The Fight for FM

[aMUSEd]

In response to what others have said, FM8 is not a PM (phase modulation) synth. The Dx7, which it was loosely based on, was technically PM, but FM7 and FM8 are true FM. Also, those who like to point out that the DX7 is 'really' a PM synth are probably just regurgitating what they have read and don't really have a good understanding of what is going on under the hood. Yes, technically it uses PM, but it is silly to call it a PM synth, because it just uses PM as a round about way to digitally generate the EXACT same waveforms that would be achieved through FM, and ALL of the programming is done as FM. Sonically it is an FM synth, and calling it a PM synth is just going to confuse people. Please stop.

Yeah but all I was saying is "technically" it is PM, which it is, and if I hadn't said it some bright spark would have. Practically/musically it makes little difference and personally I could care less

[koolkeys]

FM8 by FAR. Plus, you can load any of the thousands of patches on the web made for the DX7, and I think even for a couple other synths like the TX7, but I'm not 100% sure on that.

Brent

[living sounds]

FM8 by FAR. Plus, you can load any of the thousands of patches on the web made for the DX7, and I think even for a couple other synths like the TX7, but I'm not 100% sure on that.

Brent

The DX7 and TX7 have identical sound engines. But the patches don't sound the same in the FM8 (and they don't sound better).

[tony tony chopper]

Sonically it is an FM synth, and calling it a PM synth is just going to confuse people. Please stop.

I would then call then 'FM' (PM) & 'true FM' (FM), because they really are different methods. PM is phase modulation, resulting in phase modulation, thus freq modulation as well.

But the difference has to be made because true FM synths may exist, and they will be inferior to PM synths (because true FM isn't that practical to use). There probably are true FM synths, probably from someone who took 'FM' to the letter and didn't realize everyone uses PM because it works better.

I mean, a PM synth should be the user's choice, so he HAS to know.


And if I say this, it's because I too made a 'true FM' engine when I coded my first FM engine. I quickly noticed something was wrong, yet it works too.

[MaliceX]

Nothing beats VOPM I'm afraid. Genuine sound of a Yamaha chip that's NOT a DX7.

[Aroused by JarJar]

Nothing beats VOPM I'm afraid. Genuine sound of a Yamaha chip that's NOT a DX7.

What's VOPM?

and doesn't anybody have any sound examples to compare?

Rather hear user work than company ad presets at this point, because I might very well be misjudging some synths from the (to me) crappy sounds of the demos, and those sounds may be the result of a situation where the company knows it needs certain cliches to attract a big public but the sounds might be radically inappropriate for the synth. Specifically, a myriad of attempts at "phat analog" cliches whereas the synths might actually really shine in a completely different field.

[lococarlos]

Also, to those who suggest buying a DX7 instead of FM8; have you ever tried programming a DX7? That's one synth that I'm grateful to have a mouse and a big screen for making patches, because it was a major PITA to make patches on the DX7 IMO. Also, FM8 is far more powerful than a DX7, Period.

Yeah, but the DX7 sounds so much better to my ears. Here's a comparison: www.scherer.de/Download/DXtest.rar
You can get a TX7 for 50 bucks (or get two for stereo), there are zillions of patches availible online, no need to do any programming. In the end, to me the sound and how I can integrate it in a mix trumps everything else.

What'd you record this with?

[living sounds]

What'd you record this with?

I think it was the BLA Sparrow, but it might have been the Lynx Aurora. I think I accidentally used the headphone out as second stereo out on some of them, which might account for a slight volume difference between the channels, but doesn't actually affect the sound.

[lococarlos]

Sonically it is an FM synth, and calling it a PM synth is just going to confuse people. Please stop.

I would then call then 'FM' (PM) & 'true FM' (FM), because they really are different methods. PM is phase modulation, resulting in phase modulation, thus freq modulation as well.

But the difference has to be made because true FM synths may exist, and they will be inferior to PM synths (because true FM isn't that practical to use). There probably are true FM synths, probably from someone who took 'FM' to the letter and didn't realize everyone uses PM because it works better.

I mean, a PM synth should be the user's choice, so he HAS to know.


And if I say this, it's because I too made a 'true FM' engine when I coded my first FM engine. I quickly noticed something was wrong, yet it works too.

So what is the difference then? Some have said that PM was a hack on early FM synths to generate the exact same waveform that would be generated by strict FM (aroused by JarJar gave the formula). You say this is not the case?

[tony tony chopper]

and doesn't anybody have any sound examples to compare?

FM is a pretty simple digital technique, there's no room for differences, so no 'this one sounds more better/more analog' bar discussions (although some will probably claim that '8bit sounded better'..)

So they will all sound the same, the only differences will be in the features/limitations and the waveforms offered. FM synthesis also requires good multipoint envelopes, because it's all in the modulation.

And if something doesn't sound like a DX7, it's because parameters couldn't be translated 100% accurately (lack of specifications), most FM synths are way more capable than a DX7.

So what is the difference then?

The difference will be in the way to achieve more or less the same sounds. As the one who will program presets, you should care.

[tony tony chopper]

Nothing beats VOPM I'm afraid

It's just another FM chip, and it's basically what killed FM & MIDI files.

It was the time early consoles had crap music, and PC's had those Adlib/Soundblasters with OPL2/3 chips. It's because most PC's came with those chips that everyone was staying away from 'crap MIDI files', not realizing they were just score files passing through a very bad GM bank for FM.
(while lucky ones had rompler soundcards)

Then digital audio appeared in consumer cards & quickly replaced all this, and FM was forgotten, until now, where you can judge what FM was good for and what it wasn't.

[living sounds]

and doesn't anybody have any sound examples to compare?

FM is a pretty simple digital technique, there's no room for differences, so no 'this one sounds more better/more analog' bar discussions (although some will probably claim that '8bit sounded better'..)

So they will all sound the same, the only differences will be in the features/limitations and the waveforms offered. FM synthesis also requires good multipoint envelopes, because it's all in the modulation.

And if something doesn't sound like a DX7, it's because parameters couldn't be translated 100% accurately (lack of specifications), most FM synths are way more capable than a DX7.

So what is the difference then?

The difference will be in the way to achieve more or less the same sounds. As the one who will program presets, you should care.

So much for the theory, but if you compare them side by side you notice how much tighter the bass is on the hardware, the attack sounds a lot faster and more natural, the texture of the sound is more complex and interesting and the whole thing works way better in a mix. There's nothing wrong with the theory, but there have to be differences in the algorithms and/or implimentation that account for these differences.

[tony tony chopper]

There's nothing wrong with the theory, but there have to be differences in the algorithms and/or implimentation that account for these differences.

that's not differences in the algo's, it's differences in the parameters (how do YOU map your DX7 params to a software synth envelope?) and waveforms (are you using the same ones?).

much tighter the bass

if you ask the software synth to do 'much tighter bass', it will.

So you could argue that maybe the DX7 was easier to get good sounds with, but I seriously doubt it would be even half as easy to make a preset with a DX7 than with today's software synths.

[lococarlos]

So what is the difference then?

The difference will be in the way to achieve more or less the same sounds. As the one who will program presets, you should care.

you said you wrote an FM engine and realized the differences and advantages of a PM implementation. Can you please explain the specific advantages and differences?

[tony tony chopper]

Can you please explain the specific advantages and differences?

with true FM you will easily get crap or unstable results when messing with params, it's easier with PM. Again, different ways to achieve more or less the same, one is easier to make patches for.