Well, I happen to agree with BOTH of you guys to a large degree, so I admit I don't fully see the dispute. I learned to program on a CZ-1000 (my first synth), and it DID teach me a lot of the basic concepts of analog synthesis. That being said, imagine my surprise and minor disappointment when I got my first analog synth years ago and discovered most had only ADSR envelopes, and if they had two oscillators per sound, they (the oscillators) didn't have dedicated envelopes and filters to be processed independently (like the CZ, though the CZ only offered a "filter-like effect"). Didn't digest the concept of a filter at first...in my mind it was merely a "brightness" knob. Didn't realize it was just a big EQ basically.
My CZ-1000 eventually broke, but I later picked up a CZ-5000, a CZ-1, and a VZ-10. I do think it's pretty easy to program too (VZ-10 less so), but I visualize numbers fairly well and had a decent background in math when I started. And when I say "easy to program", I mean grasping the concept of HOW to program it was easy enough. The physical act of programming it is much slower than twisting some knobs I'll agree.
So again, not sure I see the dispute. I can only say it's a bit subjective. I love analog (have many), love digital (PM, FM, Rompler), and have even enjoyed soft (mostly through Props Reason). Variety is the spice of life...
Cheers,
WadRad
------------------ Re:
[CZ-VZ-Files] Re: Hello guys, new user, and newbee here! ; ------------------
Sunday, June 16, 2013 5:40 AM
From:
"Daniel Forró"
Add sender to Contacts
To:
CZ-VZ-Files@yahoogroups.com
History of synthesizers started with subtractive principle many years
ago, not "these days". It was the first architecture, and despite many
other principles came later, this one has always been in use until our
days. Thanks to this it's considered as a standard in the world of
synthesizers. So when I hear "synthesizer", this is what I imagine
first. And I'm not alone in this - many analog and digital
synthesizers and samplers follow or at least emulate this
architecture, Casio PD synths being good example for this. What's
wrong with these facts?
Even when we accept this fact and try to see CZ as the dual
subtractive synth, still there are very complex (and thanks to its
movable Sustain and End points also quite unique) envelopes - nothing
for beginners. And nothing which we can find on common subtractive
synth with ADSR envelope.
And because PD principle is hidden behind the user interface, and user
has no access to it, it's hardly usable as a learning tool for FM
synthesis. Far away from FM, and so simple that I wouldn't call it an
advanced subset of it. Envelopes also differs. Besides FM is only one
part of Yamaha algorithm synthesis - in fact it's a combination of FM
(yes, PM actually) with additive harmonic and additive component
synthesis. Algorithm synthesis doesn't pretend being subtractive synth
(which is what CZ does), so it's clear there's no filter there.
Magic of programming analog subtractive synth is in understanding how
to set and balance these important parameters: Filter Cutoff
Frequency, amount of filter envelope modulation, Sustain level in
filter envelope and Keyboard Scaling for filter. I'm sorry but I don't
see any of these parameters on CZ so there's not much knowledge we can
get from it and apply on some subtractive synth.
;
Anyway there's not big sense in comparing of those systems - each of
them has different architecture, offers different sounds and it's
necessary to learn how to work with each of them. There's hardly
anything like universal knowledge we can easily transfer from one
system to the other.
Daniel Forro
On 15 Jun, 2013, at 11:26 PM, synergeezer wrote:
> "I don't think so, it's not typical subtractive synth". And this
> applies because almost everyone is using subtractive synthesis,
> these days? On what planet? CZs present an advanced subset of the
> modulation potential of the Yamaha FM (actually, PM) synthesizers.
> The skills one learns, rather easily, IMO, on the CZs applies very
> well to subtractive, as well as to FM synthesizers. The CZs are a
> very gentle introduction to synthesizer programming!
>
> - synergeezer
>
> --- In CZ-VZ-Files@...m, Daniel Forró wrote:
>>
>> I don't think so, it's not typical subtractive synth, it just tries
>> to
>> imitate that structure (behind this face is hidden PD Synthesis). In
>> comparison with the other synths trying to imitate "standard"
>> subtractive synth here oscillator is digital, there's no real filter,
>> envelopes are difficult to understand and program, concept of "lines"
>> is also rather unusual (because there are in fact two independent
>> synths), and ring and noise modulation is also not quite typical.
>>
>> Never mind, important is it can produce interesting sounds :-)
>> ;
>> Daniel Forro
>>
>> On 15 Jun, 2013, at 12:15 AM, synergeezer wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> IMHO, the CZ is the best bit of gear for learning how to program a
>>> synthesizer (okay, maybe a big modular might be better).