Ensoniq EPS

Scotteralus · Post by **Scotteralus** » Fri May 23, 2008 4:15 pm

I am looking at an ENSONIQ EPS 16 Workstation on Ebay. So far the price is right but I'm confused by one part of the description I found on this forum. It says:

"On the synthesizer side it has two great filters with switchable hi, low and band pass, 6dB to 24dB cutoffs. BUT, they aren't resonant. "

Can anyone tell me what it means that the filters aren't resonant? Thanks very much.

S

michael stein · Post by **michael stein** » Fri May 23, 2008 8:02 pm

non-resonant means that at a high resonance (Q) the filter will not self oscillate and produce a pure sine wave. High resonant filters have a certain character ex. minimoog, tb-303, SCI prophet (x). Your Juno-106 has a pretty resonant filter. Play with its settings high on the resonance and low on the cut-off. The EPS wont be able to create that type of sound exactly but then again the EPS is a sampler and its synthesis side is for modulation of the samples so its not really to important for you to need a resonant filter. If you want that type of sound just sample it into the EPS.

gs · Post by gs » Fri May 23, 2008 8:27 pm

I believe what Michael is talking about is filters that have resonance but don't self oscillate. That has nothing to do with filters THAT HAVE NO RESONANCE AT ALL. Many Korg and Alesis ROMplers from the early 90s are like this: digital filters, no resoance. The EPS may have a filter similar to these.

BTW, there ARE samplers from the era of the EPS that actually do have resonant analog filters - my DSS-1 is one of them.

Post by **meatballfulton** » Fri May 23, 2008 8:50 pm

Scotteralus wrote:Can anyone tell me what it means that the filters aren't resonant?

It means they aren't resonant

Analog filters used in synthesizers typically have controls for cutoff frequency and resonance (or "Q"). Increasing resonance makes the filter pass more signal near the cutoff frequency, creating chirping, whistling and "squelch" effects.

Back 20 years ago the DSP power needed to do resonant digital filters was too expensive so many digital synths and samplers well into the mid 90s lacked resonant filters.

tom Cadillac · Post by **tom Cadillac** » Fri May 23, 2008 10:26 pm

I use an EPS quite a bit. But wouldn't say its got great filters. Not say compared to what you'd find in a Mono/Poly or SQ80.

But that's not really important as the EPS really shines in other ways - its great for easy vocal sampling and using its capacities more fully creates some really evocative lo-fi keyboard patches, which sit really great in the mix with sad vocals. I'v mostly started with quite simple casiotone sounds and used the EPS to mould them into a denser and thicker sound. The filters are nice here since they can be modulated with aftertouch for some nice tonal shadings and I use this all the time and creates some nice expression possibilities in the patch.

But its got the feel of a classic instrument and I'm sure you can get lots of other stuff from it. I wouldn't hesitate in buying one.

xonox · Post by **xonox** » Fri May 23, 2008 11:31 pm

The first EPS has no resonance on the filters. The EPS 16 probably has similar filters.

No resonance in the filters. So basically the low pass cuts high frequencies but doesn't add any harmonics like you can do with a resonant filter

Automatic Gainsay · Post by **Automatic Gainsay** » Fri May 23, 2008 11:48 pm

When the EPS came out, no one was looking to emulate analog synths, which is really the best use for a self-oscillating resonant filter. Samplers were about sampling other sounds and using them in a musical context. The concept of a sampler as a synth emulator came about later.

felis · Post by **felis** » Sat May 24, 2008 12:58 am

The non-resonant filters on my EPS weren't much better than a bass/treble control on a radio.

Well - not really, because you could still mod them with envelopes/lfo's and such.

xonox · Post by **xonox** » Sat May 24, 2008 1:26 am

felis wrote:The non-resonant filters on my EPS weren't much better than a bass/treble control on a radio.

Well - not really, because you could still mod them with envelopes/lfo's and such.

You know, this is pretty much what i had in mind. Well, my EPS has been in repair for a while now but last time i used it, the filters seemed a bit more powerful than such controls

Analog Freak · Post by **Analog Freak** » Sat May 24, 2008 3:03 am

I think the Ensoniq EPS is worth owning, even without resonant filters. They have polyphonic aftertouch, tons of modulation capabilities, and they sound a lot better than most people seem to think a 12 bit sampler should. The load while playing feature is a nice one, and in my opinion, the EPS is a killer pad machine. I like mine a lot, and I don't think I'll ever get rid of it. To answer your question resonance is basically boosting the frequencies right around the cutoff point of the filter. It's a bit hard to describe the sounds you get out of a filter with the resonance cranked up, but if you've ever listened to hardcore techno, you probably aren't going to be hearing much of that sort of thing coming out of an EPS. As long as you aren't planning on using it for analog emulation (which can be done with some good samples and programming) it should do just about anything you want. If you do get one, it's a nice bonus to have a memory expansion card, and make sure the disk drive works without it, your EPS is a big doorstop. A few disks to get you started would be to your benefit as well.

Automatic Gainsay · Post by **Automatic Gainsay** » Sat May 24, 2008 6:21 am

samplers aren't about filters, they're about SAMPLING

Post by **madtheory** » Sat May 24, 2008 11:17 am

Automatic Gainsay wrote:When the EPS came out, no one was looking to emulate analog synths, which is really the best use for a self-oscillating resonant filter. Samplers were about sampling other sounds and using them in a musical context. The concept of a sampler as a synth emulator came about later.

That's purely a matter of opinion. It's not that simple. I don't think there were any concepts involved as such, if so, can you explain why JL Cooper had a lot of success with the GenMod for the Emulator, and why did Emu take this concept further with the Emulator II? Filter resonance was one of the features that made the EII a better sampler than a Fairlight II or III, for example. In the case of cheaper samplers, leaving out filter res was a cost cutting exercise. Not everyone did it- Yamaha tried to do it digitally on the TX16W. Emu however, put res on all their samplers, which is what drew many artists (e.g. Orbital) to these instruments.

Filters are very important for creative sampling. Clearly, sampling is not your thing, and you have your opinion on the subject. But your opinion is not a fact.

clubbedtodeath · Post by **clubbedtodeath** » Sat May 24, 2008 2:00 pm

madtheory wrote:Clearly, sampling is not your thing, and you have your opinion on the subject. But your opinion is not a fact.

Mee-ow!

Post by **madtheory** » Sun May 25, 2008 1:52 pm

Very cute!!!

rockmanrock · Post by **rockmanrock** » Tue May 27, 2008 12:15 pm

madtheory wrote:Filters are very important for creative sampling. Clearly, sampling is not your thing, and you have your opinion on the subject. But your opinion is not a fact.

Filters are seen as a must-have these days but with the Ensoniq samplers you can do a h**l of a lot of creative things despite not having them. Autechre (while not being my cup of tea these days) based their sound on Ensoniq samplers for quite a few albums.

Ensoniq EPS

Ensoniq EPS

Re: Ensoniq EPS