Something is here:
Daniel Forro
On 1 Oct, 2013, at 10:04 PM, analogmonster@... wrote:
Yeah Daniel is right, PCM is just digital sampling and not what I was referring to.I remember where I first heard the idea, but the site no longer exists. It was a guy known as synth seal, and he had a page called sealed's deep synthesis page.He described the Casio spectrum dynamics engine as essentially additive synthesis using several pulse waves of different widths. I've seen this explanation else where, but I don't know if they all got the idea from him and he is wrong-his site existed at least 10 years ago. This is why I want to take a scope to the raw waveforms.He was certainly a guy who knew his stuff though - I believe he was who discovered through sysex programming you can access previously unknown waveforms and modulation modes in the cz1/1000.But PCM means just sampling, not some type of digital synthesis in real time. When talks about thin pulse waves, he means something different.If only I understood well.Daniel ForroI just pulled off the cover of my (working) HT6000 and there written on the keyboard, staring at me, is 'Pulse Code Modulation'. I should've remembered that rather than Casio's fancy 'Spectrum Dynamics' label! Therefore you are most probably very right about the raw sounds being pulse code generated, effectively digital waveforms! This kind of makes sense as many of the later Casios (mid to late 1980's onwards) used PCM generated sounds. Add the HT model's chorus, analogue filter and the ability to adjust the amplifier and filter envelopes (plus ring mod, detune and velocity on the HT6000) to give you some quite unique sounds.Like you, I love my HT6000 so much that when my first model died suddenly, I snapped up the next one I found on Ebay. It probably cost less than having my original repaired, though I do hope to get that one working again sooner or later.It is quite unique sounding, part way between digital and analogue. For some reason the 'single oscillator' 700/ 3000 and HZ600 models sound more analogue, though the 6000 is more versatile. And if you use the ring mod waveforms and detune the 4th 'line' to 73, you get a sub-oscillator effect to generate lower bass frequencies. Not quite in the Roland Juno 60 or Moog league, but certainly enough to be usable for bass lines.Thanks also for the compliment on my Casio collection! The best thing about it is that most the boards didn't cost much at all. The most expensive were the CZ101 (90GBP back in 1990) and the CZ-1 (125GBP). Most cost between 10 - 20 GBP. Even the VZ-1 I picked up for only 70GBP! There are bargains still to be had, though some models are now more sought after, especially the CZ101 and HT6000 with prices rising accordingly. None are 'big' money compared with similar aged Roland/ Korgs/ Yamahas. Even the new XW-P1 is a bargain for what it offers at the price, compared with the competition, with many magazine reviews placing it in a class of its own.Long live Casio!On 1 October 2013 12:39, <analogmonster@...> wrote:I completely agree generror is wrong about the ht/hz range. I LOVE my ht6000, nothing else sounds like it. Some day I will open it up and take a scope to the filter input as I want to see what the raw waveforms look like. If you have the filter open as much as possible it definitely sounds very digital and unique, certainly nothing like my cz1000 and vz10m and theoretically the ht6000 should be between the two if it were a pd synth.The most talked about theory for the makeup of the ht6000 voice is that it is entirely based on thin pulse waves combined using the built in envelopes, ring mod, tremolo etc. this makes a lot of sense to me when I listen to it. Still it would be nice to know for sure.