Korg DS-8, FM or PM?

[gridsleep]

The Casio VZ-1 review emphasizes that the CZ line uses Phase Distortion while the VZ uses Phase Distortion and Frequency Modulation, and that the Yamaha synths actually use Phase Modulation, not FM. If the Korg DS-8 uses the Yamaha type of synthesis, is it, too, a Phase Modulation synthesizer, or is it a true FM synth?

[commodorejohn]

It's a standard Yamaha FM chip in there, so yeah, it's FM, even though Korg arranges it to look more like the CZ-series voice architecture.

[gridsleep]

But what was indicated in the VZ article is that the Yamaha synths DON'T use FM, but Phase Modulation. And you seem to be saying that the DS-8 is closer to the Phase Distortion of the CZ synths? So, does the DS-8 actually use Phase Distortion, then, or is it true FM as in the VZ-1? The whole confusion is three different kinds of synth engine that do sort of the same thing but in different ways, and people indiscriminately calling them by whatever name comes to mind, rather than what the engine actually is doing.

[meatballfulton]

The DS-8 (and 707) uses the same voice chip as 4-op Yamaha DX synths like the DX-9, 21, 27, 100, FB01, etc. The programming interface emulates subtractive synthesis without direct control of algorithms and operators, so the overall tonal pallete of the DS-8 is narrower than the Yamahas.

Whether or not that is "real" FM is just symantics.

[commodorejohn]

But what was indicated in the VZ article is that the Yamaha synths DON'T use FM, but Phase Modulation. And you seem to be saying that the DS-8 is closer to the Phase Distortion of the CZ synths? So, does the DS-8 actually use Phase Distortion, then, or is it true FM as in the VZ-1? The whole confusion is three different kinds of synth engine that do sort of the same thing but in different ways, and people indiscriminately calling them by whatever name comes to mind, rather than what the engine actually is doing.

Technically speaking, yes, Yamaha FM actually uses phase modulation - this is because it gives effectively the same results as true FM but is computationally simpler. So yes, the DS-8 is only FM to the extent that any of Yamaha's DX line is FM - but it isn't Casio's PD. Casio PD (used in the CZ series, not used in the VZ-1) eschews Yamaha's flexible arrangement of independent operators modulating each other for a simpler approach of selecting between different skew patterns for its sine-table lookup, so no matter how similar they may be at the lowest level, there's still distinct differences in how PD and FM work.

The DS-8 looks kind of like a CZ-series synth at the user level because it locks the FM voice architecture into algorithm 4 to give two two-operator stacks that it presents as sort of like an analog subtractive synthesizer, like the CZ-series does, but it's still purely Yamaha underneath.

[gridsleep]

Very good. Thanks for the detailed reply.

[gridsleep]

I have since discovered via cx5m.net that the DS-8 and 707 use the same FM chip set as the Yamaha DX9 and MSX CX5M, so in some ways it is less advanced than the DX7, but may sound better due to its overall design.

[commodorejohn]

The original 4-op FM chips only sound better than the DX7 in that they use 16-bit DACs; it's not until you get into the TX81Z/DX11 and its multiple operator waveforms that new possibilities not offered on the DX7 start cropping up.

[max badwan]

The original 4-op FM chips only sound better than the DX7 in that they use 16-bit DACs; it's not until you get into the TX81Z/DX11 and its multiple operator waveforms that new possibilities not offered on the DX7 start cropping up.

I'm sure you mean multiple waveform operators there

[gridsleep]

Monotimbrality can be quite a limitation. The DX7 might have started out as away too expensive or unreliable if they had developed it to access more than one voice at a time. Looking at the TG77 with its six op AFM, AWM2, and sequencer, it can handle four voices at once on sixteen channels for a full sixty-four instrument orchestra playing in real time.

[commodorejohn]

Yeah, that is the downside to the Mk.1 DX7. The DX7-II addresses that nicely, and better still with the E! mod, but of course it has a bit of a different tone to the original. You could always pair a DX7 and TX7, of course.

[moremagic]

why would you need multitimbrality on the dx7 of all things, given how you can make one patch sound so completely different across the kbd? :-p

[Psy_Free]

why would you need multitimbrality on the dx7 of all things, given how you can make one patch sound so completely different across the kbd? :-p

Cos more of anything is better

Edit : apart from crabs

[gridsleep]

why would you need multitimbrality on the dx7 of all things, given how you can make one patch sound so completely different across the kbd? :-p

Cos more of anything is better

Edit : apart from crabs

Having a yard full of these would be way cool, though. Just have to remember to keep the kittens inside.

[calaverasgrande]

why would you need multitimbrality on the dx7 of all things, given how you can make one patch sound so completely different across the kbd? :-p

Cos more of anything is better

Edit : apart from crabs

Having a yard full of these would be way cool, though. Just have to remember to keep the kittens inside.

Why does that crab have a hamburger falling out of its butt?