Aurora FM - New Win(32/64) VSTi FM synthesizer - Introductory pricing

[RyFi]

Dexed patches seem to sound better in Dexed, from my few test patches. Not sure why that would be; ‘twas just a quick test.

Because Aurora FM isn't a DX7 emulator or a Dexed emulator! It is not and will never be as accurate to a DX7 as a synth whose entire goal is to be an accurate emulation of a DX7. Aurora FM is fundamentally too different in too many ways to ever be able to emulate a DX7 precisely. If you want a DX7 emulation, use Dexed. If you want a kick-ass FM synth that can do way more than just sound like a 36-year old synth, that's what Aurora FM's for.

[RyFi]

Hey Ryan, I have a couple of questions. Would it be possible to add a button that collapses the effects section in order to make the GUI less busy? I doubt I will use the effects very often, as I'm inclined to process the synth first through DAC emulations and then through external FX. Also, I am interested whether you're planning on adding the ability to read external custom tuning files such scl apart from the built-in alternative tunings.

I haven't bought the synth yet, but I'm bound to pull the trigger sooner or later, as it's too cheap, sounds too good and I'm too much of an FM addict to not buy it. I likewise dig the old-school look of it. Anyway, the best of luck with your project. The more FM synths, the merrier.

Hey crickey13. I'm making some big changes and the appearance of the effects section will be different as a result. That's all I'm gonna say for now.

Ugh, this tuning stuff is a tough sell. I think like 2 people care about alternative and micro-tunings. Supporting more formats for tuning specification is a LOT of work to do for those 2 people who would use it. I really can't justify that at the moment.

Thanks for your interest and support! You know where to buy it

[crickey13]

Hey crickey13. I'm making some big changes and the appearance of the effects section will be different as a result. That's all I'm gonna say for now.

Right, say no more. Then I'm just gonna shut up for the time being and wait for the changes.

Ugh, this tuning stuff is a tough sell. I think like 2 people care about alternative and micro-tunings. Supporting more formats for tuning specification is a LOT of work to do for those 2 people who would use it. I really can't justify that at the moment.

All right, I thought it would be a lot simpler than that. Does it support any external microtuning format and load any form of external tuning files or are you limited to the tunings specified in the submenu?

[RyFi]

All right, I thought it would be a lot simpler than that. Does it support any external microtuning format and load any form of external tuning files or are you limited to the tunings specified in the submenu?

No, no external formats. If I were to change that, obviously I'd support Scala, then I'd need to decide if it was worth handling the Yamaha sysex formats too. But I'm getting anxiety just thinking about this when I'm deep into making other big improvements to Aurora FM that will be a lot more useful to a lot more people...

[crickey13]

No, no external formats. If I were to change that, obviously I'd support Scala, then I'd need to decide if it was worth handling the Yamaha sysex formats too. But I'm getting anxiety just thinking about this when I'm deep into making other big improvements to Aurora FM that will be a lot more useful to a lot more people...

All right, gotcha, thanks for clearing that up. No worries, I'm sure there are more pressing priorities with a project like this. I guess I would love to see oversampling and microtonal support at some point, but you're the boss here and I'm sure there are other things to attend to before that.

[RyFi]

You might have luck twisting my arm if you can explain to me how you make use of micro-tunings and why they're important to you. Is your goal to eschew the imperfections of equal temperament (which some of my built-in alternative tunings already do), or do you make crazy experimental music in cool/trippy/f**ked up scales? Or something else?

[gentleclockdivider]

Why the attitude ?

[RyFi]

Why the attitude ?

To whom are you referring? Me? I don't know what you're talking about because I haven't said anything with any attitude, or at least that wasn't my intent.

[don_sook]

Man, I had a go with the demo last weekend. And I gotta say, it is SO much easier to use this than Dexed for me. And it's only $17 CAD.

[RyFi]

Man, I had a go with the demo last weekend. And I gotta say, it is SO much easier to use this than Dexed for me. And it's only $17 CAD.

Thanks! Glad to hear it! Ease and efficiency of use is certainly one of my primary guiding principles.

[crickey13]

You might have luck twisting my arm if you can explain to me how you make use of micro-tunings and why they're important to you. Is your goal to eschew the imperfections of equal temperament (which some of my built-in alternative tunings already do), or do you make crazy experimental music in cool/trippy/f**ked up scales? Or something else?

When I wanna make music that sounds tonally different and somewhat exotic, then I find it easier to employ alternative tunings rather than complex Western harmony. Complex harmony still tends to sound quite Western and European and doesn't sound all that exotic.

FM often has an acoustic quality to it that I dig which is also the reason why it seems to go so well with microtonality. Maybe it's just me, but microtonality has a kind of rustic, kind of exotic quality to it and that coupled with the acoustic sound of FM is very appealing to me. Plus, if you want to write a piece that sounds Arabic or Gamelan, then it's good to have microtonal support, makes it sound more authentic. Of course it's all a matter of personal taste.

One of my favorite albums of all time is the second album by Aphex Twin called Selected Ambient Works Volume II. He uses a lot of microtonal stuff there. I also really like ragas from Indian classical music and they employ alternative tunings as well. Maybe that's the reason why I associate microtonality with rusticity, a lot of exotic instruments and even some premodern European instruments were just tuned differently. It's not so much about sounding experimental or trippy, it just sounds different, kind of rustic, sometimes atonal, harsh and haunting, but at other times quite subtle.

It's hard to describe because you can go from one extreme to another. Also, I don't feel I have nearly enough experience with it to give any conclusive judgement and I am in no way an expert on the subject, it's just a sonic area that's a lot of fun to explore, especially with something as acoustic and percussive sounding as FM. Hope that makes sense.

[RyFi]

Makes sense to me. Thanks for elaborating . I agree that FM synthesis and precise micro-tuning control are a natural complement to one another.

[satchnut]

Dexed patches seem to sound better in Dexed, from my few test patches. Not sure why that would be; ‘twas just a quick test.

Because Aurora FM isn't a DX7 emulator or a Dexed emulator! It is not and will never be as accurate to a DX7 as a synth whose entire goal is to be an accurate emulation of a DX7. Aurora FM is fundamentally too different in too many ways to ever be able to emulate a DX7 precisely.

Ok, good to know . I haven’t been following the thread closely, but what appeared to be a conversation regarding the accuracy to Yamaha manuals in this thread, as well as what is mentioned in reviews of Autora FM, combined with my general (if rudimentary) experience with FM synths that import DX/TX sysex, gave me the impression that Aurora FM was meant to be a well-performing DX/TX-like plus a lot more.

Not trying to knock your synth. I’ll probably end up buying it either way cuz of the perfectly spooky tones that randomizer conjures... perfect for a good Halloween track . I’m just trying to imagine exactly where this synth would sit in my mess—err—collection of FM soft/hard synths (including Dexed).

Methinks this thread is the appropriate venue to discuss sysex import predictability, as it gives insight into the general character of the synth, as well as addresses a possible practical concern.

If you want a kick-ass FM synth that can do way more than just sound like a 36-year old synth, that's what Aurora FM's for.

I can get on board with that.

[THE INTRANCER]

Are there any plans for a new more modern GUI ? Is it possible for users to reskin it themselves ?

[RyFi]

Ok, good to know . I haven’t been following the thread closely, but what appeared to be a conversation regarding the accuracy to Yamaha manuals in this thread, as well as what is mentioned in reviews of Autora FM, combined with my general (if rudimentary) experience with FM synths that import DX/TX sysex, gave me the impression that Aurora FM was meant to be a well-performing DX/TX-like plus a lot more.

I can't remember what all's been said over the last nearly 3 years, but yes, the crux of the matter is what I just proclaimed and what you now understand.

Of course it would be foolish of me to not try to translate Yamaha sysexes to the closest that my synth engine supports, and I've definitely endeavoured to do that (there may still be some gains to be made, and I'm working on those along with a dozen other things). The prior discussions I believe were about trying to explain that I was performing my translation to the best of my and my synth's abilities while referencing my interpretation of available literature on the specifications of the DX7.

But anyways, beyond that issue of making sure I'm at least translating as best as I can, that's it folks, end of story, there's nothing else I can do. Why would anyone expect a synth that isn't a DX7 emulation to sound like a DX7 and act surprised or confused as to why not? You already know! Because it's not and it's not trying to be or proclaiming to be.

So I get very exasperated that I need to keep saying this and making it clear. It's a sore spot that keeps getting picked at. It's super easy for some stranger on the internet to say something like "Aurora doesn't sound as good as Dexed" (just paraphrasing, I know you didn't say that), and then people read that and think "well gee, Dexed's free and it sounds better than Aurora FM which isn't free... why the hell would I buy that?" and then that negatively portrays my product which I've poured thousands of hours of blood, sweet, and tears into, and it sucks! It's so easy for people to spread misinformation, and so exhausting to have to keep trying to dispel it. So yeah, this issue can ruffle my feathers. I hope it's understandable why.

My synth can do a hundred things Dexed can't do and it's constantly getting better. Can we please enjoy that?

To be fair, I have customers, many which are members of this forum and contributors to this thread, who love Aurora FM and have been insanely generous with their compliments and appreciation, and I'm eternally thankful and grateful for that. It's just... not a large number of customers...at all ... so it sucks that I need to keep one eye on what people are saying and be ready to dispel any inaccuracies or have to defend something, lest I lose potential sales that are seriously vital to my well-being...

Anyways, enough about that... until the next time someone brings it up.

I’m just trying to imagine exactly where this synth would sit in my mess—err—collection of FM soft/hard synths (including Dexed).

If anyone only has Dexed, I wouldn't even dignify that with a response. My synth does vastly more than Dexed and if that's not glaringly obvious, then please let me know - obviously I've failed somewhere. If you already have one of the big name FM synths, then sure, maybe you don't need Aurora FM. I don't know. I've honestly never used FM7/8 so I can't say, and I've used Sytrus a bit and couldn't friggin' stand to use it for more than a couple of minutes. I dunno. I think Aurora FM's dope. It's one of my favourite synths. For the price, I think it's brilliant. Heh.