M1 vs D-50

[crimsontider]

I just purchased the M1 as part of the digital collection from korg and love it. Wasn't the M1 Korgs answer to the D-50? Or was it the other was around?
Guess I'm wanting to know how close the two sound to each other and which you would rather have as a vsti.

[beej]

The D-50 was first, and was the second samploid synth (Ensoniq ESQ1 was first). the D-50 could do the breathy chiffy stuff, and had chorus and reverb built in.

The M1 came a year later, and improved on the D50 design by being multitimbral, having a sequencer, and having a full multi-FX section plus a drum section, and was the arrival of the keyboard workstation proper.

[adydub]

The M1 came out a bit after the D50. The M1 was the first modern ROMpler, whereas although the the D50 did use samples, they were mostly short attack transients that were combined with a VA type synth engine.

They do have different characters. Mostly this is down to the much longer and varied samples in the M1, and the resonant filters in the D50.

I'd go with the virtual M1 any day, but that's not to say the D50 isn't without a certain unique quality.

[Krakatau]

Wasn't the M1 Korgs answer to the D-50? Or was it the other was around?

i don't think so, i guess that, in fact, the D50 was the answer of Roland to the DX7 (and other FM synth from Yamaha)

It was a time in the middle of the eighties when ROMsamples were too expensive, so in the D50 synthesis technique, only the attack where based on samples

[boin]

D-50 was Roland's answer to Yamaha's FM DX synths. It was advertised as using "LA - Linear Arithmetic" synthesis, supposedly much easier to program than the "digital multiplicative - DX" approach of Yamaha's FM synths. It had a collection of small samples (mostly the attack phase of some acoustic instruments) and digital generators and filters. The filter was even resonant (well, kind of) but only for square waveforms! And it included an internal EQ and reverb, pretty unusual and new for the day. Great synth, capable of a wide range of beautiful sounds, but not that easy to program at all - especially without a PG1000 (google this - nice gadget). But it was definitely easier to program than a DX-7, being closer to a subtractive/additive synth.

The M1 appeared after the D-50 and it is a totally different kind of animal. The M1 began the fad of "workstations", the all-in-one boxes, multitimbral, internal FX, internal sequencers, depending more and more on samples (memory was getting cheaper), aiming to a "realistic sound" goal more than being a general synthesizer. I remember the first M1 demo I heard: a cheesy song (IMO) totally recorded and produced with the M1, with drums, a sax solo and things like that. It impressed me that a single keyboard could do all that - but it never really impressed me as a synthesizer. But this is only my opinion...

[boin]

A little late...

[Torben]

I think you are refering to S-50 and not D-50 right?

[Krakatau]

I think you are refering to S-50 and not D-50 right?

i don't think so either, S50 was a sampler ( 8 bits depth i guess ) not a synth

[crimsontider]

Thanks for the input. I always thought that the D-50 and the M1 were both the start of the affordable digital workstation that used PCM's that could be shaped somewhat but that the D-50 aged much better. I know a few bands that still use it today(Type O negative).

I gather that the D-50 and the M1 do not sound similar.

[beej]

Yep - one sounds very 'Roland' and the other sounds very 'Korg'.

Generally speaking, I associate Roland's sound character as thinner, clear and sparkley, and Korg's general character as thicker, not quite as toppy, denser and more effect heavy.

[mao]

IMHO D50 is really a little beast. M1 have a sequencer but today everything have a sequener. The D50 is still a warm synth capable of special sounds thanks to the spectrum waves, the "jammed waves" and the beautiful resonant filters. Large pads and long sweet sweepes are still today wonderful. I bought a 2nd hand D550 for few euros and I'm very very very happy with it... It sit over my K2000RS sounds to me as good as in the middle '80ies.

Some very famous preset:

Digital Native Dance
Spaciuos Sweep
Staccato Heaven
Cathedral Organ (Incredible church Organ)
Fantasia
Shakuhachi (Do you remeber that Malboro spot?)
Nylon Atmosphere
Sountrack (used by everyone...)
Nightmare.

Go for it...

[1-2-Many]

I always thought that the D-50 and the M1 were both the start of the affordable digital workstation.....

The D-50 was/is NOT by any stretch a "workstation" synth. Hell it barely has midi!
Still a unique synth IMO.

And the ESQ-1 came much before the M1 as the first multitimbral/track workstation synth with a sequencer.

[aliengroover]

I always thought that the D-50 and the M1 were both the start of the affordable digital workstation.....

The D-50 was/is NOT by any stretch a "workstation" synth. Hell it barely has midi!
Still a unique synth IMO.

And the ESQ-1 came much before the M1 as the first multitimbral/track workstation synth with a sequencer.

True, but Korg was the first, and really only company to nail the workstation concept. Korg may not have the best sounds, but they do workstations better than anybody ever has...well, outside of the Synclavier.

And Beej, I see your descriptions of the Roland and Korg "sounds" totally opposite. Korg is totally toppy and "thinner". I typically rely on my Roland for more of the meat and the Korg for the butter on top. But hey, sounds are subjective.
Peace

[dahwoud]

Take a look here: http://www.synthmania.com/d-50.htm and here http://www.synthmania.com/m1.htm

[crimsontider]

Take a look here: http://www.synthmania.com/d-50.htm and here http://www.synthmania.com/m1.htm

Thanks, I didn't realize that the D-50 had been added.
Couldn't ask for better information.