8 knobs, so use paging and divide per operator or per category

Both of these approaches are far from optimal, but the flexibility of how FM can be used (with everything in series or everything in parallel as most extreme options and some form of layering as inbetween) should mean that you can go for a 2 or 3 "oscillator" approach. Brightness/inharmonicity is something that is imperfectly caught in an X/Y field, but making it linear is even worse.

To keep the UI as minimal as possible, you can make one primary layer, and have the interface of the secondary share space with the tertiary one. Then algorithm choice is also a matter of "how do you divide the operators over each layer", so choosing between operators becomes a much more intuitive process.

edit: talk is cheap, and a mockup would be preferable, so I'll see what I can do in that regard.
Hmm, I think your point isnt so much about knobs as it is about fm programming interfaces in general. I mean even what you are proposing is still relatively complicated for the avergage synth user who just wants a more on the
Fly, natural and less cerebral patching / programming experience. I maintain that FM isnt suitable for that and that knobs cant significantly change or improve tjat (which is fine by me). But maybe I am too biased. Anyway I am open for surprises.
Old 28th February 2019
  #107
Deleted 7a792f4
Guest
Quote:
Originally Posted by StupidDisco View Post
Hmm, I think your point isnt so much about knobs as it is about fm programming interfaces in general. I mean even what you are proposing is still relatively complicated for the avergage synth user who just wants a more on the
Fly, natural and less cerebral patching / programming experience. I maintain that FM isnt suitable for that and that knobs cant significantly change or improve tjat (which is fine by me). But maybe I am too biased. Anyway I am open for surprises.
Have you met the 'Super Knob' on the MODX ?

Srsly, I do believe there is a happy medium in knob count and functionality, where there is enough 'on the fly' (excellent descriptive phrase there) editing for someone who wants to quickly shape the sound (and even use those same controls for real-time performance).
- you'd be half way there by just allowing a 'master section' on the tail end of the FM engine that controls a Digital filter with ADSR and 8 waveform selection knobs for each of the 8 operators (on the front end).
📝 Reply

Similar Threads

Thread / Thread Starter Replies / Views Last Post
replies: 395 views: 77118
Avatar for robotunes
robotunes 9th October 2018
replies: 60 views: 11177
Avatar for entresolmusic
entresolmusic 3rd April 2020
replies: 214 views: 10915
Avatar for Arder
Arder 12th January 2020
replies: 990 views: 68587
Avatar for psionic11
psionic11 4th September 2020
Topic:
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearslutz Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…
🖨️ Show Printable Version
✉️ Email this Page
🔍 Search thread
🎙️ View mentioned gear
Forum Jump
Forum Jump