Yahoo Groups archive
Thread
2005-08-11 by yazzofever
I need a sax patch, i've tried making my own but hey I would love to hear if anyone else has a patch they would be willing to share. i'm looking for a jazzy baritone, tenor sounding patch. If it is part of a sysex dump that would be great! thanks a lot, looking forward to it... btw, where is everybody this summer? aren't you playing your cz? micah
2005-08-23 by yazzofever
I didn't hear anything back on the saxaphone patch guys. Where is everybody-this group has gone dead. Anyway, I would love to hear back from the group about your feelings on trying to get Yamaha DX7 FM sounding stuff on your CZ. I've made a couple of FM sounding basses that are in my opinion, pretty decent in the FM world. They are hard and crisp and yet have a warm feel as well. It is so important to have a real hard attack and then have the ring mod set on 1 or 2 but not 3, it's emphazies too high of a harmonic. Sometimes I can get it using the Ring set on 0 but it is too dull in my opinion. FM bass needs to stand out in a mix. Are there any others with tips on getting FM bass out of their CZ? Something else is setting the line select to 1+1-it really add's the beef needed. I found in the waveform selection to go for 3 | 4 and then take your key follow's and set them down to 0. Don't worry about dco but for your dcw set it at 99 | 97 / 63 | 00 / (sus)55 | 98 and then end it on the next stage of the env. For your dca, make sure the attack is fast and don't let the it have too much sustain. Does it sound exactly like the DX? No, not as clean and crisp-the CZ is more grittier and distorted-I don't think that is so bad but you can't get FM exactly. The envelope's distort-especially when you are trying to get a bass. Bells on the other hand, work pretty good but it seems to get them as clean as a DX7, they kind of sound out of tune and almost unuseable. I could be wrong in all of this-prove me wrong. Do you have a CZ FM sounding bass patch that could rival the mighty DX? micah
2005-08-23 by Rocky Rodenbach
I feel it would be almost impossible to get a CZ to sound as good as DX7 I have both by the way. I love my CZ, but the DX7 is a much better instrument overall especially performance wise. The CZ on the other hand is good at experimenting and gives you easier control over producing your own sounds. If anyone has ever tried to make sense of the DX7 they quickly realize how incredibly difficult it is to program!! ----- Original Message -----
From: "yazzofever" <yazzofever@...> To: <CZsynth@yahoogroups.com> Sent: Tuesday, August 23, 2005 2:26 PM Subject: [CZsynth] What is your best FM bass patch? >I didn't hear anything back on the saxaphone patch guys. > > Where is everybody-this group has gone dead. > > Anyway, I would love to hear back from the group about your feelings > on trying to get Yamaha DX7 FM sounding stuff on your CZ. I've made > a couple of FM sounding basses that are in my opinion, pretty decent > in the FM world. They are hard and crisp and yet have a warm feel as > well. It is so important to have a real hard attack and then have > the ring mod set on 1 or 2 but not 3, it's emphazies too high of a > harmonic. Sometimes I can get it using the Ring set on 0 but it is > too dull in my opinion. FM bass needs to stand out in a mix. > > Are there any others with tips on getting FM bass out of their CZ? > > Something else is setting the line select to 1+1-it really add's the > beef needed. I found in the waveform selection to go for 3 | 4 and > then take your key follow's and set them down to 0. Don't worry > about dco but for your dcw set it at 99 | 97 / 63 | 00 / (sus)55 | 98 > and then end it on the next stage of the env. For your dca, make > sure the attack is fast and don't let the it have too much sustain. > > Does it sound exactly like the DX? No, not as clean and crisp-the CZ > is more grittier and distorted-I don't think that is so bad but you > can't get FM exactly. The envelope's distort-especially when you are > trying to get a bass. Bells on the other hand, work pretty good but > it seems to get them as clean as a DX7, they kind of sound out of > tune and almost unuseable. > > I could be wrong in all of this-prove me wrong. Do you have a CZ FM > sounding bass patch that could rival the mighty DX? > > micah > > > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > >
2005-08-23 by Summa
On 23 Aug 2005 at 18:26, yazzofever wrote: > I didn't hear anything back on the saxaphone patch guys. If you want a good sounding sax, take the Yamaha VL-1 or a rompler ;) > Where is everybody-this group has gone dead. > > Anyway, I would love to hear back from the group about your feelings > on trying to get Yamaha DX7 FM sounding stuff on your CZ. I've made a > couple of FM sounding basses that are in my opinion, pretty decent in > the FM world. They are hard and crisp and yet have a warm feel as > well. It is so important to have a real hard attack and then have the > ring mod set on 1 or 2 but not 3, it's emphazies too high of a > harmonic. Depends on the Waveforms you ringmod, sometimes even a negative Oct settings are nice. When it comes to ringmod additional +7 or +5 semitones are often nice... Sometimes I can get it using the Ring set on 0 but it is > too dull in my opinion. FM bass needs to stand out in a mix. As I said, this depends on the waves you ringmod, when taking resonant waves or a Oct 0 with a slight detune resonant can be fine too... > Are there any others with tips on getting FM bass out of their CZ? Depends on what kind of FM basses you're looking for, since FM synths are capable of quite different basses... > Something else is setting the line select to 1+1-it really add's the > beef needed. Well, I rather prefere using the copy section to add slight differences between the oscillators... > I could be wrong in all of this-prove me wrong. Do you have a CZ > FM sounding bass patch that could rival the mighty DX? I guess you checked my Sax and DX basses... ;) To be honest, no... but the DX can't do Casio CZ rubber basses that well either... ;) ...Summa -- CZ/VZ mailing list : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CZsynth FMHeaven mailing list : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/fmheaven/ FS1R mailing list : http://www.ampfea.org/mailman/listinfo/fss-list Vokator mailing list : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vokator Wellenform Chat So and Do 22.00 CET: http://chat.moogulator.com/
2005-08-24 by Scott Nordlund
>Are there any others with tips on getting FM bass out of their CZ? I think one important thing to note is that FM synths can't easily produce broad-spectrum sounds (looking at graphs of the Bessel function stuff there's not really anything that resembles something like a saw wave or square wave spectrum). Getting the same harmonics shouldn't be too hard- modulator-carrier ratios of 1:1 and 2:1 correspond to saw and square waves, respectively, and more complex or inharmonic ratios can be gotten with ring mod. It's the amounts of the harmonics that makes it difficult. Softer sounds without a lot of high harmonics should be fairly similar, it's the brighter sounds that I think would be more problematic. Anyway I don't have a CZ so I can't be a huge amount of help.
2005-08-24 by steve_the_composer
--- In CZsynth@yahoogroups.com, "yazzofever" <yazzofever@y...> wrote: [snip] > Anyway, I would love to hear back from the group about your > feelings on trying to get Yamaha DX7 FM sounding stuff on your CZ. If you like Casio and you want a Yamaha DX FM type sound, I'd recommend looking into the Casio VZ line. To me those sound much more like DX type sounds than anything I've heard from the CZ line. > I've made a couple of FM sounding basses that are in my opinion, > pretty decent in the FM world. They are hard and crisp and yet > have a warm feel as well. [snip] You CZ bass synthesis technique sounds quite intriguing. Obviously you put a lot of thought into your design. Years ago, I developed a "Rubbery Bass" for the CZ. It was not a crisp, FM type sound, but I thought I'd mention the technique I used in case you like it. Using the EG, I had a slight swell after the decay of the basic note. It was noticeable for isolated notes, but sequences of notes, the swell just tended to blend into the bass line. Its kind of a psycho-acoustic effect based on the observation that as a string vibrates, there's some kind of intereference/oscillation going on. My ear heard it as a kind of swelling after effect. So that's what I did. I have no idea where the original patch is, but I thought I'd at least add this to the discussion of CZ Bass patch design techniques. If I find it, I'd be happy to post it. --Steve
2005-08-24 by M.J.B.
okay steve, scott, summa and rocky... so it's not a dx, but why did people buy the cz101 back in 1984, even more then that in '86 with the "1." Who was Casio targeting? Was is just people who couldn't program or who didn't have enough $? And if I hadn't of been 6 in 1984, and let's say I would have had the money to buy a DX7, were there people out there who actually bought the casio cz series over the dx series? Why? Did you? micah 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
2005-08-24 by Rocky Rodenbach
----- Original Message -----
From: "M.J.B." <yazzofever@...>
To: <CZsynth@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, August 24, 2005 4:31 PM
Subject: [CZsynth] okay so it isn't fm but hey...why did you or anyone else
buy the CZ's?
> okay steve, scott, summa and rocky...
>
> so it's not a dx, but why did people buy the
> cz101 back in 1984, even more then that in '86
> with the "1."
>
> Who was Casio targeting? Was is just people who
> couldn't program or who didn't have enough $?
>
> And if I hadn't of been 6 in 1984, and let's say
> I would have had the money to buy a DX7, were
> there people out there who actually bought the
> casio cz series over the dx series? Why? Did
> you?
>
>
> micah
Actually, I would think most people bought the CZ101 over the CZ1000 because
of the price. The CZ101 had the same architecture the CZ1000 had, but it
had mini keys vs. the full sized keys the CZ1000 offered.
I think Casio was targeting the low end user on a limited budget yet
still wanted a synth that had a lot of features. I don't think that lack of
programming came in to that much, the CZ only came with 16 preset sounds, so
you still have the learn the in's and out's if you want to expand the range
of what was there.
I really don't know the percentage of people who would favor the CZ over
the DX7. I would have to strongly assume that the serious studio musicians
and the like would choose the DX7 over it's velocity and pressure sensitive
keys, mod wheel, breath controller, 16 note polyphony, etc. Plus, the DX7
is built like a tank, a very good keyboard to take on the road. Like I
mentioned, I still like my CZ even through it no longer works, I need to
find one on Ebay one of these days.
Rocky2005-08-24 by Wilson Zorn
At the time, the CZ was marketed very much as a synth-on-the-cheap, with sales staff featuring how it could be run via a sequencer on a different channel for each voice (very cool at that time). But I don't think it was so much seen by anyone as a cheap FM-ish synth, it was its own thing with its own sound. If you wanted "any" cheap synth the CZ might be picked, but by the same token if you wanted FM sound you'd get something else or if you wanted the PD sound you'd get the CZ or VZ. I got the CZ-101 frankly, initially, purely out of limited funds, but I was and remain quite happy with that choice. In fact as soon as I could, back at that time even, I got a 2nd CZ101. I recently bought a CZ-5000. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Rocky Rodenbach" <yooper@...> To: <CZsynth@yahoogroups.com> Sent: Wednesday, August 24, 2005 1:44 PM Subject: Re: [CZsynth] okay so it isn't fm but hey...why did you or anyone else buy the CZ's? > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "M.J.B." <yazzofever@...> > To: <CZsynth@yahoogroups.com> > Sent: Wednesday, August 24, 2005 4:31 PM > Subject: [CZsynth] okay so it isn't fm but hey...why did you or anyone else > buy the CZ's? > > > > okay steve, scott, summa and rocky... > > > > so it's not a dx, but why did people buy the > > cz101 back in 1984, even more then that in '86 > > with the "1." > > > > Who was Casio targeting? Was is just people who > > couldn't program or who didn't have enough $? > > > > And if I hadn't of been 6 in 1984, and let's say > > I would have had the money to buy a DX7, were > > there people out there who actually bought the > > casio cz series over the dx series? Why? Did > > you? > > > > > > micah > > > Actually, I would think most people bought the CZ101 over the CZ1000 because > of the price. The CZ101 had the same architecture the CZ1000 had, but it > had mini keys vs. the full sized keys the CZ1000 offered. > I think Casio was targeting the low end user on a limited budget yet > still wanted a synth that had a lot of features. I don't think that lack of > programming came in to that much, the CZ only came with 16 preset sounds, so > you still have the learn the in's and out's if you want to expand the range > of what was there. > I really don't know the percentage of people who would favor the CZ over > the DX7. I would have to strongly assume that the serious studio musicians > and the like would choose the DX7 over it's velocity and pressure sensitive
> keys, mod wheel, breath controller, 16 note polyphony, etc. Plus, the DX7 > is built like a tank, a very good keyboard to take on the road. Like I > mentioned, I still like my CZ even through it no longer works, I need to > find one on Ebay one of these days. > > Rocky > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > >
2005-08-24 by Summa
Hi, On 24 Aug 2005 at 13:31, M.J.B. wrote: > okay steve, scott, summa and rocky... > > so it's not a dx, but why did people buy the > cz101 back in 1984, even more then that in '86 > with the "1." Probably since it was more affordable than a DX7, multitimbral, easier to programm... > Who was Casio targeting? Was is just people who > couldn't program or who didn't have enough $? Well, soundprogramming with the DX7 isn't easy, at my current state of experience it don't make a difference if it's a DX7 or CZ-1 but for a beginner FM Synthesis has a steep learning curve... Other than that even a CZ can do quite some sounds a DX7 isn't able to do and of course vice versa. Also the sound character is different... > And if I hadn't of been 6 in 1984, and let's say > I would have had the money to buy a DX7, were > there people out there who actually bought the > casio cz series over the dx series? Why? Did > you? I was targeting a DX7 at that time, but it was a good thing I wasn't able to afford one. Since I bought a TX81z a year after the CZ-1 and had a hard time getting into the programming... ...Summa -- CZ/VZ mailing list : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CZsynth FMHeaven mailing list : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/fmheaven/ FS1R mailing list : http://www.ampfea.org/mailman/listinfo/fss-list Vokator mailing list : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vokator Wellenform Chat So and Do 22.00 CET: http://chat.moogulator.com/
2005-08-25 by Scott Nordlund
>so it's not a dx, but why did people buy the >cz101 back in 1984, even more then that in '86 >with the "1." Well it's not competition for the DX7, but it's still got some unique and interesting sounds. I think it's best to not try emulating synths with other synths...the CZ maybe isn't the best for DX sounds, but try to get a Prophet 5 patch on a DX7... >Who was Casio targeting? Was is just people who >couldn't program or who didn't have enough $? That's a good question to ask with a lot of Casio products- does anyone really need a boombox/keyboard combo, or a calculator with vibrato? >And if I hadn't of been 6 in 1984, and let's say >I would have had the money to buy a DX7, were >there people out there who actually bought the >casio cz series over the dx series? Why? Did >you? I might have gone for both.
2005-08-25 by M.J.B.
We have a lot of CZ people here but our VZ crew is a little quiet. But, from what I've heard and hope to actually experience, you are holding a mighty fine synth or module!! So, with that in mind, could our vz-1, 10m, 8m users respond with a resounding "I" please!! and tell us what you love most about your VZ! were waiting... micah 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
2005-08-26 by Scott Nordlund
>So, with that in mind, could our vz-1, 10m, 8m >users respond with a resounding "I" please!! > >and tell us what you love most about your VZ! I've got a 10M and I like the fact that there are enough oscillators to make a nice layered sound.
2005-08-26 by Summa
Hi Micah, I like that it combines FM with Ringmodulation, I dislike that it uses constant waves instead of feedback since feedback is better for the "filter type" sweeps... ...Summa On 25 Aug 2005 at 15:43, M.J.B. wrote: > We have a lot of CZ people here but our VZ crew > is a little quiet. But, from what I've heard and > hope to actually experience, you are holding a > mighty fine synth or module!! > > So, with that in mind, could our vz-1, 10m, 8m > users respond with a resounding "I" please!! > > and tell us what you love most about your VZ! > > were waiting... > > micah > > > 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 > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > --------------------~--> <font face=arial size=-1><a > href="http://us.ard.yahoo.com/SIG=12hc165ba/M=362335.6886442.7839733.3 > 022183/D=grplch/S=1705032144:TM/Y=YAHOO/EXP=1125016992/A=2894366/R=0/S > IG=138c78jl6/*http://www.networkforgood.org/topics/arts_culture/?sourc > e=YAHOO&cmpgn=GRP&RTP=http://groups.yahoo.com/">What would our lives > be like without music, dance, and theater? Donate or volunteer in the > arts today at Network for Good</a>.</font> > --------------------------------------------------------------------~- > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > -- CZ/VZ mailing list : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CZsynth FMHeaven mailing list : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/fmheaven/ FS1R mailing list : http://www.ampfea.org/mailman/listinfo/fss-list Vokator mailing list : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vokator Wellenform Chat So and Do 22.00 CET: http://chat.moogulator.com/
2005-08-26 by Jez
I've just got a VZ8M, so it's a bit early to comment. However after 15 minutes with a Windcontroller last night, my first impression is Best Pianos Ever. So now I have to work out how to change the sounds. :-? Anyone got a quick online tutorial on how-to-use a VZ8M? It's definately going to replace my CZ101 - I have limited room. So if anyone wants a CZ101 in good condition in Belgium, drop me an email.
2005-08-26 by Scott Nordlund
>I like that it combines FM with Ringmodulation, I dislike that it uses >constant >waves instead of feedback since feedback is better for the "filter type" >sweeps... It's really pretty limited for straight FM- the voice structure is versitile enough in theory, but when operator pairs are strictly limited to a modulator:carrier ratio of 2:1, it really constricts things. It works well enough for a 2-operator pair ring-modulated with another wave, but it doesn't have near the flexibility of FM algorithms. Also the saw waves are less useful than you'd think with FM- it enables some interesting flavors that a DX definately can't do (at least the sine-wave-only synths), bright square and saw timbres (even a decent approximation of pulsewidth modulation), but mostly when used with FM it just sounds harsh and distorted, regardless of frequency ratio- and with no filters, the brighter sounds end up being pretty static. Other things I don't like: while a sound can be very expressive in terms of velocity sensitivity and stuff, it's difficult to make it dynamic to the point where it dramatically changes the character of the sound (except for really radical sounds). And the basic tonality of it tends to be rather sine-wavey with certain types of sounds, it gets fatiguing and sometimes different sounds end up not mixing well. And the envelope attack is annoying with longer attacks (it's the wrong shape)- to give a more natural feel it needs 2 or 3 stages, which is a pain to program (but I had the same problem with the TX7- at least there are enough envelope stages here that it's not a problem) Oh, and the phase of the oscillators resets for every note (unlike the DX7 which could do it optionally)- so the super thick 8-saw wave stack that should be awesome just sounds obnoxious. Just so it doesn't sound too negative, there are a lot of things that I like... the envelopes are great, and if you don't mind spending an hour carefully picking values, they can do some REALLY complex things. And the pitch envelope can have a really huge depth that can span the entire audio range... keyboard tracking curves enable interesting crossfades, Shepard tones, drumkits, etc. So yeah, it's very powerful and great, but best used with other synths. Its limitations might become too frustrating if you don't also have something else to use.
2005-08-26 by Summa
On 26 Aug 2005 at 10:25, Scott Nordlund wrote: > >I like that it combines FM with Ringmodulation, I dislike that it > >uses constant waves instead of feedback since feedback is better for > >the "filter type" sweeps... > > It's really pretty limited for straight FM- the voice structure is > versitile enough in theory, but when operator pairs are strictly > limited to a modulator:carrier ratio of 2:1, it really constricts > things. It works well enough for a 2-operator pair ring-modulated > with another wave, but it doesn't have near the flexibility of FM > algorithms. That's not completely true if you use 4 Operators you can have at least two operators with free definable fequencies, check my tutorial... > Also the saw waves are less useful than you'd think with FM- it > enables some interesting flavors that a DX definately can't do (at > least the sine-wave-only synths), bright square and saw timbres (even > a decent approximation of pulsewidth modulation), but mostly when used > with FM it just sounds harsh and distorted, regardless of frequency > ratio- and with no filters, the brighter sounds end up being pretty > static. I don't see that, since with feedback (what also creates saw type timbres) and 3 Operators I can recreate nearly every non resonant CZ waveform and be able to simulate filter sweeps (with static waveforms it lacks quality). Feedback or those static saw waveforms are needed for rich non sinusoid timbres > And the envelope attack is annoying with longer attacks (it's the > wrong shape)- to give a more natural feel it needs 2 or 3 stages, > which is a pain to program (but I had the same problem with the TX7- That's a general problem of linear envelopes... > So yeah, it's very powerful and great, but best used with other > synths. Its limitations might become too frustrating if you don't > also have something else to use. Shouldn't be ones first synth and one should be a passionate FM geek to get along with it. But I could imagine making a song with this synth only... ...Summa -- CZ/VZ mailing list : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CZsynth FMHeaven mailing list : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/fmheaven/ FS1R mailing list : http://www.ampfea.org/mailman/listinfo/fss-list Vokator mailing list : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vokator Wellenform Chat So and Do 22.00 CET: http://chat.moogulator.com/
2005-08-26 by Larry T.
--- In CZsynth@yahoogroups.com, "M.J.B." <yazzofever@y...> wrote: > We have a lot of CZ people here but our VZ crew > is a little quiet. But, from what I've heard and > hope to actually experience, you are holding a > mighty fine synth or module!! > > So, with that in mind, could our vz-1, 10m, 8m > users respond with a resounding "I" please!! I have: VZ-10M. VZ-8M CZ-101, CZ-1 FZ-10M, FZ-20M SZ-1 (and lots of non-Casio stuff too) I bought my CZ-101 about 3 months after I bought my first Atari 520St system (back when both were selling new). In fact, I bought the CZ from an Atari dealer! Fraction of the price of ANY other synthesizer at the time. In reality, Casio was the 'Atari' of the synth market, very VERY good bang for the buck, just never marketed properly. FYI: The CZ family are not even slightly FM type synthesis. The VZ's are closer. Theere is very little similarity between CZ sounds and the DX family sounds. (And yes, the CZ is FAR easier to program then the DX.) Larry T.
2005-08-26 by Summa
On 26 Aug 2005 at 16:19, Larry T. wrote: > FYI: The CZ family are not even slightly FM type synthesis. The VZ's > are closer. Theere is very little similarity between CZ sounds and > the DX family sounds. (And yes, the CZ is FAR easier to program then > the DX.) The CZ is working with Phase Modulation, like the DX7 (Yamaha just called it FM) but implementation is different... ...Summa -- CZ/VZ mailing list : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CZsynth FMHeaven mailing list : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/fmheaven/ FS1R mailing list : http://www.ampfea.org/mailman/listinfo/fss-list Vokator mailing list : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vokator Wellenform Chat So and Do 22.00 CET: http://chat.moogulator.com/
2005-08-26 by kmiddlemas@aol.com
Hi,
My, this subject is getting deep and profound! So here's my pennies
worth..
I've got a CZ1 (x2), VZ10m, TX81z, DX27 and FM7 (DX7 emulator). None of these
synths sound like each other and none use the same sound generation. The CZ-1
uses PD's first generation sound engine which has some major limitations but
limitations have their good points. It's certainly the most analogue sounding
of the afore mentioned. The VZ is second generation (IPD) and addresses a lot
of the CZ's failings. That said, it sounds a lot more like FM than the CZ.
PD and FM actually have a lot in common but use different approaches and
mechanics. Where original FM synths used pure sine waves PD used a common set of
fixed waveforms. This is where FM became to complex for most users as a bit of
mathematics had to be applied if you wanted any sort of programming fruition.
PD on the other hand bypasses this step by offering 8 preset waveforms which
could be coupled together to give different tonal characteristics. The
waveforms offered are actually quite a good selection, and remember technology of that
era was more limited than now. PD has a warmer sound but not so good as FM
for acoustic synthesis. Both are great for sub basses and solo leads where they
can sound very similar hence the similarity in sound generation.
The TX81z is actually an FM 4op synth with fixed waveforms or algorithms and
more advanced than the DX9, DX21, 27, 100, FB01 is vastly superior sonically
and multi timbral. The lesser FM synths are so limited with thin tonal quality
that its beggars belief how Yamaha sold so many. Cheap probably and vastly
less usable than a CZ machine. IPD on the other hand is quite clearly getting
closer to the realm of the DX7. It's far more complex than the CZ range but has
the drawbacks of FM programming. Menu driven tedium which kills a lot of
inspired programming. That's why companies resorted back to knobs and sliders,
real-time interaction!
The CZ-1 is still my favourite even though its perhaps the simplest sound
engine. Limitations can be effective but most importantly it's easy and fun to
use. Lots of single operation buttons with simple menus. Programming the others
is like drawing poison from a wound. The VZ is a great sounding synth but to
many menus to grapple with just as FM has. I've had limited success with
programming my own sounds but time is of the essence and I generally resort to my
analogues or the CZ with its pseudo analogue architecture for inspiration. So
what it doesn't have PWM or real filters that feedback loop. Remember that
manufacturers at this time were trying to get away from analogue architectures and
embrace the holy grail of acoustic emulation. The digital age was beckoning.
The question of price, well lets face it, us mere mortals couldn't afford the
mighty DX7 in the mid eighties. Casio got the CZ101 out at the right time
although I wouldn't agree that it was targeted at the pro market. It's more
likely that all the other CZ machines were a spin off where Casio seen a potential
market. This is apparent when you consider the use of the same uninspired
patches for all machines. The CZ3000 and CZ5000 are good synths and I've used both
but offer nothing much new on the CZ101. On the other hand the CZ-1 is the
most pro of all the range and has a lot of extra usable features including
velocity sensitivity. The most inspired to my mind is the 'OPERATION MEMORIES'
which give the machine a lot more clout when used live.
To compare a FM synth to a PD synth has always been subjective andhas been
exhausted many years ago whichever angle you looked at it. I like to think that
great minds think alike and is true when considering their sound philosophies.
Let's face it the futures virtual anyway so enjoy them while they last.
Midcomsys.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]2005-08-26 by Scott Nordlund
> > It's really pretty limited for straight FM- the voice structure is > > versitile enough in theory, but when operator pairs are strictly > > limited to a modulator:carrier ratio of 2:1, it really constricts > > things. It works well enough for a 2-operator pair ring-modulated > > with another wave, but it doesn't have near the flexibility of FM > > algorithms. > >That's not completely true if you use 4 Operators you can have at least two >operators with free definable fequencies, check my tutorial... I know how that works, it's just not as nice as the algorithm structure of a DX7, which I think included most useful combinations. So yeah, I can get FM with two modulators and one carrier, or longer multi-operator chains, but it doesn't cover all of the DX7 territory. At least on the VZ though the pitch menu is much nicer... > > Also the saw waves are less useful than you'd think with FM- it > > enables some interesting flavors that a DX definately can't do (at > > least the sine-wave-only synths), bright square and saw timbres (even > > a decent approximation of pulsewidth modulation), but mostly when used > > with FM it just sounds harsh and distorted, regardless of frequency > > ratio- and with no filters, the brighter sounds end up being pretty > > static. > >I don't see that, since with feedback (what also creates saw type timbres) >and 3 >Operators I can recreate nearly every non resonant CZ waveform and be able >to >simulate filter sweeps (with static waveforms it lacks quality). Feedback >or >those static saw waveforms are needed for rich non sinusoid timbres I know the feedback is cool (particularly multiple-operator feedback loops which do wonderful strange things)- but I remember messing with this for quite a while, FM really isn't much good for broad-spectrum sounds, it does an okay impersonation of a resonant filter sweep, but it acts more like a bandpass filter. You can get a "sort of" saw wave using feedback but it's either got not enough bass or not enough trebel. Fiddling with it a bunch and layering waveforms does some good but it's much easier to get full-spectrum waves on the VZ (...though as I said, no filter, which limits usefulness). Anyway the DX7 is never going to do PWM, I think the SY77 and 99 can do it but in a different way. >Shouldn't be ones first synth and one should be a passionate FM geek to get >along >with it. But I could imagine making a song with this synth only... making a song, sure, but I wouldn't want to do much more than one, I'd end up beating my head against the wall trying to get a certain sound on the VZ when the ESQ-M can do it much easier and much better.
2005-08-27 by steve_the_composer
Congrats on the VZ8m. Be sure to check out the sound files here and in the CZ-VZ Files group. Also, there are some resources--including stuff on programming the VZ. Are you gonna use it with the DH-100? If so, you may want to play around with routing the aftertouch to A ENV BIAS [Amp Envelope]. Also, check out the different curves for the W mode [wind]. Its been a while since I programmed sounds on the VZ, but if you are using the DH, you have some special capabilities with the VZ-8m. (BTW: Are you still in the wind-controller group? I finally took my name off the list after all the officially approved Off-Topic discussions of Michael Brecker's health issues and other OT issues, while the discussion of recording techniques for making MP3s was deemed condemned. Don't get me wrong: I have much admiration for Brecker. It was just the hypocracy I didn't care to witness.) As far as how to change the sound, I recommend the user manual and the resources in the file section here and in the CZ-VZ files group. --- In CZsynth@yahoogroups.com, Jez <jezosaurus@g...> wrote: > I've just got a VZ8M, so it's a bit early to comment. However after 15 > minutes with a Windcontroller last night, my first impression is Best > Pianos Ever. So now I have to work out how to change the sounds. :-? > > Anyone got a quick online tutorial on how-to-use a VZ8M? > > It's definately going to replace my CZ101 - I have limited room. > > So if anyone wants a CZ101 in good condition in Belgium, drop me an email.
2005-08-27 by Summa
Hi Scott, On 26 Aug 2005 at 19:30, Scott Nordlund wrote: > > > It's really pretty limited for straight FM- the voice structure is > > > versitile enough in theory, but when operator pairs are strictly > > > limited to a modulator:carrier ratio of 2:1, it really constricts > > > things. It works well enough for a 2-operator pair ring-modulated > > > with another wave, but it doesn't have near the flexibility of FM > > > algorithms. Well, it can do most of the DX7 Algorithms, even same a DX7 can't do... > I know how that works, it's just not as nice as the algorithm > structure of a DX7, which I think included most useful combinations. The algorithms of the DX7 work within the limitation of its architecture, what means no Operator will have more than 3 inputs. They're not the most usefull ones, having worked a lot with FMHeaven and FM7 I create some quite even more usefull connections that a DX7 can't do.. > So yeah, I can get FM with two modulators and one carrier, or longer > multi-operator chains, but it doesn't cover all of the DX7 territory. Algorithms are not the most essential part of the FM, I tend to use about a hand full quite often the other ones are needed for some more exotic purposes... > At least on the VZ though the pitch menu is much nicer... The VZ has quite some abilities that surpass the DX7, for instance that it can pitch the operator frequency down to 0Hz, what the DX can't, what can be used for very nice moving pad sounds or as sine waveshaper (it's not working with other waveforms than sine, since those are no real operator waveforms an the VZ as they aren't on the FS1R). Another thing is the 2nd LFO per Voice... > I know the feedback is cool (particularly multiple-operator feedback > loops which do wonderful strange things)- but I remember messing with > this for quite a while, FM really isn't much good for broad-spectrum > sounds, it does an okay impersonation of a resonant filter sweep, but > it acts more like a bandpass filter. If going the simple way with for instance 2 Operators, but with one more between carrier and feedback modulator, you can create more than just saw or square waveforms, even ringmod style timbres are possible, when having the right frequency relations... A good thing is adding a tiny little chorus to the DX sound while sounddesigning, since it makes it easier for the ear to recognise the waveform you create. What is in general a good advice when creating new timbres on waveform basis... > You can get a "sort of" saw wave > using feedback but it's either got not enough bass or not enough > trebel. > Fiddling with it a bunch and layering waveforms does some > good but it's much easier to get full-spectrum waves on the VZ > (...though as I said, no filter, which limits usefulness). Well, it's less the character of the feedback that causes a problem with the DX7 but having only one per algorithm. I like the waveforms created by FM feedback very much, even used in small doses and even on operators in the middle of an algorithm can enhance the sound a lot... > Anyway the > DX7 is never going to do PWM, Well, not real one, but some nice PWM style sounds are possible with the DX7 too. I think the SY77 and 99 can do it but in > a different way. Yep, I think it's using 2 saws, one of them inverted and bot layered with a little detune (the old workstation/PCM based synth trick). To be honest I haven't tried that with my TG77 yet... Other than that on the SY77/99 one can change the Phase of the waveforms, what with layering and detuning can create PWM like effects as well or by using a fixed frequency carrier at LFO frequency (0Hz waveshaping thing)... > >Shouldn't be ones first synth and one should be a passionate FM geek > >to get along with it. But I could imagine making a song with this > >synth only... > > making a song, sure, but I wouldn't want to do much more than one, I'd > end up beating my head against the wall trying to get a certain sound > on the VZ when the ESQ-M can do it much easier and much better. I for sure wouldn't go for an ESQ-M, I'm too much an FM geek and prefere real synthesis to taylor the waveforms instaed of simply layering them... I'm pretty much know my FM, so it wouldn't end up in headbanging... ;) ...Summa -- CZ/VZ mailing list : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CZsynth FMHeaven mailing list : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/fmheaven/ FS1R mailing list : http://www.ampfea.org/mailman/listinfo/fss-list Vokator mailing list : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vokator Wellenform Chat So and Do 22.00 CET: http://chat.moogulator.com/
2005-08-27 by steve_the_composer
This is obviously a very thoughtful and thought-provoking assessment. Thanks for posting it! --- In CZsynth@yahoogroups.com, "Scott Nordlund" <gsn10@h...> wrote: [snip] > It's really pretty limited for straight FM- the voice structure is versitile > enough in theory, but when operator pairs are strictly limited to a > modulator:carrier ratio of 2:1, it really constricts things. I thought that this is where the amp bias/amp sensitivity in the iPD [interactive Phase Distortion] scheme of things. Doesn't the amount of the amp of any modules that modulate [phase or ring] a sounding oscillator provide extensive flexibility? --Steve
2005-08-27 by Jez
On 8/27/05, steve_the_composer <smw-mail@...> wrote: > Congrats on the VZ8m. Thanks Steve. > (BTW: Are you still in the wind-controller group? I finally took my > name off the list after all the officially approved Off-Topic > discussions of Michael Brecker's health issues and other OT issues, > while the discussion of recording techniques for making MP3s was > deemed condemned. Don't get me wrong: I have much admiration for > Brecker. It was just the hypocracy I didn't care to witness.) Yes, i still subscribe. At the moment, the discussions are some very US centric union issues, and the usual "VL-70m is the only thing to use" > As far as how to change the sound, I recommend the user manual and the > resources in the file section here and in the CZ-VZ files group. It came with the manual, and I've already found some decent resources on the Net. Do you have any recommendations for an editor? I don't fancy programming it through the menus.
2005-08-27 by Scott Nordlund
> > > > It's really pretty limited for straight FM- the voice structure is > > > > versitile enough in theory, but when operator pairs are strictly > > > > limited to a modulator:carrier ratio of 2:1, it really constricts > > > > things. It works well enough for a 2-operator pair ring-modulated > > > > with another wave, but it doesn't have near the flexibility of FM > > > > algorithms. > >Well, it can do most of the DX7 Algorithms, even same a DX7 can't do... How's that? Unless I'm missing something, the algorithms I'd consider most useful (1, 3, 5, 12, 20, 21, and 22) don't seem to be possible on the VZ architecture, at least without the fixed frequency limitation. (and I know I'm ignoring the ring mod and the options it enables, I'm just talking about straight FM here). >The algorithms of the DX7 work within the limitation of its architecture, >what >means no Operator will have more than 3 inputs. They're not the most >usefull >ones, having worked a lot with FMHeaven and FM7 I create some quite even >more >usefull connections that a DX7 can't do.. I'm just wondering how an SY/TG-77/99 or FS1r improve things... One day I'm going to have to pick one of those up... >The VZ has quite some abilities that surpass the DX7, for instance that it >can >pitch the operator frequency down to 0Hz, what the DX can't, what can be >used for >very nice moving pad sounds or as sine waveshaper (it's not working with >other >waveforms than sine, since those are no real operator waveforms an the VZ >as they >aren't on the FS1R). Another thing is the 2nd LFO per Voice... 0 Hz? I've noticed it can go a lot lower than the DX but I don't think it goes all the way down to 0 Hz... does it? The two LFOs are definately appreciated, though honestly I don't use the tremolo much. I at least like the "multi" setting (but the TX802 includes that, right?), and the way the controllers can change the speed. No random wave though! >Well, it's less the character of the feedback that causes a problem with >the DX7 >but having only one per algorithm. I like the waveforms created by FM >feedback >very much, even used in small doses and even on operators in the middle of >an >algorithm can enhance the sound a lot... I regret not playing with that enough when I had my TX7, it was definately cool... > > making a song, sure, but I wouldn't want to do much more than one, I'd > > end up beating my head against the wall trying to get a certain sound > > on the VZ when the ESQ-M can do it much easier and much better. > >I for sure wouldn't go for an ESQ-M, I'm too much an FM geek and prefere >real >synthesis to taylor the waveforms instaed of simply layering them... >I'm pretty much know my FM, so it wouldn't end up in headbanging... ;) I'm not saying the ESQ-M is the king of all synths any more than the VZ is, but waveforms, when used with AM or sync, can do some radical timbre changes that give very dynamic sounds. It's got more options than you'd think, especially with modulation (which tends to be pretty tame in FM synths, at least the ones I've used). For the VZ to compete in that area, it would have to have multiple pitch envelopes and LFOs that can be routed freely to control whatever (for instance, LFOs in the ESQ-M can be used to crossfade oscillators, detune oscillators against each other, modulate other LFOs, etc.). Plus filter overdrive, modulated panning (which I think the VZ-8M can do?), and other nice little things like that. Of course, I got the Dave Smith Instruments Evolver recently, and it has a totally sick modulation matrix that is way better...
2005-08-27 by Scott Nordlund
> > It's really pretty limited for straight FM- the voice structure is >versitile > > enough in theory, but when operator pairs are strictly limited to >a > > modulator:carrier ratio of 2:1, it really constricts things. > >I thought that this is where the amp bias/amp sensitivity in the iPD >[interactive Phase Distortion] scheme of things. Doesn't the amount >of the amp of any modules that modulate [phase or ring] a sounding >oscillator provide extensive flexibility? Well, that's definately cool, but limited as well- for each oscillator the amp sensitivity can be set independently (like the DX7, etc.), and this can then be modulated by the tremolo LFO or mod wheel or whatever, *but* it's only positive modulation, so the LFO can't, for instance, crossfade two different modulators, or anything really cool like that. And since there's only one source, you can't use the mod wheel to control the level of one oscillator and the foot pedal to the control the level of a different one. The modulation options are pretty good, but it seems to me like it's geared more torward subtle things. The amp sensitivity at least is independent from velocity sensitivity, which does have different curves, independent for each oscillator, that CAN crossfade or switch or whatever. The fixed modulator:carrier ratio is different, it just means that when a two-oscillator pair is set to phase modulation, it's stuck at one frequency ratio that makes square wave-ish sounds and can't be changed. You can get around that by muting the modulator and turning on EXT PHASE, letting the two previous oscillators act as truly independent modulators.
2005-08-27 by steve_the_composer
--- In CZsynth@yahoogroups.com, Jez <jezosaurus@g...> wrote: [snip] > Yes, i still subscribe. At the moment, the discussions are some very > US centric union issues, and the usual "VL-70m is the only thing to > use" Thanks for confirming that I'm only missing stuff that I have no interest in. > It came with the manual, and I've already found some decent resources > on the Net. > Do you have any recommendations for an editor? I don't fancy > programming it through the menus. I used the front panel, and it is not the most user-friendly way to design patches. Phonophobe uploaded some Atari software that runs on a PC with Atari emulator software--Steem. I never found the time to fully master the software/emulation process. I just checked the CZ-VZ Files group and there's some software there. I don't recall if I tried it. Maybe others here have other leads. http://launch.groups.yahoo.com/group/CZ-VZ-Files/files/ Also check out the VZ patches in this group. cliffe123 posted two sets of VZ patches that cover a wide variety of the VZ's capabilities. Summa and phonophobe have some neat patches, and then there are the original VZ ROM banks. I am not sure where my VZ patches are. We (VZ-8m owners) have space for 64 user [INT] normal patches and 64 combos in addition to preset banks 1 and 2 in ROM [PST1 and PST2]. Hope to hear some VZ sounds and music from you. --Steve
2005-08-27 by Summa
On 27 Aug 2005 at 14:37, Scott Nordlund wrote: > >Well, it can do most of the DX7 Algorithms, even same a DX7 can't > >do... > > How's that? Unless I'm missing something, the algorithms I'd consider > most useful (1, 3, 5, 12, 20, 21, and 22) don't seem to be possible on > the VZ architecture, at least without the fixed frequency limitation. #1 is possible, the complete 3-6 Operator line, if you can live with the 1:2 limitation for 1,2 and 5,6 even the complete algorithm.. #3 Same here with the 1:2 limitation...2,3 and 5,6 #5 1:2 limitation or dropping 1 line ... #12 both lines are possible but one of the lines will facing the 1:2 limitation for two of the operators, but that's depening on how you built it... #20 looks tricky but isn't since it's possible to part 1, 2, 3 in two new lines at the expense of needing an additional carrier, while 4, 5, 6 is easy to create ... #21 see #20 #22 see #20 > >The algorithms of the DX7 work within the limitation of its > >architecture, what means no Operator will have more than 3 inputs. > >They're not the most usefull ones, having worked a lot with FMHeaven > >and FM7 I create some quite even more usefull connections that a DX7 > >can't do.. > > I'm just wondering how an SY/TG-77/99 or FS1r improve things... One > day I'm going to have to pick one of those up... The FS1R isn't improving much algorithm wise, but using those modable/changable (frequency/bandwidth) formants as operator waveforms can do some nice tricks and FM get much more modable on that synth... TG77 is rather expanding the classic FM and has even a free algorithm, but with certain limitations like 3 feedbacks per algorithm... > >The VZ has quite some abilities that surpass the DX7, for instance > >that it can pitch the operator frequency down to 0Hz, what the DX > >can't, what can be used for very nice moving pad sounds or as sine > >waveshaper (it's not working with other waveforms than sine, since > >those are no real operator waveforms an the VZ as they aren't on the > >FS1R). Another thing is the 2nd LFO per Voice... > > 0 Hz? I've noticed it can go a lot lower than the DX but I don't > think it goes all the way down to 0 Hz... does it? It does go down to 0Hz... > The two LFOs are definately appreciated, though honestly I don't use > the tremolo much. Since it's possible to change its influence for single operators it can be the basis for moving/changing sounds and another way to create PWM type sounds... > I at least like the "multi" setting (but the TX802 > includes that, right?), and the way the controllers can change the > speed. No random wave though! T802 should be able to do what? Sorry, haven't had a good night sleep, so it might be my fault having problems understanding your question... > > I'm not saying the ESQ-M is the king of all synths any more than the > VZ is, but waveforms, when used with AM or sync, can do some radical AM before or after filter? > timbre changes that give very dynamic sounds. It's got more options > than you'd think, especially with modulation (which tends to be pretty > tame in FM synths, at least the ones I've used). For the VZ to > compete in that area, it would have to have multiple pitch envelopes > and LFOs that can be routed freely to control whatever (for instance, > LFOs in the ESQ-M can be used to crossfade oscillators, detune > oscillators against each other, modulate other LFOs, etc.). Sound like nice basic synthesis features to me, I still would prefere using an FM synth... Plus > filter overdrive, modulated panning (which I think the VZ-8M can do?), > and other nice little things like that. Well, I haven't tried that but the VZ-1 should be able to do panning too when layer a patch with tremolo settings with itsef and using the tremolo invert switch of the OP-Mems... > Of course, I got the Dave Smith Instruments Evolver recently, and it > has a totally sick modulation matrix that is way better... I have one too, but I'm pretty used working with a mod-matrix from other synths... ...Summa -- CZ/VZ mailing list : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CZsynth FMHeaven mailing list : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/fmheaven/ FS1R mailing list : http://www.ampfea.org/mailman/listinfo/fss-list Vokator mailing list : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vokator Wellenform Chat So and Do 22.00 CET: http://chat.moogulator.com/
2005-08-27 by steve_the_composer
Thanks for you additional comments, Scott. I may play around with the VZ some more one of these months to see if I can push the limits you discuss. --- In CZsynth@yahoogroups.com, "Scott Nordlund" <gsn10@h...> wrote: [snip] > . . *but* it's only positive modulation, so the LFO can't, > for instance, crossfade two different modulators, or anything > really cool like that. Hmmmmmmm. That would be cool to do on the VZ!!! > And since there's > only one source, you can't use the mod wheel to control the level of one > oscillator and the foot pedal to the control the level of a different one. Although you can have more than one source routed to the amp envelope (Aftertouch, Foot Controller, Mod Wheel, and Defined Controller), you are right. all you can do is affect the bias globally for all amp envelopes in all modules. > The modulation options are pretty good, but it seems to me like > it's geared more torward subtle things. > > The amp sensitivity at least is independent from velocity > sensitivity, which does have different curves, independent for > each oscillator, that CAN crossfade or switch or whatever. Hmmmmmmm. I never played around with the velocity curves, but I see you are right!!!! There is a "negative" curve that could be used for cross fades. > The fixed modulator:carrier ratio is different, it just means that > when a two-oscillator pair is set to phase modulation, it's stuck > at one frequency ratio that makes square wave-ish sounds and can't > be changed. You can get around that by muting the modulator and > turning on EXT PHASE, letting the two previous oscillators act as > truly independent modulators. This is what I have done--used one line not as a sound source but to modulate a second line (via EXT PHASE). I seem to recall playing around with slow attacks and rapid decays on the DCAs of the modulating modules, though I can't remember what the effects were. In theory it would seem to make sense that the amount of the modulation (eg, ((module 1 DCO/DCA interacting with module 2 DCO/DCA) in turn interacting with module 3 DCO/DCA) to affect module 4 would change the ratio you mentioned. [Line A + M3 ==> M4.] However, since I haven't done much with sound design on the VZ in some time, I will defer to your explanation. --Steve
2005-08-27 by Scott Nordlund
>#1 is possible, the complete 3-6 Operator line, if you can live with the >1:2 >limitation for 1,2 and 5,6 even the complete algorithm.. ...etc. The problem is that I really don't like the fixed ratio limitation- even if the ratio is suitable for the sound, I generally prefer to subtly detune all of the oscillators from each other to get a thicker sound. So I avoid FM unless I can really do it "right". > > 0 Hz? I've noticed it can go a lot lower than the DX but I don't > > think it goes all the way down to 0 Hz... does it? > >It does go down to 0Hz... Maybe I should check that again. > > The two LFOs are definately appreciated, though honestly I don't use > > the tremolo much. > >Since it's possible to change its influence for single operators it can be >the >basis for moving/changing sounds and another way to create PWM type >sounds... Yeah, I usually use fixed-frequency ring mod instead. > > I at least like the "multi" setting (but the TX802 > > includes that, right?), and the way the controllers can change the > > speed. No random wave though! > >T802 should be able to do what? Sorry, haven't had a good night sleep, so >it >might be my fault having problems understanding your question... The "multi" setting on the LFO page enables a different LFO for each voice- unlike the DX7 (and a lot of other synths) that only has one global LFO. I think I read somewhere that the TX802 and DX7-II models have this feature. > > I'm not saying the ESQ-M is the king of all synths any more than the > > VZ is, but waveforms, when used with AM or sync, can do some radical > >AM before or after filter? Before. Oscillator 1 modulates Oscillator 2. Doesn't seem that great that great at first but it enables all kinds of really nasty weird sounds, or really thick sounds, or whatever. >Well, I haven't tried that but the VZ-1 should be able to do panning too >when >layer a patch with tremolo settings with itsef and using the tremolo invert >switch of the OP-Mems... I hadn't thought of that! But usually when using operation memories I'd just detune the patch against itself in stereo and invert the vibrato, the sound is then interesting enough that I don't need the panning effects.
2005-08-30 by Summa
On 27 Aug 2005 at 17:11, Scott Nordlund wrote: > >#1 is possible, the complete 3-6 Operator line, if you can live with > >#the > >1:2 > >limitation for 1,2 and 5,6 even the complete algorithm.. > > ...etc. > > The problem is that I really don't like the fixed ratio limitation- > even if the ratio is suitable for the sound, I generally prefer to > subtly detune all of the oscillators from each other to get a thicker > sound. So I avoid FM unless I can really do it "right". You can at least work completely free with 4 Operators, using one operator per module to define the frequency, but it involves a bit planing to create the algorithms... > > > 0 Hz? I've noticed it can go a lot lower than the DX but I don't > > > think it goes all the way down to 0 Hz... does it? > > > >It does go down to 0Hz... > > Maybe I should check that again. Well, I rechecked... it's been nearly 9 month since I touched the VZ soundprogramming wise, I think you're right, there's still a modulation of about 0.5Hz or less in the sound... > > > The two LFOs are definately appreciated, though honestly I don't > > > use the tremolo much. > > > >Since it's possible to change its influence for single operators it > >can be the basis for moving/changing sounds and another way to create > >PWM type sounds... > > Yeah, I usually use fixed-frequency ring mod instead. Hmmm, that should simply do the tremolo thing... > The "multi" setting on the LFO page enables a different LFO for each > voice- unlike the DX7 (and a lot of other synths) that only has one > global LFO. I think I read somewhere that the TX802 and DX7-II models > have this feature. I see, I know that problem from the AN200 but in that case I can use the freedraw envelopes to get so much modulation into the sound that noone will recognise the limitation. Btw. when it comes to the TX802, it's part of the voice settings... > > > I'm not saying the ESQ-M is the king of all synths any more than > > > the VZ is, but waveforms, when used with AM or sync, can do some > > > radical > > > >AM before or after filter? > > Before. Oscillator 1 modulates Oscillator 2. Doesn't seem that great > that great at first but it enables all kinds of really nasty weird > sounds, or really thick sounds, or whatever. If prefere having Oscillator1 -> Filter1 -> AM / Oscillator2 -> Filter2 -> AM the way it's possible with the MT32/D110/D50/JV/XV/Fantom/K5000 Synths. That can be source for interesting controllable timbre changes like voice, radio noises or even plucked string type sounds... > >Well, I haven't tried that but the VZ-1 should be able to do panning > >too when layer a patch with tremolo settings with itsef and using the > >tremolo invert switch of the OP-Mems... > > I hadn't thought of that! But usually when using operation memories > I'd just detune the patch against itself in stereo and invert the > vibrato, the sound is then interesting enough that I don't need the > panning effects. That depends on the sound, some FX or ambient type pads can be improved with some panning. But I guess I currently think too much on making stylisch impressive sounds due to my job... ...Summa -- CZ/VZ mailing list : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CZsynth FMHeaven mailing list : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/fmheaven/ FS1R mailing list : http://www.ampfea.org/mailman/listinfo/fss-list Vokator mailing list : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vokator Wellenform Chat So and Do 22.00 CET: http://chat.moogulator.com/
2005-08-31 by Scott Nordlund
> > >Since it's possible to change its influence for single operators it > > >can be the basis for moving/changing sounds and another way to create > > >PWM type sounds... > > > > Yeah, I usually use fixed-frequency ring mod instead. > >Hmmm, that should simply do the tremolo thing... Actually there's an interesting trick you can do this way- set all 4 oscillator pairs to ring, with the "modulators" set to low fixed frequency each one slightly different, on saw 1 or saw 2 waves. And set the other oscillators to sine waves of different harmonics- so they each have saw wave tremolo of different frequencies. It can make this interesting delay sort of effect, but the saw waves go out of sync. I got a really cool sound this way and I tend to overuse it. > > > > I'm not saying the ESQ-M is the king of all synths any more than > > > > the VZ is, but waveforms, when used with AM or sync, can do some > > > > radical > > > > > >AM before or after filter? > > > > Before. Oscillator 1 modulates Oscillator 2. Doesn't seem that great > > that great at first but it enables all kinds of really nasty weird > > sounds, or really thick sounds, or whatever. > >If prefere having Oscillator1 -> Filter1 -> AM / Oscillator2 -> Filter2 -> >AM the >way it's possible with the MT32/D110/D50/JV/XV/Fantom/K5000 Synths. That >can be >source for interesting controllable timbre changes like voice, radio noises >or >even plucked string type sounds... Either kind of AM is cool, though obviously I'd prefer to have both. On the ESQ it's really more a good way to get new waveforms (sometimes with interesting aliasing harmonics) or get a really thick detuned sound.
2005-09-07 by Clifton Bryant
It's still a darn great synth and I still have mine. I have one vz1 and two vz-10m's. I don't even go out to buy new synth's anymore because im very happy with my vz's when I first brought them. Cliff
> > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > http://mail.yahoo.com
2005-09-08 by phonophobie
i like the combination of FM and RM - it can be very powerful and can produce some unique sounds. modulating the envelopes with velocity is a nice feature. 8 modules are good for layering and chord sounds. and it´s pretty cheap second hand - for that price you´ll get a lot of synthesis ! :) --- In CZsynth@yahoogroups.com, "Clifton Bryant" <cliffe123@y...> wrote:
> It's still a darn great synth and I still have mine. I have one vz1 > and two vz-10m's. I don't even go out to buy new synth's anymore > because im very happy with my vz's when I first brought them. > > Cliff > > > > __________________________________________________ > > Do You Yahoo!? > > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > > http://mail.yahoo.com
2005-09-11 by midcomsys
Hmm, I have to disagree with that statement Summa. There have been many articles about this in the past. Phase distortion is perhaps a different approach but the mechanics are very similar. I think Casio didn't want to infringe on Yamaha's copyrights at that time. Below there's a link to an article about the CZ230s. Hope this helps you understand. http://users.informatik.haw- hamburg.de/~windle_c/TableHooters/Casio_CZ-230S.html --- In CZsynth@yahoogroups.com, "Summa" <flotorian@f...> wrote: > On 26 Aug 2005 at 16:19, Larry T. wrote: > > > FYI: The CZ family are not even slightly FM type synthesis. The VZ's > > are closer. Theere is very little similarity between CZ sounds and > > the DX family sounds. (And yes, the CZ is FAR easier to program then > > the DX.) > > The CZ is working with Phase Modulation, like the DX7 (Yamaha just called it FM) > but implementation is different... > > ...Summa > > -- > > CZ/VZ mailing list : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CZsynth > FMHeaven mailing list : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/fmheaven/ > FS1R mailing list : http://www.ampfea.org/mailman/listinfo/fss-list > Vokator mailing list : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vokator
> > > Wellenform Chat So and Do 22.00 CET: http://chat.moogulator.com/
2005-09-11 by Summa
That wasn't my statement, check who you're quoting :) I know that Yamahas FM and Phase Distortion are both working with Phase Modulation, but using a different kind of implementation... On 11 Sep 2005 at 9:53, midcomsys wrote: > Hmm, I have to disagree with that statement Summa. There have been > many articles about this in the past. Phase distortion is perhaps a > different approach but the mechanics are very similar. I think Casio > didn't want to infringe on Yamaha's copyrights at that time. Below > there's a link to an article about the CZ230s. Hope this helps you > understand. > > http://users.informatik.haw- > hamburg.de/~windle_c/TableHooters/Casio_CZ-230S.html > > --- In CZsynth@yahoogroups.com, "Summa" <flotorian@f...> wrote: > > On 26 Aug 2005 at 16:19, Larry T. wrote: > > > > > FYI: The CZ family are not even slightly FM type synthesis. The > VZ's > > > are closer. Theere is very little similarity between CZ sounds > and > > > the DX family sounds. (And yes, the CZ is FAR easier to program > then > > > the DX.) > > > > The CZ is working with Phase Modulation, like the DX7 (Yamaha just > called it FM) > > but implementation is different... > > > > ...Summa > > > > -- > > > > CZ/VZ mailing list : > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CZsynth > > FMHeaven mailing list : > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/fmheaven/ > > FS1R mailing list : > http://www.ampfea.org/mailman/listinfo/fss-list > > Vokator mailing list : > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vokator > > > > > > Wellenform Chat So and Do 22.00 CET: http://chat.moogulator.com/ > > > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > --------------------~--> Life without art & music? Keep the arts alive > today at Network for Good! > http://us.click.yahoo.com/iuUuID/dnQLAA/n1hLAA/QnLolB/TM > --------------------------------------------------------------------~- > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > -- CZ/VZ mailing list : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CZsynth FMHeaven mailing list : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/fmheaven/ FS1R mailing list : http://www.ampfea.org/mailman/listinfo/fss-list Vokator mailing list : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vokator Wellenform Chat So and Do 22.00 CET: http://chat.moogulator.com/
2005-09-11 by steve_the_composer
Thanks for posting the link to the article. I enjoyed reading it. It has a lot of interesting historical background and other information. However, I have a bone to pick. At one point the article states: "Other rumours claim that Casio's PD hardware employs more general lookup- tables mappings instead of mathematically exact multiplications to circumvent the patent, which only results in slightly different timbres (or even in the same when as a special case the employed table "coincidentally" maps a multiplication)." I didn't think it was a rumor, but a bona fide explanation of how the CZ synth engine worked. I don't know if it was Casio slinging the bull in order to avoid a suit, but it seemed to make sense the way the synth engine supposedly worked--harmonic content determined not by frequency modulation of one wave by another but by altering the phase of the wave based on the rate at which waves were read out of ROM: "This system is capable of producing a variety of wave forms by distorting the read phase angles of sine and cosine waves that are written in ROM. The pattern of the read phase angle distortion is determined by the specification of the DCO . . . WAVE FORM." [CZ- 5000 manual, p. 14] The chart that follows the above explanation shows how a resultant wave is derived from a cosine wave when distorted (or shifted) by a phase angle (from 0 to 2 pi). I can see that this might be likened to frequency modulation in the traditional sense. Maybe it is just explanatory hocus-pocus. Personally, I don't think it is. Nevertheless, if it is described this way in the CZ manuals, I would hardly call it a rumor.
2005-09-12 by Scott Nordlund
>I didn't think it was a rumor, but a bona fide explanation of how >the CZ synth engine worked. I don't know if it was Casio slinging >the bull in order to avoid a suit, but it seemed to make sense the >way the synth engine supposedly worked--harmonic content determined >not by frequency modulation of one wave by another but by altering >the phase of the wave based on the rate at which waves were read out >of ROM: I'm actually fairly sure FM synthesis works like this too: From what I understand (and this is based on some speculation but it seems right to me), it's really pretty basic stuff. Imagine you have a digital oscillator that consists of a phase register, a pitch register (increments the phase register by a certain amount every cycle), and a sinewave lookup table (actually just a quarter-sine that gets flipped around 3 times). The phase register feeds into the lookup table and the output is a sine wave: sin(f*t) (I'm ignoring the amplifier). If you added an external signal from another oscillator to the value of the phase register, you'd have phase modulation, as in the DX7: sin(f*t + x). I'm fairly sure all the CZ series does is use something slightly more fancy as the modulating signal (well, except the resonant waveforms, which use some kind of funky amplitude modulated sine wave sync to mimic resonance). I think the DX7 only really uses one hardware oscillator for all operators and switches between them every clock cycle.
2005-09-12 by Summa
Not a single real oscillator, everything in the DX is calculated and according to their patents they're using waveform/sine tables too... You can find them in the misc section of Atoms link page http://smasher.suspicious.org/fs1r/links The text might be a bit boring but check the scematics (by pressing images), especially when it comes to the patents from 1979-1981 ...Summa On 11 Sep 2005 at 23:57, Scott Nordlund wrote: > I think the DX7 only really uses one hardware oscillator for all > operators and switches between them every clock cycle. > > > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > --------------------~--> Life without art & music? Keep the arts alive > today at Network for Good! > http://us.click.yahoo.com/iuUuID/dnQLAA/n1hLAA/QnLolB/TM > --------------------------------------------------------------------~- > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > -- CZ/VZ mailing list : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CZsynth FMHeaven mailing list : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/fmheaven/ FS1R mailing list : http://www.ampfea.org/mailman/listinfo/fss-list Vokator mailing list : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vokator Wellenform Chat So and Do 22.00 CET: http://chat.moogulator.com/
2005-09-13 by wadrad
Great exchange of info on this thread... I'd forgotten about all the cool links and info on Smasher's FS1R site... I was so inspired by the dialogue, I spent over half the weekend just cranking out new patches on the VZ-10m. I worked with it a bit when I first got it (about a year ago) basically to understand HOW it was programmed, but this was the first time to really dive in and do some "from-scratch" patch programming. Also reminded myself or some of the pros and cons of the machine. Again, good discussion... thanks! Wadrad --- In CZsynth@yahoogroups.com, "Summa" <flotorian@f...> wrote: > Not a single real oscillator, everything in the DX is calculated and according to > their patents they're using waveform/sine tables too... > > You can find them in the misc section of Atoms link page > > http://smasher.suspicious.org/fs1r/links > > The text might be a bit boring but check the scematics (by pressing images), > especially when it comes to the patents from 1979-1981 > > ...Summa > > > On 11 Sep 2005 at 23:57, Scott Nordlund wrote: > > > > I think the DX7 only really uses one hardware oscillator for all > > operators and switches between them every clock cycle. > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > > --------------------~--> Life without art & music? Keep the arts alive > > today at Network for Good! > > http://us.click.yahoo.com/iuUuID/dnQLAA/n1hLAA/QnLolB/TM > > ------------------------------------------------------------------ --~- > > > > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > CZ/VZ mailing list : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CZsynth > FMHeaven mailing list : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/fmheaven/ > FS1R mailing list : http://www.ampfea.org/mailman/listinfo/fss-list > Vokator mailing list : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vokator
> > > Wellenform Chat So and Do 22.00 CET: http://chat.moogulator.com/
2005-09-13 by Jez
Anyone got a PC editor I can use with my VZ8M? On 9/13/05, wadrad <wadrad@...> wrote: > > Great exchange of info on this thread... I'd forgotten about all the > cool links and info on Smasher's FS1R site... > > I was so inspired by the dialogue, I spent over half the weekend just > cranking out new patches on the VZ-10m. I worked with it a bit when > I first got it (about a year ago) basically to understand HOW it was > programmed, but this was the first time to really dive in and do > some "from-scratch" patch programming. Also reminded myself or some > of the pros and cons of the machine. > > Again, good discussion... thanks! > Wadrad > > --- In CZsynth@yahoogroups.com, "Summa" <flotorian@f...> wrote: > > Not a single real oscillator, everything in the DX is calculated > and according to > > their patents they're using waveform/sine tables too... > > > > You can find them in the misc section of Atoms link page > > > > http://smasher.suspicious.org/fs1r/links > > > > The text might be a bit boring but check the scematics (by pressing > images), > > especially when it comes to the patents from 1979-1981 > > > > ...Summa > > > > > > On 11 Sep 2005 at 23:57, Scott Nordlund wrote: > > > > > > > I think the DX7 only really uses one hardware oscillator for all > > > operators and switches between them every clock cycle. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > > > --------------------~--> Life without art & music? Keep the arts > alive > > > today at Network for Good! > > > http://us.click.yahoo.com/iuUuID/dnQLAA/n1hLAA/QnLolB/TM > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > --~- > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > CZ/VZ mailing list : > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CZsynth > > FMHeaven mailing list : > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/fmheaven/ > > FS1R mailing list : > http://www.ampfea.org/mailman/listinfo/fss-list > > Vokator mailing list : > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vokator > > > > > > Wellenform Chat So and Do 22.00 CET: http://chat.moogulator.com/ > > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
2005-09-14 by phonophobie
i uploaded all available vz software here: http://launch.groups.yahoo.com/group/CZ-VZ-Files/ i prefer the atari editor... :) --- In CZsynth@yahoogroups.com, Jez <jezosaurus@g...> wrote:
> Anyone got a PC editor I can use with my VZ8M? > > On 9/13/05, wadrad <wadrad@y...> wrote: > > > > Great exchange of info on this thread... I'd forgotten about all the > > cool links and info on Smasher's FS1R site... > > > > I was so inspired by the dialogue, I spent over half the weekend just > > cranking out new patches on the VZ-10m. I worked with it a bit when > > I first got it (about a year ago) basically to understand HOW it was > > programmed, but this was the first time to really dive in and do > > some "from-scratch" patch programming. Also reminded myself or some > > of the pros and cons of the machine. > > > > Again, good discussion... thanks! > > Wadrad > > > > --- In CZsynth@yahoogroups.com, "Summa" <flotorian@f...> wrote: > > > Not a single real oscillator, everything in the DX is calculated > > and according to > > > their patents they're using waveform/sine tables too... > > > > > > You can find them in the misc section of Atoms link page > > > > > > http://smasher.suspicious.org/fs1r/links > > > > > > The text might be a bit boring but check the scematics (by pressing > > images), > > > especially when it comes to the patents from 1979-1981 > > > > > > ...Summa > > > > > > > > > On 11 Sep 2005 at 23:57, Scott Nordlund wrote: > > > > > > > > > > I think the DX7 only really uses one hardware oscillator for all > > > > operators and switches between them every clock cycle. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > > > > --------------------~--> Life without art & music? Keep the arts > > alive > > > > today at Network for Good! > > > > http://us.click.yahoo.com/iuUuID/dnQLAA/n1hLAA/QnLolB/TM > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > > --~- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > CZ/VZ mailing list : > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CZsynth > > > FMHeaven mailing list : > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/fmheaven/ > > > FS1R mailing list : > > http://www.ampfea.org/mailman/listinfo/fss-list > > > Vokator mailing list : > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vokator > > > > > > > > > Wellenform Chat So and Do 22.00 CET: http://chat.moogulator.com/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]