Korg Op6 vs Arturia DX7 V (vst comparison only), thoughts?

[ghostwhistler]

Is one better?

If so why?

[gentleclockdivider]

1. " Is one better ?"
-According to some people , one will be better then the other .
2." If so why ? "
-Subjective reasons

[Artie Fichelle]

DX7 V can be microtuned by odd´s sound stuff. Therefore millions of more sounds possible.

[ghostwhistler]

1. " Is one better ?"
-According to some people , one will be better then the other .
2." If so why ? "
-Subjective reasons

I asked a serious question, this is just stupid. Blocked

[nominil]

But it *is* subjective in that it depends on what you want.

Are we talking about the GUIs? how important are certain aspects of the GUIs of the two synths to you?

How important is simplicity of synth architecture?

Do you want more and varied built-in effects, or do you prefer to use other VSTs for that?

Do you want or need something that's got a bajillion presets in the wild or does that matter?

That's just for starters.

I'd rather have both. Opsix has a number of options that are nice for modern sound design, but I like the straightforward nature of the DX7's architecture. I would not be able to choose.

If you can't demo both synths somehow and you don't want to plod through YouTube videos of both synths, then tell us what's important to you in a synth and go a bit more in-depth than "which bear is better?"

1. " Is one better ?"
-According to some people , one will be better then the other .
2." If so why ? "
-Subjective reasons

I asked a serious question, this is just stupid. Blocked

[nominil]

Also, I should note that Arturia have polished DX7 V nicely and it works well. The cpu use may be a bit high, but it's not bad. On the other hand, Opsix had a rocky launch, and I haven't used it much lately to see if the heavy cpu use and peaking improved or not. Personally, I use OPS7 more than either of these.

[ghostwhistler]

But it *is* subjective in that it depends on what you want.

Are we talking about the GUIs? how important are certain aspects of the GUIs of the two synths to you?

How important is simplicity of synth architecture?

Do you want more and varied built-in effects, or do you prefer to use other VSTs for that?

Do you want or need something that's got a bajillion presets in the wild or does that matter?

That's just for starters.

I'd rather have both. Opsix has a number of options that are nice for modern sound design, but I like the straightforward nature of the DX7's architecture. I would not be able to choose.

If you can't demo both synths somehow and you don't want to plod through YouTube videos of both synths, then tell us what's important to you in a synth and go a bit more in-depth than "which bear is better?"

1. " Is one better ?"
-According to some people , one will be better then the other .
2." If so why ? "
-Subjective reasons

I asked a serious question, this is just stupid. Blocked

Great, so let me hear your opinions. Seems odd to reply to a request for opinions by just saying "what's the point of posting an opinion".

Something someone might say could resonate with me and spark interest.

I'm looking at the opsix vst because Korg is having a sale right now and I don't like the fx in the arturia dx7, conversely the latter appears to offer more modulation options and envelope options.

[nominil]

I do think opsix has more and better effects than DX7 V. There are also interesting operator modes in opsix that DX7 V does not have. There are decent modulation options in opsix. I haven't compared the two instruments that way, but I'd think you'd have enough to work with in either synth. For greater breadth of sound design, I'd go for the opsix. But I'd test the latest version to see how it works on your machine.

I do think the DX7 V might be more approachable, polished, and efficient than Opsix. The GUI is very easy to work with.

If I could only pick between those two and had no plans to buy the one I didn't pick up in the future, I'd go for DX7 V. I just think it's more straightforward and obvious, and I like that. My vision is kind of crap and the GUI seems more accessible. It's more restricted in sound designs, but that isn't a bad thing necessarily. And since I have other plugins, I wouldn't worry about the effects not being great, though I personally think they're good enough

[ghostwhistler]

The DX7 V is decent. But I like the options in the Op6 which I am currently demoing.

it's very much swings and roundabouts. The dx7 has more options for envelope construction, but they are a bit more awkward to work with. I hate the default dx7 envirlope model, even though it's optional in the dx7v. I just cannot get used to it. Op6 seems to have a more simple adsr. I can't tell if there are further options and Korg are crap at providing tutorials/manuals in their vsts

[NoriSato]

I have DX7-V and now demoing OPsix, also have original YAMAHA DX-7 H/W from 1970s.

Currently I prefferd DX7-V and maybe do not purchase OPsix this time.
Both can produce nice sound well, but for emulation, DX-7V is closer to original.

- DX7-V has original 8 parameter EG, but OPsix has only ADSR. DX7-V also has 32 step MSEG mode.
- DX7-V has DAC Resolution(to 16bit) and verocity switch(to max 100), which sound very close to original.
- Both have Level-Scaler same as original, but DX7-V can switch to more complex lavel-scaler mode.

DX7-V has multimode filter for each operator. Usualy its behavior is per note base, but once you use one of MOD-ENV to modify its cut-off, it act as per mix base. Maybe MOD-ENV itself is not per note base.So it is not suitable for old-school subtractive synthesys.

OPsix has some feature which original and DX7-V do not have. Such as Ring Modulater, Filter FM, per note filter env, and better builtin effects. DX7-V seems to have previous version of Arturia's effects. New Arturia's synth have much better effects.

But this kind of features, I already have U-he Bazille and many good VST effects, not so attractive for me. There are tons of preset for DX7. For using them and tweaking them , DX7-V is more efficient. If I want to make new sound based on FM, I will use Bazille or Phase-Plant. They have lots more features compare to OPsix.

[dune_rave]

opsix sounds the best. on the other hand, i had some crash with it, and i dont remember crash with dx7, phase plant or bazille....

[Tj Shredder]

I hate the default dx7 envirlope model, even though it's optional in the dx7v. I just cannot get used to it. Op6 seems to have a more simple adsr.

That alone would be the deal breaker for op6. For expressive playing ADSR is way too limited: start a sound with low velocity and then let the sustain raise above the peak of the first segment with aftertouch. That is easy with the four segments of the DX envelope and completely impossible with ADSR…!
If its not about loading old DX patches but sound design, I would look at F‘em from Tracktion. Not only way cheaper (on sale), also way more capable than both…
FX is never a criteria to exclude. I can add any FX I like without problem to any synth…

[NikkiA]

If its not about loading old DX patches but sound design,

Totally agree, and if you were designing a 'modern FM' like F'em or Opsix, why on earth stop there, Casio got the envelopes right on the CZ series, up to 8 steps with a user-defined sustain point.

Although I'd probably go a step or two further, and define the sustain points as start and end, so that you can have looping envelope sections with complex shapes. Perhaps even add more than 8 steps.

ADSR is just too limiting, even if some synths (vital for example) have enough trigger flexibility to emulate bloom pads (where the filter continues opening after release) and the like.

[ghostwhistler]

I hate the default dx7 envirlope model, even though it's optional in the dx7v. I just cannot get used to it. Op6 seems to have a more simple adsr.

That alone would be the deal breaker for op6. For expressive playing ADSR is way too limited: start a sound with low velocity and then let the sustain raise above the peak of the first segment with aftertouch. That is easy with the four segments of the DX envelope and completely impossible with ADSR…!
If its not about loading old DX patches but sound design, I would look at F‘em from Tracktion. Not only way cheaper (on sale), also way more capable than both…
FX is never a criteria to exclude. I can add any FX I like without problem to any synth…

I mean that's fair enough. Though I'm a little unclear on your example. It sounds like all you'd need is to have the attack rate on the modulator operator be slower than that of the carrier, so that you hear the modulation swelling over time, no?

I don't know about F. Em. It sounds promising, unfortunately it's not currently on sale as far as i can tell. Opsix is.

[perpetual3]

ITB Tracktion F em is pretty much unequaled. However, if you compare FEm with Op6, 2 op sine waves for both mod and car you will find that the harmonics generated through modulation and feedback to be substantially different the instance you add any kind of modulation, including the envelopes at so called identical settings. Tracktion also doesn’t allow modulation of an operators width. But the tracktion enevelopes are far more featured, the flow lfo is very powerful and of course it’s 11 op vs 6. However, the op6 operator modes really do open up the synth in ways that other FM synths cannot. Personally, I got the op6 native via hardware and FEm for $25 on sale.

As far as a DX7 emu is concerned I use the Plogue OPS7. All of Plogue’s fm synths have IMHO more character and presence that the competition by an obvious margin.

I hate the default dx7 envirlope model, even though it's optional in the dx7v. I just cannot get used to it. Op6 seems to have a more simple adsr.

That alone would be the deal breaker for op6. For expressive playing ADSR is way too limited: start a sound with low velocity and then let the sustain raise above the peak of the first segment with aftertouch. That is easy with the four segments of the DX envelope and completely impossible with ADSR…!
If its not about loading old DX patches but sound design, I would look at F‘em from Tracktion. Not only way cheaper (on sale), also way more capable than both…
FX is never a criteria to exclude. I can add any FX I like without problem to any synth…

I mean that's fair enough. Though I'm a little unclear on your example. It sounds like all you'd need is to have the attack rate on the modulator operator be slower than that of the carrier, so that you hear the modulation swelling over time, no?

I don't know about F. Em. It sounds promising, unfortunately it's not currently on sale as far as i can tell. Opsix is.