IS FM synthesis your goto?

[layzer]

unprocessed FM tends to sound quite thin. i tried to get the OXE dev to make a version of OXE that layered 8 voice channels similar to the way the yamaha TX802 can layer voices. with independant panning, detuning, ect... he never showed much
interest. would have made OXE one fat sounding synth IMHO. oh well.

Hey layzer,

For Linux users the Hexter FM synthesizer can be instantiated multiple times in the ghostess host, yielding a pretty good emulation of the TX802 or TX816. It will also load my original 802 patches correctly, something Dexed can't do yet.

Hexter :

http://dssi.sourceforge.net/hexter.html

ghostess :

http://smbolton.com/linux.html

I wrote a little HOWTO for emulating the 802 :

https://www.linuxmusicians.com/viewtopi ... 19&t=10508

(Linux only, sorry.)

I miss my 802 and my TG77.

Best,

dp

yeah, almost any synth can be loaded as multiple instances , panned, detuned and all that.
yes, the TX802 is after all really 8 two note polyphonic DX7's in a box.

but for some reason i just never do the multi instance on any VSTi lol

i also like Albino for its ability to layer patches internally. more synths
shouod follow this model!!!!

[foosnark]

I just don't think of it in terms of my goto synthesis technique. I grab whatever instrument I'm in the mood to play with, and just experiment. I try to mix it up a lot, and work with synth that haven't seen a lot of use in a while. The specific synthesis type is irrelevant.

Yeah, I do a lot of "I haven't used _______ in a while, I'll go with that" but the blank could be a specific synth, effect, method of synthesis, trick/technique, or whatever.

[fmr]

yeah, almost any synth can be loaded as multiple instances , panned, detuned and all that.
yes, the TX802 is after all really 8 two note polyphonic DX7's in a box.

Actually the TX802 is the module version of the DX7 II, and is only capable of layer two FM elements (each with 16 note polyphony), just like the DX7 II.

What you are referring is the TX816, which is a box where you have eight TX7 cards, being each one a complete DX7. Therefore, you have eight DX7 in a box. There was a version with just two cards, the TX216, equivalent, "grosso modo", to the DX5.

EDIT: Correction. After checking facts, it seems that the TX802 could, in fact, also perform eight part multitimbral. But it was the module version of the DX7 II, not the DX7. The TX816, OTOH, could perform like eight fully independent 16 voice DX7s.

[cryophonik]

I've never really been able to create a complex sound that I envision using pure FM synthesis.

Heheh Adlib times

With FM, I get the occasional happy accident, but more often it's some sort of unfortunate sonic disaster.

[Cruba]

I work alot with pads and also need the real dirt 'n' dust sounds. FM is 100 times to "polite" to do that job for me. In the end my last 4 songs for my 1st album are pure Synth1, just Marvins Drumsynths and Deputy (in last song) added.

Sometimes I play around with a FM synth and tweak some hours, but listening to my songs I would never be able to do that based on FM or Wavetable (like Tunefish or Kaira).

If musicians are happy with FM sure I've no problems with it. Ther's some nice freebies out like Shimmerbox, but it's a snap for me to compensate that with Synth1.

[Numanoid]

I am polling kvr users to find out if FM synthesis is your favorite. I dont just want to hear from FM users. I want to really know when you listen to sounds you want to put in your song how likely are you to grab FM? Thanks

Kind of reminds me of this Monty Python sketch:



Why is it so important to know what others are using/doing, the main point is what you are happy with yourself aint it ?

[xtreme sounds]

I have my reasons. But such a strange video.

[Numanoid]

I have my reasons. But such a strange video.

Just an illustration when somebody being incapable, living out their dreams via others experience

[Cruba]

Said the one with 20756 posts... rofl

~epic~

[Numanoid]

Said the one with 20756 posts

For somebody with 63 posts, you got no clue how it feels at the dizzy heights

~miniscule~

[xoxos]

the main point is what you are happy with yourself aint it ?

maybe you should try it

would you get off him bro.

[xtreme sounds]

Im not concerned. My purpose is to get an unbiased opinion of the true value of FM synthesis in todays music. I ask the KVR forum because you have experience with all of this stuff. Theres nothing more to it other that having this knowledge for my own benefit. So far I have gotten some really good feedback. Pun intended.

[Numanoid]

I am polling kvr users to find out if FM synthesis is your favorite. I dont just want to hear from FM users. I want to really know when you listen to sounds you want to put in your song how likely are you to grab FM?

Why?

How do you intend to use your findings?

[justin3am]

Im not concerned. My purpose is to get an unbiased opinion of the true value of FM synthesis in todays music. I ask the KVR forum because you have experience with all of this stuff. After all how do you now that I wasnt thinking of developing a new vsti and want to determine FM synthesis future?

I don't really approach sounds this way. If I have a specific sound in mind (rare) I look for synths which have features that I need, to get that type of sound. More often than not, I don't start with a specific sound in mind. I just keep tweaking a synth until I get an interesting sound. If it works in the context of a song, I use it. If not, I put it in a folder of sounds for later use (which I almost never use ).

In most patches I do, I end up using filter FM when I need to add some gritty texture or oscillator FM when I need to add some harmonic content. I'll go for analog style exponential or linear frequency modulation when I'm looking for abrasive or atonal sounds. I'll go for the DX7 style phase modulation when I'm looking for a sound which should have the harmonics related to the fundamental. There are no hard and fast rules though. My favorite sounds usually come from trying different things and carefree experimentation.

[Lotuzia]

yeah, almost any synth can be loaded as multiple instances , panned, detuned and all that.
yes, the TX802 is after all really 8 two note polyphonic DX7's in a box.

Actually the TX802 is the module version of the DX7 II, and is only capable of layer two FM elements (each with 16 note polyphony), just like the DX7 II.

What you are referring is the TX816, which is a box where you have eight TX7 cards, being each one a complete DX7. Therefore, you have eight DX7 in a box. There was a version with just two cards, the TX216, equivalent, "grosso modo", to the DX5.

EDIT: Correction. After checking facts, it seems that the TX802 could, in fact, also perform eight part multitimbral. But it was the module version of the DX7 II, not the DX7. The TX816, OTOH, could perform like eight fully independent 16 voice DX7s.

Yes, TX802 ( I have one) is 8 part multitimbral, for a max polyphony of 16 voices. So, each part has 2 voice polyphony.( you can chain parts btw) And it's engine is closer to the DX7 Mk 2 ( Which I have too) than the original one.

A very interesting mode let's you alternate the patches, wich can have slightly to totally different patches loaded, while playing a single partition. It make wonders if you assign some of those nasty FM percussions that each have a complete life, or variations of the same patch ( In wich case the partition you play should not be more than 2 voices polyphony) It can also be mind blowing by assigning very different patches. Add to that the 8 separate outputs that you can further process individually and a simple global patch can really become a world in itself.

NI FM8 adds a lot of possibilities. Especially because FM algorythms become totally user configurable. And a few other things. Total freedom is always something to consider. But having the hw also has it's benefits.( MKII allows to layer 2 patches on the fly for example, and the 802 has this marvellous 'predictable round robin' thing)