Free FM Synthesizer Dexed (VST Windows and Mac)

VST, AU, AAX, CLAP, etc. Plugin Virtual Instruments Discussion
Post Reply New Topic
RELATED
PRODUCTS
Dexed

Post

EvilDragon wrote:
Nope they're pretty lame as the perspective is totally wrong. Incredibly bad, perhaps ;)
Agreed. Against the flat background the knobs look they're all bent forward. Never seen a synth like that.
A top down view would have been the correct way to go there.
I guess, in design, there really is a reason why form follows function and not the other way around.

Post

a little bit of DX mysticism and inspiration for ENV1 who knows he's going to work on our favorite plug in :)
honestly i wouldn't mind paying a few bucks for the result.

Post

moshimoshi wrote:
edit - I realise I made an assumption that you wanted ADSRs. Maybe you just want to invert the rate controls, I guess this wouldn't be catastrophic for compatibility etc, but I don't know, is it that hard to simply adjust to this methodology? I think about them like the LFO paradigm, i.e. Rate = slow at the low end of the knob/fader, fast at the high end of the knob/fader.
I think it's completely reasonable that no synth designers use rate and they all use duration now, that's all i am saying. rate yields a duration after calculation, and it can easily be expressed in a better way for ease of use. the gui should be easy, and more thinking can be done under the hood. two knobs for each stage of the envelope is really bad. we've got graphical envelopes now. ;)

in fact, if people want to use dexed as a programmer for their hardware, changing the envelope interface in the VST will have no bearing on the patching inside the hardware, and the emulation is still faithful. Let me just cite that Dexed has a filter, so it is already "corrupted" as a faithful emulation ;)

Post

/* pinknoise */
Last edited by noiseresearch on Mon Nov 30, 2020 8:20 pm, edited 1 time in total.
/* whitenoise */ /* abandon */ /* reincarnated */

Post

Of course there is, this was suggested to him back when the browser was in the making, still not implemented.

A worse alternative would be to at least show full path to the current bank so you could go back to where you were and work from there if needed. If I have several instances can't remember which one holds what bank and where it is located. And Dexed works as a preset browser/player mostly, so this should be obvious.

Post

Can we get a switch to toggle between the internal synth engine with the hardware DX7?
Intel Core2 Quad CPU + 4 GIG RAM

Post

how about the UI automatically showing which operator is carrier and modulator, for each algorithm?

Post

hermetica wrote:how about the UI automatically showing which operator is carrier and modulator, for each algorithm?
Huh???
It does that now. Carriers are always on the bottom.

Post

overhishead wrote:
moshimoshi wrote:
I think it's completely reasonable that no synth designers use rate and they all use duration now, that's all i am saying. rate yields a duration after calculation, and it can easily be expressed in a better way for ease of use. the gui should be easy, and more thinking can be done under the hood. two knobs for each stage of the envelope is really bad. we've got graphical envelopes now. ;)

in fact, if people want to use dexed as a programmer for their hardware, changing the envelope interface in the VST will have no bearing on the patching inside the hardware, and the emulation is still faithful. Let me just cite that Dexed has a filter, so it is already "corrupted" as a faithful emulation ;)
Whaaa?
The DX7 rate is nothing like you describe. It's not linear for a start. It's a look-up table in ROM and has four different slopes just for 0 - 1.
Two knobs, or two settings for the envelop is exactly what the DX 7 used.

If you want to re-write Dexed into something else then either use something else or fork the project and do your own.

I find the GUI perfectly easy to use, the sounds almost exact and the EG (9.4.0) almost perfect.

The DX 7 does have a non adjustable filter on the output to limit the HF from the DA. Later models had different filtering. Dexed does not implement this in the emulation so the filter allows you to trim the sound between engines and models to help remove the 'artificial' brightness that everyone complains about from Dexed.

It's great as it is. Light, fast, quite accurate, easy to use, easy to program.

Post

Jellinghaus DX-Programmer. I've actually seen one in a store, under glass. Didn't get to try it.
I think it might match the Viscount "Oberheim" OB-12. I have a sneaking desire for an OB-12.

Post

I personally have an very overt desire for an OB-12...

Post

overhishead wrote:
moshimoshi wrote:
edit - I realise I made an assumption that you wanted ADSRs. Maybe you just want to invert the rate controls, I guess this wouldn't be catastrophic for compatibility etc, but I don't know, is it that hard to simply adjust to this methodology? I think about them like the LFO paradigm, i.e. Rate = slow at the low end of the knob/fader, fast at the high end of the knob/fader.
I think it's completely reasonable that no synth designers use rate and they all use duration now, that's all i am saying. rate yields a duration after calculation, and it can easily be expressed in a better way for ease of use. the gui should be easy, and more thinking can be done under the hood. two knobs for each stage of the envelope is really bad. we've got graphical envelopes now. ;)

in fact, if people want to use dexed as a programmer for their hardware, changing the envelope interface in the VST will have no bearing on the patching inside the hardware, and the emulation is still faithful. Let me just cite that Dexed has a filter, so it is already "corrupted" as a faithful emulation ;)
The thing is - the 2nd knob for each stage sets the level. You can't solve the issue of 8 knobs by just 'converting rate to duration'. Having rate/level for each stage makes the envelopes a lot more versatile than ADSRs - think about it. Sometimes it's good to learn a new (old) and different paradigm, it can get you to different sounds and think about sound design differently. There's no point all synths being the same just to satisfy some notion that 'we shouldn't be doing that in this day and age'.

I would highly recommend having a flick through this excellent manual for the DX7. It's not the same as the original japanese-produced manual. It's really well-written and informative, it has some great explanations of FM and how to think about the DX7:

https://www.manualslib.com/manual/19629 ... a-Dx7.html
(use the download link so you can view the actual PDF without any added watermarks)

- page 23 onwards is a great explanation of using the DX7
- page 26 has an explanation of the envelopes

The filter in Dexed as far as I know is monophonic, it can't be considered as part of the synth voice architecture. You can't modulate it polyphonically. For me it just allows a quick way of rolling off some top end... it's handy to have, but it's not really part of the synth imo, more an additional effect.

As someone else said, if you want to change Dexed so fundamentally - you should fork it off and develop it yourself or with some like-minded coder(s). It really seems like a lot of work to me when you could just learn how the envelopes work in about 10 minutes.

Post

The thing is - the 2nd knob for each stage sets the level. You can't solve the issue of 8 knobs by just 'converting rate to duration'. Having rate/level for each stage makes the envelopes a lot more versatile than ADSRs - think about it. Sometimes it's good to learn a new (old) and different paradigm, it can get you to different sounds and think about sound design differently. There's no point all synths being the same just to satisfy some notion that 'we shouldn't be doing that in this day and age'.
Exactly! Exactly!
A duration does not logically fit with the variable level envelope that Yamaha used. It changes depending on the last note level, the over all level and of course the segment level.
Because the rate is not linear, a GUI like fixed level -variable duration systems is out of the question. It would need to be some weird logarithmic scale which would confuse the B graders even more.

One of the most salient points is that the level in modulator affects and effects the timbre. So a variable level is crucial for EG programming in the DX7 FM. Done right you can get something like a filter sweep.
As I mentioned earlier the rate is not linear. 25 is not twice the duration of 50 its like maybe 15 times (I forget the exactness)

As far as books explaining this complex EG system read ...
The Complete DX7 by Howard Massey
There's a good reason an old tattered copy will set you back over $100.

Post

guys.

no, just no.

we HAVE non linear envelopes in 2018 already, they are called "logarithmic" everyone understands that. no other synth uses Dexed's sort of interface in 2018. Especially not a Commercial FM synth (because no one would buy it.) An XY grid was not possible in 1979 otherwise Yamaha would have made a graphical envelope then. Why am I harping on the FM synth envelope Controls? because FM synths are some of the most complicated synths to program as it is, so why not make it simpler? Why hold on to these knobs? First of all, it is very difficult to visually reference what shape the darn envelope is by looking at 8 knobs. Does that make a shred of sense? Come on maaaan!

FM8 can do Everything Dexed can do and more. Why didn't Native Instruments opt to use 8 rotary knobs for the envelopes? Because no one would buy that.

reminder for the "fork it yourself" purists: DX7 does not have a filter. let that sink in a bit.

I am very well versed on all the Yamaha FM synths, having owned most of the important ones already, if you missed that.

the extreme few of you who are happy with 8 knobs instead of a graphical envelope are in the extreme minority guys. why not just admit you may be wrong instead of being a stick in the mud?

/runt

Post

If you want an FM synth that isn't Dexed and doesn't work like Dexed then there are plenty of other choices out there. Get one of them.

But spending lots of time demanding that a really useful free synth should be changed into something quite different seems a bit pointless.

Steve

Post Reply

Return to “Instruments”