Question #04 (Detune) ??

As you will know the DETUNE has upper/lower limits of +/- 7. And that FINE
TUNING (ie the tunings between each COURSE tuned Frequency) has a range of
99 Cents.
Now, in a couple of books i have read it states that each incremental
increase/decrease of a DETUNE value (eg. from +6 to +7) is an even finer
amount (an increase of pitch in this example) than a 1 x Cent increase (eg.
from 1.97 to 1.98) in FINE TUNING mode. In other words, an increment change
of 1 x Cent in FINE TUNING produces a greater shift in pitch than one
increment change in DETUNE.
Is this correct ?? i ask because on other keyboards i have owned, the
distance between two semitones is divided into 100 x Cents (ie. 50 x Cents =
1 x 1/4 tone, 25 x Cents = 1/8th tone, etc). But on the DX7 i think (correct
me if i am wrong here) its the distance between two COURSE FREQUENCIES which
is divided into Cents.

Not correct. A cent is defined as 1/100 of a semitone. An octave=1200cent,
a fifth=700cents, a semitone=100cents. This is not keyboard specific.

In the DX7 manual I read:

<quote>
FREQUENCY FINE
This lets you make small changes in the current
operator's frequency. With this control, the maximum
available increase in frequency is just under the next
available "Coarse" setting (1.99 times "F COARSE").
<unquote>

But this is wrong! Maybe this has caused your confusion.
It's only correct for the lowest COARSE values.
If you start from COARSE=3.00 you can increase this to 5.970 using the
FINE parameter. This more than 4.000. If you start with COARSE=30.00 you
can increase this to 59.70 using FINE, which is much more than 31.00!

A little table will make things more clear:
COARSE FINE RATIO
0(=0.5) 0 0.500
0(=0.5) 99 0.995
1 0 1.000
1 99 1.990
2 0 2.000
2 99 3.980
3 0 3.000
3 99 5.970
4 0 4.000
4 99 7.960
30 0 30.00
30 99 59.70
31 0 31.00
31 99 61.69

About DETUNE the manual says:
<quote>
DETUNE
Detune is like a "super fine" frequency adjustment for
each operator. You can shift the frequency over a
range of -7 to +7. Mild detuning can enrich the
harmonic structure and more closely simulate the
imperfect nature of a real acoustic instrument. Maxi-
mum detuning between carriers can be used to cause
"beating" within a voice to help simultate chorusing
or multiple instrument effects.
<unquote>

I don't read any details about the resolution of the DETUNE parameter.
Maybe anyone else on this list knows more?

--
MT

Paul

2013-09-03 00:02:26 UTC

Post by Martin Tarenskeen

Not correct. A cent is defined as 1/100 of a semitone. An octave=1200cent,
a fifth=700cents, a semitone=100cents. This is not keyboard specific.
<quote>
FREQUENCY FINE
This lets you make small changes in the current
operator's frequency. With this control, the maximum
available increase in frequency is just under the next
available "Coarse" setting (1.99 times "F COARSE").
<unquote>
But this is wrong! Maybe this has caused your confusion.
It's only correct for the lowest COARSE values.
If you start from COARSE=3.00 you can increase this to 5.970 using the
FINE parameter. This more than 4.000. If you start with COARSE=30.00 you
can increase this to 59.70 using FINE, which is much more than 31.00!
COARSE FINE RATIO
0(=0.5) 0 0.500
0(=0.5) 99 0.995
1 0 1.000
1 99 1.990
2 0 2.000
2 99 3.980
3 0 3.000
3 99 5.970
4 0 4.000
4 99 7.960
30 0 30.00
30 99 59.70
31 0 31.00
31 99 61.69
<quote>
DETUNE
Detune is like a "super fine" frequency adjustment for
each operator. You can shift the frequency over a
range of -7 to +7. Mild detuning can enrich the
harmonic structure and more closely simulate the
imperfect nature of a real acoustic instrument. Maxi-
mum detuning between carriers can be used to cause
"beating" within a voice to help simultate chorusing
or multiple instrument effects.
<unquote>
I don't read any details about the resolution of the DETUNE parameter.
Maybe anyone else on this list knows more?
--
MT

Hi Martin,

Thank you for your continued help.

I think you are correct in that the DX7 manual is wrong regarding its explaination of FINE TUNING. And yes it really did confuse me greatly !! Anyway, I think I have got the bit regarding an Octave being 1,200 Cents and a semitone being 100 Cents thanks.

With reference to my comment on DETUNING, this was taken from another book (by Steve De Furia) on synthesizers. He says :-

[quote] This is a finer setting than even the smallest increment in Frequency Fine. [end]

Martin, you state that DETUNE is a 'super fine' setting. But is it (according to the above quotation) really finer than FINE TUNING increments. I mean, is +/- 1 in DETUNE a smaller increment than a 1/100 of a semitone !! ?? Surely such a small value (aurally) would be meaningless and unnoticeable ??

Many thanks,

Paul

db00451

2013-09-03 00:28:45 UTC

Post by Martin Tarenskeen
<quote>
FREQUENCY FINE
This lets you make small changes in the current
operator's frequency. With this control, the maximum
available increase in frequency is just under the next
available "Coarse" setting (1.99 times "F COARSE").
<unquote>
But this is wrong! Maybe this has caused your confusion.
It's only correct for the lowest COARSE values.
If you start from COARSE=3.00 you can increase this to 5.970 using the
FINE parameter. This more than 4.000. If you start with COARSE=30.00 you
can increase this to 59.70 using FINE, which is much more than 31.00!

The manual is both wrong AND right. It is perfectly correct that Fine scales the current value of Coarse by 1.00 to 1.99 in steps of 0.01. What they got wrong was saying the maximal available adjustment is just under the next available Coarse. It is, of course 1.99 times the /current/ coarse.

Martin, you state that DETUNE is a 'super fine' setting. But is it (according to the above quotation) really finer than FINE TUNING increments. I mean, is +/- 1 in DETUNE a smaller increment than a 1/100 of a semitone !! ?? Surely such a small value (aurally) would be meaningless and unnoticeable ??

No. Just try it on a DX7 and then tell us whether you still believe that. Again, that's what matters, not the numbers.

Detuning is mostly used to create subtle undulations and beating effects, either between carriers or on one carrier to create beating on all of its modulator-introduced sidebands.

Naturally one would use small values, for larger ones would not sound merely like a pleasant ensemble effect, rather like something out of tune.

If you actually tried this on the instrument instead of worrying about theory, you would not find it so unrelatable and shocking.

That could also answer any questions you might have about exactly how it's implemented, the size of the effect, whether it differs between fundamental pitches, etc.

Daniel Forró

2013-09-03 01:00:59 UTC

Post by db00451
The manual is both wrong AND right. It is perfectly correct that
Fine scales the current value of Coarse by 1.00 to 1.99 in steps of
0.01.

Not at all. Please read my message before making such statements.

Daniel Forro

db00451

2013-09-03 01:06:58 UTC

Post by db00451
The manual is both wrong AND right. It is perfectly correct that
Fine scales the current value of Coarse by 1.00 to 1.99 in steps of
0.01.

Not at all. Please read my message before making such statements.
Daniel Forro

And please think about what I actually meant before taking the first chance to shoot me down.

Fine scales Coarse by a _ratio_ of 1.00 to 1.99, by multiplying, not adding.

So, a Coarse of 0.5 can be scaled between Fines of 0.5 and 1.99 * 0.5 = 0.995. A Coarse of 1 can be scaled from 1 to 1.99. A Coarse of 2 can be scaled between 2 and 2 * 1.99 = 3.98.

Nothing I have said contradicts your post if people would just read mine properly.

Daniel Forró

2013-09-03 02:26:18 UTC

Then OK, apology is at my side, hopefully you weren't shot down :-) I
have no reason to do it, I usually appreciate your messages.

Having been only a poor victim of European classical music education
since early childhood to Ph.D. from composition theory, until now I
had a chance to learn only addition and subtraction under 10. I was
always said we stupid musicians don't need more for counting the beats.

I promise I will dust off my old school math text books and fill the
holes in my knowledge as soon as possible.
Also some English lesson would be helpful...

Daniel Forro

Post by db00451
The manual is both wrong AND right. It is perfectly correct that
Fine scales the current value of Coarse by 1.00 to 1.99 in steps of
0.01.

Not at all. Please read my message before making such statements.
Daniel Forro

And please think about what I actually meant before taking the first
chance to shoot me down.
Fine scales Coarse by a _ratio_ of 1.00 to 1.99, by multiplying, not adding.
So, a Coarse of 0.5 can be scaled between Fines of 0.5 and 1.99 *
0.5 = 0.995. A Coarse of 1 can be scaled from 1 to 1.99. A Coarse of
2 can be scaled between 2 and 2 * 1.99 = 3.98.
Nothing I have said contradicts your post if people would just read mine properly.

db00451

2013-09-03 02:31:06 UTC

Post by Daniel ForrÃ³
Then OK, apology is at my side, hopefully you weren't shot down :-) I
have no reason to do it, I usually appreciate your messages.

No hard feelings whatsoever. :) And thanks for your compliment! Likewise to your posts.

Post by Daniel ForrÃ³
Having been only a poor victim of European classical music education
since early childhood to Ph.D. from composition theory, until now I
had a chance to learn only addition and subtraction under 10. I was
always said we stupid musicians don't need more for counting the beats.
I promise I will dust off my old school math text books and fill the
holes in my knowledge as soon as possible.
Also some English lesson would be helpful...

I hope my message didn't make it seem like I was questioning either your English or maths. Clearly your education was more extensive than mine, which is currently only at BSc Hons level. ;) And what I've seen of your posts leaves me in no doubt that you have a very good grasp of maths and English, the latter especially for a non-native speaker if you mean that. So I meant nothing bad about those at all.

To be fair, although my first message about did say "ratio" and "scale", which implies multiplication and not addition, I could have been even more clear. So how you read it wasn't totally unreasonable.

At the end of the day, we both said the same thing, just in different ways! Which could maybe help readers to understand it better. :)

Daniel Forró

2013-09-02 09:31:57 UTC

Post by Paul
Hi folks,
Having been reading up on the DETUNE function of the DX7, i would be
very grateful if anyone could help clear up a question for me please.

I'll try my best.

Post by Paul
As you will know the DETUNE has upper/lower limits of +/- 7.

True.

Post by Paul
And that FINE TUNING (ie the tunings between each COURSE tuned
Frequency) has a range of 99 Cents.

Not true. It has nothing to do with Cents, it's ratio setting.
Range of this parameter is 99 steps. Size of the step is defined by
the setting of Coarse tuning:
- so if you select 1.00, then size is 0.01, and values will change
from 1.00 to 1.99
- if you select 0.50, size of the step is 0.005, values will be from
0.500, then 0.505 to 0.995 (Attention! Display on DX7 II D doesn't
show numbers with three decimal points, I didn't check how it's on
DX7, no time now, probably the same... And I remember there was
mistake in one value on certain DX7 series, I've found it many years
ago.)
- and so on. When you select 31.00, size of the step is 0.31, and
values will change from 31.00, then 31.31 until 61.69.

That means the size of this step is always different, with each
setting of Coarse Tuning Ratio. That also means lot of values are
missing, and lot of them repeats...

Post by Paul
Now, in a couple of books i have read it states that each
incremental increase/decrease of a DETUNE value (eg. from +6 to +7)
is an even finer amount (an increase of pitch in this example) than
a 1 x Cent increase (eg. from 1.97 to 1.98) in FINE TUNING mode. In
other words, an increment change of 1 x Cent in FINE TUNING produces
a greater shift in pitch than one increment change in DETUNE.

Which books? Maybe you read some wrong books. This is nonsense. Fine
tuning and Detune has nothing to do with Cents.

Post by Paul
Is this correct ??

Nope.

Post by Paul
i ask because on other keyboards i have owned, the distance between
two semitones is divided into 100 x Cents (ie. 50 x Cents = 1 x 1/4
tone, 25 x Cents = 1/8th tone, etc). But on the DX7 i think
(correct me if i am wrong here) its the distance between two COURSE
FREQUENCIES which is divided into Cents.

Not at all.

Post by Paul
For instance, if you played the note C1 and then moved the value of
the Cents

??? which one ??? There are no Cents in Course and Fine and Detune
settings.

Post by Paul
up to full, then this would take you up to (pitch) C2 which is the
next Octave up.

???

Post by Paul
In which case 1 x Cent is a far greater a value (on the DX7) than
on other synths (which use Cents as a division) ??
Hope that makes sense guys !!

It doesn't make sense. It looks like you mix quite different things
together.

So once more:
Coarse + Fine setting is Ratio, it has nothing to do with Cents.
Detune is also some relative step, not Cents. I haven't time now to
check with my precise microtonal Korg tuner MT1200 how much Cents is
this step. Maybe later.

If you are talking about microtuning, then of course we can talk about
Cents. This has nothing to do with tuning of operators in FM engine,
it's done in different menu and independent on concrete setting of FM
engine. First DX/TX generation didn't have microtuning, but E! and
some other modifications added it.

Talking about this let's not forget that Yamaha didn't use Cents, but
Yamaha steps for microtuning. On TX81z and similar instruments they
have 768 steps in octave, on DX7 and its relative they used 1024 steps
in octave. The reason for this was probably derived from the hardware
(resolution of digital chips - both numbers looks very "digital").
These values differs from Cents scale, which uses 1200 steps in
octave. If you are interested in microtuning, I'm specialist in it and
can send you formulae for conversion Yamaha steps to Cents.

Daniel Forro

P.S.: Paul, sorry to mention, but I don't understand your studying
method. Throw away all those books, switch on your DX, sit down to it,
focus on its display, press Edit and try everything by your brain and
ears, parameter by parameter. Do it every day for 30 minutes. If you
do it, you will immediately find such basic thing like size of the
steps for FINE Ratio Tuning, and many others. For such revelations you
don't need to understand FM engine. Just try ranges of parameters and
what it does with the sound.

It seems to me that you ask some questions, where answers are obvious
after sitting at the instrument for five minutes.

jammie

2013-09-02 10:12:17 UTC

on the sy85 and sy99 it says whats in the manual what the steps are related to cents

as daniel is right its steps not cents but there steps are fractional cents

as it tells you what a step is equivelent to 1.17-cent steps ... Oscillator Waveform Fine Tune

the above is whats stated in the manual for the sy85 and sy99

so a yamaha finetune step is equal to 1.17cents
----- Original Message -----
From: Daniel Forró
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Monday, September 02, 2013 10:31 AM
Subject: Re: [YamahaDX] Question #04 (Detune) ??

Post by Paul
Hi folks,
Having been reading up on the DETUNE function of the DX7, i would be
very grateful if anyone could help clear up a question for me please.

I'll try my best.

Post by Paul
As you will know the DETUNE has upper/lower limits of +/- 7.

True.

Post by Paul
And that FINE TUNING (ie the tunings between each COURSE tuned
Frequency) has a range of 99 Cents.

Which books? Maybe you read some wrong books. This is nonsense. Fine
tuning and Detune has nothing to do with Cents.

Post by Paul
Is this correct ??

Nope.

Not at all.

Post by Paul
For instance, if you played the note C1 and then moved the value of
the Cents

??? which one ??? There are no Cents in Course and Fine and Detune
settings.

Post by Paul
up to full, then this would take you up to (pitch) C2 which is the
next Octave up.

???

Post by Paul
In which case 1 x Cent is a far greater a value (on the DX7) than
on other synths (which use Cents as a division) ??
Hope that makes sense guys !!

Daniel Forró

2013-09-02 11:35:43 UTC

Post by jammie
on the sy85 and sy99 it says whats in the manual what the steps are related to cents

Paul didn't ask about SY85 and SY99, only about DX7 and FM synthesis.

When you mention it, it's so:
- SY85 is rompler and limited sampler, there's no FM engine. There is
parameter called Fine, but it is just tuning of the sample. Range is
-63 to +63, and one step is indeed Yamaha microtonal step, which is
1200/1024 = 1.171875 Cent.

Post by jammie
as daniel is right its steps not cents but there steps are
fractional cents

I have never heard about the unit called "fractional cent". If you are
talking about "Fractional Scaling", this is completely different
beast, it has nothing common with the tuning - it sets level.

Post by jammie
as it tells you what a step is equivelent to 1.17-cent steps ...
Oscillator Waveform Fine Tune

Yes, see above.

Post by jammie
the above is whats stated in the manual for the sy85 and sy99

Concerning SY99, we must distinguish the editing on Common Element
level, and editing of AFM Element itself.

On Element Edit level there are these parameters for tuning:
- Element Detune - range -7 to +7, it's only relative value, not Cents

- Microtuning - in user programmable tuning parameter "Coarse" assign
pitch (note) to the key. Parameter "Fine" makes fine tuning of this
pitch. Range is -43 to +42, one step is Yamaha microtonal step
1200/1024 = 1.171875 Cent. We can individually tune each MIDI key, and
absolute number of steps is less than it should be for 128 keys, only
10794 (because the lowest key C#-2 can be tuned only in the range from
0 to +42).
These two parameters have the same names as those two in AFM engine,
but that's totally different.

On AFM level we have similar parameters in operator tuning like in
former FM (to make more confusion operator is now called in some menu
"oscillator"):
- Coarse and Fine Tune - when in "Ratio" mode, it sets only ratio.
There are no Cents. When in "Fixed" mode, it sets frequency in Hertz,
and it's not changed by keyboard - all keys play the same pitch.

- Detune - it was improved in AFM, now the range is -15 to +15, and
one step is Yamaha microtonal step - 1200/1024 = 1.171875 Cent.

Post by jammie
so a yamaha finetune step is equal to 1.17cents

Yes, when we talk about microtuning on some Yamaha instruments (not on
4 OP machines - they have different size of microtonal step) and
Detune in AFM operator. Not at all when we talk about FM engine on
DX7, there are no Cents.

Daniel Forro

Martin Tarenskeen

2013-09-03 06:30:00 UTC

Hi,

(....I deleted all the quotes....)

Yes, the operator detune parameter is a very subtle one. It can help to
make the DX sound less "digital". You could try the following experiment:

Take a sustained type of patch, for example a BRASS or STRINGS pad sound.
Listen to them carefully.

Then edit the DETUNE for each of the 6 operators to a value of 0.

Listen again.

Then start fooling around with detune settings for modulators and/or
carriers in the patch. Check which algorithm is used and look at the
diagrams that are printed on top of the DX7 to know which operators are
used as carriers and which operators are used as modulators in the patch
you are playing with.

Listen if you can hear the effect when detuning one or more operators.

It might be difficult to hear the effect of the detune parameter when
editing and listening only to a single operator. But the effect becomes
more audible when tweaking the detune for several operators and listen to
the resulting sound.

PS: answering a question about operator coarse/fine/detune frequencies
with an additional story about microtuning (even if this is also a
fascinating subjec), does not really help to make things clear.

--
MT

Daniel Forró

2013-09-03 08:31:24 UTC

It was not me, who started to talk about Cents, so it was necessary to
explain, where DX instruments work with Cents. What's confusing in it?
Just another explanation added. It didn't hurt. When I'm teaching, I
always explain little bit more than necessary, to show what's
connected to the main theme.

OK, back to Detune parameter, I will reveal few tricks from my FM
programming secret pocket:

- Do "cross detuning" between carriers to keep total tuning
symmetrically around zero value and not shift the pitch of the
instrument. For example Algo 5/6 - OP1 = -4, OP3 = 0, OP5 = +4. Of
course it depends also on the sound of the stripe, when it produces
only some noise component, this has no effect.
With more complex detuning we can sum values of all OP to find if it's
well balanced - for example we have these settings in Algo 5: OP1 =
-5, OP2 = -3, OP3 = +1, OP4 = -5, OP5 = +2, OP6 = +4. This gives sums
-8 for the first stripe, -4 for the second one, +6 for the third one,
all together (-8)+(-4)+6 = -6. That means total tuning of the
instrument is little bit down.

(Talking about the master tuning, I will add this:
Old DX7 uses it's Data Entry slider by default as a Master Tune
controller - it's Function parameter on the button 1. That's
unfortunately too easy way how to change tuning the instrument, and
rather dangerous in live performance. So I always selected some
neutral Function parameter, like Battery Check, to avoid "out-of-tune"
surprise.
More far distant remark:
Casio CZ synths use this MIDI CC6 as Master Tune, so when you connect
DX7 as masterkeyboard to CZ101 for example, and move with Data Entry,
CZ goes out of tune. Let's talk about incompatibility of the first
MIDI generation...)

- For detuned sounds using algorithms with two stripes, set all
operators in one stripe to the same value in one direction, and all
operators in the other stripe to the same value in opposite direction.
Which direction we set in which stripe is not important, important is
only the difference between two values - for greater effect use higher
difference.

- More sophisticated rule for "cross detuning" says: do it diagonally
in the structure of the algorithm, carrier against modulator in
different stripe. So in Algo 3 it's good to set for example OP1 = -7,
and modulator in the second stripe opposite - OP5 = +7. This way we'll
get more natural sounding chorus, not just detuning.

- Good trick how to expand the range of Detune parameter on the old DX/
TX generation: use Fine Tune with connection to Detune. Let's take
1.00 as middle value (with Detune = 0), then we have standard range -7
to +7. When we need to go more down, just set Fine Tune = 0.995 and
Detune = +7, that will be the same like Fine Tune = 1.00 with Detune =
-8. Then we can continue with Detune to zero, which will set in fact
values -9 to -15.
In opposite direction set Fine Tune = 1.01, then Detune = -7 will set
in fact value +8, and we can continue to zero to get maximal value +15.

- Concerning the concrete range of Detune on old DX7, I don't know
exact value in Cents, but approximate value in Hertz. In the range
around 2000 Hz, maximal difference between -7 and +7 is about 4 Hz.

- To hear better the beating effect produced by Detune parameter,
switch off parameter Sync.

Daniel Forro

Post by Martin Tarenskeen
Hi,
(....I deleted all the quotes....)
Yes, the operator detune parameter is a very subtle one. It can help to
make the DX sound less "digital". You could try the following
Take a sustained type of patch, for example a BRASS or STRINGS pad sound.
Listen to them carefully.
Then edit the DETUNE for each of the 6 operators to a value of 0.
Listen again.
Then start fooling around with detune settings for modulators and/or
carriers in the patch. Check which algorithm is used and look at the
diagrams that are printed on top of the DX7 to know which operators are
used as carriers and which operators are used as modulators in the patch
you are playing with.
Listen if you can hear the effect when detuning one or more operators.
It might be difficult to hear the effect of the detune parameter when
editing and listening only to a single operator. But the effect becomes
more audible when tweaking the detune for several operators and listen to
the resulting sound.
PS: answering a question about operator coarse/fine/detune frequencies
with an additional story about microtuning (even if this is also a
fascinating subjec), does not really help to make things clear.
--
MT

Paul

2013-09-03 14:38:29 UTC

Post by Daniel ForrÃ³
OK, back to Detune parameter, I will reveal few tricks from my FM
- Do "cross detuning" between carriers to keep total tuning
symmetrically around zero value and not shift the pitch of the
instrument. For example Algo 5/6 - OP1 = -4, OP3 = 0, OP5 = +4. Of
course it depends also on the sound of the stripe, when it produces
only some noise component, this has no effect.
With more complex detuning we can sum values of all OP to find if it's
well balanced - for example we have these settings in Algo 5: OP1 =
-5, OP2 = -3, OP3 = +1, OP4 = -5, OP5 = +2, OP6 = +4. This gives sums
-8 for the first stripe, -4 for the second one, +6 for the third one,
all together (-8)+(-4)+6 = -6. That means total tuning of the
instrument is little bit down.
Old DX7 uses it's Data Entry slider by default as a Master Tune
controller - it's Function parameter on the button 1. That's
unfortunately too easy way how to change tuning the instrument, and
rather dangerous in live performance. So I always selected some
neutral Function parameter, like Battery Check, to avoid "out-of-tune"
surprise.
Casio CZ synths use this MIDI CC6 as Master Tune, so when you connect
DX7 as masterkeyboard to CZ101 for example, and move with Data Entry,
CZ goes out of tune. Let's talk about incompatibility of the first
MIDI generation...)
- For detuned sounds using algorithms with two stripes, set all
operators in one stripe to the same value in one direction, and all
operators in the other stripe to the same value in opposite direction.
Which direction we set in which stripe is not important, important is
only the difference between two values - for greater effect use higher
difference.
- More sophisticated rule for "cross detuning" says: do it diagonally
in the structure of the algorithm, carrier against modulator in
different stripe. So in Algo 3 it's good to set for example OP1 = -7,
and modulator in the second stripe opposite - OP5 = +7. This way we'll
get more natural sounding chorus, not just detuning.
- Good trick how to expand the range of Detune parameter on the old DX/
TX generation: use Fine Tune with connection to Detune. Let's take
1.00 as middle value (with Detune = 0), then we have standard range -7
to +7. When we need to go more down, just set Fine Tune = 0.995 and
Detune = +7, that will be the same like Fine Tune = 1.00 with Detune =
-8. Then we can continue with Detune to zero, which will set in fact
values -9 to -15.
In opposite direction set Fine Tune = 1.01, then Detune = -7 will set
in fact value +8, and we can continue to zero to get maximal value +15.
- Concerning the concrete range of Detune on old DX7, I don't know
exact value in Cents, but approximate value in Hertz. In the range
around 2000 Hz, maximal difference between -7 and +7 is about 4 Hz.
- To hear better the beating effect produced by Detune parameter,
switch off parameter Sync.
Daniel Forro

Thank you Daniel,

i never read such an explaination anywhere before !!

i will have a good study of all your examples. Very interesting stuff indeed !!

i notice you call a STACK (of OP's) a STRIPE ?? Is that correct ??

Ta,

Paul

Daniel Forró

2013-09-03 15:17:17 UTC

Post by Paul
i notice you call a STACK (of OP's) a STRIPE ?? Is that correct ??

Yes, it's the same. I've seen this somewhere in some FM literature...
Probably "stack" is better term.

Daniel Forro

Paul

2013-09-03 19:21:51 UTC

Post by Paul
i notice you call a STACK (of OP's) a STRIPE ?? Is that correct ??

Yes, it's the same. I've seen this somewhere in some FM literature...
Probably "stack" is better term.
Daniel Forro

Thanks Daniel,

I have also ROW used before instead of Stripe or Stack.

Paul

db00451

2013-09-03 20:24:19 UTC

I have also [seen] ROW used before instead of Stripe or Stack.

Really? That seems technically inaccurate as a row is horizontal. Operators connected in series - another name for our collection - flow vertically. Hence, the correct term for that would be a column.

At best, "row" would describe algorithm 32, with its horizontally arranged set of carriers.

Of course, these geometric concerns don't actually reflect the underlying maths, but since we're using metaphors to understand the algorithms in terms of how they're illustrated on the synth, we should at least get the geometry right so that our metaphors make sense.

FWIW, I've never heard the term "stripe" in all my reading on FM, but maybe it's used in a few communities only.

Paul

2013-09-03 20:56:20 UTC

I have also [seen] ROW used before instead of Stripe or Stack.

Really? That seems technically inaccurate as a row is horizontal. Operators connected in series - another name for our collection - flow vertically. Hence, the correct term for that would be a column.
At best, "row" would describe algorithm 32, with its horizontally arranged set of carriers.
Of course, these geometric concerns don't actually reflect the underlying maths, but since we're using metaphors to understand the algorithms in terms of how they're illustrated on the synth, we should at least get the geometry right so that our metaphors make sense.
FWIW, I've never heard the term "stripe" in all my reading on FM, but maybe it's used in a few communities only.

Hi DB,

Yes, ROW is an inaccurate term now that you mention it !! And so you are correct in that it can only be given to Algo 32.

Paul

db00451

2013-09-03 21:04:02 UTC

Post by Paul
Yes, ROW is an inaccurate term now that you mention it !! And so you are correct in that it can only be given to Algo 32.

That was just an example, not the only one. It could also be applied to any other algorithm with parallel carriers - or, because it's such a loose metaphor, even parallel modulators I guess.

But loose metaphors aren't going to get any of us anywhere, so it's not important.

Paul

2013-09-03 14:20:17 UTC

Post by Martin Tarenskeen
Hi,
(....I deleted all the quotes....)
Yes, the operator detune parameter is a very subtle one. It can help to
Take a sustained type of patch, for example a BRASS or STRINGS pad sound.
Listen to them carefully.
Then edit the DETUNE for each of the 6 operators to a value of 0.
Listen again.
Then start fooling around with detune settings for modulators and/or
carriers in the patch. Check which algorithm is used and look at the
diagrams that are printed on top of the DX7 to know which operators are
used as carriers and which operators are used as modulators in the patch
you are playing with.
Listen if you can hear the effect when detuning one or more operators.
It might be difficult to hear the effect of the detune parameter when
editing and listening only to a single operator. But the effect becomes
more audible when tweaking the detune for several operators and listen to
the resulting sound.
PS: answering a question about operator coarse/fine/detune frequencies
with an additional story about microtuning (even if this is also a
fascinating subjec), does not really help to make things clear.
--
MT

Cheers Martin,

Thats really helpful as you have given me a clear METHOD to work with. And also i did not realise that the DETUNE could be applied to achieve a less 'digital' tone. And yes, i found it near impossible to hear its effect when used in isolation with one single Carrier. Thats exactly what i was trying to explain earlier to members about me not being able to do it by 'ear'. Maybe a trained ear can recognise the changes but i certainly can't !!

i have always thought of DETUNE as a way of getting a 'fatter' sound out of a team of Operators. For instance, if you made a Hammond-Organ type patch using Algo 32 (so consisting of 6 x sine wave Carriers), then you could DETUNE each Operator in such a fashion to attain a 'thicker' texture (somewhat similar to CHORUS) :-

OP 1 = -7

OP 2 = +7

OP 3 = +5

OP 4 = -5

OP 5 = +2

OP 6 = -2

Anyway, that would be my interprutation and application of the function.

Ta,

Paul

db00451

2013-09-03 14:26:43 UTC

Post by Paul
i found it near impossible to hear its effect when used in isolation with one single Carrier. Thats exactly what i was trying to explain earlier to members about me not being able to do it by 'ear'. Maybe a trained ear can recognise the changes but i certainly can't !!

Well, of course it's not going to be easy to hear in isolation, to anyone who doesn't have extreme perfect pitch. If you had made it clearer that was what you meant by not being able to hear its effect, we'd have probably arrived here sooner.

Post by Paul
i have always thought of DETUNE as a way of getting a 'fatter' sound out of a team of Operators.

Yes, that's the point. So you know the answer right from the beginning, after all? What was all that other stuff for? Haha. :P

Paul

2013-09-03 14:47:55 UTC

Post by Paul
i have always thought of DETUNE as a way of getting a 'fatter' sound out of a team of Operators.

Yes, that's the point. So you know the answer right from the beginning, after all? What was all that other stuff for? Haha. :P

Hi DB,

Well i tried to make my question clear and i also called the thread 'DETUNE'. But things just got a bit diverted and also due to my seemingly lack of understanding. And also the mistake in the DX7 manual which Martin kindly pointed out was obviously throwing me off course !!

i was advised to do things by 'ear' but my reason for posting this question was because i just could not hear any differences (because my ear is simply not good enough in this area !!).

Anyway, i think i got there in the end..........

Cheers,

Paul

Daniel Forró

2013-09-03 14:56:54 UTC

Post by Paul
Thats really helpful as you have given me a clear METHOD to work
with. And also i did not realise that the DETUNE could be applied
to achieve a less 'digital' tone.

I don't think so, DX7 is digital synth and will always sound alike.

But Detune can add some irregularity thanks to the beating, if perfect
regularity is what you mean by the term "digital".

(On DX7 II D we have more means how to apply even more irregularity -
thanks to the Random Pitch parameter and microtuning.)

Post by Paul
And yes, i found it near impossible to hear its effect when used in
isolation with one single Carrier. Thats exactly what i was trying
to explain earlier to members about me not being able to do it by
'ear'. Maybe a trained ear can recognise the changes but i
certainly can't !!

Changes are too small, it's difficult to hear it. But for producing
beating and chorus effect even very small change in frequency works.

Post by Paul
i have always thought of DETUNE as a way of getting a 'fatter' sound
out of a team of Operators. For instance, if you made a Hammond-
Organ type patch using Algo 32 (so consisting of 6 x sine wave
Carriers), then you could DETUNE each Operator in such a fashion to
attain a 'thicker' texture (somewhat similar to CHORUS) :-
OP 1 = -7
OP 2 = +7
OP 3 = +5
OP 4 = -5
OP 5 = +2
OP 6 = -2

This is one of possible applications, but not too authentic for
simulation of organ sounds - electronic organ generally have octaves,
fifths and other intervals in tune, and often also in the sync. For
Hammond organ simulation I would switch off Oscillator Sync to
emphasize the effect, thanks to independent phases.

You understand very well that detuning should be done symmetrically to
keep total pitch of the instrument on the frequency set by Master
Tuning.

Other details about Detune parameter I have sent in previous message.

Daniel Forro

Martin Tarenskeen

2013-09-03 20:37:30 UTC

Post by Paul
Thats really helpful as you have given me a clear METHOD to work
with. And also i did not realise that the DETUNE could be applied
to achieve a less 'digital' tone.

I don't think so, DX7 is digital synth and will always sound alike.

That's why I put 'digital' between quotation marks. In fact "digital
sound" does not exist. Every sound we can hear is analog: It's the
vibrations of the air that reaches our ears and which is finally processed
by our brains so that we can hear. If we look at it that way the sounds
from a DX7 sound just as analog as am Oberheim, a Minimoog, a Theremin, a
Stradivarius or a Steinway Grand :-) But all of them do have their own
specific sonic character, caused by the way they are designed.

-----

It's funny that there are so many DX7 patches that are inspired by classic
analog synths like Moog, Arp, or Oberheim. Just take a look at the
patchnames in the many available DX7 libraries.

But when the DX7 became a bestseller, also the opposite thing happened:
For example the Roland JX8P and JX10 have many patches that try to say
"Hey, you can create DX-style bells and e-pianos on our synths too!"
just before Roland released their own digital D50 synth.

Then we had the "vintage analog synths" hype. People started paying
ridiculous prices for those old Vintage and Analog synths that were
supposed to sound much more "FAT", "WARM", or "DIRTY" than the latest
digital synths.

In that period I have even seen a 2nd hand DX7 synth for sale
advertized as "vintage analog synth". Really!

Bottom line: If it sounds good it sounds good. Who cares if it's digital
or analog.

--
MT

Jason Adkins

2013-09-03 21:19:02 UTC

Sorry everyone but there is going to be massive rants now:-

Post by Martin Tarenskeen
That's why I put 'digital' between quotation marks. In fact "digital
sound" does not exist. Every sound we can hear is analog: It's the
vibrations of the air that reaches our ears and which is finally processed
by our brains so that we can hear.

And some peoples hearing and brain are better than others,I'm sure in
the future
at birth we will all have a socket put into the back of the head...

Post by Martin Tarenskeen
It's funny that there are so many DX7 patches that are inspired by classic
analog synths like Moog, Arp, or Oberheim. Just take a look at the
patchnames in the many available DX7 libraries.

Yeah and all of the patches sound nothing like them!

Post by Martin Tarenskeen
But when the DX7 became a bestseller, also the opposite thing
For example the Roland JX8P and JX10 have many patches that try to say
"Hey, you can create DX-style bells and e-pianos on our synths too!"
just before Roland released their own digital D50 synth.

Will never have anything said against the JX8P,brilliant synth.
The D-50 was different it used sampled wave's

Post by Martin Tarenskeen
Bottom line: If it sounds good it sounds good. Who cares if it's digital
or analog.

Correct.

Post by Martin Tarenskeen
--
MT

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

Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/YamahaDX/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/YamahaDX/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
YamahaDX-***@yahoogroups.com
YamahaDX-***@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
YamahaDX-***@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Martin Tarenskeen

2013-09-03 22:13:45 UTC

Post by Jason Adkins

Post by Martin Tarenskeen
It's funny that there are so many DX7 patches that are inspired by
classic analog synths like Moog, Arp, or Oberheim. Just take a look at
the patchnames in the many available DX7 libraries.

Yeah and all of the patches sound nothing like them!

Exactly. That's what I find funny.

Post by Jason Adkins

Post by Martin Tarenskeen
For example the Roland JX8P and JX10 have many patches that try to say
"Hey, you can create DX-style bells and e-pianos on our synths too!"
just before Roland released their own digital D50 synth.

Will never have anything said against the JX8P,brilliant synth.

Absolutely. But the wannabee-DX7-e-piano-imitation in the preset bank
sucks. That is, if you try to compare it to a DX7. But you shouldn't. It's
a different synthesizer.

Post by Jason Adkins
The D-50 was different it used sampled wave's

Yes, it was Roland's first serious digital answer to the DX7. It used
sampled waveforms as part of the digital synth engine, but it was a real
synth not a sample rom player. Today people are more interested in the
earlier Roland analog synths like Jupiter 8, Juno 60, TB-303, SH-101,
JX8P. But the D50 should not be overseen. It can make some really good
sounds.

Post by Jason Adkins

Post by Martin Tarenskeen
Bottom line: If it sounds good it sounds good. Who cares if it's
digital or analog.

Correct.

Where can I find the big rant you promised us?

:-)

MT

Paul

2013-09-03 00:32:55 UTC

Post by Paul
Hi folks,
Having been reading up on the DETUNE function of the DX7, i would be
very grateful if anyone could help clear up a question for me please.

I'll try my best.

Post by Paul
As you will know the DETUNE has upper/lower limits of +/- 7.

True.

Post by Paul
And that FINE TUNING (ie the tunings between each COURSE tuned
Frequency) has a range of 99 Cents.

Not true. It has nothing to do with Cents, it's ratio setting.
Range of this parameter is 99 steps. Size of the step is defined by
- so if you select 1.00, then size is 0.01, and values will change
from 1.00 to 1.99
- if you select 0.50, size of the step is 0.005, values will be from
0.500, then 0.505 to 0.995 (Attention! Display on DX7 II D doesn't
show numbers with three decimal points, I didn't check how it's on
DX7, no time now, probably the same... And I remember there was
mistake in one value on certain DX7 series, I've found it many years
ago.)
- and so on. When you select 31.00, size of the step is 0.31, and
values will change from 31.00, then 31.31 until 61.69.
That means the size of this step is always different, with each
setting of Coarse Tuning Ratio. That also means lot of values are
missing, and lot of them repeats...

Which books? Maybe you read some wrong books. This is nonsense. Fine
tuning and Detune has nothing to do with Cents.

Post by Paul
Is this correct ??

Nope.

Not at all.

Post by Paul
For instance, if you played the note C1 and then moved the value of
the Cents

??? which one ??? There are no Cents in Course and Fine and Detune
settings.

Post by Paul
up to full, then this would take you up to (pitch) C2 which is the
next Octave up.

???

Post by Paul
In which case 1 x Cent is a far greater a value (on the DX7) than
on other synths (which use Cents as a division) ??
Hope that makes sense guys !!

It doesn't make sense. It looks like you mix quite different things
together.
Coarse + Fine setting is Ratio, it has nothing to do with Cents.
Detune is also some relative step, not Cents. I haven't time now to
check with my precise microtonal Korg tuner MT1200 how much Cents is
this step. Maybe later.
If you are talking about microtuning, then of course we can talk about
Cents. This has nothing to do with tuning of operators in FM engine,
it's done in different menu and independent on concrete setting of FM
engine. First DX/TX generation didn't have microtuning, but E! and
some other modifications added it.
Talking about this let's not forget that Yamaha didn't use Cents, but
Yamaha steps for microtuning. On TX81z and similar instruments they
have 768 steps in octave, on DX7 and its relative they used 1024 steps
in octave. The reason for this was probably derived from the hardware
(resolution of digital chips - both numbers looks very "digital").
These values differs from Cents scale, which uses 1200 steps in
octave. If you are interested in microtuning, I'm specialist in it and
can send you formulae for conversion Yamaha steps to Cents.
Daniel Forro
P.S.: Paul, sorry to mention, but I don't understand your studying
method. Throw away all those books, switch on your DX, sit down to it,
focus on its display, press Edit and try everything by your brain and
ears, parameter by parameter. Do it every day for 30 minutes. If you
do it, you will immediately find such basic thing like size of the
steps for FINE Ratio Tuning, and many others. For such revelations you
don't need to understand FM engine. Just try ranges of parameters and
what it does with the sound.
It seems to me that you ask some questions, where answers are obvious
after sitting at the instrument for five minutes.

Hi Daniel.

Thanks for the reply and advice.

I see now that the FINE TUNING divisions are not in Cents !! And that the value of each 'step' (not Cent !!) is governed by the COARSE TUNING setting. So the steps will always be different depending on the ratio setting.

Thanks for your offer of help with Micro Tuning, but that is way beyond my intellectual scope !!

Regardless of the fact that I used the wrong terminology in my OP and also was not clear in my description of the question I was trying to present to the forum, I am not (as you suggested I do) able to solve a lot of things by 'ear'. I can not honestly hear the differences in whether or not a Cent/Step/Detune value is a certain amount higher/lower when making adjustments in small increments. My ears are simply not that good !! So that's why I was relying on a textbook or help from the forum to try and solve it. I wish I could hear these things but I am not skilled enough in this area. Though in saying that, I suppose practice makes perfect !!

Ta,

Paul

db00451

2013-09-02 16:26:22 UTC

As has been said, the numbers you quote are multiples/ratios, totally unrelated to cent-based adjustment.

Post by Paul
In other words, an increment change of 1 x Cent in FINE TUNING produces a greater shift in pitch than one increment change in DETUNE.
Is this correct ??

Yes.

Post by Paul
i ask because on other keyboards i have owned, the distance between two semitones is divided into 100 x Cents (ie. 50 x Cents = 1 x 1/4 tone, 25 x Cents = 1/8th tone, etc).

It is ever thus, on every keyboard and instrument. Cents are cents, wherever they are. People don't get to redefine them.

Post by Paul
But on the DX7 i think (correct me if i am wrong here) its the distance between two COURSE FREQUENCIES which is divided into Cents.

As above, you have to be corrected because you are wrong.

The Fine tune takes the current base ratio (0.5, 1.0, 2.0, etc.) and multiples it by hundredths between 1.00 and 1.99.

Also as someone else already said, just choose detunes that sound good. Their exact value doesn't matter.

You could measure it yourself by, e.g., playing a non-detuned and a detuned operator over one another, measuring how often they beat to silence, and divide the result into the fundamental frequency of the non-detuned op. You should probably check multiple notes to be sure that the ratio is constant. Do you care that much?

Of course, someone else has probably done this somewhere. Maybe you could search more.

FWIW, the detuning will not necessarily equate to a humanly logical number/fraction of cents. It might not even be constant from note to note. It all depends upon how the DX7 actually implements it in its FM chip.

Which numbers sound good for any situation are more important than the dry technical details in this case.

db00451

2013-09-02 16:56:15 UTC

As has been said, the numbers you quote are multiples/ratios, totally unrelated to cent-based adjustment.

Post by Paul
In other words, an increment change of 1 x Cent in FINE TUNING produces a greater shift in pitch than one increment change in DETUNE.
Is this correct ??

No. (Well, /maybe/, depending on how Fine works and how low your frequency and ratio are [i.e. ratio 0.5], but in almost all cases, no.)

Post by Paul
i ask because on other keyboards i have owned, the distance between two semitones is divided into 100 x Cents (ie. 50 x Cents = 1 x 1/4 tone, 25 x Cents = 1/8th tone, etc).

It is ever thus, on every keyboard and instrument. Cents are cents, wherever they are. People don't get to redefine them.

Post by Paul
But on the DX7 i think (correct me if i am wrong here) its the distance between two COURSE FREQUENCIES which is divided into Cents.

As above, you have to be corrected because you are wrong.

The Fine tune takes the current base ratio (0.5, 1.0, 2.0, etc.) and multiples it by hundredths between 1.00 and 1.99.

Also as someone else already said, just choose detunes that sound good. Their exact value doesn't matter.

You could measure it yourself by, e.g., playing a non-detuned and a detuned operator over one another, measuring how often they beat to silence, and divide the result into the fundamental frequency of the non-detuned op. You should probably check multiple notes to be sure that the ratio is constant. Do you care that much?

Of course, someone else has probably done this somewhere. Maybe you could search more.

FWIW, the detuning will not necessarily equate to a humanly logical
number/fraction of cents. It might not even be constant from note to note. It all depends upon how the DX7 actually implements it in its FM chip.

Which numbers sound good for any situation are more important than the dry technical details in this case.

Paul

2013-09-03 01:24:49 UTC

As has been said, the numbers you quote are multiples/ratios, totally unrelated to cent-based adjustment.

Post by Paul
In other words, an increment change of 1 x Cent in FINE TUNING produces a greater shift in pitch than one increment change in DETUNE.
Is this correct ??

No. (Well, /maybe/, depending on how Fine works and how low your frequency and ratio are [i.e. ratio 0.5], but in almost all cases, no.)

Post by Paul
i ask because on other keyboards i have owned, the distance between two semitones is divided into 100 x Cents (ie. 50 x Cents = 1 x 1/4 tone, 25 x Cents = 1/8th tone, etc).

It is ever thus, on every keyboard and instrument. Cents are cents, wherever they are. People don't get to redefine them.

Post by Paul
But on the DX7 i think (correct me if i am wrong here) its the distance between two COURSE FREQUENCIES which is divided into Cents.

As above, you have to be corrected because you are wrong.
The Fine tune takes the current base ratio (0.5, 1.0, 2.0, etc.) and multiples it by hundredths between 1.00 and 1.99.
Also as someone else already said, just choose detunes that sound good. Their exact value doesn't matter.
You could measure it yourself by, e.g., playing a non-detuned and a detuned operator over one another, measuring how often they beat to silence, and divide the result into the fundamental frequency of the non-detuned op. You should probably check multiple notes to be sure that the ratio is constant. Do you care that much?
Of course, someone else has probably done this somewhere. Maybe you could search more.
FWIW, the detuning will not necessarily equate to a humanly logical
number/fraction of cents. It might not even be constant from note to note. It all depends upon how the DX7 actually implements it in its FM chip.
Which numbers sound good for any situation are more important than the dry technical details in this case.

Hi DB,

Ta for the reply.

As Martin stated earlier, there is a mistake in the DX7 manual which was really throwing me of course, but he has pointed it out to me now, thank goodness.

Regarding your helpful advice on DETUNING, you are basically saying detune (say) 2 x Operators until they sound good by ear !! I totally understand that, but what I have been trying to solve is roughly how many Cents/Steps or whatever equal one single adjustment on the DETUNE. This I can not solve by ear because my ears are far too weak in this area !!

Cheers,

Paul

db00451

2013-09-03 01:30:28 UTC

Post by Paul
Regarding your helpful advice on DETUNING, you are basically saying detune (say) 2 x Operators until they sound good by ear !!

Basically. That's one of the main reasons that the function exists, as I elaborated in a later reply to one of your subsequent messages.

Post by Paul
I totally understand that, but what I have been trying to solve is roughly how many Cents/Steps or whatever equal one single adjustment on the DETUNE.

Do you think it'd make much difference to know? What I meant was that the audible end result is much more important than knowing exactly what fraction of a cent is invoked by detune of N for any single note.

Post by Paul
This I can not solve by ear because my ears are far too weak in this area !!

If your ears aren't going to do it, as I also said in a subsequent post, you would need to do some empirical recordings and devise a way to analyse them. That's something I would do if it were a question I cared much about, but I don't know if you feel similarly confident.

And again, perhaps your ears just want to hear music, and not theory. That's fine too. Everyone places different emphases on different parts of the synthesising experience. Don't feel you have to force theory onto yourself, especially if it's stopping you from doing everything else.

Paul

2013-09-03 01:43:57 UTC

Post by Paul
Regarding your helpful advice on DETUNING, you are basically saying detune (say) 2 x Operators until they sound good by ear !!

Basically. That's one of the main reasons that the function exists, as I elaborated in a later reply to one of your subsequent messages.

Post by Paul
I totally understand that, but what I have been trying to solve is roughly how many Cents/Steps or whatever equal one single adjustment on the DETUNE.

Post by Paul
This I can not solve by ear because my ears are far too weak in this area !!

If your ears aren't going to do it, as I also said in a subsequent post, you would need to do some empirical recordings and devise a way to analyse them. That's something I would do if it were a question I cared much about, but I don't know if you feel similarly confident.
And again, perhaps your ears just want to hear music, and not theory. That's fine too. Everyone places different emphases on different parts of the synthesising experience. Don't feel you have to force theory onto yourself, especially if it's stopping you from doing everything else.

Thanks DB,

That's very encouraging advice from you.

Yes, I think you are right in that there is not need to solve such an issue if (at the end of the day) nobody (except possibly STOCKHOUSEN !!) can even hear the minute adjustments !! I suppose its a bit like getting two pint bottles of milk and spending 3 x months analysing why and how one has a minutely less amount than the other, when nobody even NOTICES anyway !!

I think it is very easy to get caught and wrapped up in all this fine detail. As you say at the end of the day it should be about the MUSIC !! Though in saying that, it is obviously imperative for a musician to learn his instrument which is what I am ultimately trying to do.

Ta,

Paul

Daniel Forró

2013-09-03 02:13:54 UTC

Perfectly said!

Some scientific souls among us can be tempted to try to know each
detail, sometimes I'm obsessed, too, and try to be perfectionist. For
the sound designer is can be good, but it's not so important for
musician. It can have even opposite effect and can cause some mental
blocks.

We always should try to find a balance between knowing everything
about one thing, or one thing about everything. And musician should
concentrate on making the music, nowadays it's not so necessary to
program own sounds, there's a huge choice. Anyway from my experience
one isolated sound from one instrument doesn't mean too much. More
important are combinations of different (or even similar) sounds from
different instruments. And ideal is to use even multitimbral
instruments for producing just one sound. All power of internal effect
processors can be dedicated to one sound (of course it can be layered
sound as well). This has been my main working way in my studio for the
last twenty years.

As I work in many music styles, and also did lot of arrangements, I
know well that the same music can be successfully arranged for quite
different instruments, and even in different genre, and still it will
be recognizable. That's a proof that in most cases the music itself
(melody, harmony, rhythm, polyphony, form...) is more important than
its sound and timbre dress. Of course in some music styles, especially
electronic music using unique and unusual sounds, sound can be very
inspiring and can even dictate shape of music.

Daniel Forro

Post by Paul
Regarding your helpful advice on DETUNING, you are basically saying
detune (say) 2 x Operators until they sound good by ear !!

Basically. That's one of the main reasons that the function exists,
as I elaborated in a later reply to one of your subsequent messages.

Post by Paul
I totally understand that, but what I have been trying to solve is
roughly how many Cents/Steps or whatever equal one single
adjustment on the DETUNE.

Do you think it'd make much difference to know? What I meant was
that the audible end result is much more important than knowing
exactly what fraction of a cent is invoked by detune of N for any
single note.

Post by Paul
This I can not solve by ear because my ears are far too weak in this area !!

If your ears aren't going to do it, as I also said in a subsequent
post, you would need to do some empirical recordings and devise a
way to analyse them. That's something I would do if it were a
question I cared much about, but I don't know if you feel similarly
confident.
And again, perhaps your ears just want to hear music, and not
theory. That's fine too. Everyone places different emphases on
different parts of the synthesising experience. Don't feel you have
to force theory onto yourself, especially if it's stopping you from
doing everything else.

p***@aol.com

2013-09-04 18:31:01 UTC

I would like to discuss another method for providing detuning or
richness to DX7 patches. The following idea was presented and published
in the AfterTouch magazine as the patch "Cirrus", way back when. I
think it was called "patch of the month" or something like that. I have
built a large family of pads, brass, keyboards all using this concept.

Set a carrier at 1 Hz tone. Then set the modulator the normal way,
tracking the keyboard. The sidebands will have 2 Hz offsets, creating a
beating. One can then build on this in many ways, for example 3 pairs,
where the carriers are themselves varied slightly, for example I have a
pad with 1 Hz, 1.122 Hz and 1.202 Hz. The modulators for this patch are
all set to 1 with detunings of 0, -7 and +7 for additional internal
phasing.

The degree of feedback, if one uses algo 5 for example, can impart a
degree of brassiness. A nice slow attack and release makes a great pad,
with a lot of internal phasing and chorusing (for lack of knowing the
technically correct term). I have also stacked these pairs (algo 1) and
made a terrific patch I call "Hazy Cloud" that makes a great low,
sinister drone or anchor note. These are very rich to begin with, even
before adding chorusing, eq, reverb, etc.

If one has a preconception that digital or FM sound has a certain
limitation, chances are you will find ways to prove this to yourself.
If one allows for the possibility of more, exploration can reveal much.

p***@aol.com

2013-09-04 20:29:15 UTC

I just sent in a post about using 1Hz carriers as a way to achieve
detuning. Thought I'd give a link with some examples.
http://hexara.com/Audio/SweetTusa.mp3

This is a quiet little piece, and ALL the sounds originate from DX7S.
The solo line and some of the background is a keyboard version of the
"cirrus" idea, with one of the three pairs being a square wave (2:1)
rather than a 1Hz carrier with 1.0 modulator. The modulating filter
background IS using a version of "cirrus"--the mod filter being
provided by Cakewalk Sonar DAW. The gong does not use the 1 Hz idea,
but is actually two patches played together, with one of them detuned
to give the gong something of a beating effect. Hope you all enjoy
listening to it! :)

Paul

2013-09-06 01:27:20 UTC

Post by p***@aol.com
I just sent in a post about using 1Hz carriers as a way to achieve
detuning. Thought I'd give a link with some examples.
http://hexara.com/Audio/SweetTusa.mp3
This is a quiet little piece, and ALL the sounds originate from DX7S.
The solo line and some of the background is a keyboard version of the
"cirrus" idea, with one of the three pairs being a square wave (2:1)
rather than a 1Hz carrier with 1.0 modulator. The modulating filter
background IS using a version of "cirrus"--the mod filter being
provided by Cakewalk Sonar DAW. The gong does not use the 1 Hz idea,
but is actually two patches played together, with one of them detuned
to give the gong something of a beating effect. Hope you all enjoy
listening to it! :)

Hi Phil,

THANKS for you last couple of posts.

I don't seem to be able to access the mp3 demo you kindly made. Perhaps you would be kind enough to email me the track as an attachment please. I would really like to hear it.

Ta,

Paul

Paul

2013-09-06 21:28:37 UTC

Thats a really nice texture you created there Phil. A very warm and interesting overall sound.

Did you play each track (voice) in 'live' and then layer them up to create the composition ?? Or are the parts sequenced (eg in Cubase) ??

You mention 'AfterTouch'. Is this a keyboard magazine or something ??

What is 'Cirrus' please ??

Thanks a lot,

Paul

Daniel Forró

2013-09-06 22:34:29 UTC

Post by Paul
Did you play each track (voice) in 'live' and then layer them up to
create the composition ?? Or are the parts sequenced (eg in
Cubase) ??

DX7 can play only one sound (in the normal case, when the sound is not
programmed in a special way with using key scaling). That means we
can't use MIDI multitrack sequencing with it. Music has to be recorded
track by track as audio multitrack (on hardware multitrack recorder or
to similar software). But of course for individual tracks we can use
sequencing, and synchronize tracks as necessary. There are more
possibilities how to do track sync.

Post by Paul
You mention 'AfterTouch'. Is this a keyboard magazine or something ??

That was magazine Yamaha published in the second half of 80ies - with
promotion for new products, patches from users and famous musicians,
tips & tricks... I have still few numbers somewhere. And from time to
time they can be bought on Ebay.

I'm not sure if somebody scanned all of them, I didn't find PDF. It
would be good. There was lot of info.

Post by Paul
What is 'Cirrus' please ??

He mentioned it - a patch for DX7 published in Aftertouch magazine.
Because it was in patch sheet form, one has to set parameters manually.

Daniel Forro

Brendan Mccaffrey

2013-09-07 11:45:12 UTC

All my groups are corrupt since the updates from yahoo. Anybody else in the same position ?. Sent from Yahoo! Mail for iPhone

Martin Tarenskeen

2013-09-07 12:19:21 UTC

All my groups are corrupt since the updates from yahoo. Anybody else in the same position ?.

You are not the only having trouble. I have read several messages from
people complaining in different Yahoo groups.

Personally I have not had any problems yet, but I keep my fingers crossed.
Something strange is going on that the Yahoo people should fix.

--
MT

Bruce Wahler

2013-09-07 12:40:54 UTC

Don't hold your breath waiting for help from Yahoo. I've been the owner
of a large group for years, and any time I've had a question about the
group -- particularly, about maintenance -- I'm on my own. There is a
group called 'moderatorcentral' that I joined, 70K+ members. Guess
what? It's a distribute-only group; no one can post a question there!
I have yet to find a place to get help from Yahoo on moderating a group,
other than to post on Yahoo Answers and hope someone responds -- and
that the response has any merit.

To be fair, Yahoo Groups is free. But they dropped the tech support
years ago.

Regards,

-BW

Bruce Wahler
Ashby Solutions.com^(TM)
***@ashbysolutions.com
http://music.ashbysolutions.com
877.55.ASHBY (877.552.7429)

Post by Brendan Mccaffrey

All my groups are corrupt since the updates from yahoo. Anybody else

in the same position ?.
You are not the only having trouble. I have read several messages from
people complaining in different Yahoo groups.
Personally I have not had any problems yet, but I keep my fingers crossed.
Something strange is going on that the Yahoo people should fix.
--
MT

Brendan Mccaffrey

2013-09-07 15:24:49 UTC

Thanks guys , It sux. I think I set up a new account for groups. Sent from Yahoo! Mail for iPad

Bruce Wahler

2013-09-07 12:19:32 UTC

Not sure what you are seeing. I can browse, YamahaDX, NordElectro,
CloneWheel and others. The look has changed, and the Files section is
now under the "More" submenu, but nothing seems missing -- at least,
with a quick check.

The most annoying part is that the Control Panel seems broken: I can
change the features of the groups I own, but when I try to save the
results, I get a message that says, "Sorry, an error occurred while
loading the content."

Regards,

-BW

Bruce Wahler
Ashby Solutions.com^(TM)
***@ashbysolutions.com
http://music.ashbysolutions.com
877.55.ASHBY (877.552.7429)

All my groups are corrupt since the updates from yahoo. Anybody else
in the same position ?.
Sent from Yahoo! Mail for iPhone
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Subject: * [YamahaDX] Re: Question #04 (Detune) ??
*Sent: * Fri, Sep 6, 2013 10:55:33 PM

Post by Daniel ForrÃ³
DX7 can play only one sound (in the normal case, when the sound is not
programmed in a special way with using key scaling). That means we
can't use MIDI multitrack sequencing with it.

The DX7 II can play two voices at once, either split or layered. When
split, it can receive each voice on a separate MIDI channel.
Grey Matter E! for the DX7 II enables the full 16 channels and up to 8
timbres.

db00451

2013-09-09 11:51:59 UTC

Post by Bruce Wahler
Not sure what you are seeing. I can browse, YamahaDX, NordElectro,
CloneWheel and others. The look has changed, and the Files section is
now under the "More" submenu, but nothing seems missing -- at least,
with a quick check.
[...]

Paul

2013-09-08 00:16:41 UTC

The DX7 II can play two voices at once, either split or layered. When split, it can receive each voice on a separate MIDI channel.
Grey Matter E! for the DX7 II enables the full 16 channels and up to 8 timbres.

Ta DB,

So you can't use the DX7 Mark 1 as a Multi-Timbral instrument. So can only transmit and receive on 1 x Midi Channel ??

And the DX7 Mark 2, can this therefore transmit and receive on 2 x Mini Channels simultaneously ??

I have never heard of GREY MATTER before ??

Thanks,

Paul

db00451

2013-09-08 01:26:14 UTC

Post by Paul
So you can't use the DX7 Mark 1 as a Multi-Timbral instrument. So can only transmit and receive on 1 x Midi Channel ??

Correct.

Another significant limitation is that it can only transmit on MIDI channel 1.

Also, it can be set to receive on any of the 16 channels, but only one at a time - i.e. not receive from all channels at once (for the single voice).

Post by Paul
And the DX7 Mark 2, can this therefore transmit and receive on 2 x Mini Channels simultaneously ??

I'm not sure, actually. It can definitely do splits and bitimbrality, but someone else will need to confirm whether splits can receive and/or transmit on more than one channel.

But, certainly, it can be configured to transmit on any or all of the 16 channels.

And because I'm now just regurgitating info that you could find on Wikipedia, go there: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yamaha_DX7#MIDI

Post by Paul
I have never heard of GREY MATTER before ??

Time to go to Google too, then.

Sorry, but these are things that are easy to research for yourself.

db00451

2013-09-08 01:27:50 UTC

So you can't use the DX7 Mark 1 as a Multi-Timbral instrument. So can only transmit and receive on 1 x Midi Channel ??

And the DX7 Mark 2, can this therefore transmit and receive on 2 x Mini Channels simultaneously ??

I'm not sure, actually. It can definitely do splits and bitimbrality, but someone else will need to confirm whether splits can receive and/or transmit on more than one channel.

But, certainly, it can be configured to receive transmit on any or all of the 16 channels. (MAYBE two, as I said above)

And because I'm now just regurgitating info that you could easily find on Wikipedia, go there: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yamaha_DX7#MIDI

I have never heard of GREY MATTER before ??

Time to go to Google too, then.

Sorry, but these are things that are easy to research for yourself.

Bruce Wahler

2013-09-08 01:55:49 UTC

Yamaha had significant 'growing pains' with MIDI; in fact, certain
features in MIDI (ex: Mono mode) were modified because Yamaha
misinterpreted them, but being the '800-lb. gorilla' in the room, some
accommodations were necessary. The early Yamaha MIDI synths -- i.e.,
DX7 -- were not very MIDI-friendly.

Another issue is the the DX7 MK I sent velocity of 0-100, rather than
0-127, as the MIDI spec requires. It will, however *respond* to 0-127
from an external keyboard.

Regards,

-BW

Bruce Wahler
Ashby Solutions.com^(TM)
***@ashbysolutions.com
http://music.ashbysolutions.com
877.55.ASHBY (877.552.7429)

Post by Paul

So you can't use the DX7 Mark 1 as a Multi-Timbral instrument. So

can only transmit and receive on 1 x Midi Channel ??
Correct.
Another significant limitation is that it can only transmit on MIDI channel 1.
Also, it can be set to receive on any of the 16 channels, but only one
at a time - i.e. not receive from all channels at once (for the single
voice).

And the DX7 Mark 2, can this therefore transmit and receive on 2 x

Mini Channels simultaneously ??
I'm not sure, actually. It can definitely do splits and bitimbrality,
but someone else will need to confirm whether splits can receive
and/or transmit on more than one channel.
But, certainly, it can be configured to receive transmit on any or all
of the 16 channels. (MAYBE two, as I said above)
And because I'm now just regurgitating info that you could easily find
on Wikipedia, go there: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yamaha_DX7#MIDI

I have never heard of GREY MATTER before ??

Time to go to Google too, then.
Sorry, but these are things that are easy to research for yourself.

Martin Tarenskeen

2013-09-08 21:22:10 UTC

Post by Bruce Wahler
Another issue is the the DX7 MK I sent velocity of 0-100, rather than
0-127, as the MIDI spec requires. It will, however *respond* to 0-127
from an external keyboard.

I have understood this is a widely spread myth: the DX7 Mk I *can* sent
velocity up to 127, but the due to a badly choosen velocity curve you have
to hit the keys *extremely* hard to get any higher than 100. Can anyone
confirm this?

--
MT

db00451

2013-09-08 22:25:54 UTC

Post by Martin Tarenskeen
I have understood this is a widely spread myth: the DX7 Mk I *can* sent
velocity up to 127, but the due to a badly choosen velocity curve you have
to hit the keys *extremely* hard to get any higher than 100. Can anyone
confirm this?

Good point. People with DX7 mk 1 should test this exhaustively and tell us their empirical findings.

This is because too many/most of the claims online could be the usual problem of people reading things and repeating them endlessly like parrots without testing it themselves.

However, I did just read a page for the SuperMax, claiming the full range of 0~127 as one of its enhanced features.

In any case, clarity on whether the limit exists and, if so, whether it is at 100 or 99 would be much welcome.

As an example of the kind of nonsense that gets posted all over the internet, I just read someone saying the same limitation also occurs on the DX7 II, SY77, SY99, etc. also! Which is TOTALLY false.

SOME individual units of those and other keyboards by Yamaha - it seems to be more luck-of-the-draw than anything else - have been reported (not just parroted) as struggling to hit the higher end of their range, but they most certainly DO NOT have a hard limit at all. I can hit my SY99 hard and get it to 127 or at least very close.

As for the DX7 II, the ability to send the full range of available velocities was specifically one of

db00451

2013-09-08 22:54:59 UTC

I guess I forgot to finish that one!

Post by db00451
As for the DX7 II, the ability to send the full range of available velocities was specifically one of

...its new/improved features, AFAIK. Which, alongside the thing about the SuperMax, makes it believable that the many repetitions of the claim about the DX7 and velocity are true.

However, I acknowledge that, unlike for the SuperMax, I don't have personal testing or an empirical source for the DX7 II, just things I remember reading; however, combining the two bits of info, it does seem to support the claims, otherwise I would take my own advise and not repeat the thing about the DX7 II.

Yep, be sceptical about things people say on forums, etc. Often in direct proportion to how many people say them! Look for evidence like the above or people who can confirm they've tested it on a synth, read a service manual, etc. Else it could easily just be a regurgitated myth.

db00451

2013-09-08 22:28:09 UTC

Apparently I forgot to finish typing!

Post by db00451
As for the DX7 II, the ability to send the full range of available velocities was specifically one of

...its new/improved features. Which seems like another point in favour of the widely spread meme about the MIDI velocity.

Still, I always warn people against trusting anything simply because many people repeat it. Sometimes such things are completely false.

Wes Garland

2013-09-09 15:44:12 UTC

I don't know the meme you're talking about, but the original DX-7 can only
send velocity 0 through 118 -- and not all values in between. I'm pretty
sure I verified this experimentally in the lab 15 or so years ago. This is
in conflict with the MIDI implementation chart in the manual, but Yamaha's
FAQ agrees with my recollection:
http://faq.yamaha.com/us/en/article/musical-instruments/keyboards/synthesizers/dx7ii-fd/722/1684/a_midi_slave_cannot_achieve_full_volume_when_controlled_by_a_dx7_series_synthesizer

Wes

Post by db00451
**
Apparently I forgot to finish typing!

Post by db00451
As for the DX7 II, the ability to send the full range of available

velocities was specifically one of
...its new/improved features. Which seems like another point in favour of
the widely spread meme about the MIDI velocity.
Still, I always warn people against trusting anything simply because many
people repeat it. Sometimes such things are completely false.

--
Wesley W. Garland
Director, Product Development
PageMail, Inc.
+1 613 542 2787 x 102

Bruce Wahler

2013-09-09 16:44:51 UTC

Well, there we have it -- from the 'horse's mouth.' ;-)

Over the years, I have heard the number described as 0-100 (most
common), 0-99, and 0-108, but never 0-118 -- an unexpected end value, in
either decimal or hexadecimal (0x76). If we take the info from the
Yamaha site at face value, the problem is on both the first- and
second-generation DX7s, and there is no fix from Yamaha for it.

Thanks for the link, Wes.

Regards,

-BW

Bruce Wahler
Ashby Solutions.comâ¢
***@ashbysolutions.com
http://music.ashbysolutions.com
877.55.ASHBY (877.552.7429)

Post by Wes Garland
I don't know the meme you're talking about, but the original DX-7 can
only send velocity 0 through 118 -- and not all values in between. I'm
pretty sure I verified this experimentally in the lab 15 or so years
ago. This is in conflict with the MIDI implementation chart in the
http://faq.yamaha.com/us/en/article/musical-instruments/keyboards/synthesizers/dx7ii-fd/722/1684/a_midi_slave_cannot_achieve_full_volume_when_controlled_by_a_dx7_series_synthesizer
Wes
Apparently I forgot to finish typing!

Post by db00451
As for the DX7 II, the ability to send the full range of

available velocities was specifically one of
...its new/improved features. Which seems like another point in
favour of the widely spread meme about the MIDI velocity.
Still, I always warn people against trusting anything simply
because many people repeat it. Sometimes such things are
completely false.
--
Wesley W. Garland
Director, Product Development
PageMail, Inc.
+1 613 542 2787 x 102

db00451

2013-09-09 22:19:48 UTC

Hi Wes,

Post by Wes Garland
I don't know the meme you're talking about

I meant "meme" not as its modern connotation of an internet-based, rather its literal definition of any idea that spreads from mind to mind, regardless of truth value. Here, that's the widely recited idea that DX7 mk 1 can only send velocities of 0~100, and the sub-meme that the DX7 II (incl. the confusingly named DX7s) fixed all that.

Post by Wes Garland
http://faq.yamaha.com/us/en/article/musical-instruments/keyboards/synthesizers/dx7ii-fd/722/1684/a_midi_slave_cannot_achieve_full_volume_when_controlled_by_a_dx7

But if this is true, it seems that parroted claim about the mk 1 is false, and so is the one that the II was any different in this regard.

Whilst I thank you for the link and for reporting that you probably tested this, I should point out that it's not unheard of for Yamaha to get things wrong, too. Still, the situation is probably not as bad as everyone makes it out to be without testing it themselves, and I could do worse things than to assume what you cited is correct. ;)

It would have been really bad* if the DX7 mk 1 could only generate up to 100 from its own keybed but could receive up to 127 from outside, assuming Yamaha didn't clamp velocities to 100 internally: that would mean up to a whole 1/5 of the range of velocities, responsitivity, modulation index, etc. would be unavailable from its own keyboard.

118 is much less bad in that regard. Still not ideal but much better. Part of me feels like Yamaha just chose that as an average from the well-known fact that some DX7 II, SY77, SY99, etc. struggle to hit the high velocities. But I want to say they wouldn't generalise that coarsely without saying so, so maybe it is indeed a hard(ware) limit.

Just thinking aloud, really.

* IMO, or whatever I need to say to avoid getting burned at the stake like the last time I dared to call something about the DX7 suboptimal.

Daniel Forró

2013-09-09 03:55:29 UTC

As I have written, I don't think OMNI/MONO understanding was an issue.

But there was another mistake Yamaha did in first DX7 (and some other
machines, like KX1, KX5, QX1...), which damaged MIDI Standard more
significantly:

- Aftertouch data were sent as CC 3 (instruments with SN 1001-24880,
and 25123-26005). That excluded this controller from the practical use
on all later instruments.
(Of course it can be used if we need it, but it has no official
defined function like the other CC)
(Yamaha was not the only one sinner concerning keeping the standards -
CC 9 is also not defined because it was used by Ensoniq for aftertouch
data. Somebody who decided this at Yamaha and Ensoniq must have been
under drugs or got crazy, as of course there is independent command
for aftertouch in MIDI Standard.)

Also the first generation of DX7 doesn't work with Running Status.

Yamaha used some MIDI CC even on later instruments in non standard
way, for example:
- PF70/80 uses CC 1 for tremolo depth, CC 4 for tremolo speed
- SY85 can use CC 124 for control of LFO

Daniel Forro

Post by Bruce Wahler
Yamaha had significant 'growing pains' with MIDI; in fact, certain
features in MIDI (ex: Mono mode) were modified because Yamaha
misinterpreted them, but being the '800-lb. gorilla' in the room,
some accommodations were necessary. The early Yamaha MIDI synths --
i.e., DX7 -- were not very MIDI-friendly.
Another issue is the the DX7 MK I sent velocity of 0-100, rather
than 0-127, as the MIDI spec requires. It will, however *respond*
to 0-127 from an external keyboard.
Regards,
-BW
Bruce Wahler

Daniel Forró

2013-09-09 03:06:40 UTC

Post by Paul
So you can't use the DX7 Mark 1 as a Multi-Timbral instrument. So
can only transmit and receive on 1 x Midi Channel ??

Yes.

Post by Paul
And the DX7 Mark 2, can this therefore transmit and receive on 2 x
Mini Channels simultaneously ??

Not Mini, but for sure MIDI.
Transmit on one MIDI channel only, receive on two different channels
in Split Mode.

Post by Paul
I have never heard of GREY MATTER before ??

Name of the firm was Grey Matter Response, they produced card which
changed OS in DX7, DX7S and DX7 II D/FD.
There's a lot of info about it on internet, and in Files section.

Daniel Forro

Paul

2013-09-10 00:19:12 UTC

Post by Paul
So you can't use the DX7 Mark 1 as a Multi-Timbral instrument. So
can only transmit and receive on 1 x Midi Channel ??

Yes.

Post by Paul
And the DX7 Mark 2, can this therefore transmit and receive on 2 x
Mini Channels simultaneously ??

Not Mini, but for sure MIDI.
Transmit on one MIDI channel only, receive on two different channels
in Split Mode.

Post by Paul
I have never heard of GREY MATTER before ??

Name of the firm was Grey Matter Response, they produced card which
changed OS in DX7, DX7S and DX7 II D/FD.
There's a lot of info about it on internet, and in Files section.
Daniel Forro

Thanks a lot Daniel.

So even though you can Split and Layer the DX7ii, it can Receive on 2 x Midi channels, but only Transmit on 1.

Thanks for the pointers on Grey Matter.

Paul

p***@aol.com

2013-09-08 03:14:38 UTC

Daniel mostly answered the questions from Paul. Thank you!

I dug out my old AfterTouch magazines from storage. My collection is
pretty spotty. The issue with "Cirrus" is dated June 1986: Vol. 2, No.
6, pg. 8. I wonder if Yamaha would mind so much if these were to go
online?

But truly, the exact patches are not so crucial. It's the concept. If
you know the basics of DX programming you should be able to run with
the idea. The 1HZ carriers are great for warming up patches.

My DAW is Cakewalk Sonar--Homestudio 6. All the parts were either
hand-input (via a keyboard scoring tool) or live recorded, as MIDI,
using my DX7S as a midi controller. I confess, I use the Native
Instruments soft synth FM7 (I think FM8 is now current) for playback,
but the FM7 patches are all direct imports from the DX7S which is where
they were created some 25 (?!) years ago, not counting minor envelope
tweaking. I could have used the DX7S to play back the audio from the
MIDI and built the acoustic tracks from there for the final mix-down.
(DX7S only plays one patch at a time, doesn't have the split keyboard.)

Working this way seems to make sense for my limited gear: record MIDI,
generate audio from that MIDI, mix down the audio. This way, you can go
in and edit/clean up the MIDI as needed, and regenerate the audio for
the final mixes. And if you have an old computer like mine, doing the
MIDI playback piecemeal (a track or two at a time) helps keep the
timing accurate and minimizes dropouts or clicks.

The solo line, btw, used too many notes for my polyphony. So I took the
MIDI and split the part into multiple tracks, going from one track to
another just before reaching the note limits. It was a bit
laborious/time consuming, but it sounds a lot better now than it did
when there were clicks from notes being cut off before they finished
decaying!

Thanks for encouragement and compliments! I am currently working on
some pieces for oboe (my "main" instrument) and synth.

Happy detuning!

Phil Freihofner

Paul

2013-09-08 13:44:00 UTC

Post by p***@aol.com
Daniel mostly answered the questions from Paul. Thank you!
I dug out my old AfterTouch magazines from storage. My collection is
pretty spotty. The issue with "Cirrus" is dated June 1986: Vol. 2, No.
6, pg. 8. I wonder if Yamaha would mind so much if these were to go
online?
But truly, the exact patches are not so crucial. It's the concept. If
you know the basics of DX programming you should be able to run with
the idea. The 1HZ carriers are great for warming up patches.
My DAW is Cakewalk Sonar--Homestudio 6. All the parts were either
hand-input (via a keyboard scoring tool) or live recorded, as MIDI,
using my DX7S as a midi controller. I confess, I use the Native
Instruments soft synth FM7 (I think FM8 is now current) for playback,
but the FM7 patches are all direct imports from the DX7S which is where
they were created some 25 (?!) years ago, not counting minor envelope
tweaking. I could have used the DX7S to play back the audio from the
MIDI and built the acoustic tracks from there for the final mix-down.
(DX7S only plays one patch at a time, doesn't have the split keyboard.)
Working this way seems to make sense for my limited gear: record MIDI,
generate audio from that MIDI, mix down the audio. This way, you can go
in and edit/clean up the MIDI as needed, and regenerate the audio for
the final mixes. And if you have an old computer like mine, doing the
MIDI playback piecemeal (a track or two at a time) helps keep the
timing accurate and minimizes dropouts or clicks.
The solo line, btw, used too many notes for my polyphony. So I took the
MIDI and split the part into multiple tracks, going from one track to
another just before reaching the note limits. It was a bit
laborious/time consuming, but it sounds a lot better now than it did
when there were clicks from notes being cut off before they finished
decaying!
Thanks for encouragement and compliments! I am currently working on
some pieces for oboe (my "main" instrument) and synth.
Happy detuning!
Phil Freihofner

Thats very interesting Phil,

Thanks a lot.

It would be great if you could possible scan in the AFTERTOUCH article with the CIRRUS patch if possible. i would really love to see it please if possible. As i say, i looked on ebay but could not see any copies for sale.

So you use FM8 with Cakewalk. So you created patches on your DX7s and then imported them into your DAW for storage/tweaking/recording ?? i have Cubase 6 which i have been learning for a couple of years. i am trying to larning something about MIXING but its made me realise how poor my 'ears' are !! ha ha

So you paly the Oboe. Does that mean you really like 'narrow pulse waves' !! ?? lol

Best,

Paul

Daniel Forró

2013-09-09 03:12:35 UTC

Post by Paul
It would be great if you could possible scan in the AFTERTOUCH
article with the CIRRUS patch if possible. i would really love to
see it please if possible.

I'd like to have it, too.

Daniel Forro

Paul

2013-09-08 13:40:06 UTC

Daniel Forró

2013-09-09 02:21:53 UTC

Exactly, this is good feature and fake split is one application of it.
With algo 5/6 it's possible to have three different sounds - if not on
the keyboard, then in whole MIDI range for use in sequencer. Don't
forget that this fake split has crossing zones where both sounds at
the left and right side from breakpoint are continuously faded in/out,
so if we want distinguished sounds, these zones can't be used.
Another limitation is all those sounds receive data on the same MIDI
channel so MIDI controllers, pitch bend, aftertouch are common to all.

Daniel Forro

I have been learning about setting the KEYBOARD SCALING so that you
can have a 'fake' split keyboard (ie either side of the
Breakpoint). And then set your Exponential/Linear Curves etc.

p***@aol.com

2013-09-09 05:45:26 UTC

Post by Paul
Thats very interesting Phil,

Thanks a lot.

It would be great if you could possible scan in the AFTERTOUCH article
with the CIRRUS patch if possible. i would really love to see it please
if possible. As i say, i looked on ebay but could not see any copies
for sale.

So you use FM8 with Cakewalk. So you created patches on your DX7s and
then imported them into your DAW for storage/tweaking/recording ?? i
have Cubase 6 which i have been learning for a couple of years. i am
trying to larning something about MIXING but its made me realise how
poor my 'ears' are !! ha ha

So you paly the Oboe. Does that mean you really like 'narrow pulse
waves' !! ?? lol

Best,

Paul<<

Another Paul (or was that you?) mentioned that in this group's archive
of patches there are sets that include the Aftertouch patches, and
Cirrus is among them. I don't know how to access that stuff, I've been
more of a lurker than an active participant. But the basic concept is
simple: make three identical pairs of envelopes, your basic pad, then
put in 1 Hz carriers and the normal 1 (plus detuning as I mentioned in
the first post) to track the keyboard for the modulators. I used 81 as
the output levels for the carriers.

Cubase should also work. You can record and edit MIDI on it, yes?
Learning mixing takes some time, but if you stick with it and do a lot
of experiments, I'm sure you will continue to improve at it, and your
ear will grow as well. A lot has to do with learning what eq areas (as
in tonal spectrum/color) are the most important for different sounds,
and finding complementary combinations, rather than letting regions get
overly crowded. Also, left & right are easy for spacing, but one can
also use more or less reverb for forward/back, and chorus for spreading
a sound out vs having it come from a single spot. Those are the
biggies, yes?

Yes, I do like nice rich tones! But I think the biggest influence of
oboe was that it made me very discontented with almost all synths and
samplers for many years. Only the DX7 appealed to me, because of the
ability to use aftertouch, as well as pedal, to continuously alter tone
color. With oboe, it's almost all about expression and shaping notes
(via volume and tone color) and not so much about how many notes you
play.

Best wishes,

Phil

Daniel Forró

2013-09-09 07:50:32 UTC

Post by p***@aol.com
I used 81 as
the output levels for the carriers.

I usually keep carrier levels on max, if there's not special reason
(like mixing stacks in algo 5/6). But with fixed frequency carriers it
can be different.

Post by p***@aol.com
Cubase should also work. You can record and edit MIDI on it, yes?
Learning mixing takes some time, but if you stick with it and do a lot
of experiments, I'm sure you will continue to improve at it, and your
ear will grow as well.

Some parameters of mix can be done on MIDI level - modern instruments
reacts on Volume (CC 7 - I use it for setting and later balancing of
initial level, total level of the part), Expression (CC 11 - relative
changes of level during the piece), Panorama (CC 10), Reverb Depth (CC
91), some other DSP effects if instrument has them, and also work with
filter cutoff and resonance is possible, and some instruments have
extra EQ on individual parts, or another Total EQ at the output.

Alas, DX7 not...

Post by p***@aol.com
A lot has to do with learning what eq areas (as
in tonal spectrum/color) are the most important for different sounds,

This is more important for the recording acoustic instruments or
vocals. I don't use EQ at all for synthesizers, it's really not
necessary. I select the basic sound as I need it - they are programmed
in such way that some sound is more sharp, some is more soft, more
resonant or similar. Really no need to use EQ for electronic sounds.

Post by p***@aol.com
and finding complementary combinations, rather than letting regions get
overly crowded.

That's good idea. But in fact anything can be combined, and results
can be interesting and usable. Important is level balance - sometimes
we can combine sounds that way, that some of them become like small
element of total sound, we can transpose it up or down, or in some
interval, and set level very low. Or some dark sound with longer
release can be combined with sharp percussive, then it creates like
"sound shadow"... There are really many possibilities, creativity and
experimentation have no limit.

Post by p***@aol.com
Also, left & right are easy for spacing,

Yes, that's panorama. I like to use similar sounds on more channels,
and place them in stereo field.
More interesting parameter is width, but this is not possible to get
with MIDI instruments and MIDI control.

Post by p***@aol.com
but one can
also use more or less reverb for forward/back,

As I combine many instruments and use their internal DSP effects,
there's a lot possibilities, but also a certain danger that the result
will sound too artificial (different spaces, or even some sounds
totally dry). It can be good, but also it's good to have somewhere on
output of total audio one common reverb effect for all instrument, and
use it carefully for total reverb.

Post by p***@aol.com
and chorus for spreading
a sound out vs having it come from a single spot.

I understand and use chorus more as a doubling.

Post by p***@aol.com
Those are the
biggies, yes?
Yes, I do like nice rich tones! But I think the biggest influence of
oboe was that it made me very discontented with almost all synths and
samplers for many years. Only the DX7 appealed to me, because of the
ability to use aftertouch, as well as pedal, to continuously alter tone
color.

Many instruments have such possibility...

Post by p***@aol.com
With oboe, it's almost all about expression and shaping notes
(via volume and tone color) and not so much about how many notes you
play.
Best wishes,
Phil

Maybe you can try physical modeling, that could be surprising and
satisfactory for you. Talking about Yamaha, try VL1, VL7, VL70m, or VL
engine in EX5, or VL plugin card PLG150-VL. And there are more, even
some VST from other producers.
Can't be compared with samples, or analog subtractive synthesis, or
any other digital synthesis system. I've been using VL1 since 1993,
it's still just unbelievable instrument after all those years.

Daniel Forro

Paul

2013-09-10 00:42:56 UTC

Post by Paul

Post by Paul
Thats very interesting Phil,

Thanks a lot.
It would be great if you could possible scan in the AFTERTOUCH article
with the CIRRUS patch if possible. i would really love to see it please
if possible. As i say, i looked on ebay but could not see any copies
for sale.
So you use FM8 with Cakewalk. So you created patches on your DX7s and
then imported them into your DAW for storage/tweaking/recording ?? i
have Cubase 6 which i have been learning for a couple of years. i am
trying to larning something about MIXING but its made me realise how
poor my 'ears' are !! ha ha
So you paly the Oboe. Does that mean you really like 'narrow pulse
waves' !! ?? lol
Best,
Paul<<
Another Paul (or was that you?) mentioned that in this group's archive
of patches there are sets that include the Aftertouch patches, and
Cirrus is among them. I don't know how to access that stuff, I've been
more of a lurker than an active participant. But the basic concept is
simple: make three identical pairs of envelopes, your basic pad, then
put in 1 Hz carriers and the normal 1 (plus detuning as I mentioned in
the first post) to track the keyboard for the modulators. I used 81 as
the output levels for the carriers.
Cubase should also work. You can record and edit MIDI on it, yes?
Learning mixing takes some time, but if you stick with it and do a lot
of experiments, I'm sure you will continue to improve at it, and your
ear will grow as well. A lot has to do with learning what eq areas (as
in tonal spectrum/color) are the most important for different sounds,
and finding complementary combinations, rather than letting regions get
overly crowded. Also, left & right are easy for spacing, but one can
also use more or less reverb for forward/back, and chorus for spreading
a sound out vs having it come from a single spot. Those are the
biggies, yes?
Yes, I do like nice rich tones! But I think the biggest influence of
oboe was that it made me very discontented with almost all synths and
samplers for many years. Only the DX7 appealed to me, because of the
ability to use aftertouch, as well as pedal, to continuously alter tone
color. With oboe, it's almost all about expression and shaping notes
(via volume and tone color) and not so much about how many notes you
play.
Best wishes,
Phil

Thanks very much Phil,

I have been watching this video by David Gibson :-

And this one by a group of experts in conversation :-

Both videos are over two hours long !!

I am trying to spend an hour each day listening to music to try and train my ears into a more disciplined way of 'listening'. What many term as 'active' listening. I was never taught how to listen to music PROPERLY. Even at music college !!! Its been many years of trial and error.

Ta,

Paul

Paul

2013-09-10 00:41:26 UTC

Post by Paul

Post by Paul
Thats very interesting Phil,

Thanks a lot.
It would be great if you could possible scan in the AFTERTOUCH article
with the CIRRUS patch if possible. i would really love to see it please
if possible. As i say, i looked on ebay but could not see any copies
for sale.
So you use FM8 with Cakewalk. So you created patches on your DX7s and
then imported them into your DAW for storage/tweaking/recording ?? i
have Cubase 6 which i have been learning for a couple of years. i am
trying to larning something about MIXING but its made me realise how
poor my 'ears' are !! ha ha
So you paly the Oboe. Does that mean you really like 'narrow pulse
waves' !! ?? lol
Best,
Paul<<
Another Paul (or was that you?) mentioned that in this group's archive
of patches there are sets that include the Aftertouch patches, and
Cirrus is among them. I don't know how to access that stuff, I've been
more of a lurker than an active participant. But the basic concept is
simple: make three identical pairs of envelopes, your basic pad, then
put in 1 Hz carriers and the normal 1 (plus detuning as I mentioned in
the first post) to track the keyboard for the modulators. I used 81 as
the output levels for the carriers.
Cubase should also work. You can record and edit MIDI on it, yes?
Learning mixing takes some time, but if you stick with it and do a lot
of experiments, I'm sure you will continue to improve at it, and your
ear will grow as well. A lot has to do with learning what eq areas (as
in tonal spectrum/color) are the most important for different sounds,
and finding complementary combinations, rather than letting regions get
overly crowded. Also, left & right are easy for spacing, but one can
also use more or less reverb for forward/back, and chorus for spreading
a sound out vs having it come from a single spot. Those are the
biggies, yes?
Yes, I do like nice rich tones! But I think the biggest influence of
oboe was that it made me very discontented with almost all synths and
samplers for many years. Only the DX7 appealed to me, because of the
ability to use aftertouch, as well as pedal, to continuously alter tone
color. With oboe, it's almost all about expression and shaping notes
(via volume and tone color) and not so much about how many notes you
play.
Best wishes,
Phil

Thanks very much Phil,

I have been watching this video by David Gibson :-

http://youtu.be/TEjOdqZFvhY

And this one by a group of experts in conversation :-

http://youtu.be/SY5hI98HEi0

Both videos are over two hours long !!

I am trying to spend an hour each day listening to music to try and train my ears into a more disciplined way of 'listening'. What many term as 'active' listening. I was never taught how to listen to music PROPERLY. Even at music college !!! Its been many years of trial and error.

Ta,

Paul

p***@aol.com

2013-09-09 20:25:19 UTC