FM8 has two velocity options "Standard" and "DX7". It should be set to "DX7" for comparison, to get authentic velocity levels, especially with the E-Piano. I find that FM8 compares more equally to the DX7II patches, and the major difference here is 12-bit, vs. 16 bit between the old and new DX. I think FM8 kills The DX7II with the same patches and the ability to render 24/96, (64 note polyphony, effects, multiple voice layers)) there is virtually no grit or aliasing, and of course, no line level noise, as on the DX7 and II.
"The Song Called DX7" is what you tell them to listen when they ask you what does DX7 sounds like. If DX7 could speak for itself, it would present itself to people by playing that song. Wonderful.
there are so many options for coloring VSTs these days with various preamp, distortion, and even digital sampler output stages. there is nothing inherently inferior about FM8, it just needs some treatment to sound as vibrant and interesting as a hardware synth.
I know! But the DX7 is already colored, so you don't need to put in the time. The DX7 sounds full and "right" to me, FM8 don't. Dexed VST and Korg Opsix (native and hardware) sound right to me as well, so it's not a software vs. hardware or analog vs. digital kind of thing.
As far as i can remember, the differences are not only due to the analog-side but actually also to the digital side. From the service manual, they say the 6 operators are processed in 20.368032 usec (Japanese like to be accurate hehe), which would correspond to 49096.5 Hz, and it seems FM8 didn't try to respect this. This has implications in the harmonic components fold-over (well, aliasing), which plays a big role in the FM process (but totally hated in the subtractive synthesis world). So I'm not surprised if you could hear real differences in the last test that seems to expose a lot of aliasing.
Both good for different reasons. The DX7 is a little darker and more mellow. I think it would handle effects better. Nice to have an analog out to go through guitar pedals. The FM8 is more clear and up front. Depends on what sound you're trying to make.
I totally agree! Dexed is much more similar to the original DX7 and could easily replace the real deal. Watch my comparison between Dexed and the DX7 here: ua-cam.com/video/wbMzttE-jys/v-deo.html
In the song “Beat It” (1983), the Yamaha DX7 ROM-2B patch “T.Bl.-Expa.” and Yamaha GS1 patch “T.Bl.-Expa.” and Yamaha GS2 patch “T.Bl.-Expa.” were heard.
GORDOTRONIC Yes! The DX7 is (was) really a high end instrument. Velocity, aftertouch and 16 voices polyphony was a big deal in 1983. I bought my DX7 for about 150 dollars, by the way. A lot of synth for the money.
GORDOTRONIC The only difference is passing through a DA convertor. Which you can trivially do with the FM8 too. It's not like it's some analog sound engine on the DX7 that FM8 lacks...
***** if you look down the reviews here, many of us notice that the sound of the real DX7 is more appealing... Yes, plug ins are convenient, and interesting technology, but for my ears... real instruments usually sound more alive and exciting. This is what I hear in the comparison in this video.
If DX7 goes through a pre-amp, there is some added coloration just from that. A good comparison would be to pass the FM7/FM8 through that same preamp and compare that. Otherwise you might be hearing the preamp factor, which is good for most sounds.
1984... bought at Sam Ash on 48th street.... had the " grey matter installed..and the DX7 became a completely different animal! still use it to access voices on my D-110, U-110, and the SC-55...live on stage! Horns. strings. choir. you name it! ;)
With such striking differences, in the electric piano patch and forward it's odd to leave out how the DX7 was recorded, what the chain was, volumes used and so on. Was the Fm8 in high quality mode, analog up or down? Bottom line, was this a fair comparison?
M Stromkraft And was the keyboard playing the FM8 plugin set to 100 velocity max rather than MIDI standard 127 to match the DX7's crippled 100 max?Were levels matched? What gear was the DX7 routed through?Comparisons with Dexed could be interesting too.
M Stromkraft The FM8 was in high quality mode and the analog slider was set to 0. The DX7 was recorded completely dry into my Apogee Duet 2. In the intro I used the exact same send effects (delay and reverb) on the FM8 and DX7. The reason I made this video was to see if they sounded the same "out of the box", so I did not tweak the FM8 to make it more similar to the DX7.
wd25a I matched the levels in Ableton by using the velocity tool. In that way I only lost the bottom 27 velocity levels on the FM8, and I very rarely play that soft. I used some time matching the levels, but I wasn't too scientific about it. I am not patient enough to be really scientific, and frankly I think it would be a waste of time to put so much time into this kind of video. I tried Dexed, and it's certainly much closer to the real DX7, but some presets sound very different on that as well.
Eivind Engedal , thanks. I suppose the analog control could have been up as that "introduces random variations between voices" though I doubt that would have made any significant difference in this case. Personally I've started using Z3TA+ 2 also for FM-type of sounds and while my objective isn't to sound like the FM7 patches I must say it sounds noticeable good for both FM and other types of sounds.
Great song, production and cool comparison. My only question is - why do all the FM8 patches sound like there is a verrrry fast vibrato (a subtle amount) on every patch?
Thanks for the vid, this was very interesting! The patches you use are super famous, and I would imagine Native Instruments put in some extra effort to get those in particular to sound as authentic as possible. What would be interesting is if you could compare some of the more obscure factory patches to see how closely they are emulated. Although I agree the DX7 sounds better, I think most of the differences that are heard in isolation disappear in the mix (except for the tubular bells which sound annoyingly off). So overall I would still say that this is a damn good emulation considering it's a pretty complex synth to emulate. Hopefully they will improve upon it further.
Most of the patches in the intro song are actually custom patches. Here I think the pad sound along with the bass sound sound pretty much the same. It's the treble heavy patches that sound very different; this comes down to the fact that the DX7 mk1 can't produce the higher frequencies. The DX7 mkII will probably sound brighter and maybe more like the FM8 due to more modern converters. I would like to see an upgraded FM8, too. Softsynths have come very far in regards to sound quality since 2006, and a new take on a full-fledged FM softsynth would be very interesting.
Compare it to dexed 0.9.4 Best start with alg 32, OP6 only and play with the feedback. Then alg5 and OP5 & OP6 only and have a play. I put a good LP filter on the end of dexed set to ~14 -15k as I'm not sure they guys have emulated the Sallen-Key DAC noise reduction filter in the DX7. I'm very hard pressed to tell the difference even with an analyser.
digital synths have their own analog sound because they use "digital to analog" converters that at the time were of varying qualities... now, I don't know if you can do this, but if the DX7 had some sort of digital output, and you ran that into an interface to receive the digital signal, that would bypass the converters and the "color" or quality they are imparting
Yes! (I think I covered this earlier, but anyways.) In the same way as every sound card has digital to analog conversion, including your phone. The converter in the DX7 mk1 is so basic that it alters the sound (read: warmer) and creates artifacts (read: weird noise). All of this were gone in the mk2, because it had a superior converter (read: clean, sterile). I chose the mk1 because of this. I'll get to the point: If there was a way to get the digital audio signal out of the DX7 mk1, it would probably sound like the mk2. And the mk2 would probably sound more like the mk1 when run through a filter and a bit-reduction effect (also covered).
You can start here: homepages.abdn.ac.uk/mth192/pages/html/dx7.html. I use Dexed to transfer the sounds now, but you can also use www.midiox.com/ or www.snoize.com/SysExLibrarian/. The good thing is that they are all free.
for a digital recreation, it's not that bad. i still gotta take a look at your new video. DX7 vs Dexed, but that video somehow refuses to play. no idea why.
Thank you! I really don't have any clue how the video got so many views, and I have been trying to find out without getting anywhere. I even made another DX7-video, but that's not nearly as popular. I personally like everything with the new video better, but I guess it's a taste thing.
its the song in the beginning. I've listened to it, at least 8 times. the video is also very informative, and has pretty much sold me on getting a dx7. but the song is so uplifting...pure...energizing. it makes everybody feel good about life for the 1:50 min it plays. you just nailed it...that elusive thing that we songwriters try so hard to capture. like magic in a bottle. you nailed it. so when people come here to just check out a dx7 vid, they find themselves falling in love with the song, and they can't believe that something so pure and authentic sounding can come out of this device. and it happens progressively. its one of those songs, the more you listen to it the more you like it. i actually tried to contact you via soundcloud to get you permission to write to it.
You sure can! Watch my new video comparing the DX7 with Dexed (ua-cam.com/video/wbMzttE-jys/v-deo.html) and you will hear that the difference is minimal. Most times Dexed is a little warmer, it has a little boost in the low mids.
A great song with the DX7 Mk1. I don't have FM7 or FM8, but I will never trade my DX7 Mk1 for those software synths!! I had mine since 1986 and it's going stronger and stronger. It still amazes me how capable and versitile the DX7 is. Long live the DX7!!!
I'm just excited to own one of the originals, even if it's not a DX7. In a 1986 copy of Keyboard magazine that I own, there was this DX21 advertisement that I always looked at and thought how cool it would be to have one of those. 31 years later and my dream came true. ;-)
Power DX7 yep totally agree! Just bought a Roland Super JX-10 yesterday and it’s awesome! Sounds amazing and very heavy, metal construction, and the action of the keys is stunningly beautiful! They just don’t make em like they used to, ya know!!
I A/B'd my DX7 and Dexed by loading the factory .syx patch from Dexed.. Dexed doesn't even come close. Now, FM7's GUI still preferred over FM8, and wish NI would re-release it.
+Alt-Ctrl-Sleep This is my impression as well, but I think it comes closer than FM8. I plan on making a comparison video addressing the differences between the DX7 and Dexed in the future.
Cool! Maybe I'll get to making a DX7 vs. Dexed video some time. I have it, and I have tried it a couple of times. It sounds closer to the DX7 than the FM8.
@Eddie Beaumont-Thomas Hi, I have a question. I have a DX7 and i love the power that it proviedes without any additive Hardware. I also use the FM8 vst and it's exactly your point that I don't like at it. It sounds great but is not that powerfull. Do you have a suggestion to solve this? Would you just add a compressor or do you have some other advices?
@@senfboy7687 hey, I'm a DX7 owner too, I guess you should use a tape emulation like the UAD Studer A800 or Waves Abbey Road Vinyl to fatten up the sound with some cool harmonic distortion, then you should use a colouring compressor like a 1176 or Distressor (there are lots of plug-in emulations but I really like the UAD stuff), use the lowest ratio with a low attack and fast release time to keep the transients in shape. Then an AMS or Lexicon reverb would be cool for the vintage sound. (Valhalla plugins are nice alternatives.)
Why would you want to do all that, and you can get the hardware version see you guy's say vsts sound so great but i notice you are all trying to put the analog hardware sound in it which tells me plugins have not gotten to the place where they sound better than hardware, and they won't ever.
They are from the factory sound bank. I got them from a web page called Dave Bensons DX7 Page, but the page was recently shut down. I'm sure you will find it if search around the net for a while.
Thank you! :) You would need more coloring than a simple lpf to get the FM8 to sound similar, but not much. You can get very far in software today. The free Dexed VST is almost identical, but I'm still keeping my DX7.
What is the music playing in the first section of the video? I really like it! Is there anywhere I can download it, or even better, an extended version of it?
+sitedrm It's just a noodle I took a little further. I have revisited the Ableton project and done som tweaks. You can find it here: soundcloud.com/eivind-engedal/the-song-called-dx7-yamaha-dx7-demo
Yes! Just google DX7 factory presets. You can import the sysx in FM8. However, I recommend you to use Dexed instead. It's much closer to the DX7 if you're after that sound. Hear for yourself: ua-cam.com/video/wbMzttE-jys/v-deo.html
Hey, nice music, you must listen to stuff from Valerie etc. haha Is that pad sound a factory preset or a user-created one? I haven't bought a DX yet, but played one at a friend's house, didn't hear anything that good in it. If you don't mind telling me the name of it if it's from FM8 or whatever dumped into the DX that'd be sweet too :D
The pad sound is actually the only patch I made myself. It's really simple stuff. Tried to make an analog-like pad, so there's just a set of two carriers getting modulated by one modulator each and sort of mimicking a filter.
The intro song uses custom patches, most of them found on the net. The single instrument patches are from the factory banks that came with the first DX7 when it was shipped in 1983.
fightpriest Thank you too! The pad sound is actually one of the very few patches I've made my self. It's very simple. Just one carrier FM-ing (is that a word?) one operator, I did that twice or three times to fatten it up, I guess. It's a long time since I've been programming my DX7. I got lazy and started to use my analog synths instead.
You can notice the difference in tub bells. It sounded nice on the dx7 but on the fm8? That sounded like a detune. And it sounds a bit creepy when detuned.
Sky Avila Yeah, I know. But I'm not certain it's the analogue circuitry that gives the DX7 its edge. It's a whole system. I'm with you on the greatness of mixing digital with analogue ideals, that these days actually can be attained with great plug-ins (only 3-5 years ago these were not quite there). Did you read about Brien Eno's idea of feeding the DX7 too little power? Stuff like that is very interesting and very hard to emulate.
FM8 isn't a straight up copy of DX7 anyway, it's a compatible FM synth. I'm pretty certain after comparing numerous patches that FM8 is intentionally voiced warmer than DX7. Thus DX7 seems more open and airy on some sounds. Dexed sounds more like DX7 in balance; brighter with more of that airy tizz. One mans open and airy could be another mans glassy and cold. I like both.
M Stromkraft When you or I make a patch we don't really know what's going on under the hood, it's all modelled. I guess if you use the various FM synths all the time then you would get a better idea how to compensate to make a sonically exact sounding copy if that's what you mean. When comparing the synths sometimes different patches sound more alike.
wd25a, we do have some clue at least as FM is based in mathematical algorithms. There are of course deviations from theory and different choices made by the different development teams (and the patch programmers) concerning default behavior and the technical limitations of the time. There are noticeable differences between most synths, also softsynths, even if you set them up somewhat the same. The teams do put their mark, just as they should. I don't really see the value in getting exactly the same sound as in the original FM7 unless you need those specific classic patches.
wd25a I agree. It's a lot like DX or TX synths, but to my way of thinking it's a different instrument. If my need for FM sounds outlives my DX this seems like a logical alternative. It's probably capable of SY territory too, so I would say it's probably more versatile, when all is said.
+maxbass72 It doesn't have a name, really. I just called it "The Song Called DX7" when I put it up on Soundcloud (soundcloud.com/eivind-engedal/the-song-called-dx7-yamaha-dx7-demo).
If you have played seriously with a DX7,made tracks or jams,you know that no software will ever really have THAT sound.It has this delicious out-of-an-actual machine sound,that organic sound(i don't really know how to describe ),it sound more alive and cut through a lot more.Like you said in description the components color the sound,and it really shows,it is what makes it a lot more interesting and rich.That being said FM8 is an amazing VST also and i use it all the time.But if you want real sick FM DX7 sound you need the real thing.
the fxbip ಠ_ಠ it's hard to take going on and on about how "warm and organic" the *digital* synth is seriously... it can be different but basing your reasoning why on some kind je ne sais quoi is silly. even in the case of analog v digital there's all sorts of knowable science behind how those act that most VSTis don't replicate.
I have the DX7 and started using FM7 because I was able to get an identical sound using MAudio Delta 1010. Plus programming it was so easy compared to the actual DX7.
Thank you! The version that is on Soundcloud sounds much better, and you can download an uncompressed version of the song. In case you didn't already know. Link: soundcloud.com/eivind-engedal/the-song-called-dx7-yamaha-dx7-demo
It’s ironic that the DX7 has been improved upon over the years…because it’s actually all the things that are “wrong” with the original that give it its unique sound. E.g. the 12 bit DACs with all the aliasing that goes with them, the analogue output circuitry etc, etc. I actually own the DX7ii and TX802 with the 16 bit DACs - not because it sounds “better” but because of the much better midi/layering etc. I keep thinking I should maybe get an original one for the sound........In my opinion, the plug ins sound too clean and nice, not grainy and shrill enough.....(I’ve got FM7 and 8) There’s something about the way the plug ins generate the sound that just doesn’t sound quite the same - but as many other comments have said - who’s really going to notice in a mix anyway?
The thing is: A DX7 (or the like) is truly a software synth in its core just like an FM8. The difference is the signal runs through a DAC, passes through cables and eventually gets recorded. It's this "inevitable" analog portion of the recording process that annoyed people in the eighties, only to find out 20 years later that a completely digital chain is plain boring. So, this is a bold statement now, as I haven't tried it yet, but: run the FM8 (or any other soft synth) audio signal (analog) from your audio output through a mixer and return it right back into your audio hardware so you can record it. I know it wouldn't be exactly the same, as it wouldn't use that DX7-specific DAC, but you get the idea. It's the same with MIDI timing. Many folks like it, because the MIDI timing has slight differences due to cable lengths, MIDI in/out components, or even MIDI chains (connecting things using MIDI thru). Exactly this technology was said to be mechanical and not human in the early 1980s. Nowadays, we like it, because the digital MIDI-to-audio bouncing is so precise (sample-accurate I'd say) that the old times seem like the good old times. We're all kind of victims of the zeitgeist. I remember a guy literally trashing his Jupiter 8 in the 1980s because analog was out of fashion then. Today, I'm buying samplers in ridiculous amounts. They're a dime a dozen. Maybe in 10 years a S1000 will cost $5000 again. Just think of all the massively overpriced analog monsters for sale. I admit, there's also the hype component to be considered (TR-909.. yawn) Having said all this, I only have one simple conclusion for the past, present and future: Do whatever pleases your ears. It may take 20 years before people realize it actually sounded damn good.
Stef Ole That might help, but I don't think using a modern clean sounding mixer or preamp would do much. I've read that Bruce Swedien took this to the extreme by sending the synths into the room and miking them in the old school way. I usually just use a vintage style eq plugin (Waves Scheps 73) and/or a tape simulator (U-he Satin) to add some character.
+Stef Ullrich I don't think the actual FM chips used in the DX and TX synths are technically software. They're hardcoded chips produced by Yamaha specifically for the synth, different to a DSP chip running software that does the job which is what many synths these days use. I don't know if there would be all that much audio difference, though.
This is one of the more noticeable differences, the way they handle vibrato (lfo). The FM8 arp is definitely brighter and stands out in the mix, but sounds a tad more "plastic" to my ears.
the warm sound is probably made because of the filtering process used on first AD/DA converter there was not so clean and good like today, and they used a lot of analog filtering process, same thing for the first CD player and sampler in the 80's, it was more warm but have a lack of definition.
A tip is that when you want to recreate music made in the 80s you should get 80s gear in order to recreate this style/sound. Its like the noise of a record. Not only the composition and mix is the "record' but in the "record" we include the noisy old fashioned recording itself with the mediums of the era. So the same stands for the actual "real hardware - software' debate. The Original Dx 7 mark I (which "sounds" much better even from the next hardware version mkII) will always win. The only case that software wins is when the original real instrument is not around. And please stop debating about which one sounds better and make some good music. Cause all these either hardware or software nowdays, are simply the expression tools for a musician so debating about which sounds better is such a waste of time.
Very well written! I did this comparison because I felt there was a big difference and I would like to see just how big it was. Quite recently I compared the DX7 with the Dexed VST. This time around they were much similar, but there still is a slight difference. As you pointed out: using vintage instruments is pretty much like recording to tape or taking analog photographs. The imperfect mediums make the product more alive and adds some kind of magic.
tbh it depends on the patch doesn't it? fm8 sometimes sounds a little better, dx7 sometimes sounds a little to moderately better. Another thing, these patches arent the same patch, so saying one sounds better than the other, when the patch itself could be better...
Good comparison, the fm8 is a great vst as far as programming is concerned but sound is vety thin, you cannot do professional recording using these vsts, but its good for fun and makes our dream comes true by getting a sense of the real thing. , we have to take this out of our head, not for serious productions.
FM8 first pad was so much more static. The tone was there but it's obviously not able to emulate modulation correctly. The DX7 sounded better therefore, richer, and the tone also was *ever* so slightly warmer.
Subtle difference, for sure. A bit tangential, but neither platform is very conducive to sculpting new sounds (the clicks and menus on screen are barely a step up from the DX7's infamously unusable interface). This seems to show that improving FM synthesis has nothing to do with how fast the chips run, which is a great point to make. I'm hoping to see advances in user interface that allow making new sounds, and changing the sounds on the fly. The DT7 is a bit of an exercise in the extreme, but I'm tempted to try it when it's ready to find out whether this method of sound sculpting can become intuitive with enough practice.
FM sure is hard to work with. Growing up with "Take on Me" on the radio, the Sega Genesis (MegaDrive) and the Adlib (Sound Blaster), I kind of fell in love with the characteristic FM-sound. So FM makes some fun sounds, but it sure is no fun to program.
Years and years ago I was all about software thinking that old hardware is dated and "silly" in these times. But move forward another 10 years and I'm still producing music with much more knowledge and I can tell you hardware synths are much better. Dont get me wrong software is great and I still use it a lot but when it comes to these classic fm type sounds hardware wins every time. I've owned a dx7, and I currently own a dx7iid and a sy77 amongst other synths and the proof is in the pudding.
There’s always going to analog snobs who reckon that the digital version sounds not as good and though I heard some very slight differences on some patches , it’s not like people would stop dancing and go burn someone’s house down and crucify them because someone used a FM8 instead of a DX7 .
monsterjazzlicks To be honest I have programmed only a few simple patches. It's hard to get in to the flow when programming the DX7. One reason is the single data-slider, another is the fact that you have to press the key again to hear the result when you edit something. The fact that you have to edit 6 envelopes does not make it easier either. The Korg DW6000 is much easier to program, even though it also just has one data-slider.
Eivind Engedal Ok, cheers. Yes, your comments are correct about the DX7 though of course there are DX MANAGER and DEXED s/w programs you can use for editing. I do not know anything of the DW6000 I am afraid.
Brass1: DX7 = FM8 - Same sound to my ears. E.Piano1: DX7 > FM8 - Faster Phasing on DX7 from fine tuning, making more lively harmonics. Bass1: DX7 < FM8 - Sharper attack on FM8, probably due to difference in velocity curve. Tub Bells: DX7 < FM8 - Sharper harmonics from FM8, likely due to difference in velocity curve. Take Off: DX7 > FM8 - Shockingly different programming, liked better how the dx7 lands on a solid tone before drifting off with release. I think all of these are subject to small differences in programming. I still personally think DeXed is the best simulation of a DX7
the thing about Dexed is it doesn't support full portamento. It only works on ascending or hammer on notes. It doesn't work in reverse. Which really limits your expressibility.
i try a new VST call DECIMORT 2 it emulate the sound of the DAC especialy 12 bit or 10 bit old sampling machine like Linn Drum or SP 12, i add this to my PX7 Reason DX7 emulator and it give back the warm sound of the original DAC unit ^^
1:37 thank you for escaping jail to bring us this video!
In the 1988 Kids Incorporated version of the Foreigner song "Say You Will", the Yamaha DX7 internal patch "Electric Piano 1" was heard.
beautiful intro music, great video.
What a nice melody in the beginning)
That was a very interesting presentation, comparing the original DX7 and its digital clone... The difference is bigger than I expected too!
Georgios Zaimis Be wary of potentially flawed methodology in the test. Interesting nonetheless. DX7 is digital too of course.
Difference??? I hear virtually none at all. And I'm a Yamaha user for 30 years, including the DX7
At 3:00, the edited version of the Yamaha DX7 patch "Tub Bells".
FM8 has two velocity options "Standard" and "DX7". It should be set to "DX7" for comparison, to get authentic velocity levels, especially with the E-Piano. I find that FM8 compares more equally to the DX7II patches, and the major difference here is 12-bit, vs. 16 bit between the old and new DX. I think FM8 kills The DX7II with the same patches and the ability to render 24/96, (64 note polyphony, effects, multiple voice layers)) there is virtually no grit or aliasing, and of course, no line level noise, as on the DX7 and II.
Thanks for pointing that out!
"The Song Called DX7" is what you tell them to listen when they ask you what does DX7 sounds like. If DX7 could speak for itself, it would present itself to people by playing that song. Wonderful.
Thank you!
Great comparison! I have FM8 and a TX-81Z, but I've always wanted a real DX7... I think this might've convinced me to get one.
Check out the TX7 as well. Doesn't take up much room but is the same thing as the DX7. If you get an editor, you'll be able to edit the patches on it.
Margatroid Try Dexed.
very nice music , love the dx7 . always wanted one as a kid
The right notes for the right sounds. Excellent review!
For me Dx7, better in mids and harmonics! Thanks for the video from Spain
there are so many options for coloring VSTs these days with various preamp, distortion, and even digital sampler output stages. there is nothing inherently inferior about FM8, it just needs some treatment to sound as vibrant and interesting as a hardware synth.
I know! But the DX7 is already colored, so you don't need to put in the time. The DX7 sounds full and "right" to me, FM8 don't. Dexed VST and Korg Opsix (native and hardware) sound right to me as well, so it's not a software vs. hardware or analog vs. digital kind of thing.
The Native Instruments FM7 patches “Tub Erupt” and “Tuberise B” are heard in 2001-present Taco Bell commercials.
That warmness, wow.
In the Kids Incorporated song “Bad, Bad Trouble” (1985), the edited Yamaha DX7 ROM-1A patch “Tub Bells” is heard.
As far as i can remember, the differences are not only due to the analog-side but actually also to the digital side. From the service manual, they say the 6 operators are processed in 20.368032 usec (Japanese like to be accurate hehe), which would correspond to 49096.5 Hz, and it seems FM8 didn't try to respect this.
This has implications in the harmonic components fold-over (well, aliasing), which plays a big role in the FM process (but totally hated in the subtractive synthesis world). So I'm not surprised if you could hear real differences in the last test that seems to expose a lot of aliasing.
At 2:58, edited DX7 tub bells.
hm. I am not nostalgic, but the original sounds quite a bit more charismatic.
In the beginning of the covered song on Kids Incorporated "There'll Be Sad Songs", the Yamaha DX7 ROM-2B patch "Tub Bells-Expansion" was heard.
Both good for different reasons. The DX7 is a little darker and more mellow. I think it would handle effects better. Nice to have an analog out to go through guitar pedals. The FM8 is more clear and up front. Depends on what sound you're trying to make.
I totally agree! Dexed is much more similar to the original DX7 and could easily replace the real deal. Watch my comparison between Dexed and the DX7 here: ua-cam.com/video/wbMzttE-jys/v-deo.html
In the song “Beat It” (1983), the Yamaha DX7 ROM-2B patch “T.Bl.-Expa.” and Yamaha GS1 patch “T.Bl.-Expa.” and Yamaha GS2 patch “T.Bl.-Expa.” were heard.
Why?
The Yamaha DX7 internal patch “Tub. Erupt.” and ROM-2B patch “T.Bl.-Expa.” were/are heard in 1989-present Taco Bell commercials.
shocking difference really! the DX7 is so much more open and musical
GORDOTRONIC Dx7 was 1,995 dollars when it came out ... FM8 costs 225 dollars!
GORDOTRONIC Yes! The DX7 is (was) really a high end instrument. Velocity, aftertouch and 16 voices polyphony was a big deal in 1983. I bought my DX7 for about 150 dollars, by the way. A lot of synth for the money.
Eivind Engedal you got a great deal! I had one when they were new, and made many great songs with it
GORDOTRONIC The only difference is passing through a DA convertor. Which you can trivially do with the FM8 too. It's not like it's some analog sound engine on the DX7 that FM8 lacks...
***** if you look down the reviews here, many of us notice that the sound of the real DX7 is more appealing... Yes, plug ins are convenient, and interesting technology, but for my ears... real instruments usually sound more alive and exciting. This is what I hear in the comparison in this video.
If DX7 goes through a pre-amp, there is some added coloration just from that. A good comparison would be to pass the FM7/FM8 through that same preamp and compare that. Otherwise you might be hearing the preamp factor, which is good for most sounds.
The pre-amps on my Focusrite Clarett (with air turned off) is almost too clean. I don't think the difference would be very big.
1984... bought at Sam Ash on 48th street.... had the " grey matter installed..and the DX7 became a completely different animal! still use it to access voices on my D-110, U-110, and the SC-55...live on stage! Horns. strings. choir. you name it! ;)
With such striking differences, in the electric piano patch and forward it's odd to leave out how the DX7 was recorded, what the chain was, volumes used and so on. Was the Fm8 in high quality mode, analog up or down?
Bottom line, was this a fair comparison?
M Stromkraft And was the keyboard playing the FM8 plugin set to 100 velocity max rather than MIDI standard 127 to match the DX7's crippled 100 max?Were levels matched? What gear was the DX7 routed through?Comparisons with Dexed could be interesting too.
M Stromkraft The FM8 was in high quality mode and the analog slider was set to 0. The DX7 was recorded completely dry into my Apogee Duet 2. In the intro I used the exact same send effects (delay and reverb) on the FM8 and DX7. The reason I made this video was to see if they sounded the same "out of the box", so I did not tweak the FM8 to make it more similar to the DX7.
wd25a I matched the levels in Ableton by using the velocity tool. In that way I only lost the bottom 27 velocity levels on the FM8, and I very rarely play that soft. I used some time matching the levels, but I wasn't too scientific about it. I am not patient enough to be really scientific, and frankly I think it would be a waste of time to put so much time into this kind of video. I tried Dexed, and it's certainly much closer to the real DX7, but some presets sound very different on that as well.
Eivind Engedal , thanks. I suppose the analog control could have been up as that "introduces random variations between voices" though I doubt that would have made any significant difference in this case.
Personally I've started using Z3TA+ 2 also for FM-type of sounds and while my objective isn't to sound like the FM7 patches I must say it sounds noticeable good for both FM and other types of sounds.
Great song, production and cool comparison. My only question is - why do all the FM8 patches sound like there is a verrrry fast vibrato (a subtle amount) on every patch?
Thanks for the vid, this was very interesting!
The patches you use are super famous, and I would imagine Native Instruments put in some extra effort to get those in particular to sound as authentic as possible. What would be interesting is if you could compare some of the more obscure factory patches to see how closely they are emulated.
Although I agree the DX7 sounds better, I think most of the differences that are heard in isolation disappear in the mix (except for the tubular bells which sound annoyingly off). So overall I would still say that this is a damn good emulation considering it's a pretty complex synth to emulate. Hopefully they will improve upon it further.
Most of the patches in the intro song are actually custom patches. Here I think the pad sound along with the bass sound sound pretty much the same. It's the treble heavy patches that sound very different; this comes down to the fact that the DX7 mk1 can't produce the higher frequencies. The DX7 mkII will probably sound brighter and maybe more like the FM8 due to more modern converters.
I would like to see an upgraded FM8, too. Softsynths have come very far in regards to sound quality since 2006, and a new take on a full-fledged FM softsynth would be very interesting.
Thanks for this :-) Just what I needed. Love the DX7, but for some purposes being able to load my DX patches on the laptop is awesome!
As soon as I get mine back from servicing I'll do some experiments myself.
Compare it to dexed 0.9.4 Best start with alg 32, OP6 only and play with the feedback. Then alg5 and OP5 & OP6 only and have a play. I put a good LP filter on the end of dexed set to ~14 -15k as I'm not sure they guys have emulated the Sallen-Key DAC noise reduction filter in the DX7.
I'm very hard pressed to tell the difference even with an analyser.
digital synths have their own analog sound because they use "digital to analog" converters that at the time were of varying qualities... now, I don't know if you can do this, but if the DX7 had some sort of digital output, and you ran that into an interface to receive the digital signal, that would bypass the converters and the "color" or quality they are imparting
Yes! (I think I covered this earlier, but anyways.) In the same way as every sound card has digital to analog conversion, including your phone. The converter in the DX7 mk1 is so basic that it alters the sound (read: warmer) and creates artifacts (read: weird noise). All of this were gone in the mk2, because it had a superior converter (read: clean, sterile). I chose the mk1 because of this. I'll get to the point: If there was a way to get the digital audio signal out of the DX7 mk1, it would probably sound like the mk2. And the mk2 would probably sound more like the mk1 when run through a filter and a bit-reduction effect (also covered).
0:00 I love music like this.....
At 0:00, the song where the Oberheim DMX is heard.
THANK YOU M8. very instructive.
well done! very good VS mate
Where can I download the DX7 patches FM8 used in this video?
You can start here: homepages.abdn.ac.uk/mth192/pages/html/dx7.html. I use Dexed to transfer the sounds now, but you can also use www.midiox.com/ or www.snoize.com/SysExLibrarian/. The good thing is that they are all free.
for a digital recreation, it's not that bad.
i still gotta take a look at your new video.
DX7 vs Dexed, but that video somehow refuses to play. no idea why.
That's strange. Hope you get it to work soon. Dexed is free, so you should take it for a spin if you haven't already. :)
the vid only has so many vies because the song is awewsome
Thank you! I really don't have any clue how the video got so many views, and I have been trying to find out without getting anywhere. I even made another DX7-video, but that's not nearly as popular. I personally like everything with the new video better, but I guess it's a taste thing.
its the song in the beginning. I've listened to it, at least 8 times. the video is also very informative, and has pretty much sold me on getting a dx7. but the song is so uplifting...pure...energizing. it makes everybody feel good about life for the 1:50 min it plays. you just nailed it...that elusive thing that we songwriters try so hard to capture. like magic in a bottle. you nailed it. so when people come here to just check out a dx7 vid, they find themselves falling in love with the song, and they can't believe that something so pure and authentic sounding can come out of this device. and it happens progressively. its one of those songs, the more you listen to it the more you like it. i actually tried to contact you via soundcloud to get you permission to write to it.
These days you can work completely with VSTs and get analog warmth with hardware add-ons like the Elektron Analog Heat
You sure can! Watch my new video comparing the DX7 with Dexed (ua-cam.com/video/wbMzttE-jys/v-deo.html) and you will hear that the difference is minimal. Most times Dexed is a little warmer, it has a little boost in the low mids.
A great song with the DX7 Mk1. I don't have FM7 or FM8, but I will never trade my DX7 Mk1 for those software synths!! I had mine since 1986 and it's going stronger and stronger. It still amazes me how capable and versitile the DX7 is. Long live the DX7!!!
I just bought a DX-21. These things are tanks!
Yes, those synths made back in 80's (and 70's) are like tanks. The used strong metal and plastic and they can be quite heavy.
I'm just excited to own one of the originals, even if it's not a DX7. In a 1986 copy of Keyboard magazine that I own, there was this DX21 advertisement that I always looked at and thought how cool it would be to have one of those. 31 years later and my dream came true. ;-)
You're the man POWER.... and great channel by the way....
Power DX7 yep totally agree! Just bought a Roland Super JX-10 yesterday and it’s awesome! Sounds amazing and very heavy, metal construction, and the action of the keys is stunningly beautiful! They just don’t make em like they used to, ya know!!
the Dx7 makes me allways thinking of Miami vice ;-)
And almost every pop song in the 80s.
I A/B'd my DX7 and Dexed by loading the factory .syx patch from Dexed.. Dexed doesn't even come close. Now, FM7's GUI still preferred over FM8, and wish NI would re-release it.
+Alt-Ctrl-Sleep This is my impression as well, but I think it comes closer than FM8. I plan on making a comparison video addressing the differences between the DX7 and Dexed in the future.
Just checked the Take Off preset on Dexed.
Identical to the hardware version after a tiny bit of EQ.
Cool! Maybe I'll get to making a DX7 vs. Dexed video some time. I have it, and I have tried it a couple of times. It sounds closer to the DX7 than the FM8.
Looks like this guy beat me to it, though: ua-cam.com/video/D3xCO8tB1kg/v-deo.html
The FM8 does sound thinner than the DX but nothing you couldn't fix in the mix.
@Eddie Beaumont-Thomas Hi, I have a question. I have a DX7 and i love the power that it proviedes without any additive Hardware. I also use the FM8 vst and it's exactly your point that I don't like at it. It sounds great but is not that powerfull. Do you have a suggestion to solve this? Would you just add a compressor or do you have some other advices?
@@senfboy7687 hey, I'm a DX7 owner too, I guess you should use a tape emulation like the UAD Studer A800 or Waves Abbey Road Vinyl to fatten up the sound with some cool harmonic distortion, then you should use a colouring compressor like a 1176 or Distressor (there are lots of plug-in emulations but I really like the UAD stuff), use the lowest ratio with a low attack and fast release time to keep the transients in shape. Then an AMS or Lexicon reverb would be cool for the vintage sound. (Valhalla plugins are nice alternatives.)
By the way -1 to -3 gain reduction would be enough for most of the presets.
@@utkuarseven5318 Hi Utku, thanks for your response! I will try it soon.
Why would you want to do all that, and you can get the hardware version see you guy's say vsts sound so great but i notice you are all trying to put the analog hardware sound in it which tells me plugins have not gotten to the place where they sound better than hardware, and they won't ever.
Wow, really love these sounds! Please, how would I go about getting these exact presets for FM8?!
Just do a google search. That's what I did. There are millions of patches out there.
Eivind Engedal I can also recommend buying patches from this guy: ua-cam.com/video/j1KTAkoAj38/v-deo.html
Does anyone happen to have a link to the patches used in the examples?
They are from the factory sound bank. I got them from a web page called Dave Bensons DX7 Page, but the page was recently shut down. I'm sure you will find it if search around the net for a while.
This is a hilariously good example of why to use the DX7. I wonder how much of that would get fixed by throwing a simple lpf on the FM8 output
Thank you! :) You would need more coloring than a simple lpf to get the FM8 to sound similar, but not much. You can get very far in software today. The free Dexed VST is almost identical, but I'm still keeping my DX7.
I remember when I used to stay up all night on my DX7 just to make my own programs, mostly bass sounds.
Well... Making programs on the DX7 definitely takes time. The main reason why subtractive synthesis is much more popular than FM, I guess.
What is the music playing in the first section of the video? I really like it! Is there anywhere I can download it, or even better, an extended version of it?
+sitedrm It's just a noodle I took a little further. I have revisited the Ableton project and done som tweaks. You can find it here: soundcloud.com/eivind-engedal/the-song-called-dx7-yamaha-dx7-demo
So this DX7 sound is what we hear in vaporwave tracks?
I do not have a 'fm8' preset from this video.
Should I download the presets separately?
Yes! Just google DX7 factory presets. You can import the sysx in FM8. However, I recommend you to use Dexed instead. It's much closer to the DX7 if you're after that sound. Hear for yourself: ua-cam.com/video/wbMzttE-jys/v-deo.html
Hi, could you tell me the name of the soft brass pad used used in the first couple of minutes? Is it custom?
Hey, nice music, you must listen to stuff from Valerie etc. haha
Is that pad sound a factory preset or a user-created one? I haven't bought a DX yet, but played one at a friend's house, didn't hear anything that good in it. If you don't mind telling me the name of it if it's from FM8 or whatever dumped into the DX that'd be sweet too :D
The pad sound is actually the only patch I made myself. It's really simple stuff. Tried to make an analog-like pad, so there's just a set of two carriers getting modulated by one modulator each and sort of mimicking a filter.
Disco Machine Stop following me Jordan
Haha I ran into somebody else not too long ago too on random videos, I don't recognize the username though, who is this?
Oh that pad man wow!!! And is it going thru the valhalla vintage verb?I'm going to bring a kiss to my DX7, soo glad that i have one!!!
Where would you get the original sysex files from? Would you be willing to share your classic sounds?
touching
The FM8's version of "tub bells" actually sound more like the preset on the DX21.
Hi! Where can y find this patches to use in FM8? Thanks!!!
Love it! Not a big difference. Is it your own patches or do you know where I can find them? :) Cheers!
The intro song uses custom patches, most of them found on the net. The single instrument patches are from the factory banks that came with the first DX7 when it was shipped in 1983.
Eivind Engedal Oh, ok. Thank you! :) I really liked the intro song, especially the pad. Do you have any idea how to get that specific sound? Sorry!
fightpriest Thank you too! The pad sound is actually one of the very few patches I've made my self. It's very simple. Just one carrier FM-ing (is that a word?) one operator, I did that twice or three times to fatten it up, I guess. It's a long time since I've been programming my DX7. I got lazy and started to use my analog synths instead.
any where i can get the factory dx7 patches for fm8?
You can notice the difference in tub bells. It sounded nice on the dx7 but on the fm8? That sounded like a detune. And it sounds a bit creepy when detuned.
Well - theres sure something missing in the FM8 versions - analog warmth....that can be however fixed with plug-ins.
+Sky Avila hi, how would you make the FM8 sound like a real dx7?
Its a secret....hehe. theres presets to download that have the DX7 sounds, and to fatten them up you can use plug ins
+Sky Avila While there's some analogue circuitry in there you do know the DX7 is a 12-bit digital synthesizer, right?
So? Im talking about the sound not what its made of.
Sky Avila
Yeah, I know. But I'm not certain it's the analogue circuitry that gives the DX7 its edge. It's a whole system.
I'm with you on the greatness of mixing digital with analogue ideals, that these days actually can be attained with great plug-ins (only 3-5 years ago these were not quite there). Did you read about Brien Eno's idea of feeding the DX7 too little power? Stuff like that is very interesting and very hard to emulate.
FM8 isn't a straight up copy of DX7 anyway, it's a compatible FM synth.
I'm pretty certain after comparing numerous patches that FM8 is intentionally voiced warmer than DX7. Thus DX7 seems more open and airy on some sounds. Dexed sounds more like DX7 in balance; brighter with more of that airy tizz. One mans open and airy could be another mans glassy and cold. I like both.
wd25a , the only way to know these differences first hand is to program your own both on an FM7 and in FM8 or other FM-capable softsynth.
M Stromkraft When you or I make a patch we don't really know what's going on under the hood, it's all modelled.
I guess if you use the various FM synths all the time then you would get a better idea how to compensate to make a sonically exact sounding copy if that's what you mean. When comparing the synths sometimes different patches sound more alike.
wd25a, we do have some clue at least as FM is based in mathematical algorithms. There are of course deviations from theory and different choices made by the different development teams (and the patch programmers) concerning default behavior and the technical limitations of the time. There are noticeable differences between most synths, also softsynths, even if you set them up somewhat the same. The teams do put their mark, just as they should.
I don't really see the value in getting exactly the same sound as in the original FM7 unless you need those specific classic patches.
M Stromkraft
Agreed and sample engines offer those anyway.
wd25a I agree. It's a lot like DX or TX synths, but to my way of thinking it's a different instrument. If my need for FM sounds outlives my DX this seems like a logical alternative. It's probably capable of SY territory too, so I would say it's probably more versatile, when all is said.
where could i purchase these patches ?
+Kyle B. I mean for fm8. How can i get these , could you possibly send to me or sell ?
+djgusmusic Start here: homepages.abdn.ac.uk/mth192/pages/html/dx7.html The sysex files can be imported in FM8
dx 7! what is the title of melody in the beginning?
+maxbass72 It doesn't have a name, really. I just called it "The Song Called DX7" when I put it up on Soundcloud (soundcloud.com/eivind-engedal/the-song-called-dx7-yamaha-dx7-demo).
+Eivind Engedal Wonder if it sounds familiar . . . kinda like the intro from "Nothing's gonna stop us now" by Jefferson Airplane
Well I have a love/hate relationship with my DX7 but one thing's for sure- nothing sounds quite like the DX7!
It sure has a characteristic sound, but I usually layer it with analog synths in my songs.
Did you program the FM8 sounds yourself? The bass sound is something I've been after for some time .
chardbass It's the electric bass sound from the factory library. You can find the factory sysx on the net and load it right into the FM8.
If you have played seriously with a DX7,made tracks or jams,you know that no software will ever really have THAT sound.It has this delicious out-of-an-actual machine sound,that organic sound(i don't really know how to describe ),it sound more alive and cut through a lot more.Like you said in description the components color the sound,and it really shows,it is what makes it a lot more interesting and rich.That being said FM8 is an amazing VST also and i use it all the time.But if you want real sick FM DX7 sound you need the real thing.
the fxbip ಠ_ಠ
it's hard to take going on and on about how "warm and organic" the *digital* synth is seriously... it can be different but basing your reasoning why on some kind je ne sais quoi is silly. even in the case of analog v digital there's all sorts of knowable science behind how those act that most VSTis don't replicate.
Thanks!
I have the DX7 and started using FM7 because I was able to get an identical sound using MAudio Delta 1010. Plus programming it was so easy compared to the actual DX7.
The comparison scene: 1:37~
I have both the FM8 and a Modular V from Arturia. You can build cathedrals with just those two.
very pretty song
Thank you! The version that is on Soundcloud sounds much better, and you can download an uncompressed version of the song. In case you didn't already know. Link: soundcloud.com/eivind-engedal/the-song-called-dx7-yamaha-dx7-demo
Great video
It’s ironic that the DX7 has been improved upon over the years…because it’s actually all the things that are “wrong” with the original that give it its unique sound. E.g. the 12 bit DACs with all the aliasing that goes with them, the analogue output circuitry etc, etc. I actually own the DX7ii and TX802 with the 16 bit DACs - not because it sounds “better” but because of the much better midi/layering etc. I keep thinking I should maybe get an original one for the sound........In my opinion, the plug ins sound too clean and nice, not grainy and shrill enough.....(I’ve got FM7 and 8) There’s something about the way the plug ins generate the sound that just doesn’t sound quite the same - but as many other comments have said - who’s really going to notice in a mix anyway?
came here for the Electric Piano. Im pleased
Then you weren't listening to the same recording. It's literally the worst before and after.
Это что-то из народного фолка. Характерно использование ударных инструментов.
2:26 Illuminati
what is the intro song?
***** Just a noodle I made some time back using soft synths. All I did was to replace all the tracks with sounds from the FM8 and the the DX7.
so different!
The thing is: A DX7 (or the like) is truly a software synth in its core just like an FM8. The difference is the signal runs through a DAC, passes through cables and eventually gets recorded. It's this "inevitable" analog portion of the recording process that annoyed people in the eighties, only to find out 20 years later that a completely digital chain is plain boring. So, this is a bold statement now, as I haven't tried it yet, but: run the FM8 (or any other soft synth) audio signal (analog) from your audio output through a mixer and return it right back into your audio hardware so you can record it. I know it wouldn't be exactly the same, as it wouldn't use that DX7-specific DAC, but you get the idea.
It's the same with MIDI timing. Many folks like it, because the MIDI timing has slight differences due to cable lengths, MIDI in/out components, or even MIDI chains (connecting things using MIDI thru). Exactly this technology was said to be mechanical and not human in the early 1980s. Nowadays, we like it, because the digital MIDI-to-audio bouncing is so precise (sample-accurate I'd say) that the old times seem like the good old times.
We're all kind of victims of the zeitgeist. I remember a guy literally trashing his Jupiter 8 in the 1980s because analog was out of fashion then. Today, I'm buying samplers in ridiculous amounts. They're a dime a dozen. Maybe in 10 years a S1000 will cost $5000 again. Just think of all the massively overpriced analog monsters for sale. I admit, there's also the hype component to be considered (TR-909.. yawn)
Having said all this, I only have one simple conclusion for the past, present and future: Do whatever pleases your ears. It may take 20 years before people realize it actually sounded damn good.
Stef Ole That might help, but I don't think using a modern clean sounding mixer or preamp would do much. I've read that Bruce Swedien took this to the extreme by sending the synths into the room and miking them in the old school way. I usually just use a vintage style eq plugin (Waves Scheps 73) and/or a tape simulator (U-he Satin) to add some character.
+Stef Ullrich I don't think the actual FM chips used in the DX and TX synths are technically software. They're hardcoded chips produced by Yamaha specifically for the synth, different to a DSP chip running software that does the job which is what many synths these days use. I don't know if there would be all that much audio difference, though.
At 3 min., the Tube Bells preset sounds very different between the two synths, it`s better in DX7.
Someone, how did you edit the DX7 tub bell patch?
the FM8 arpeggio at the beginning sounds a bit more beautiful. perhabs a vibrato added
This is one of the more noticeable differences, the way they handle vibrato (lfo). The FM8 arp is definitely brighter and stands out in the mix, but sounds a tad more "plastic" to my ears.
the warm sound is probably made because of the filtering process used on first AD/DA converter there was not so clean and good like today, and they used a lot of analog filtering process, same thing for the first CD player and sampler in the 80's, it was more warm but have a lack of definition.
Try Propellerhead's PX7. You will be amazed !
interesting would be a simple reamping - DA-Conversation -> 7m Cable -> AD-Conversation
where is the interest ?
A tip is that when you want to recreate music made in the 80s you should get 80s gear in order to recreate this style/sound. Its like the noise of a record. Not only the composition and mix is the "record' but in the "record" we include the noisy old fashioned recording itself with the mediums of the era. So the same stands for the actual "real hardware - software' debate. The Original Dx 7 mark I (which "sounds" much better even from the next hardware version mkII) will always win. The only case that software wins is when the original real instrument is not around. And please stop debating about which one sounds better and make some good music. Cause all these either hardware or software nowdays, are simply the expression tools for a musician so debating about which sounds better is such a waste of time.
Very well written! I did this comparison because I felt there was a big difference and I would like to see just how big it was. Quite recently I compared the DX7 with the Dexed VST. This time around they were much similar, but there still is a slight difference. As you pointed out: using vintage instruments is pretty much like recording to tape or taking analog photographs. The imperfect mediums make the product more alive and adds some kind of magic.
tbh it depends on the patch doesn't it? fm8 sometimes sounds a little better, dx7 sometimes sounds a little to moderately better.
Another thing, these patches arent the same patch, so saying one sounds better than the other, when the patch itself could be better...
Good comparison, the fm8 is a great vst as far as programming is concerned but sound is vety thin, you cannot do professional recording using these vsts, but its good for fun and makes our dream comes true by getting a sense of the real thing. , we have to take this out of our head, not for serious productions.
Awesome.
dx7 does sound better imo
FM8 first pad was so much more static. The tone was there but it's obviously not able to emulate modulation correctly. The DX7 sounded better therefore, richer, and the tone also was *ever* so slightly warmer.
Subtle difference, for sure. A bit tangential, but neither platform is very conducive to sculpting new sounds (the clicks and menus on screen are barely a step up from the DX7's infamously unusable interface). This seems to show that improving FM synthesis has nothing to do with how fast the chips run, which is a great point to make. I'm hoping to see advances in user interface that allow making new sounds, and changing the sounds on the fly. The DT7 is a bit of an exercise in the extreme, but I'm tempted to try it when it's ready to find out whether this method of sound sculpting can become intuitive with enough practice.
FM sure is hard to work with. Growing up with "Take on Me" on the radio, the Sega Genesis (MegaDrive) and the Adlib (Sound Blaster), I kind of fell in love with the characteristic FM-sound. So FM makes some fun sounds, but it sure is no fun to program.
Great example of why soft synths don't cut it if you want the best.
That said, FM8 electric piano sounded pretty good!
Years and years ago I was all about software thinking that old hardware is dated and "silly" in these times. But move forward another 10 years and I'm still producing music with much more knowledge and I can tell you hardware synths are much better.
Dont get me wrong software is great and I still use it a lot but when it comes to these classic fm type sounds hardware wins every time. I've owned a dx7, and I currently own a dx7iid and a sy77 amongst other synths and the proof is in the pudding.
Near as makes no difference, and if there is any difference, who would know or care in your audience, and who's to say the original sounds best?
There’s always going to analog snobs who reckon that the digital version sounds not as good and though I heard some very slight differences on some patches , it’s not like people would stop dancing and go burn someone’s house down and crucify them because someone used a FM8 instead of a DX7 .
@@Max-qh7yu - The DX7 is a digital synth, other than the DACs, so your comment is just nonsense.
Do you not program any of you OWN sounds please?
monsterjazzlicks To be honest I have programmed only a few simple patches. It's hard to get in to the flow when programming the DX7. One reason is the single data-slider, another is the fact that you have to press the key again to hear the result when you edit something. The fact that you have to edit 6 envelopes does not make it easier either. The Korg DW6000 is much easier to program, even though it also just has one data-slider.
Eivind Engedal Ok, cheers. Yes, your comments are correct about the DX7 though of course there are DX MANAGER and DEXED s/w programs you can use for editing.
I do not know anything of the DW6000 I am afraid.
Brass1: DX7 = FM8 - Same sound to my ears.
E.Piano1: DX7 > FM8 - Faster Phasing on DX7 from fine tuning, making more lively harmonics.
Bass1: DX7 < FM8 - Sharper attack on FM8, probably due to difference in velocity curve.
Tub Bells: DX7 < FM8 - Sharper harmonics from FM8, likely due to difference in velocity curve.
Take Off: DX7 > FM8 - Shockingly different programming, liked better how the dx7 lands on a solid tone before drifting off with release.
I think all of these are subject to small differences in programming.
I still personally think DeXed is the best simulation of a DX7
the thing about Dexed is it doesn't support full portamento. It only works on ascending or hammer on notes. It doesn't work in reverse. Which really limits your expressibility.
nice track!
i try a new VST call DECIMORT 2 it emulate the sound of the DAC especialy 12 bit or 10 bit old sampling machine like Linn Drum or SP 12, i add this to my PX7 Reason DX7 emulator and it give back the warm sound of the original DAC unit ^^