Yahoo Groups archive

Casio CZ/ VZ/ FZ - Pro Series

Index last updated: 2026-04-28 22:42 UTC

Thread

Synthmaker

Synthmaker

2008-04-10 by jdcx64

Yesterday I was shown a piece of software that may be of interest to
many people on this list:
www.synthmaker.com is an amazing graphical tool for synth development.
Component modules can be chosen chosen from a selection of buttons,
midi things, oscillators, envelopes. filters, etc. and placed on the
working area, and their input/output terminals connected with virtual
patch cables.
The modules are made of other modules and C-like code. The insides of
modules are available for inspection and editing, and new modules can
be created.
Module code is translated into DSP-like (4 floating point operations
per clock cycle SSE pentium) code that runs in real time on a per
sample basis, and amazingly you can have a look at the actual SSE
instructions.
One of the pre-made demo projects is a virtual TB-303, a real one, not
a rompler. The software has also been used to make CZ-like emulators.
The greatest: if you build something worthy you can save it as a
stand-alone executable and distribute it for free or for profit.
If you're interested download the demo and have a look at the forums.
I'm trying to overcome my MS phobia and have a windows PC on my desk
just to use it.

Joaquim

Re: Synthmaker

2008-04-10 by katzenhans2000

hello,
i am using synthmaker for about a year now, its really great stuff!
and: you cannot only save your creations as standalone, you can also
create vst(i)s.
one great feature: sysex is implemented now, so you can design your
own software controller for every sysex capable synth.
its great to build effects, synths, controllers,...
on my website you can find some vst effects (and their standalone
versions) and synths i created with synthmaker
(http://www.blechturmstudios.at).
and yes, its a shame it doesnt run on mac...
all the best,
michael


--- In CZsynth@yahoogroups.com, "jdcx64" <jdcx64@...> wrote:
Show quoted textHide quoted text
>
> Yesterday I was shown a piece of software that may be of interest to
> many people on this list:
> www.synthmaker.com is an amazing graphical tool for synth development.
> Component modules can be chosen chosen from a selection of buttons,
> midi things, oscillators, envelopes. filters, etc. and placed on the
> working area, and their input/output terminals connected with virtual
> patch cables.
> The modules are made of other modules and C-like code. The insides of
> modules are available for inspection and editing, and new modules can
> be created.
> Module code is translated into DSP-like (4 floating point operations
> per clock cycle SSE pentium) code that runs in real time on a per
> sample basis, and amazingly you can have a look at the actual SSE
> instructions.
> One of the pre-made demo projects is a virtual TB-303, a real one, not
> a rompler. The software has also been used to make CZ-like emulators.
> The greatest: if you build something worthy you can save it as a
> stand-alone executable and distribute it for free or for profit.
> If you're interested download the demo and have a look at the forums.
> I'm trying to overcome my MS phobia and have a windows PC on my desk
> just to use it.
> 
> Joaquim
>

Re: [CZsynth] Synthmaker

2008-04-10 by Summa

Hi Joaquim,

with a price of 185 Euro this isn't exactly freeware nor is it very 
much on topic. I'd prefere to keep this forum free of spam and I'm 
not able to tell a part between postings of an enthusiastic user and 
firm employees...

I hope you understand!

...Summa


On 10 Apr 2008 at 16:58, jdcx64 wrote:

> Yesterday I was shown a piece of software that may be of interest to
> many people on this list: www.synthmaker.com is an amazing graphical
> tool for synth development. Component modules can be chosen chosen
> from a selection of buttons, midi things, oscillators, envelopes.
> filters, etc. and placed on the working area, and their input/output
> terminals connected with virtual patch cables. The modules are made of
> other modules and C-like code. The insides of modules are available
> for inspection and editing, and new modules can be created. Module
> code is translated into DSP-like (4 floating point operations per
> clock cycle SSE pentium) code that runs in real time on a per sample
> basis, and amazingly you can have a look at the actual SSE
> instructions. One of the pre-made demo projects is a virtual TB-303, a
> real one, not a rompler. The software has also been used to make
> CZ-like emulators. The greatest: if you build something worthy you can
> save it as a stand-alone executable and distribute it for free or for
> profit. If you're interested download the demo and have a look at the
> forums. I'm trying to overcome my MS phobia and have a windows PC on
> my desk just to use it.
> 
> Joaquim

-- 

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

http://www.summasounds.de/

Re: Synthmaker

2008-04-10 by jdcx64

Hi,

Yes I'm excited about Synthmaker but I don't work for the company, I
first saw the software last night.

I thought it would be of interest to CZ the list because it probably
is the only way non-programmers can play with CZ synthesis, and I
don't mean just emulate a CZ but take CZ synthesis to new heights:
more voices, real noise, real resonance, a more direct user interface.

(I don't call it 'phase distortion' synthesis because I don't like the
 expression - the 'distortion' word suggests something different)

About the cost: I think we should be able to talk about non-free
software. The personal edition costs less (but the plugins or software
you make can not be sold). There is a demo. If you use it at home you
only pay if you want to.

This is a nicer than average list (I know what I'm talking about), I
wouldn't want to send spam to it or start an off-topic discussion.

Joaquim

--- In CZsynth@yahoogroups.com, "Summa" <flotorian@...> wrote:
Show quoted textHide quoted text
>
> Hi Joaquim,
> 
> with a price of 185 Euro this isn't exactly freeware nor is it very 
> much on topic. I'd prefere to keep this forum free of spam and I'm 
> not able to tell a part between postings of an enthusiastic user and 
> firm employees...
> 
> I hope you understand!
> 
> ...Summa
> 
> 
> On 10 Apr 2008 at 16:58, jdcx64 wrote:
> 
> > Yesterday I was shown a piece of software that may be of interest to
> > many people on this list: www.synthmaker.com is an amazing graphical
> > tool for synth development. Component modules can be chosen chosen
> > from a selection of buttons, midi things, oscillators, envelopes.
> > filters, etc. and placed on the working area, and their input/output
> > terminals connected with virtual patch cables. The modules are made of
> > other modules and C-like code. The insides of modules are available
> > for inspection and editing, and new modules can be created. Module
> > code is translated into DSP-like (4 floating point operations per
> > clock cycle SSE pentium) code that runs in real time on a per sample
> > basis, and amazingly you can have a look at the actual SSE
> > instructions. One of the pre-made demo projects is a virtual TB-303, a
> > real one, not a rompler. The software has also been used to make
> > CZ-like emulators. The greatest: if you build something worthy you can
> > save it as a stand-alone executable and distribute it for free or for
> > profit. If you're interested download the demo and have a look at the
> > forums. I'm trying to overcome my MS phobia and have a windows PC on
> > my desk just to use it.
> > 
> > Joaquim
> 
> -- 
> 
> 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
> 
> http://www.summasounds.de/
>

Re: Synthmaker

2008-04-10 by jdcx64

How many of you would pay 50 Eur for a no limits Super CZ?
- loads CZ patches
- windows executable + plugin
- many waveforms per voice
- real noise waveform
- real resonance (self-oscillating)
- midi controllable, including configurable sysex messages for each
synth setting
- assignable LFOs
- assignable envelopes
- assignable wheels
- assignable knobs (midi-borrowed from other devices)
- sequenceable synth parameters for (ala Korg MS2000)
etc.

Joaquim

Re: Synthmaker

2008-04-10 by katzenhans2000

--- In CZsynth@yahoogroups.com, "jdcx64" <jdcx64@...> wrote:
>
> How many of you would pay 50 Eur for a no limits Super CZ?
> - loads CZ patches
> - windows executable + plugin
> - many waveforms per voice
> - real noise waveform
> - real resonance (self-oscillating)
> - midi controllable, including configurable sysex messages for each
> synth setting
> - assignable LFOs
> - assignable envelopes
> - assignable wheels
> - assignable knobs (midi-borrowed from other devices)
> - sequenceable synth parameters for (ala Korg MS2000)
> etc.
> 
> Joaquim
>

I am thinking of building a controller for my cz5000 and vz8m. But I
wonder if both synths can handle sysex in realtime and if all
parameters are accessable. And I am quite new to sysex (never needed
it) ;-)
btw sorry for my bad english.

michael

Re: Synthmaker

2008-04-10 by jdcx64

--- In CZsynth@yahoogroups.com, "katzenhans2000" <gzuz55@...> wrote:

> I am thinking of building a controller for my cz5000 and vz8m. But I
> wonder if both synths can handle sysex in realtime and if all
> parameters are accessable. And I am quite new to sysex (never needed
> it) ;-)

The CZs can't, the only thing they can handle is complete patch
uploads. That's my only real gripe with the CZs.

Joaquim

Re: Synthmaker

2008-04-10 by katzenhans2000

--- In CZsynth@yahoogroups.com, "jdcx64" <jdcx64@...> wrote:
>
> --- In CZsynth@yahoogroups.com, "katzenhans2000" <gzuz55@> wrote:
> 
> > I am thinking of building a controller for my cz5000 and vz8m. But I
> > wonder if both synths can handle sysex in realtime and if all
> > parameters are accessable. And I am quite new to sysex (never needed
> > it) ;-)
> 
> The CZs can't, the only thing they can handle is complete patch
> uploads. That's my only real gripe with the CZs.
> 
> Joaquim
>

Ah, I see. Thats bad, but thanks.
So I wont start with it *lol*
But I started to create an emulation of a CZ, but its still hard for
me to create the right waveforms. But thats another forum :-)

michael

Re: [CZsynth] Re: Synthmaker

2008-04-10 by Summa

I think you missunderstood me, this wasn't a request ;)

Btw. if you don't use Phase Distortion, Phase Modulation, Waveshaping 
or what ever you call the synthesis, it'll be far from a CZ...

...Summa

On 10 Apr 2008 at 18:57, jdcx64 wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> Yes I'm excited about Synthmaker but I don't work for the company, I
> first saw the software last night.
> 
> I thought it would be of interest to CZ the list because it probably
> is the only way non-programmers can play with CZ synthesis, and I
> don't mean just emulate a CZ but take CZ synthesis to new heights:
> more voices, real noise, real resonance, a more direct user interface.
> 
> (I don't call it 'phase distortion' synthesis because I don't like the
>  expression - the 'distortion' word suggests something different)
> 
> About the cost: I think we should be able to talk about non-free
> software. The personal edition costs less (but the plugins or software
> you make can not be sold). There is a demo. If you use it at home you
> only pay if you want to.
> 
> This is a nicer than average list (I know what I'm talking about), I
> wouldn't want to send spam to it or start an off-topic discussion.
> 
> Joaquim
> 
> --- In CZsynth@yahoogroups.com, "Summa" <flotorian@...> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Joaquim,
> > 
> > with a price of 185 Euro this isn't exactly freeware nor is it very
> > much on topic. I'd prefere to keep this forum free of spam and I'm
> > not able to tell a part between postings of an enthusiastic user and
> > firm employees...
> > 
> > I hope you understand!
> > 
> > ...Summa
> > 
> > 
> > On 10 Apr 2008 at 16:58, jdcx64 wrote:
> > 
> > > Yesterday I was shown a piece of software that may be of interest
> > > to many people on this list: www.synthmaker.com is an amazing
> > > graphical tool for synth development. Component modules can be
> > > chosen chosen from a selection of buttons, midi things,
> > > oscillators, envelopes. filters, etc. and placed on the working
> > > area, and their input/output terminals connected with virtual
> > > patch cables. The modules are made of other modules and C-like
> > > code. The insides of modules are available for inspection and
> > > editing, and new modules can be created. Module code is translated
> > > into DSP-like (4 floating point operations per clock cycle SSE
> > > pentium) code that runs in real time on a per sample basis, and
> > > amazingly you can have a look at the actual SSE instructions. One
> > > of the pre-made demo projects is a virtual TB-303, a real one, not
> > > a rompler. The software has also been used to make CZ-like
> > > emulators. The greatest: if you build something worthy you can
> > > save it as a stand-alone executable and distribute it for free or
> > > for profit. If you're interested download the demo and have a look
> > > at the forums. I'm trying to overcome my MS phobia and have a
> > > windows PC on my desk just to use it.
> > > 
> > > Joaquim
> > 
> > -- 
> > 
> > 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
> > 
> > http://www.summasounds.de/
> >
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------
> 
> 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

http://www.summasounds.de/

Re: CZ-Synthesis

2008-04-11 by jdcx64

I took you for an overzealous moderator. My mistake, there are no such
people on this forum.

Of course it must be 'Phase Distortion' synthesis, I'm just wondering
why on earth the marketing people at Casio came up with such an
expression.

I greatly admire the idea for the Cosmo / CZ / PD synthesis. I'm also
deeply sorry that the concept was abandoned and that there never was a
CZ-202, CZ-2, etc. A CZ-7 would be a beast of a synth, outperforming
everything else on the market: PD synthesis takes so little CPU power
that even on a mobile phone processor there really would be no limits.

PD synthesis is done by fetching waveform values from a sin look-up
table at a non-constant rate. An accurate name for it would have been
'sin-table-fetch-rate-modulation' or 'rate-modulation' for a short.

It happens that a sin look-up table is just a software optimization
technique for the sin function, widely used when CPUs can not
calculate it themselves.

If we forget the detail that the sin function has been implemented
with a look-up table, then:
'sin-table' -> 'sin' -> 'signal'
'fetch-rate' -> 'frequency'

My conclusion is that 'Phase Distortion' synthesis is more accurately
described by the words 'Frequency Modulation', a modulation of the sin
signal so deep as to halt it for a while and where the modulator is
complex and contains higher frequencies than the carrier itself, but
it still is frequency modulation.

At the time the CZ line was launched another Japanese company was
already using the words 'Frequency Modulation' to describe a
completely different (and less clever) approach to sound synthesis and
Casio probably had to come up with some different wording.

I read a vague statement on the web saying that Yamaha still managed
to sue Casio for patent infringement, does anyone have any details on
this? If this is true it should be a clear case against patent law
(abuse).

Joaquim

p.s. Patent law is probably not bad, it's just being widely ignored, I
think. Patent offices make a lot more money from the patent
applications that are granted, and indirectly so do lawyers and other
people involved. The requirement that 'patents must not be obvious for
specialists on the subject matter' should kill 95% of patent
applications, the same 95% that result in bad patents. This is true at
least for the subjects I'm familiar with.


--- In CZsynth@yahoogroups.com, "Summa" <flotorian@...> wrote:
Show quoted textHide quoted text
>
> I think you missunderstood me, this wasn't a request ;)
> 
> Btw. if you don't use Phase Distortion, Phase Modulation, Waveshaping 
> or what ever you call the synthesis, it'll be far from a CZ...
> 
> ...Summa
> 
> On 10 Apr 2008 at 18:57, jdcx64 wrote:
> 
> > Hi,
> > 
> > Yes I'm excited about Synthmaker but I don't work for the company, I
> > first saw the software last night.
> > 
> > I thought it would be of interest to CZ the list because it probably
> > is the only way non-programmers can play with CZ synthesis, and I
> > don't mean just emulate a CZ but take CZ synthesis to new heights:
> > more voices, real noise, real resonance, a more direct user interface.
> > 
> > (I don't call it 'phase distortion' synthesis because I don't like the
> >  expression - the 'distortion' word suggests something different)
> > 
> > About the cost: I think we should be able to talk about non-free
> > software. The personal edition costs less (but the plugins or software
> > you make can not be sold). There is a demo. If you use it at home you
> > only pay if you want to.
> > 
> > This is a nicer than average list (I know what I'm talking about), I
> > wouldn't want to send spam to it or start an off-topic discussion.
> > 
> > Joaquim
> > 
> > --- In CZsynth@yahoogroups.com, "Summa" <flotorian@> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi Joaquim,
> > > 
> > > with a price of 185 Euro this isn't exactly freeware nor is it very
> > > much on topic. I'd prefere to keep this forum free of spam and I'm
> > > not able to tell a part between postings of an enthusiastic user and
> > > firm employees...
> > > 
> > > I hope you understand!
> > > 
> > > ...Summa
> > > 
> > > 
> > > On 10 Apr 2008 at 16:58, jdcx64 wrote:
> > > 
> > > > Yesterday I was shown a piece of software that may be of interest
> > > > to many people on this list: www.synthmaker.com is an amazing
> > > > graphical tool for synth development. Component modules can be
> > > > chosen chosen from a selection of buttons, midi things,
> > > > oscillators, envelopes. filters, etc. and placed on the working
> > > > area, and their input/output terminals connected with virtual
> > > > patch cables. The modules are made of other modules and C-like
> > > > code. The insides of modules are available for inspection and
> > > > editing, and new modules can be created. Module code is translated
> > > > into DSP-like (4 floating point operations per clock cycle SSE
> > > > pentium) code that runs in real time on a per sample basis, and
> > > > amazingly you can have a look at the actual SSE instructions. One
> > > > of the pre-made demo projects is a virtual TB-303, a real one, not
> > > > a rompler. The software has also been used to make CZ-like
> > > > emulators. The greatest: if you build something worthy you can
> > > > save it as a stand-alone executable and distribute it for free or
> > > > for profit. If you're interested download the demo and have a look
> > > > at the forums. I'm trying to overcome my MS phobia and have a
> > > > windows PC on my desk just to use it.
> > > > 
> > > > Joaquim
> > > 
> > > -- 
> > > 
> > > 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
> > > 
> > > http://www.summasounds.de/
> > >
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > ------------------------------------
> > 
> > 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
> 
> http://www.summasounds.de/
>

Re: [CZsynth] Re: CZ-Synthesis

2008-04-12 by Summa

Hi Joaquim,

On 11 Apr 2008 at 16:07, jdcx64 wrote:

> I took you for an overzealous moderator. My mistake, there are no such
> people on this forum.

I might be a bit overprotective, but this isn't my only yahoogroup I 
run so starting plenty of discussions about spamming would be rather 
work intensive... 

> Of course it must be 'Phase Distortion' synthesis, I'm just wondering why
> on earth the marketing people at Casio came up with such an expression.

Distortion Synthesis is a pretty common expression, even so it's 
recently rather used for waveform generation within Virtual Analog 
Synths...

check:

http://www-
ccrma.stanford.edu/~stilti/papers/TimStilsonPhDThesis2006.pdf
 
> PD synthesis is done by fetching waveform values from a sin look-up
> table at a non-constant rate. An accurate name for it would have been
> 'sin-table-fetch-rate-modulation' or 'rate-modulation' for a short.

Also known as waveshaping, what is a rather squishy expression for 
plenty of nonlinear stuff including distortion...
 
> It happens that a sin look-up table is just a software optimization
> technique for the sin function, widely used when CPUs can not
> calculate it themselves.

But the imperfection of such a table is partly responsible for the 
character of those synths...

> My conclusion is that 'Phase Distortion' synthesis is more accurately
> described by the words 'Frequency Modulation', a modulation of the sin
> signal so deep as to halt it for a while and where the modulator is
> complex and contains higher frequencies than the carrier itself, but it
> still is frequency modulation.

But frequency modulation reacts on the DC-Offset of the input 
function/fetching waveform, so isn't it better to use phase 
modulation like Yamaha did?
 
> At the time the CZ line was launched another Japanese company was
> already using the words 'Frequency Modulation' to describe a
> completely different (and less clever) approach to sound synthesis and
> Casio probably had to come up with some different wording.

Well, the difference is, that Casio CZ Synths work mainly with 
waveshaping, I'm not exactly sure about the VZ Series, while first 
and 2nd generation of Yamaha FM-Synths weren't able to do true 
waveshaping since they aren't able to tune down Oscillators to 0Hz, 
like 3rd and 4the Generation (TG/SY77&99 and FS1R) are able to do...
Still what I still miss is a modern FM-Synth with an assignable 
Ringmodulator, except my Clavia G2...

> I read a vague statement on the web saying that Yamaha still managed
> to sue Casio for patent infringement, does anyone have any details on
> this? If this is true it should be a clear case against patent law
> (abuse).

I think it was because of the VZ Series, since it's alot closer to 
the Yamaha Synths. I've been told that Casio stopped their 
professional series since the VZ and FZ Generation haven't sold as 
well as expected.

Best regards!

...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

http://www.summasounds.de/

Re: [CZsynth] Re: CZ-Synthesis

2008-04-12 by Wilson Zorn

The "phase distortion" name never made me blink, I never even thought about 
it.  And, to me, it sounds accurate. I'm NOT saying you're wrong, what I'm 
saying is that in terms of perceptions I never at all shared that one.  So 
that makes me curious; I know this is a tangent, but did others find that 
term off-putting or misrepresentational?

I'm very sad that PD died.  I love it, and that's even at the limited state 
it was left at.  For my ears, it was far superior to FM, and I also found it 
easier to make sounds in.

----- Original Message ----- 
Show quoted textHide quoted text
From: "jdcx64" <jdcx64@...>
To: <CZsynth@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, April 11, 2008 9:07 AM
Subject: [CZsynth] Re: CZ-Synthesis


>I took you for an overzealous moderator. My mistake, there are no such
> people on this forum.
>
> Of course it must be 'Phase Distortion' synthesis, I'm just wondering
> why on earth the marketing people at Casio came up with such an
> expression.
>
> I greatly admire the idea for the Cosmo / CZ / PD synthesis. I'm also
> deeply sorry that the concept was abandoned and that there never was a
> CZ-202, CZ-2, etc. A CZ-7 would be a beast of a synth, outperforming
> everything else on the market: PD synthesis takes so little CPU power
> that even on a mobile phone processor there really would be no limits.
>
> PD synthesis is done by fetching waveform values from a sin look-up
> table at a non-constant rate. An accurate name for it would have been
> 'sin-table-fetch-rate-modulation' or 'rate-modulation' for a short.
>
> It happens that a sin look-up table is just a software optimization
> technique for the sin function, widely used when CPUs can not
> calculate it themselves.
>
> If we forget the detail that the sin function has been implemented
> with a look-up table, then:
> 'sin-table' -> 'sin' -> 'signal'
> 'fetch-rate' -> 'frequency'
>
> My conclusion is that 'Phase Distortion' synthesis is more accurately
> described by the words 'Frequency Modulation', a modulation of the sin
> signal so deep as to halt it for a while and where the modulator is
> complex and contains higher frequencies than the carrier itself, but
> it still is frequency modulation.
>
> At the time the CZ line was launched another Japanese company was
> already using the words 'Frequency Modulation' to describe a
> completely different (and less clever) approach to sound synthesis and
> Casio probably had to come up with some different wording.
>
> I read a vague statement on the web saying that Yamaha still managed
> to sue Casio for patent infringement, does anyone have any details on
> this? If this is true it should be a clear case against patent law
> (abuse).
>
> Joaquim
>
> p.s. Patent law is probably not bad, it's just being widely ignored, I
> think. Patent offices make a lot more money from the patent
> applications that are granted, and indirectly so do lawyers and other
> people involved. The requirement that 'patents must not be obvious for
> specialists on the subject matter' should kill 95% of patent
> applications, the same 95% that result in bad patents. This is true at
> least for the subjects I'm familiar with.
>
>
> --- In CZsynth@yahoogroups.com, "Summa" <flotorian@...> wrote:
>>
>> I think you missunderstood me, this wasn't a request ;)
>>
>> Btw. if you don't use Phase Distortion, Phase Modulation, Waveshaping
>> or what ever you call the synthesis, it'll be far from a CZ...
>>
>> ...Summa
>>
>> On 10 Apr 2008 at 18:57, jdcx64 wrote:
>>
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > Yes I'm excited about Synthmaker but I don't work for the company, I
>> > first saw the software last night.
>> >
>> > I thought it would be of interest to CZ the list because it probably
>> > is the only way non-programmers can play with CZ synthesis, and I
>> > don't mean just emulate a CZ but take CZ synthesis to new heights:
>> > more voices, real noise, real resonance, a more direct user interface.
>> >
>> > (I don't call it 'phase distortion' synthesis because I don't like the
>> >  expression - the 'distortion' word suggests something different)
>> >
>> > About the cost: I think we should be able to talk about non-free
>> > software. The personal edition costs less (but the plugins or software
>> > you make can not be sold). There is a demo. If you use it at home you
>> > only pay if you want to.
>> >
>> > This is a nicer than average list (I know what I'm talking about), I
>> > wouldn't want to send spam to it or start an off-topic discussion.
>> >
>> > Joaquim
>> >
>> > --- In CZsynth@yahoogroups.com, "Summa" <flotorian@> wrote:
>> > >
>> > > Hi Joaquim,
>> > >
>> > > with a price of 185 Euro this isn't exactly freeware nor is it very
>> > > much on topic. I'd prefere to keep this forum free of spam and I'm
>> > > not able to tell a part between postings of an enthusiastic user and
>> > > firm employees...
>> > >
>> > > I hope you understand!
>> > >
>> > > ...Summa
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > On 10 Apr 2008 at 16:58, jdcx64 wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > Yesterday I was shown a piece of software that may be of interest
>> > > > to many people on this list: www.synthmaker.com is an amazing
>> > > > graphical tool for synth development. Component modules can be
>> > > > chosen chosen from a selection of buttons, midi things,
>> > > > oscillators, envelopes. filters, etc. and placed on the working
>> > > > area, and their input/output terminals connected with virtual
>> > > > patch cables. The modules are made of other modules and C-like
>> > > > code. The insides of modules are available for inspection and
>> > > > editing, and new modules can be created. Module code is translated
>> > > > into DSP-like (4 floating point operations per clock cycle SSE
>> > > > pentium) code that runs in real time on a per sample basis, and
>> > > > amazingly you can have a look at the actual SSE instructions. One
>> > > > of the pre-made demo projects is a virtual TB-303, a real one, not
>> > > > a rompler. The software has also been used to make CZ-like
>> > > > emulators. The greatest: if you build something worthy you can
>> > > > save it as a stand-alone executable and distribute it for free or
>> > > > for profit. If you're interested download the demo and have a look
>> > > > at the forums. I'm trying to overcome my MS phobia and have a
>> > > > windows PC on my desk just to use it.
>> > > >
>> > > > Joaquim
>> > >
>> > > -- 
>> > >
>> > > 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
>> > >
>> > > http://www.summasounds.de/
>> > >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > ------------------------------------
>> >
>> > 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
>>
>> http://www.summasounds.de/
>>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>

Re: CZ-Synthesis

2008-04-13 by synergeezer

Firstly, let me say that I've always been pretty satisfied with the
(marketing) distinctions between FM, PM, and PD synthesizers.
Since FM already had a long (since B.C. [Before Chowning]) and
illustrious history in radio (I don't mean a variety show!), and was
understood as a sine (cosine) wave modifying a sine (cosine) wave, and
there were lots of sources for printouts and graphs of the Bessel
functions, to help with understanding the sidebands generated, I think
 it would have misled me if Casio had called the CZs "frequency" or
"phase" modulation synthesizers.  The Bessel graphs don't help much
with PD synthesis!
Although, technically (so I've read), the DX7 and its kin use PM,
rather than the FM claimed, the Bessel graphs still help.
I guess that anything using a modulator and carrier that are not both
sine (cosine) waves could be considered PD, the way I think of it. 
So, I think of the TX81Z as a PD synth (this might be where I would
say the "FM" description is misleading; the value in the TX81Z comes
more from the complex waveforms available, rather than from the
modulation varieties).  I think of the VZs (which I love!) as PM
synths with PD abilities.  I also think of the Synergy as a PM synth,
although it has a non-sine wave available (a kind of pointy sine wave,
or over-inflated triangle wave).
I completely agree that the CZs are far easier to program than FM/PM
synths, but I think FM/PM synths are more "powerful" and "versatile"
than the CZs.  Please, don't think that I am putting down the CZs - I
love them!  I have a CZ1, 5000, and two 101s.  A CZ is my first
recommendation for a beginning synthesist who wants to learn to
program.  Most people can be having loads of fun programming a CZ in a
short time.
Even more interesting to me are the FM/PM synths, whose power remains
largely untapped, IMO, even with the thousands of DX7 patches
available.  Almost every time I sit down to program a DX7, or,
especially, a VZ, I find something I've never heard before!
I don't think of PD as dead, with used instruments constantly
available.  It's true that PD, in the CZ sense, is not being
developed, anymore.  But, fairly recently, Yamaha made the FS1R (16
operators, OK 8+8), which I have not plunged into programming, yet,
but the presets are worth current cost.

(enough, already! B^{)
- synergeezer

--- In CZsynth@yahoogroups.com, "Wilson Zorn" <wilson.zorn@...> wrote:
>
> The "phase distortion" name never made me blink, I never even
thought about 
> it.  And, to me, it sounds accurate. I'm NOT saying you're wrong,
what I'm 
> saying is that in terms of perceptions I never at all shared that
one.  So 
> that makes me curious; I know this is a tangent, but did others find
that 
> term off-putting or misrepresentational?
> 
> I'm very sad that PD died.  I love it, and that's even at the
limited state 
> it was left at.  For my ears, it was far superior to FM, and I also
found it 
> easier to make sounds in.
> 
<lots of noble discussion clipped>

Re: CZ-Emulation...

2008-04-13 by jdcx64

--- In CZsynth@yahoogroups.com, "katzenhans2000" <gzuz55@...> wrote:
> ... I started to create an emulation of a CZ, but its still hard for
> me to create the right waveforms. But thats another forum :-)
> 
> michael

A CZ emulator would be great, CZ lovers are starving for a CZ with knobs!

About the waveform generation, ...from a sin table. For example, when
'Square Wave' is selected:

For parameter 'WAVE'=0 the CZ fetches values linearly from the sin
table. The resulting sound is a pure sin wave (the same as a square
wave with the harmonics filtered out)

For 'WAVE'=99, the CZ still fetches values from the sine wave but it
does it in a special way: it helds the table pointer at the pi/2
position from where it reads the +1 value repeateadly. T/2 seconds
later the table pointer jumps to the -pi/2 position, from where it
keeps reading -1 for another T/2 seconds. The result is a square wave.

For values of 'WAVE' 1 to 98 the table pointer is advanced at a rate
that is probably a weighted sum of the 'WAVE'=0 linear advance and the
'WAVE'=99 pi/2 jumps. Something like: (expressed in C with floats)

advance(t) = ( advance_wave0[t] * (99-'WAVE')/99 ) + 
             ( advance_wave99[t] * 'WAVE'/99 );

Multiplications or floats must be too painful for the CZ's CPU so it
probably does it with table reads, shifts and additions.

Joaquim

Re: [CZsynth] Re: CZ-Synthesis

2008-04-16 by Wilson Zorn

I wouldn't doubt that FM or PM has broader capabilities (I think that 
phraseology is a bit more clear than "powerful", if you don't mind) than PD, 
although I wouldn't like to really say it's more versatile in effect on a 
listener.  But the latter is purely aesthetic, and so I do emphasize that 
it's "to my ears" rather than any more general statement.

----- Original Message ----- 
Show quoted textHide quoted text
From: "synergeezer" <synergeezer@...>
To: <CZsynth@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Sunday, April 13, 2008 2:05 PM
Subject: [CZsynth] Re: CZ-Synthesis


> Firstly, let me say that I've always been pretty satisfied with the
> (marketing) distinctions between FM, PM, and PD synthesizers.
> Since FM already had a long (since B.C. [Before Chowning]) and
> illustrious history in radio (I don't mean a variety show!), and was
> understood as a sine (cosine) wave modifying a sine (cosine) wave, and
> there were lots of sources for printouts and graphs of the Bessel
> functions, to help with understanding the sidebands generated, I think
> it would have misled me if Casio had called the CZs "frequency" or
> "phase" modulation synthesizers.  The Bessel graphs don't help much
> with PD synthesis!
> Although, technically (so I've read), the DX7 and its kin use PM,
> rather than the FM claimed, the Bessel graphs still help.
> I guess that anything using a modulator and carrier that are not both
> sine (cosine) waves could be considered PD, the way I think of it.
> So, I think of the TX81Z as a PD synth (this might be where I would
> say the "FM" description is misleading; the value in the TX81Z comes
> more from the complex waveforms available, rather than from the
> modulation varieties).  I think of the VZs (which I love!) as PM
> synths with PD abilities.  I also think of the Synergy as a PM synth,
> although it has a non-sine wave available (a kind of pointy sine wave,
> or over-inflated triangle wave).
> I completely agree that the CZs are far easier to program than FM/PM
> synths, but I think FM/PM synths are more "powerful" and "versatile"
> than the CZs.  Please, don't think that I am putting down the CZs - I
> love them!  I have a CZ1, 5000, and two 101s.  A CZ is my first
> recommendation for a beginning synthesist who wants to learn to
> program.  Most people can be having loads of fun programming a CZ in a
> short time.
> Even more interesting to me are the FM/PM synths, whose power remains
> largely untapped, IMO, even with the thousands of DX7 patches
> available.  Almost every time I sit down to program a DX7, or,
> especially, a VZ, I find something I've never heard before!
> I don't think of PD as dead, with used instruments constantly
> available.  It's true that PD, in the CZ sense, is not being
> developed, anymore.  But, fairly recently, Yamaha made the FS1R (16
> operators, OK 8+8), which I have not plunged into programming, yet,
> but the presets are worth current cost.
>
> (enough, already! B^{)
> - synergeezer
>
> --- In CZsynth@yahoogroups.com, "Wilson Zorn" <wilson.zorn@...> wrote:
>>
>> The "phase distortion" name never made me blink, I never even
> thought about
>> it.  And, to me, it sounds accurate. I'm NOT saying you're wrong,
> what I'm
>> saying is that in terms of perceptions I never at all shared that
> one.  So
>> that makes me curious; I know this is a tangent, but did others find
> that
>> term off-putting or misrepresentational?
>>
>> I'm very sad that PD died.  I love it, and that's even at the
> limited state
>> it was left at.  For my ears, it was far superior to FM, and I also
> found it
>> easier to make sounds in.
>>
> <lots of noble discussion clipped>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>

RE: [CZsynth] Re: CZ-Synthesis

2008-04-16 by Scott Nordlund

Part of the difference is that FM (assuming sine wave operators) has a hard time making the sort of broad-spectrum sound (like a saw or square wave) that we've come to associate with analog synths.  Phase distortion offers the possibility of broad-spectrum waveforms and pseudo-filtering while still allowing plenty of FM-like tones.  

To: CZsynth@yahoogroups.com
Show quoted textHide quoted text
From: wilson.zorn@...
Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2008 23:55:12 -0700
Subject: Re: [CZsynth] Re: CZ-Synthesis



















    
            I wouldn't doubt that FM or PM has broader capabilities (I think that 

phraseology is a bit more clear than "powerful", if you don't mind) than PD, 

although I wouldn't like to really say it's more versatile in effect on a 

listener.  But the latter is purely aesthetic, and so I do emphasize that 

it's "to my ears" rather than any more general statement.



----- Original Message ----- 

From: "synergeezer" <synergeezer@...>

To: <CZsynth@yahoogroups.com>

Sent: Sunday, April 13, 2008 2:05 PM

Subject: [CZsynth] Re: CZ-Synthesis



> Firstly, let me say that I've always been pretty satisfied with the

> (marketing) distinctions between FM, PM, and PD synthesizers.

> Since FM already had a long (since B.C. [Before Chowning]) and

> illustrious history in radio (I don't mean a variety show!), and was

> understood as a sine (cosine) wave modifying a sine (cosine) wave, and

> there were lots of sources for printouts and graphs of the Bessel

> functions, to help with understanding the sidebands generated, I think

> it would have misled me if Casio had called the CZs "frequency" or

> "phase" modulation synthesizers.  The Bessel graphs don't help much

> with PD synthesis!

> Although, technically (so I've read), the DX7 and its kin use PM,

> rather than the FM claimed, the Bessel graphs still help.

> I guess that anything using a modulator and carrier that are not both

> sine (cosine) waves could be considered PD, the way I think of it.

> So, I think of the TX81Z as a PD synth (this might be where I would

> say the "FM" description is misleading; the value in the TX81Z comes

> more from the complex waveforms available, rather than from the

> modulation varieties).  I think of the VZs (which I love!) as PM

> synths with PD abilities.  I also think of the Synergy as a PM synth,

> although it has a non-sine wave available (a kind of pointy sine wave,

> or over-inflated triangle wave).

> I completely agree that the CZs are far easier to program than FM/PM

> synths, but I think FM/PM synths are more "powerful" and "versatile"

> than the CZs.  Please, don't think that I am putting down the CZs - I

> love them!  I have a CZ1, 5000, and two 101s.  A CZ is my first

> recommendation for a beginning synthesist who wants to learn to

> program.  Most people can be having loads of fun programming a CZ in a

> short time.

> Even more interesting to me are the FM/PM synths, whose power remains

> largely untapped, IMO, even with the thousands of DX7 patches

> available.  Almost every time I sit down to program a DX7, or,

> especially, a VZ, I find something I've never heard before!

> I don't think of PD as dead, with used instruments constantly

> available.  It's true that PD, in the CZ sense, is not being

> developed, anymore.  But, fairly recently, Yamaha made the FS1R (16

> operators, OK 8+8), which I have not plunged into programming, yet,

> but the presets are worth current cost.

>

> (enough, already! B^{)

> - synergeezer

>

> --- In CZsynth@yahoogroups.com, "Wilson Zorn" <wilson.zorn@...> wrote:

>>

>> The "phase distortion" name never made me blink, I never even

> thought about

>> it.  And, to me, it sounds accurate. I'm NOT saying you're wrong,

> what I'm

>> saying is that in terms of perceptions I never at all shared that

> one.  So

>> that makes me curious; I know this is a tangent, but did others find

> that

>> term off-putting or misrepresentational?

>>

>> I'm very sad that PD died.  I love it, and that's even at the

> limited state

>> it was left at.  For my ears, it was far superior to FM, and I also

> found it

>> easier to make sounds in.

>>

> <lots of noble discussion clipped>

>

>

> ------------------------------------

>

> Yahoo! Groups Links

>

>

>

> 




      

    
    
	
	
	
	


	


	
	
	
	
	


_________________________________________________________________
Pack up or back up�use SkyDrive to transfer files or keep extra copies. Learn how.
http://www.windowslive.com/skydrive/overview.html?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_Refresh_skydrive_packup_042008

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

RE: [CZsynth] Re: CZ-Synthesis

2008-04-16 by Scott Nordlund

Part of the difference is that FM (assuming sine wave operators) has a hard time making the sort of broad-spectrum sound (like a saw or square wave) that we've come to associate with analog synths.  Phase distortion offers the possibility of broad-spectrum waveforms and pseudo-filtering while still allowing plenty of FM-like tones.  

To: CZsynth@yahoogroups.com
Show quoted textHide quoted text
From: wilson.zorn@...
Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2008 23:55:12 -0700
Subject: Re: [CZsynth] Re: CZ-Synthesis



















    
            I wouldn't doubt that FM or PM has broader capabilities (I think that 

phraseology is a bit more clear than "powerful", if you don't mind) than PD, 

although I wouldn't like to really say it's more versatile in effect on a 

listener.  But the latter is purely aesthetic, and so I do emphasize that 

it's "to my ears" rather than any more general statement.



----- Original Message ----- 

From: "synergeezer" <synergeezer@...>

To: <CZsynth@yahoogroups.com>

Sent: Sunday, April 13, 2008 2:05 PM

Subject: [CZsynth] Re: CZ-Synthesis



> Firstly, let me say that I've always been pretty satisfied with the

> (marketing) distinctions between FM, PM, and PD synthesizers.

> Since FM already had a long (since B.C. [Before Chowning]) and

> illustrious history in radio (I don't mean a variety show!), and was

> understood as a sine (cosine) wave modifying a sine (cosine) wave, and

> there were lots of sources for printouts and graphs of the Bessel

> functions, to help with understanding the sidebands generated, I think

> it would have misled me if Casio had called the CZs "frequency" or

> "phase" modulation synthesizers.  The Bessel graphs don't help much

> with PD synthesis!

> Although, technically (so I've read), the DX7 and its kin use PM,

> rather than the FM claimed, the Bessel graphs still help.

> I guess that anything using a modulator and carrier that are not both

> sine (cosine) waves could be considered PD, the way I think of it.

> So, I think of the TX81Z as a PD synth (this might be where I would

> say the "FM" description is misleading; the value in the TX81Z comes

> more from the complex waveforms available, rather than from the

> modulation varieties).  I think of the VZs (which I love!) as PM

> synths with PD abilities.  I also think of the Synergy as a PM synth,

> although it has a non-sine wave available (a kind of pointy sine wave,

> or over-inflated triangle wave).

> I completely agree that the CZs are far easier to program than FM/PM

> synths, but I think FM/PM synths are more "powerful" and "versatile"

> than the CZs.  Please, don't think that I am putting down the CZs - I

> love them!  I have a CZ1, 5000, and two 101s.  A CZ is my first

> recommendation for a beginning synthesist who wants to learn to

> program.  Most people can be having loads of fun programming a CZ in a

> short time.

> Even more interesting to me are the FM/PM synths, whose power remains

> largely untapped, IMO, even with the thousands of DX7 patches

> available.  Almost every time I sit down to program a DX7, or,

> especially, a VZ, I find something I've never heard before!

> I don't think of PD as dead, with used instruments constantly

> available.  It's true that PD, in the CZ sense, is not being

> developed, anymore.  But, fairly recently, Yamaha made the FS1R (16

> operators, OK 8+8), which I have not plunged into programming, yet,

> but the presets are worth current cost.

>

> (enough, already! B^{)

> - synergeezer

>

> --- In CZsynth@yahoogroups.com, "Wilson Zorn" <wilson.zorn@...> wrote:

>>

>> The "phase distortion" name never made me blink, I never even

> thought about

>> it.  And, to me, it sounds accurate. I'm NOT saying you're wrong,

> what I'm

>> saying is that in terms of perceptions I never at all shared that

> one.  So

>> that makes me curious; I know this is a tangent, but did others find

> that

>> term off-putting or misrepresentational?

>>

>> I'm very sad that PD died.  I love it, and that's even at the

> limited state

>> it was left at.  For my ears, it was far superior to FM, and I also

> found it

>> easier to make sounds in.

>>

> <lots of noble discussion clipped>

>

>

> ------------------------------------

>

> Yahoo! Groups Links

>

>

>

> 




      

    
    
	
	
	
	


	


	
	
	
	
	


_________________________________________________________________
Use video conversation to talk face-to-face with Windows Live Messenger.
http://www.windowslive.com/messenger/connect_your_way.html?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_Refresh_messenger_video_042008

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Re: [CZsynth] Re: CZ-Synthesis

2008-04-16 by Wilson Zorn

Interesting, thanks, it sounds like that relates to what appeals to me about 
PD.
Show quoted textHide quoted text
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Scott Nordlund" <gsn10@...>
To: <czsynth@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, April 16, 2008 12:20 AM
Subject: RE: [CZsynth] Re: CZ-Synthesis



Part of the difference is that FM (assuming sine wave operators) has a hard 
time making the sort of broad-spectrum sound (like a saw or square wave) 
that we've come to associate with analog synths.  Phase distortion offers 
the possibility of broad-spectrum waveforms and pseudo-filtering while still 
allowing plenty of FM-like tones.

To: CZsynth@yahoogroups.com
From: wilson.zorn@...
Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2008 23:55:12 -0700
Subject: Re: [CZsynth] Re: CZ-Synthesis




















            I wouldn't doubt that FM or PM has broader capabilities (I think 
that

phraseology is a bit more clear than "powerful", if you don't mind) than PD,

although I wouldn't like to really say it's more versatile in effect on a

listener.  But the latter is purely aesthetic, and so I do emphasize that

it's "to my ears" rather than any more general statement.



----- Original Message ----- 

From: "synergeezer" <synergeezer@...>

To: <CZsynth@yahoogroups.com>

Sent: Sunday, April 13, 2008 2:05 PM

Subject: [CZsynth] Re: CZ-Synthesis



> Firstly, let me say that I've always been pretty satisfied with the

> (marketing) distinctions between FM, PM, and PD synthesizers.

> Since FM already had a long (since B.C. [Before Chowning]) and

> illustrious history in radio (I don't mean a variety show!), and was

> understood as a sine (cosine) wave modifying a sine (cosine) wave, and

> there were lots of sources for printouts and graphs of the Bessel

> functions, to help with understanding the sidebands generated, I think

> it would have misled me if Casio had called the CZs "frequency" or

> "phase" modulation synthesizers.  The Bessel graphs don't help much

> with PD synthesis!

> Although, technically (so I've read), the DX7 and its kin use PM,

> rather than the FM claimed, the Bessel graphs still help.

> I guess that anything using a modulator and carrier that are not both

> sine (cosine) waves could be considered PD, the way I think of it.

> So, I think of the TX81Z as a PD synth (this might be where I would

> say the "FM" description is misleading; the value in the TX81Z comes

> more from the complex waveforms available, rather than from the

> modulation varieties).  I think of the VZs (which I love!) as PM

> synths with PD abilities.  I also think of the Synergy as a PM synth,

> although it has a non-sine wave available (a kind of pointy sine wave,

> or over-inflated triangle wave).

> I completely agree that the CZs are far easier to program than FM/PM

> synths, but I think FM/PM synths are more "powerful" and "versatile"

> than the CZs.  Please, don't think that I am putting down the CZs - I

> love them!  I have a CZ1, 5000, and two 101s.  A CZ is my first

> recommendation for a beginning synthesist who wants to learn to

> program.  Most people can be having loads of fun programming a CZ in a

> short time.

> Even more interesting to me are the FM/PM synths, whose power remains

> largely untapped, IMO, even with the thousands of DX7 patches

> available.  Almost every time I sit down to program a DX7, or,

> especially, a VZ, I find something I've never heard before!

> I don't think of PD as dead, with used instruments constantly

> available.  It's true that PD, in the CZ sense, is not being

> developed, anymore.  But, fairly recently, Yamaha made the FS1R (16

> operators, OK 8+8), which I have not plunged into programming, yet,

> but the presets are worth current cost.

>

> (enough, already! B^{)

> - synergeezer

>

> --- In CZsynth@yahoogroups.com, "Wilson Zorn" <wilson.zorn@...> wrote:

>>

>> The "phase distortion" name never made me blink, I never even

> thought about

>> it.  And, to me, it sounds accurate. I'm NOT saying you're wrong,

> what I'm

>> saying is that in terms of perceptions I never at all shared that

> one.  So

>> that makes me curious; I know this is a tangent, but did others find

> that

>> term off-putting or misrepresentational?

>>

>> I'm very sad that PD died.  I love it, and that's even at the

> limited state

>> it was left at.  For my ears, it was far superior to FM, and I also

> found it

>> easier to make sounds in.

>>

> <lots of noble discussion clipped>

>

>

> ------------------------------------

>

> Yahoo! Groups Links

>

>

>

>
























_________________________________________________________________
Pack up or back up-use SkyDrive to transfer files or keep extra copies. 
Learn how.
http://www.windowslive.com/skydrive/overview.html?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_Refresh_skydrive_packup_042008

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links

RE: [CZsynth] Re: CZ-Synthesis

2008-04-16 by Summa

Well, with 3 Operators (Sine) + 1x Feedback (selfmodulation) it's 
possible to recreate every nonresonant CZ-Waveform + DCW type FM-
Sweeps, I tried that on the FM7 some years ago. 
With FM-Synths a bit more sophisticated than a DX7, that allows to 
tune Operators down to 0Hz for waveshaping use and feedback or saw as 
carrier waveform, it's not even very complicated to create 
Plulsewidthmodulation. 

On 16 Apr 2008 at 3:20, Scott Nordlund wrote:

> 
> Part of the difference is that FM (assuming sine wave operators) has a
> hard time making the sort of broad-spectrum sound (like a saw or
> square wave) that we've come to associate with analog synths.  Phase
> distortion offers the possibility of broad-spectrum waveforms and
> pseudo-filtering while still allowing plenty of FM-like tones.  
> 
> To: CZsynth@yahoogroups.com
> From: wilson.zorn@...
> Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2008 23:55:12 -0700
> Subject: Re: [CZsynth] Re: CZ-Synthesis
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>             I wouldn't doubt that FM or PM has broader capabilities (I
>             think that 
> 
> phraseology is a bit more clear than "powerful", if you don't mind)
> than PD, 
> 
> although I wouldn't like to really say it's more versatile in effect
> on a 
> 
> listener.  But the latter is purely aesthetic, and so I do emphasize
> that 
> 
> it's "to my ears" rather than any more general statement.
> 
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> 
> From: "synergeezer" <synergeezer@...>
> 
> To: <CZsynth@yahoogroups.com>
> 
> Sent: Sunday, April 13, 2008 2:05 PM
> 
> Subject: [CZsynth] Re: CZ-Synthesis
> 
> 
> 
> > Firstly, let me say that I've always been pretty satisfied with the
> 
> > (marketing) distinctions between FM, PM, and PD synthesizers.
> 
> > Since FM already had a long (since B.C. [Before Chowning]) and
> 
> > illustrious history in radio (I don't mean a variety show!), and was
> 
> > understood as a sine (cosine) wave modifying a sine (cosine) wave,
> > and
> 
> > there were lots of sources for printouts and graphs of the Bessel
> 
> > functions, to help with understanding the sidebands generated, I
> > think
> 
> > it would have misled me if Casio had called the CZs "frequency" or
> 
> > "phase" modulation synthesizers.  The Bessel graphs don't help much
> 
> > with PD synthesis!
> 
> > Although, technically (so I've read), the DX7 and its kin use PM,
> 
> > rather than the FM claimed, the Bessel graphs still help.
> 
> > I guess that anything using a modulator and carrier that are not
> > both
> 
> > sine (cosine) waves could be considered PD, the way I think of it.
> 
> > So, I think of the TX81Z as a PD synth (this might be where I would
> 
> > say the "FM" description is misleading; the value in the TX81Z comes
> 
> > more from the complex waveforms available, rather than from the
> 
> > modulation varieties).  I think of the VZs (which I love!) as PM
> 
> > synths with PD abilities.  I also think of the Synergy as a PM
> > synth,
> 
> > although it has a non-sine wave available (a kind of pointy sine
> > wave,
> 
> > or over-inflated triangle wave).
> 
> > I completely agree that the CZs are far easier to program than FM/PM
> 
> > synths, but I think FM/PM synths are more "powerful" and "versatile"
> 
> > than the CZs.  Please, don't think that I am putting down the CZs -
> > I
> 
> > love them!  I have a CZ1, 5000, and two 101s.  A CZ is my first
> 
> > recommendation for a beginning synthesist who wants to learn to
> 
> > program.  Most people can be having loads of fun programming a CZ in
> > a
> 
> > short time.
> 
> > Even more interesting to me are the FM/PM synths, whose power
> > remains
> 
> > largely untapped, IMO, even with the thousands of DX7 patches
> 
> > available.  Almost every time I sit down to program a DX7, or,
> 
> > especially, a VZ, I find something I've never heard before!
> 
> > I don't think of PD as dead, with used instruments constantly
> 
> > available.  It's true that PD, in the CZ sense, is not being
> 
> > developed, anymore.  But, fairly recently, Yamaha made the FS1R (16
> 
> > operators, OK 8+8), which I have not plunged into programming, yet,
> 
> > but the presets are worth current cost.
> 
> >
> 
> > (enough, already! B^{)
> 
> > - synergeezer
> 
> >
> 
> > --- In CZsynth@yahoogroups.com, "Wilson Zorn" <wilson.zorn@...>
> > wrote:
> 
> >>
> 
> >> The "phase distortion" name never made me blink, I never even
> 
> > thought about
> 
> >> it.  And, to me, it sounds accurate. I'm NOT saying you're wrong,
> 
> > what I'm
> 
> >> saying is that in terms of perceptions I never at all shared that
> 
> > one.  So
> 
> >> that makes me curious; I know this is a tangent, but did others
> >> find
> 
> > that
> 
> >> term off-putting or misrepresentational?
> 
> >>
> 
> >> I'm very sad that PD died.  I love it, and that's even at the
> 
> > limited state
> 
> >> it was left at.  For my ears, it was far superior to FM, and I also
> 
> > found it
> 
> >> easier to make sounds in.
> 
> >>
> 
> > <lots of noble discussion clipped>
> 
> >
> 
> >
> 
> > ------------------------------------
> 
> >
> 
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> 
> >
> 
> >
> 
> >
> 
> > 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _________________________________________________________________ Use
> video conversation to talk face-to-face with Windows Live Messenger.
> http://www.windowslive.com/messenger/connect_your_way.html?ocid=TXT_TA
> GLM_WL_Refresh_messenger_video_042008
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------
> 
> 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

http://www.summasounds.de/

Re: [CZsynth] Re: CZ-Synthesis

2008-04-17 by Wilson Zorn

I should mention, last night we needed to add a keyboard to something, and I 
knew I'd be going more old school, and despite this thread I actually ended 
up using my DX100, not the CZ5000!

----- Original Message ----- 
Show quoted textHide quoted text
From: "Wilson Zorn" <wilson.zorn@...>
To: <CZsynth@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, April 16, 2008 12:30 AM
Subject: Re: [CZsynth] Re: CZ-Synthesis


> Interesting, thanks, it sounds like that relates to what appeals to me 
> about PD.
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Scott Nordlund" <gsn10@...>
> To: <czsynth@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, April 16, 2008 12:20 AM
> Subject: RE: [CZsynth] Re: CZ-Synthesis
>
>
>
> Part of the difference is that FM (assuming sine wave operators) has a 
> hard time making the sort of broad-spectrum sound (like a saw or square 
> wave) that we've come to associate with analog synths.  Phase distortion 
> offers the possibility of broad-spectrum waveforms and pseudo-filtering 
> while still allowing plenty of FM-like tones.
>
> To: CZsynth@yahoogroups.com
> From: wilson.zorn@...
> Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2008 23:55:12 -0700
> Subject: Re: [CZsynth] Re: CZ-Synthesis
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>            I wouldn't doubt that FM or PM has broader capabilities (I 
> think that
>
> phraseology is a bit more clear than "powerful", if you don't mind) than 
> PD,
>
> although I wouldn't like to really say it's more versatile in effect on a
>
> listener.  But the latter is purely aesthetic, and so I do emphasize that
>
> it's "to my ears" rather than any more general statement.
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
>
> From: "synergeezer" <synergeezer@...>
>
> To: <CZsynth@yahoogroups.com>
>
> Sent: Sunday, April 13, 2008 2:05 PM
>
> Subject: [CZsynth] Re: CZ-Synthesis
>
>
>
>> Firstly, let me say that I've always been pretty satisfied with the
>
>> (marketing) distinctions between FM, PM, and PD synthesizers.
>
>> Since FM already had a long (since B.C. [Before Chowning]) and
>
>> illustrious history in radio (I don't mean a variety show!), and was
>
>> understood as a sine (cosine) wave modifying a sine (cosine) wave, and
>
>> there were lots of sources for printouts and graphs of the Bessel
>
>> functions, to help with understanding the sidebands generated, I think
>
>> it would have misled me if Casio had called the CZs "frequency" or
>
>> "phase" modulation synthesizers.  The Bessel graphs don't help much
>
>> with PD synthesis!
>
>> Although, technically (so I've read), the DX7 and its kin use PM,
>
>> rather than the FM claimed, the Bessel graphs still help.
>
>> I guess that anything using a modulator and carrier that are not both
>
>> sine (cosine) waves could be considered PD, the way I think of it.
>
>> So, I think of the TX81Z as a PD synth (this might be where I would
>
>> say the "FM" description is misleading; the value in the TX81Z comes
>
>> more from the complex waveforms available, rather than from the
>
>> modulation varieties).  I think of the VZs (which I love!) as PM
>
>> synths with PD abilities.  I also think of the Synergy as a PM synth,
>
>> although it has a non-sine wave available (a kind of pointy sine wave,
>
>> or over-inflated triangle wave).
>
>> I completely agree that the CZs are far easier to program than FM/PM
>
>> synths, but I think FM/PM synths are more "powerful" and "versatile"
>
>> than the CZs.  Please, don't think that I am putting down the CZs - I
>
>> love them!  I have a CZ1, 5000, and two 101s.  A CZ is my first
>
>> recommendation for a beginning synthesist who wants to learn to
>
>> program.  Most people can be having loads of fun programming a CZ in a
>
>> short time.
>
>> Even more interesting to me are the FM/PM synths, whose power remains
>
>> largely untapped, IMO, even with the thousands of DX7 patches
>
>> available.  Almost every time I sit down to program a DX7, or,
>
>> especially, a VZ, I find something I've never heard before!
>
>> I don't think of PD as dead, with used instruments constantly
>
>> available.  It's true that PD, in the CZ sense, is not being
>
>> developed, anymore.  But, fairly recently, Yamaha made the FS1R (16
>
>> operators, OK 8+8), which I have not plunged into programming, yet,
>
>> but the presets are worth current cost.
>
>>
>
>> (enough, already! B^{)
>
>> - synergeezer
>
>>
>
>> --- In CZsynth@yahoogroups.com, "Wilson Zorn" <wilson.zorn@...> wrote:
>
>>>
>
>>> The "phase distortion" name never made me blink, I never even
>
>> thought about
>
>>> it.  And, to me, it sounds accurate. I'm NOT saying you're wrong,
>
>> what I'm
>
>>> saying is that in terms of perceptions I never at all shared that
>
>> one.  So
>
>>> that makes me curious; I know this is a tangent, but did others find
>
>> that
>
>>> term off-putting or misrepresentational?
>
>>>
>
>>> I'm very sad that PD died.  I love it, and that's even at the
>
>> limited state
>
>>> it was left at.  For my ears, it was far superior to FM, and I also
>
>> found it
>
>>> easier to make sounds in.
>
>>>
>
>> <lots of noble discussion clipped>
>
>>
>
>>
>
>> ------------------------------------
>
>>
>
>> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>>
>
>>
>
>>
>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Pack up or back up-use SkyDrive to transfer files or keep extra copies. 
> Learn how.
> http://www.windowslive.com/skydrive/overview.html?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_Refresh_skydrive_packup_042008
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>

Re: [CZsynth] Re: CZ-Synthesis

2008-04-21 by Atom Smasher

On Sun, 13 Apr 2008, synergeezer wrote:

> I don't think of PD as dead, with used instruments constantly available. 
> It's true that PD, in the CZ sense, is not being developed, anymore.
==================

is it being developed in any sense? even with a K5000 and FS1r, i can't 
bring myself to get rid of my CZ1... but i'd get rid of it in a hurry if i 
could replace it with a rackmount unit.


> But, fairly recently, Yamaha made the FS1R (16 operators, OK 8+8), which 
> I have not plunged into programming, yet, but the presets are worth 
> current cost.
===================

you seem to know your way around the DX/TX/CZ/VZ range of synthesizers, 
and you mentioned that you have a VZ and several CZs.

i had a VZ but it's gone, now :(

i'm thinking about replacing it, not so much because i miss it as such, 
but it crossed my mind that (despite the general consensus) it might 
actually be possible to emulate a CZ with it. lemme get your opinion on 
this... if a patch only uses one carrier (sine) and one modulator 
([co]sine or other waveform), can't it emulate a CZ? it's been a while 
since i programmed a VZ, but i remember a lot of limitations... like each 
carrier/modulator pair shares a lot of the same parameters. anyway, what's 
your opinion on that? the CZ1 is great, but it's just such a huge heavy 
fscking tank.


-- 
         ...atom

  ________________________
  http://atom.smasher.org/
  762A 3B98 A3C3 96C9 C6B7 582A B88D 52E4 D9F5 7808
  -------------------------------------------------

 	"That's George Washington, the first President, of course. The
 	 interesting thing about him is that I read three -- three or
 	 four books about him last year. Isn't that interesting?"
 		-- George "dubya" Bush, 5 May 2006
 		http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/05/20060507-2.html

Re: CZ-Synthesis

2008-04-22 by synergeezer

Hi! I'm verbose, as usual.
I have a general comment about my relationship with my synthesizers,
before boring you about the specific points, below:
Before I buy a synth, I make sure it makes several sounds that I like,
and that it can be programmed, in a potentially understandable way. 
The "limitations" of a given synthesizer, given the requirements
above, seem to me to be its virtues.  The peculiarities of a
synthesizer's interface lead me down certain paths, which paths I
would not have found, even if available, with a different interface. 
This is a good thing.

So, even if someone makes a synth engine identical to the CZ1, if the
interface is different, it won't be the same!

Shop carefully, and then learn to love your synthesizer!  (Oh, except
for you rich guys - buy everything new, then, when it doesn't make you
a great musician, sell it to me, cheap!  Almost every musical item I
own was purchased used.  ;)

synergeezer
--- In CZsynth@yahoogroups.com, Atom Smasher <atom@...> wrote:
>
> On Sun, 13 Apr 2008, synergeezer wrote:
> 
> > I don't think of PD as dead, with used instruments constantly
available. 
> > It's true that PD, in the CZ sense, is not being developed, anymore.
> ==================
> 
> is it being developed in any sense? even with a K5000 and FS1r, i can't 
> bring myself to get rid of my CZ1... but i'd get rid of it in a
hurry if i 
> could replace it with a rackmount unit.
(I love my Kawai K5000S and Yamaha FS1R [now that I have a day job
{for another year - I _am_ a geezer}, and am no longer trying to make
a living in music, I can afford to have these things - is this ironic?])
I'm not hopeful that there will be a rackmount replacement for a CZ1
any time soon.  There are soft synths and analogue hardware which do
waveshaping, but not in the tradition of the CZs.  (Google
"waveshaping" or "physical modelling". e.g.)
> 
> 
> > But, fairly recently, Yamaha made the FS1R (16 operators, OK 8+8),
which 
> > I have not plunged into programming, yet, but the presets are worth 
> > current cost.
> ===================
> 
> you seem to know your way around the DX/TX/CZ/VZ range of synthesizers, 
> and you mentioned that you have a VZ and several CZs.
> 
> i had a VZ but it's gone, now :(
> 
> i'm thinking about replacing it, not so much because i miss it as such, 
> but it crossed my mind that (despite the general consensus) it might 
> actually be possible to emulate a CZ with it. lemme get your opinion on 
> this... if a patch only uses one carrier (sine) and one modulator 
> ([co]sine or other waveform), can't it emulate a CZ? it's been a while 
> since i programmed a VZ, but i remember a lot of limitations... like
each 
> carrier/modulator pair shares a lot of the same parameters. anyway,
what's 
> your opinion on that? the CZ1 is great, but it's just such a huge heavy 
> fscking tank.
Recently, flotorian indicated he had succeeded in emulating
non-resonant CZ sounds with a Yamaha DX7 (or similar).  I don't doubt
this, although I haven't tried to confirm it (I crank up a CZ when I
want CZ sounds).  Assuming it's true, you should be able to accomplish
the same with a VZ.  I am working to figure out a general mapping of
DX7 voices to the VZ.  Most DX7 algorithms can be directly emulated by
the VZ voice structure.  (Where the DX7 voice uses self-modulation,
and you have run out of modulation possibilities on the VZ, using one
of the "Saw" waves [TBD by ear, at this point in my examination] for
the replacement modulator on the VZ works well.)  I haven't tried a
voice on the DX7 that I couldn't emulate pretty well on the VZ, yet. 
(I plan to write this up for our community, after I nail it down
better.)  And I usually have 2 or more modulators left over, not to
mention (although I am) the ring-modulation ability of the VZs, more
elaborate envelopes, as well as the variety of raw waveforms.
I find the VZ versions crisper, and deeper than the DX7 sounds. (But I
love my Yamaha's almost as much as my Casio's.)
About the "fscking tank" - don't I know it, but my CZ1 sits quite
comfortably in my studio.  (But, when I was younger, I played in a
band with a Hammond B-3 and Leslie, and no roadies!  I had to help
with the organ and P.A., but I was only individually responsible for
my guitars, flute, trombone, Fender Vibrolux, and Fender Bassman
[please speak into my left ear].)
Show quoted textHide quoted text
> 
> 
> -- 
>          ...atom
> 
>   ________________________
>   http://atom.smasher.org/
>   762A 3B98 A3C3 96C9 C6B7 582A B88D 52E4 D9F5 7808
>   -------------------------------------------------
> 
>  	"That's George Washington, the first President, of course. The
>  	 interesting thing about him is that I read three -- three or
>  	 four books about him last year. Isn't that interesting?"
>  		-- George "dubya" Bush, 5 May 2006
>  		http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/05/20060507-2.html
>

Move to quarantaine

This moves the raw source file on disk only. The archive index is not changed automatically, so you still need to run a manual refresh afterward.