Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

They don't make them like that any more: the Yamaha DX7 keyboard

kevinboone.me

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 225 posts

Re: They don't make them like that any more: the Yamaha DX7 keyboard

#191

Post by kagakuninja »

relaxing wrote: post #115
TheOtherHobbes wrote: post #108

>These instruments were mostly of academic interest – I can’t think of any band that used one on stage (but I could be wrong). Very wrong. The Prophet 5, Oberheim 4/8 voice, Roland Jupiter 8, MemoryMoog, and especially the Yamaha CS80 were all available before the DX7, and very widely used on stage and in the studio. But they really were stupendously expensive - far too expensive for mere mortals. (There were also fu…

Came to quibble with the “no bands gigged polysynths” slander as well. They did, but only for about a 5 year window where it was economically feasible. There’s Sequential Prophet 5 all over Talking Heads - Stop Making Sense. Van Halen famously used an Oberheim. Basically any record in the first half of the 80s if it had synths.

Gary Numan and the PolyMoog. It was his core sound.

Re: They don't make them like that any more: the Yamaha DX7 keyboard

#192

Post by DennisP »

TheOtherHobbes wrote: post #108

>These instruments were mostly of academic interest – I can’t think of any band that used one on stage (but I could be wrong). Very wrong. The Prophet 5, Oberheim 4/8 voice, Roland Jupiter 8, MemoryMoog, and especially the Yamaha CS80 were all available before the DX7, and very widely used on stage and in the studio. But they really were stupendously expensive - far too expensive for mere mortals. (There were also fu…

Physical modeling is gaining steam these days. A good example is the Osmose, which combines a physical modeling sound engine with a keyboard that not only has polyphonic aftertouch, but lets you wiggle the keys sideways to individually shift their pitches. I have one, and it's easy to sound like you're playing an expressive acoustic instrument; perhaps one that exists in the real world, perhaps not. It's worlds away from any FM I've heard, and more expressive than samples.

They've gotten a lot of professional musicians to rave about it so I'm not convinced experimentation is all that dead.

Osmose isn't the only PM around either. Pianoteq, one of the most popular piano plugins, is pure physical modeling and sounds fantastic (though I wouldn't call this "experimental"). Some of the workstation keyboards use PM too.

https://www.expressivee.com/2-osmose

https://www.soundonsound.com/reviews/modartt-pianoteq-8

Re: They don't make them like that any more: the Yamaha DX7 keyboard

#193

Post by DennisP »

relaxing wrote: post #115
TheOtherHobbes wrote: post #108

>These instruments were mostly of academic interest – I can’t think of any band that used one on stage (but I could be wrong). Very wrong. The Prophet 5, Oberheim 4/8 voice, Roland Jupiter 8, MemoryMoog, and especially the Yamaha CS80 were all available before the DX7, and very widely used on stage and in the studio. But they really were stupendously expensive - far too expensive for mere mortals. (There were also fu…

Came to quibble with the “no bands gigged polysynths” slander as well. They did, but only for about a 5 year window where it was economically feasible. There’s Sequential Prophet 5 all over Talking Heads - Stop Making Sense. Van Halen famously used an Oberheim. Basically any record in the first half of the 80s if it had synths.

And again today. There are lots of analog polysynths available now for reasonable prices.

Re: They don't make them like that any more: the Yamaha DX7 keyboard

#194

Post by emchammer »

alterom wrote: post #48
coldtea wrote: post #18

> With hindsight, the DX7 and its ilk look like a weird diversion in the path of musical progress. Operator synthesis makes no logical sense. It became popular because we had the capability to do digital sound generation, but lacked the technology to do it in a comprehensible, systematic way. So the DX7 enjoyed huge popularity for a few years, before fading into obscurity. That's a weird take. I mean "Operator synthe…

They also didn't get why FM synthesis was so appealing, in spite of being difficult to understand for the common musician. It's in the tone . Acoustic instruments respond in a complex way to the variation in strength of input: when you strike the key in the piano faster, pluck a string harder, or blow air info the saxophone stronger, you don't merely get a louder sound: the harmonic content , the timbre of the sound…

I gave away my Reface DX after I figured out that the non-tactile capacitative touch buttons would trigger randomly when exposed to sunlight while I played it in the park.

Re: They don't make them like that any more: the Yamaha DX7 keyboard

#195

Post by dboreham »

bartread wrote: post #33
coldtea wrote: post #18

> With hindsight, the DX7 and its ilk look like a weird diversion in the path of musical progress. Operator synthesis makes no logical sense. It became popular because we had the capability to do digital sound generation, but lacked the technology to do it in a comprehensible, systematic way. So the DX7 enjoyed huge popularity for a few years, before fading into obscurity. That's a weird take. I mean "Operator synthe…

“DX7 … before fading into obscurity.” Uh, yeah, that is quite a take. Like most synths, the DX7 went through an untrendy era, but it’s certainly bounced back and you’ll hear its patches used all over the place today. That Top Gun tubular bell patch, for example, shows up quite a bit - most recently heard it on a track called 4AM (the Fauns Remix) by Power Glove. Not to mention there are a ton of software emulations,…

The DX7 is literally the only synth I've heard of. Well, that and the DX9 and the mini moog. Don't count the Fairlight since it's basically a computer.

Re: They don't make them like that any more: the Yamaha DX7 keyboard

#196

Post by dinnerpianist »

nine_k wrote: post #54
ecocentrik wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The DX7 might be the best selling synth of all time. There's a lot of them out there.

They are still excellent midi keyboards, in addition to an iconic synth engine. So I suspect DX7s are more widely applicable, and thus are much sought after, which keeps the prices not very low.

I read sometwhere that the DX7IID had corrected the original DX7's whimpy full velocity numbers delivery but found that not to tbe the case. I felt I had to use an Anatek POCKET CURVE with its dedicated DX7 compensation curve and beyond when using my IID to program the TX802 and 81Z.

Re: They don't make them like that any more: the Yamaha DX7 keyboard

#197

Post by Modified3019 »

emchammer wrote: post #194
alterom wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They also didn't get why FM synthesis was so appealing, in spite of being difficult to understand for the common musician. It's in the tone . Acoustic instruments respond in a complex way to the variation in strength of input: when you strike the key in the piano faster, pluck a string harder, or blow air info the saxophone stronger, you don't merely get a louder sound: the harmonic content , the timbre of the sound…

I gave away my Reface DX after I figured out that the non-tactile capacitative touch buttons would trigger randomly when exposed to sunlight while I played it in the park.

Interesting how that could work. The keys might have had an IR element for force sensing:

https://www.planetanalog.com/force-sensing-eliminates-false-.... (See the bit on the VCNL3030X01 sensor in the middle. I tried to text fragment link, but HN seems to strip that off)

Re: They don't make them like that any more: the Yamaha DX7 keyboard

#198

Post by ajxs »

cesaref wrote: post #165

There was mention of the sound becoming 'dull' at the higher octaves. This is not a limitation of the DAC as was suggested, but caused by the phase modulation algorithm aliasing badly at the top of the range. Basically the modulation causes higher harmonics to appear in the output, and if these are higher than nyquist (half the sampling rate) they reflect back into the audible range, and produce unpleasant very digit…

Great post! I always thought that the keyboard scaling was entirely for musical purposes. Such as emulating the difference in timbre in a plucked instrument as you go up in pitch.

One of the main DX7 patents talks about adding an averaging filter in the path of the feedback mechanism. Averaging the current sample with the last one helps prevent the high-frequency aliasing. There's also a 16Khz low-pass filter on the main output.

Here's a very in-depth look at the behaviour of feedback FM: https://ristoid.net/modular/fm_variants.html

Re: They don't make them like that any more: the Yamaha DX7 keyboard

#199

Post by honkycat »

jacobr1 wrote: post #173
_7acn wrote: post #91

But they still make great stuff like Korg Volca FM or Dirtywave M8 and many, many other beautiful synths! Apart from that, with music equipment, it's completely different than with computers. In our case, great hardware becomes outdated and goes out of use. You could say it disappears forever because its time has passed. With music equipment, it's entirely different. There, everything remains compatible, almost nothi…

Any recommendations for a starter synth? Something polyphonic, and has the ability to mess around to create new sounds (so analogue controls, but it could still be digital behind the scenes). I'd like some presets, but not be limited to them. What is on the market at a reasonable price point (under or around $500) that fits this profile?

Hydrasynth Explorer

Minifreak

buying used off of ebay / reverb is fine

Or get a Arturia MiniLab 3, it comes with a synth package and can control anything on your computer.

Good free synths:

- Dexed

- Vital

- Odin

- Pianobook / Decent Sampler

Re: They don't make them like that any more: the Yamaha DX7 keyboard

#200

Post by BlandDuck »

cesaref wrote: post #165

There was mention of the sound becoming 'dull' at the higher octaves. This is not a limitation of the DAC as was suggested, but caused by the phase modulation algorithm aliasing badly at the top of the range. Basically the modulation causes higher harmonics to appear in the output, and if these are higher than nyquist (half the sampling rate) they reflect back into the audible range, and produce unpleasant very digit…

I know there is a bunch of new DX7 implementations on more modern hardware, i.e., the Raspberry Pi.

When implemented on modern hardware, wouldn't it be possible to run the algorithm at a higher CPU processing speed, to reduce the aliasing at the higher notes, and avoid the need for keyboard scaling and thus preserve the timbre of the higher pitched notes?

Post reply on HN