Casio CZ/ VZ/ FZ - Pro Series

Thanks Terry,

Well interesting.  I did notice a difference
especially in organ 2-the CZ-1 was a bit more
muffled-not quite as crisp.  But as in science,
so many variables to consider.  But all in all
they both sound the same.  It's such a hard thing
to study.  You have to wonder how thin we are
slicing this.  I wonder even if two CZ-101's or
CZ-1's sound the same when put side by side.  

But I really appreciate your research.  My
feeling is that the CZ-1 is close enough to the
101 but gives you a lot more keyboard for the
buck.  Some Casio purists may disagree.  

What does everyone else think after listening to
these mp3's?

micah
--- Terry <daytona@...> wrote:
> 
> Hi Steve,
> > 
> > I only used a CZ-101 in a store, with
> headphones, so I can't compare 
> > the two.  
> Wow,that is one area where the CZ-101 really
> fails. They put the 
> crappiest op-amp on the headphone out, has a
> built in white noise 
> generator. Anyone ever complains that thier
> CZ-101 is noisy, they have
> probably pluged into the headphone out. Line
> out is fine.
> > If someone has a CZ-101, a CZ-1, a soundcard,
> a sequencer, and a 
> > cable to record the output of the Casios,
> they can make audio files 
> > of the same tune on the same preset and place
> them in the files 
> > section (FileA.mid and FileB.mid) so we can
> do a blind test and 
> > possibly vote on whether or not we hear a
> difference. 
> > 
> > --Steve
>  OK, I'll give this a shot! I found some really
> big differences in the
> two. With both CZ's volume set at max, the
> CZ-101 had a much hotter 
> signal. Had to set the CZ-101 to about 8 to
> match the CZ-1. Simple
> answer, "The volume on the CZ-101 goes to 11,
> man!" :)
>  Another interesting difference is with the
> extra op-amp on the CZ-1
> for final volume, all of the CZ-1's waveforms
> are inverted phase?
>  So I guess the CZ-1 is an "Inverted
> Phase-distrotion Synth". :)
> Really, all of the CZ-1 recorded sounds
> mirrored the sounds recorded
> on the CZ-101. Very strange but obvious if you
> study the schematics.
> Some of the waveforms don't really matter as
> they are symetrical, but
> most, like the saw wave is positive on the
> CZ-101 and negative on the 
> CZ-1. I suspect the CZ-3000/5000 are also
> inverted as they too have 
> the extra inverting op-amp.
>  So I made a few sound samples and uploaded
> them into the files 
> section. Some of the patches are dead on, with
> no difference, while
> others I had to double check as they sounded
> like different patches.
>  Files recorded with same MIDI file run into a
> Anatek thru, audio out
> into a Boss A/B switch. Recorded CZ-1 first
> then the CZ-101. Volumes 
> set with a meter to be about the same. All
> patches sent via MIDI to
> both synths. All velocity,aftertouch settings
> on CZ-1 set at 0. These
> were CZ-101 patches so the CZ-1 automaticly
> sets defaults for the 
> extra paramaters. Level 15, velocity amp=0
> wave=0 pitch=0.
>  Is there a difference?
> 
> Terry (The Casio Kid) 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 

y[]a[]z[]z[]o[]f[]e[]v[]e[]r[]

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com