Casio CZ/ VZ/ FZ - Pro Series

Although you are right in most facts you have written, there are some  
small inaccuracies which maybe ask more explanation.

Casio called this type of synthesis Phase Distortion (not Phase  
Modulation), they just change the shape of the wave by changing the  
speed of reading the memory, and combine (by mixing) two waves in one  
line, and combine (by mixing or ring modulation) two such lines. This  
way it was in CZ series. VZ is more complex and uses iPD synthesis,  
interactive Phase distortion where four lines are involved.
And Casio doesn't use term Operator for its oscillators.

So it hasn't much common with FM on Yamaha machines, where there are  
4, 6 or 8 operators configured in many algorithms. And however in fact  
it's Phase Modulation, the user interface is done on the base of  
Frequency Modulation, and operator pitch is the main sound changing  
parameter in algorithms (together with changing algorithm itself).  
Mixing (additive principle) is also used in algorithms, and some of  
them are only additive, not FM. It's much more complex then Casio.  
Also not all operators must be always used which gives even more  
combinations.

FS1r is more complex with it's 8 voiced/8 unvoiced operators, 88  
algorithms, Formant Shaping, Formant Sequences... Simulation of DX  
sound is only a small part what it can do.

I wouldn't compare Casio and Yamaha sound synthesis systems. Too  
different beasts.

Daniel Forro


On Aug 17, 2012, at 3:30 PM, Summa wrote:

> Hi,
>
> according to the specs their are some main differences, like the VZ-1
> do combine (well, let me call it) Phase Modulation with
> Ringmodulation, even is able to use an envelope to croosfade between
> Ringmod an Amplitude Modulation. While the FS1R can't do
> ringmodulation but is able to combine formant oscillators (the
> formant frequency has its own envelope, bandwith is controllable in
> realtime) with FM (Phase Modulation), formant oscillators can be used
> as modulator or carrier.
>
> Other than that, even so FS1R uses expanded the DX7 envelopes, the VZ
> envelopes with 8 Level/8 Times and selectable Sustain and Release
> stage, are a bit slower but more flexible.
> The VZ-1 is missing the pitch envelopes per Operator, the 8
> additional noise operators (selectable noise frequency + envelope and
> bandwith can be reduced to sine), filter and FX section.
>
> When it comes to the algorithms, the FS1R has 88 fixed ones while the
> VZ operator pairs can be configured freely within certain
> limitations.
>
> When it comes to the sound, the character of VZ-1 is rather different
> to for instance a DX7, even with similar settings (and it's obviously
> the same sound), you'll recognise the differences most of the time.
> While the FS1R has been constructed to be an DX7 impersinator, even
> has a parameter wise identical (greatly expanded) DX7 core, it is
> flexible enough to cover most VA type sounds and (being pretty much
> an chameleon) even is able to do convincing VZ-1 alike sounding
> stuff, but only if you know what you're after.
>
> User Interface wise, when trying to make you're own sound, the VZ-1
> is a lot easier to programm without an editor compared to the FS1R,
> even so its display is rather slow.
>
> So I'd say, if you're into FM (Phase Modulation) and searching for a
> character wise alternative to the Yamaha stuff, it's like comparing
> moog to oberheim.
>