FM Hardware vs FM Software- Got an Opinion?

[gjm]

Is there really a difference in sound? Do you stand by your aging classic hardware (perhaps even collect them), or does FM7-8 etc make any FM hardware (DX7, TX81z, TX802 etc) simply unnecessary? Please share your opinion.

Cheers. G.

[emef]

i owned a dx7 for 10 years
i love the dx sound
sold my dx7 after fm7 came out
fm7 is better

[Jarvisimon]

generally the sound quality is only affected by 2 factors, 1. the internal resolution used to make the sound and 2. the d/a converters on your sound card.

if you were to use analogue signals as your fm sources then this would also add to the overall sound but not many people do.

digital is far cheaper and just as effective.

[condra]

soft>hard IMO

[JJarvis]

i owned a dx7 for 10 years
i love the dx sound
sold my dx7 after fm7 came out
fm7 is better

I would rather have a DX 7 keyboard than a bloated softsynth that inspires nothing. Programming a DX 7 without an editor can be a fun and shitty experience all at the same time. The DX 7 is still a good keyboard too.

[Nick the Zombie]

I prefer software for FM. Operator is the first synth that inspired me to actually dig into FM at a deeper level than futzing around with basic controls. I'm very glad that I did!

[Android Bishop]

programming FM on hardware is a PAIN IN THE ASS and its not going to sound any better anyway because its digital. Softsynths FTW

[ARDJ]

i owned a dx7 and still own a dx100. FM8 is far more versatile, easier to program and without a doubt easier to automate! They're all running the same code so sonically they should be able to replicate each other. The only reason i still own my dx100 is for my talk box

[oblique strategies]

I haven't used any software FM synths, but I do have a Yamaha FS1R -a wonderful sounding synth. One thing I really like about the FS1R (& all hardware) is that it gets me away from the computer for a while.

Always being tethered to a computer is kind of sucky...

[bendedavis]

programming FM on hardware is a PAIN IN THE ASS and its not going to sound any better anyway because its digital. Softsynths FTW

True, I haven't even tried to program my TX81Z, I pretty much just use the presets on it. I program my own sounds in FM8 and that's easy enough.

[roby]

For the TX81Z owners, check this out http://the-all.org/tx81z/programmer.html
My reason for choosing hardware over software, in the case of the TX, or at least my TX, is that I get this unique gritty, lo-fi quality out of it. Otherwise, I use whatever works best.

[gjm]

generally the sound quality is ... affected by ... the internal resolution used to make the sound ...

Hi, are you able to explain this better to me. Where is the "internal resolution" taking place? Is that a computer hardware thing?

if you were to use analogue signals as your fm sources then this would also add to the overall sound but not many people do.

Also, what do you mean by this? Can you give me an example to help me better understand FM synthesis.

Cheers. G.

[gjm]

For the TX81Z owners, check this out http://the-all.org/tx81z/programmer.html
My reason for choosing hardware over software, in the case of the TX, or at least my TX, is that I get this unique gritty, lo-fi quality out of it. Otherwise, I use whatever works best.

Hi roby. Do you use this editor yourself? I have seen it but not demoed it. I would like to hear about your experience with the TX81z if possible, I also have one.

Cheers. G.

[leedsquietman]

I like software for the convenience, but forget the DX7 (unless you are talking DX7mkII which was a much better keyboard, better MIDI, stereo outs instead of mono, better touch sensitivity and aftertouch and more polyphony), the SY99 and SY77, the second generation Yamaha FM synths which also included PCM wavetable synthesis were the dogs nuts and I would seriously love to have one again. (had one back in the UK, but had to sell it b4 emigrating to Canada).
http://www.vintagesynth.com/yamaha/sy99.php
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1dU7FqTzySE

I also loved my little DX100 mini keyboard, it had the coole rubber band bass sound and looked cool when used as a keytar (OK, 98% of the presets were dire and programming FM is a mindf***, but no more so than people messing around with Max/MSP or Reaktor).

Operator and FM8 are really good though for convenience. The DX7 keyboard wasn't that great, it's MIDI was pants too, but it has a certain something special as JJarvis mentions, which no software could recreate. But for daily convenience and easily accessible high quality sounds, the softsynths are probably the way to go for most these days, even nostalgic old duffers like me who had wet dreams about owning a DX7 as a teen, because every band on top of the pops had one !!

[mikemc]

well, i just bought an inexpensive 20-year old [edit, it is not an FM] rackmount synth. I am sure it will be a learning curve to program, and it will have a limited utility-- much more limited than Operator, for example. But the price was ok, some of the sample sounds I heard were good, and it will cause me to think differently about some things. Mainly I am of the opinion that it might give me better sounding bass, but if that opinion isn't borne out, it is not a big risk.

I have also built my own software synths, and it was a learning curve to learn how to do that, but on the other hand I think I learned more about synthesis by building them. I was also able to come up with combinations that no sane hardware provider or commercial software provider would bother with, and the tool to build the synths is cheaper than any single soft synth.

[edit] btw, I also have a PD (Phase Distortion) synth that is really good for some sounds, and for others it is not good at all. This I think is the biggest drag about hardware synths, unless they are really really expensive, they have spotty applications.