FM8 in year 2017?

[ghettosynth]

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

I'm not sure what you think that I'm assuming. However, there is nothing that I said that can be disagreed with. It absolutely was a cost saving measure to not include analog filters for precisely the reasons that I've stated. Either they believed that they weren't necessary, or they believed that they were. If they believe that they weren't, then they were buying into the theory, which is what at least some Yamaha salespeople were saying at the time; if they believed that they were, then there is only one significant reason not to include them, namely, cost. If you didn't know this it's because they didn't tell you, but it's obvious. In fact, we know that they, at the very least, "came" to realize that filters were important because their later synths have them, albeit, in inexpensive digital variants.

Chowning refers to how the digital implementation leads to an "efficient" synthesizer in his book.

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

What's your point? It's a shit filter, you aren't telling anyone anything that we don't know. I don't care if you've made thousands of patches and was the president of Yamaha, arguing that modern FM synths don't need filters because the TX series didn't is a bullshit argument, as is asserting false authority, and appealing to numbers. As I said, even Yamaha didn't believe that filters aren't useful on an FM synth they put filters on their later FM models. It didn't take that long either, the SY77 came out in 1989.

Sure, you can create great FM patches without filters, but that doesn't mean that the best path to a patch is either a VA synth or an FM synth without filters. My point holds, and strongly, if you view FM as simply a complex oscillator in a subtractive chain then you have a lot more flexibility in how you shape sounds. Using resonance with a good filter on FM is awesome and it cannot be easily duplicated with FM.

Sorry man, I really tire of people trying to impose their traditionalist worldview on others. Just because you seem to view FM as some sacred cow that doesn't need filters because John Chowning said so doesn't mean that it's actually true. Almost any modern synth should have per voice filters, and, in 2017, they had best be high quality ZDF models if you want any attention.

See Bazille for an example of what you can do with FM oscillators and high quality filters.

[DJ Warmonger]

Operator has analog-modelled filters since 9.5 and they make SO MUCH difference. Instead of trying to do magic with elaborate FM, you can add a simple overdiven filter on top of basic patch and it works great.

Besides, I don't see how having few more options can be a trouble.

The problem with FM8 is that after so many years there's still nothing considerably better than it on the market, so NI doesn't feel they need to face the competition.

[Lotuzia]

To GS : You seem to be the one who want to impose your POV on everybody. I'm certain FM8 has more attention that any other strictly FM based soft synth under the sun (and there are a lot, and some interesting ones). And it can do patches that no other synthesizer can make, including the one you mentioned, for good reasons.(Opposite beeing equally true)

What you describe is only 'your on vision' of what 'should be' an FM synth. Diversity is bigger than that. Life is bigger than what you 'think', and want to promote as 'a diktat'.

If FM8 is not for you, then, it simply isn't. For me it's ok. If you can't understand that : End of

[ghettosynth]

Operator has analog-modelled filters since 9.5 and they make SO MUCH difference. Instead of trying to do magic with elaborate FM, you can add a simple overdiven filter on top of basic patch and it works great.

Besides, I don't see how having few more options can be a trouble.

The problem with FM8 is that after so many years there's still nothing considerably better than it on the market, so NI doesn't feel they need to face the competition.

Pretty much. Sometimes what you want from FM is some magic but that you don't want to go to the effort of manipulating those harmonics over time to mimick the filter effect. It's really just much easier to take your "complex FM oscillator" and use it in a subtractive chain. Resonance adds harmonics in pleasant ways.

[exmatproton]

Operator has analog-modelled filters since 9.5 and they make SO MUCH difference. Instead of trying to do magic with elaborate FM, you can add a simple overdiven filter on top of basic patch and it works great.

Besides, I don't see how having few more options can be a trouble.

The problem with FM8 is that after so many years there's still nothing considerably better than it on the market, so NI doesn't feel they need to face the competition.

I agree with your first point.

However, your second point is somewhat, well, debatable (at the very least). I find myself using Sytrus way more often then FM8. Especially because of the filters. Which are more usefull and sound way better in Sytrus, if you ask me. Also, from the last iteration on, the UI is resizable (FL version), it looks better (subjective as f*ck, i know) and is still being updated by the dev (image line).

[ghettosynth]

To GS : You seem to be the one who want to impose your POV on everybody.

No, I'm making an argument for filters in FM based on facts. You seem to only be able to appeal to your own authority for your arguments. You don't have to agree with me, but from a purely technical point of view, you are simply wrong and the market reflects this. There are virtually no FM synths today without resonant filters of some sort. In a discussion about what FM should be in 2017, if you're going to argue that it should be the same as it was in 1981 then at least bring some knowledge to the table.

[ghettosynth]

Operator has analog-modelled filters since 9.5 and they make SO MUCH difference. Instead of trying to do magic with elaborate FM, you can add a simple overdiven filter on top of basic patch and it works great.

Besides, I don't see how having few more options can be a trouble.

The problem with FM8 is that after so many years there's still nothing considerably better than it on the market, so NI doesn't feel they need to face the competition.

I agree with your first point.

However, your second point is somewhat, well, debatable (at the very least). I find myself using Sytrus way more often then FM8. Especially because of the filters. Which are more usefull and sound way better in Sytrus, if you ask me. Also, from the last iteration on, the UI is resizable (FL version), it looks better (subjective as f*ck, i know) and is still being updated by the dev (image line).

I wished I liked ImageLine's stuff more. Their stuff seems so "cartoony" to me. I like the FM8 interface and arpeggiator. I also have a LOT of faith in NI's ability to create really great filters. Honestly, I really WANT NI to take FM9 seriously and bring out a killer product, but I doubt that it will happen.

Is anyone else doing really great FM? I mean DX style plus modern enhancements, not Arturia style.

[Lotuzia]

To GS : You seem to be the one who want to impose your POV on everybody.

No, I'm making an argument for filters in FM based on facts. You seem to only be able to appeal to your own authority for your arguments. You don't have to agree with me, but from a purely technical point of view, you are simply wrong. In a discussion about what FM should be in 2017, if you're going to argue that it should be the same as it was in 1981 then at least bring some knowledge to the table.

My verylast answer :

* If you think FM8 is similar to the 1981 DX7 MK 1 : I can nothing for you.
* If you can't make great sounding patches, with the FM8, that no other synth can do, or great music : I can nothing for you.
* If you think that only a 0df filter could make the FM8 'usable' again, I disagree, and once again : I can nothing for you.

All in all,I now think you don't really want to discuss anything with anybody, except with those who agree with you. You just want to impose your views. And I'm not interested to carry on such a 'discussion'.

And well, ... that's all folks LtZ

[exmatproton]

Operator has analog-modelled filters since 9.5 and they make SO MUCH difference. Instead of trying to do magic with elaborate FM, you can add a simple overdiven filter on top of basic patch and it works great.

Besides, I don't see how having few more options can be a trouble.

The problem with FM8 is that after so many years there's still nothing considerably better than it on the market, so NI doesn't feel they need to face the competition.

I agree with your first point.

However, your second point is somewhat, well, debatable (at the very least). I find myself using Sytrus way more often then FM8. Especially because of the filters. Which are more usefull and sound way better in Sytrus, if you ask me. Also, from the last iteration on, the UI is resizable (FL version), it looks better (subjective as f*ck, i know) and is still being updated by the dev (image line).

I wished I liked ImageLine's stuff more. Their stuff seems so "cartoony" to me. I like the FM8 interface and arpeggiator. I also have a LOT of faith in NI's ability to create really great filters. Honestly, I really WANT NI to take FM9 seriously and bring out a killer product, but I doubt that it will happen.

Is anyone else doing really great FM? I mean DX style plus modern enhancements, not Arturia style.

Well, Sytrus is (in my books) awesome. I get your point though and i don't know of any other DX style FM synth that's worth trying. Sytrus is though.
But yeah, if it isn't your cup of tea.......i am afraid NI will drop the synths apart from Kontakt, Reaktor, Maschine. But if they don't, changes are they will indeed update FM8 with nice filters, because they can do filters.

[ghettosynth]

Well, Sytrus is (in my books) awesome. I get your point though and i don't know of any other DX style FM synth that's worth trying. Sytrus is though.
But yeah, if it isn't your cup of tea.......i am afraid NI will drop the synths apart from Kontakt, Reaktor, Maschine. But if they don't, changes are they will indeed update FM8 with nice filters, because they can do filters.

That's what I thought. I couldn't find anything else a while back when I looked, I didn't know of Sytrus though. I have a bunch of work in Reaktor that I've used to experiment with FM but it's a non-trivial thing to really replicate the U/I features of FM8.

[exmatproton]

Well, Sytrus is (in my books) awesome. I get your point though and i don't know of any other DX style FM synth that's worth trying. Sytrus is though.
But yeah, if it isn't your cup of tea.......i am afraid NI will drop the synths apart from Kontakt, Reaktor, Maschine. But if they don't, changes are they will indeed update FM8 with nice filters, because they can do filters.

That's what I thought. I couldn't find anything else a while back when I looked, I didn't know of Sytrus though. I have a bunch of work in Reaktor that I've used to experiment with FM but it's a non-trivial thing to really replicate the U/I features of FM8.

Reaktor would (could) be the obvious "other" choise. But other than those three, i can't think of any DX-style FM synth in vst/plugin format.

[ghettosynth]

Well, Sytrus is (in my books) awesome. I get your point though and i don't know of any other DX style FM synth that's worth trying. Sytrus is though.
But yeah, if it isn't your cup of tea.......i am afraid NI will drop the synths apart from Kontakt, Reaktor, Maschine. But if they don't, changes are they will indeed update FM8 with nice filters, because they can do filters.

That's what I thought. I couldn't find anything else a while back when I looked, I didn't know of Sytrus though. I have a bunch of work in Reaktor that I've used to experiment with FM but it's a non-trivial thing to really replicate the U/I features of FM8.

Reaktor would (could) be the obvious "other" choise. But other than those three, i can't think of any DX-style FM synth in vst/plugin format.

SukFM, which I can't seem to figure out where I picked it up from as I can't find it in the library. Actually did a good job of replicating the FM8 basic interface including the modulation matrix for a four op synth.

[.jon]

Dexed? It's certainly very DX-like.

I haven't found a Reaktor FM ensemble with a good interface, and building such an UI is beyond my current builder skills.

And to support ghettosynth, there's no rational reason to not include a modern filter on any synth. While I think the filter fapping here on KVR is blown way out of proportion, filters are an obviously useful feature in any type synthesis. Even if just used like an EQ.

[Lotuzia]

Reaktor would (could) be the obvious "other" choise. But other than those three, i can't think of any DX-style FM synth in vst/plugin format.

Big Tick Rhino, IL Toxic 3, Octopus, and of course RP Blue II come to my mind, and have also something to possibly add to the FM saga, and are possible candidates to compliment FM8, or replace it, if people prefer them.

[exmatproton]

Reaktor would (could) be the obvious "other" choise. But other than those three, i can't think of any DX-style FM synth in vst/plugin format.

Big Tick Rhino, IL Toxic 3, Octopus, and of course RP Blue II come to my mind, and have also something to possibly add to the FM saga, and are possible candidates to compliment FM8, or replace it, if people prefer them.

Wow...how could i forget those ones

Toxic, Octo and Blue are good ones as well indeed. I haven't worked with Rhino though.