Yamaha DX7II VSTi

[Uncle E]

The Software FM synths are the cheaper alternatives that sound nice and are pretty dang close to original DX7 sounds, but the convertors will always be missing in the sound. That's just a fact.

FWIW, Universal Audio modeled the convertors of the Lexicon 224 when they made their plugin. I do think someone could eventually circuit model the entire path of the DX7 to nail the sound AND I agree with you that we're not there yet. Until that happens, I'm using samples.

[BBFG#]

It would be cool if software could nail the sound of a DX7, but there will always be the extra warmth/grit that hardware will provide.

DX-... warmth... can't get use to any association made between the two.

[Uncle E]

DX-... warmth... can't get use to any association made between the two.

Listen to the Lately Bass patch on a DX100 vs. on FM8, you'll hear what he's getting at.

[Teksonik]

I do think someone could eventually circuit model the entire path of the DX7 to nail the sound

Why bother ? I don't think the sound is worth "nailing". Maybe it's because I used to own a DX7 and TX7 but the sound has become tired and worn out. FM8 just sounds so much better. The only pure DX sound I still use is Tubular Bells. Every other sound I use in FM8 far surpasses anything the original DX could do........but then I tend to look forward and not back.......

Using FM8 to recreate DX sounds is like using a Ferrari to drive down to the corner market for a quart of milk.....I'd rather take it out on the open road and see how she can really perform........

[Teksonik]

DX-... warmth... can't get use to any association made between the two.

Listen to the Lately Bass patch on a DX100 vs. on FM8, you'll hear what he's getting at.

I also owned a TX81Z......there was nothing "warm" about it at all......Lately Bass included

[Uncle E]

Why bother ? I don't think the sound is worth "nailing".

Hey, I don't disagree with you. The few sounds I care about have been recreated quite excellently with samples.

[BBFG#]

I do think someone could eventually circuit model the entire path of the DX7 to nail the sound

Why bother ? I don't think the sound is worth "nailing". Maybe it's because I used to own a DX7 and TX7 but the sound has become tired and worn out. FM8 just sounds so much better. The only pure DX sound I still use is Tubular Bells. Every other sound I use in FM8 far surpasses anything the original DX could do........but then I tend to look forward and not back.......

Using FM8 to recreate DX sounds is like using a Ferrari to drive down to the corner market for a quart of milk.....I'd rather take it out on the open road and see how she can really perform........

+1
I loved my DX7II (I had kind of a love/hate thing with the first one).
But I don't miss either one. FM8, exponentially better (and cleaner).

[SODDI]

I loved my DX7II (I had kind of a love/hate thing with the first one).
But I don't miss either one. FM8, exponentially better (and cleaner).

And you don't have to program on a 3" x 8" LCD display. Paging through op pages...

[Numanoid]

It would be cool if software could nail the sound of a DX7, but there will always be the extra warmth/grit that hardware will provide. So the way I see it is

I don't think warm can be used to describe DX sounds

I can understand if you mean that the hardware in this case might give a "fuller" sound with some more grit, but never warm

[Gonga]

Bottom line, there are key sounds, such as Jazz Guitar 1, that I can only get with my TX-802, and that I cannot get very close to with FM7 or FM8. For anyone to whom these sounds are important, the FM synths still rock their rack space.

[beely]

Bottom line, there are key sounds, such as Jazz Guitar 1, that I can only get with my TX-802, and that I cannot get very close to with FM7 or FM8.

Out of interest, I'd like to hear what you're hearing - can you put up an audio example of playing that patch with the 802 and the same part with FM7/FM8, so we can hear what's different?

[Numanoid]

Out of interest, I'd like to hear what you're hearing - can you put up an audio example of playing that patch with the 802 and the same part with FM7/FM8, so we can hear what's different?

There will always be some kind of ghost in a machine that gives it a certain sound that cannot be recreated

Why would otherwise people be hanging on to their MiniMoog with MiniV, Minimonsta, Diva and Monark around?

99,7% of users will be happy with using the plugin version, but that remaining 0,3% group cannot, and tend to be very vocal about why the hardware is so much more special

[Teksonik]

I had the opportunity to purchase a TX81Z for $40 a week ago.........and passed. The original 4 Op sounds aren't even worth that much IMHO. I sold my DX7,TX7, and TX81Z years ago and never looked back. I prefer to look at it the other way around.....the DX can't come close to emulating the range and quality of FM8.

[Numanoid]

I had the opportunity to purchase a TX81Z for $40 a week ago.........and passed.

In my house it would have made a great, but albeit expensive, doorstep

[Teksonik]

Out of interest, I'd like to hear what you're hearing - can you put up an audio example of playing that patch with the 802 and the same part with FM7/FM8, so we can hear what's different?

There will always be some kind of ghost in a machine that gives it a certain sound that cannot be recreated

Why would otherwise people be hanging on to their MiniMoog with MiniV, Minimonsta, Diva and Monark around?

99,7% of users will be happy with using the plugin version, but that remaining 0,3% group cannot, and tend to be very vocal about why the hardware is so much more special

But the subject isn't about the MiniMoog. It's about Yamaha's digital synths vs. software digital synths. I too would like to hear audio examples of that "ghost in the machine" when it comes to the DX.