FM8 in year 2017?

[Autobot]

FM8 is good as is it is. Data import bugs aside I see no reason to update it and add more complexity. Like with the hardware FM series don't think there's that many people who have actually bothered to learn to program it anyway.

No one want more complexity.

Speak for yourself. I'd give NI money for FM9 that came closer to FS1R territory and incorporated ZDF Filters and more flexible effects.

Lol. ZDF Filters and flexible effects are not more complexity. And more operators also are neither.

[Lotuzia]

FM8 is good as is it is. Data import bugs aside I see no reason to update it and add more complexity. Like with the hardware FM series don't think there's that many people who have actually bothered to learn to program it anyway.

That's more/less how I see it too.

FM7 look was more glamorous, and tbh, closer to the DX series overall colors and look. But afaik, there's nothing FM7 could od that FM8 can't (at least all ly patches translated very well from one to another)

I must admit that I was a bit surprised by FM8 at the beginning, and did not like it that much( dull feeling), but over time the passion of the sound was much stronger than the GUI 1rst time feel, and I really enjoyed playing with it. It's a very deep and complex synth. Yes, it could be enhanced, but still, perfect for 2017, and even in the years to come -imho-)

[ghettosynth]

FM8 is good as is it is. Data import bugs aside I see no reason to update it and add more complexity. Like with the hardware FM series don't think there's that many people who have actually bothered to learn to program it anyway.

No one want more complexity.

Speak for yourself. I'd give NI money for FM9 that came closer to FS1R territory and incorporated ZDF Filters and more flexible effects.

Lol. ZDF Filters and flexible effects are not more complexity. And more operators also are neither.

FS1R is more than just more operators. Since you clearly didn't define complexity, then it's rather open as to interpretation. In any case, Robotmonky's response followed mine where I expressed an interest in new filters, meaning that it's quite reasonable to infer that complexity was meant in the broadest sense, e.g., significant changes to internal modules, changes to the U/I, etc. In any case, my disagreement is fundamentally with "FM8 is good as it is", again, speak for yourself. Whatever you and Robotmonkey meant by that, I simply don't agree. In general, I would like to see FM9 be further evolution of FM8.

Frankly, I don't really care about the data import bugs. I couldn't care less if they completely ditched DX/TX compatibility.

[djshire]

I think we should be happy that NI did not yet retire FM8.

Concerning GUI size:

When designing patches I'm working in the standalone mode which uses a bigger Gui (it uses the windows DPI scaling feature).

Do not work on my system win7. Is this exclusive for newer OS?

I use OSX, but based upon my usage of Windows in the past, it should be under Start Menu->Programs->Native Instruments->FM8

[yul]

Hi all! I am a proud owner of FM8 and have been for many years. I got drawn to it early on due to the most pleasing sounds that came out of it.

Now fast forward around 5-7 years and I am playing with it every single day building really nice patches I mean to the extent where I feel it's sound (when well programmed) can not easily be matched.

Of course I am a big fan of subtractive but when I audition and compare my FM with many top of the line synths and I really am having a hard time justifying using anything else.

On the downside, it can be hard to reverse engineer some patches and things can get complicated fast. Some sounds can be a bit cliché but with some good programming it can beat analog. I try to keep things light and simple but it's so easy to stack and cross mod sometimes it's becoming an exercise in restraint.

On last thing is the FM8 filter which I feel is a nice addition but can't really put it to good use. I know a lot of simple FM sounds are band limited and this is why the filter may not work well but in other cases, I am really not sure if it's high quality or not (I am having a hard time getting a nice resonant effect with it). Perhaps I am not using it properly or it should be used as a formant filter mainly. Luckily I found how to get keytracking going on it using the KeySc tab. but I have the subtractives always available to get that typical filtered sound.

It would be nice to have a ZDF filter in there at some point
Cheers

[gentleclockdivider]

Hi all! I am a proud owner of FM8 and have been for many years. I got drawn to it early on due to the most pleasing sounds that came out of it.

Now fast forward around 5-7 years and I am playing with it every single day building really nice patches I mean to the extent where I feel it's sound (when well programmed) can not easily be matched.

Of course I am a big fan of subtractive but when I audition and compare my FM with many top of the line synths and I really am having a hard time justifying using anything else.

On the downside, it can be hard to reverse engineer some patches and things can get complicated fast. Some sounds can be a bit cliché but with some good programming it can beat analog. I try to keep things light and simple but it's so easy to stack and cross mod sometimes it's becoming an exercise in restraint.

On last thing is the FM8 filter which I feel is a nice addition but can't really put it to good use. I know a lot of simple FM sounds are band limited and this is why the filter may not work well but in other cases, I am really not sure if it's high quality or not (I am having a hard time getting a nice resonant effect with it). Perhaps I am not using it properly or it should be used as a formant filter mainly. Luckily I found how to get keytracking going on it using the KeySc tab. but I have the subtractives always available to get that typical filtered sound.

It would be nice to have a ZDF filter in there at some point
Cheers

Exactly , the filter in FM8 is the same as in FM7 and sounds pretty thin ..well it's almost over 16 years old ..and most vst 's from that era had shitty filters
I think they just put it in there to filter the noise operator .

[egbert101]

<delete>

[yul]

Yes it will beat analog if you think about analog being saw/tri/square/noise +sync/ring mod/fm going through a filter.

If you can get over wanting that cat meow sound of an analog LP filter, of course well programmed FM will beat that and even sound organic on top of it!

[danbroad]

I would prefer a larger GUI, the older DX7 livery, and the return of bank attributes and management they removed in later versions. It's a relative ease to program with the matrix view, but I agree there's a little touching up could be done. However, I'd rather they left ZDF and other modernisms out - I can run hundreds of instances without a massive CPU hit, it's just about the lowest CPU hog out there.

[yul]

However, I'd rather they left ZDF and other modernisms out - I can run hundreds of instances without a massive CPU hit, it's just about the lowest CPU hog out there.

Yes that is a very good point I totally agree. Leave ZDF out of it indeed (since it does not needs fast modulations) but perhaps add a better digital model..

[ghettosynth]

I would prefer a larger GUI, the older DX7 livery, and the return of bank attributes and management they removed in later versions. It's a relative ease to program with the matrix view, but I agree there's a little touching up could be done. However, I'd rather they left ZDF and other modernisms out - I can run hundreds of instances without a massive CPU hit, it's just about the lowest CPU hog out there.

It is, and it's reflected in the quality of the filter and effects. I don't care about CPU consumption, I just want great instruments. Putting an analog filter in the chain is one of the best things that you can do for complex FM sounds.

[Lotuzia]

I would prefer a larger GUI, the older DX7 livery, and the return of bank attributes and management they removed in later versions. It's a relative ease to program with the matrix view, but I agree there's a little touching up could be done. However, I'd rather they left ZDF and other modernisms out - I can run hundreds of instances without a massive CPU hit, it's just about the lowest CPU hog out there.

It is, and it's reflected in the quality of the filter and effects. I don't care about CPU consumption, I just want great instruments. Putting an analog filter in the chain is one of the best things that you can do for complex FM sounds.

It (odf filter) would add a significant cpu cost though. But anyway, even if the FM8, and the former Yam HW DX series alias like hell -it's possibly part of it's charm, or character- , and the emphasis of the FM8 filter is difficult to make it sound really pleasant ( It will behave like a -cheap- regular LPF in all other cases, so no, it's far from only for filtering the noise ...), you dont need any improvments to create thousands of thousands of awsome patches with the FM8. Different than VA. Sure. But this is the key to diversity and synthesis. FM8 is already a great instrument, and the former DX series had simply ... no filter at all. And the Dx series were on thousands of fabulous recordings. It's not only the machines, it's most often the men playing them too.

[dayjob]

i loath the algorithms/routing window. specifically the preset section within that window. it's awful.

"did i just write over an existing routing preset or make a new one? i don't know."


if they modernized the gui and made it a bit more friendly to get around and also the envelopes window.. i hate that kind of thing but i hate it in absynth too. i just don't enjoy using it so tend to keep it simple there.

i like its sound though and it has plenty of operators. the FX are mostly irrelevant to me.

[ghettosynth]

I would prefer a larger GUI, the older DX7 livery, and the return of bank attributes and management they removed in later versions. It's a relative ease to program with the matrix view, but I agree there's a little touching up could be done. However, I'd rather they left ZDF and other modernisms out - I can run hundreds of instances without a massive CPU hit, it's just about the lowest CPU hog out there.

It is, and it's reflected in the quality of the filter and effects. I don't care about CPU consumption, I just want great instruments. Putting an analog filter in the chain is one of the best things that you can do for complex FM sounds.

It (odf filter) would add a significant cpu cost though. But anyway, even if the FM8, and the former Yam HW DX series alias like hell -it's possibly part of it's charm, or character- , and the emphasis of the FM8 filter is difficult to make it sound really pleasant ( It will behave like a -cheap- regular LPF in all other cases, so no, it's far from only for filtering the noise ...), you dont need any improvments to create thousands of thousands of awsome patches with the FM8. Different than VA. Sure. But this is the key to diversity and synthesis. FM8 is already a great instrument, and the former DX series had simply ... no filter at all. And the Dx series were on thousands of fabulous recordings. It's not only the machines, it's most often the men playing them too.

The original DX series didn't have filters for cost reasons. You can view FM as some sort of sacred cow that stands alone as it did in a market driven product, or, as an implementation of some precious theoretical idea that it didn't need filters, which, only sounds good in theory, pun intended. I prefer to see FM synthes as merely a form of complex oscillator that deserves good per voice filters as much as any other synth. Even Kontakt, which could use better filters yet, has better filters than FM8.

There's no reason to leave high quality filters off of any modern FM implementation. It was done so originally because they were digital synths and the only way to do per voice filtering at the time meant demultiplexing the voices into separate D2A converters, adding an analog filter per voice, and then summing them after the fact. To get the most out of that configuration you'd need per voice VCAs as well and also demultiplexed and converted envelope and LFO signals. FM didn't have filters because it allowed Yamaha to create something new at low cost, not because it couldn't benefit from them.

Really, if you don't want improvements other than bug fixes, then just keep using FM8, I'm really hoping that NI is forward thinking enough to bring something more powerful and fresh to FM9.

[Lotuzia]

Having worked for Yamaha, I can say that what you assume is not what they thought.

And yes, I keep using FM8, and have made hundred of patches with it. Some use the filters 'as_a_very-standard' lpf filter. It does it's job, especially if you don't push the emphasis. And they sound great on their own. imho & ymmv eetc