Who here has a DX-7?

Just 'borrowed' one from school (the II fd) but i'm pretty sure i could offer 50 and they'd let me have it seeming they have no idea what it is. anyway, discuss your thoughts, experiences and programing tips.

they're a bit abstract to get into programming at first, but they're awesome, especially if you midi them up.

for 50 bucks buy that shit. i'll give you a hundred.

i don't have one, but definitely plan to get one!

i have one of the lesser models. Maybe a DX21. I forget. It's at my dad's house atm.

I have a DX-7. In fact I bought it for $50 with the original box, pedal, carts etc. from some farmer looking hippies at a swap meet.

I did have to replace the internal battery though. Since these things are getting old, that's pretty common.

It's a great synth. I use this editor:

http://www.thedx7.co.uk/2nd%20page.html

Learn to tell your operators from your carriers, and program away. There are thousands of patches available online too. It can really get some good sounds that analog can't.

It feels so good to obtain something like this for like tiny percentage of the say the ebay price.And yeah ive been going over some of those websites and the IIFD has a floppy drive which i think the others dont?

it always surprises me that people are willing to pay money for a (very heavy) antiquated digital synth that is very nearly PERFECTLY replicated via software.

NI's FM7 loads and plays back DX7 patches with astounding accuracy. i helped set up more than a few touring musicians who wanted to dump their DX7s / TX816/Z units because they were completely eclipsed by software.

there indeed was one specific function of the DX series operators that is not replicated in the FM7/8 code - but it escapes me at the moment, and it was high level enough that for practical purposes it wasn't remotely necessary.

beyond that, the only reason that comes to mind would be some form of luddite masochism whereupon the prospective user would enjoy programming via one of the most frustrating user interfaces known to man.

but that's just me.

i'd buy it for £50 - can't beat an actual synth with keys and stuff on it.

i had a dx7 for years

brilliant synth, used to use it at gigs but its well heavy to carry around

people say its hard to programme, i never found it to be

its not as hands on as analogue but i always preferred the clangy noises from digital synths

i sold my dx7 when fm7 was released

i use fm8 now... killer synth

  emef said:

people say its hard to programme, i never found it to be

i think the concepts behind programming it are fairly straightforward. personally, i found the only thing difficult about programming on the ACTUAL DX series was the actual physical way you had to go about it, as opposed to the shockingly simple method of clicking and dragging to adjust operators in the FM7/8 interfaces.

using a DX7's user interface to program is similar in limitation to how i imagine posting to WATMM using cuneiform on clay tablets might be.

  maus said:

it always surprises me that people are willing to pay money for a (very heavy) antiquated digital synth that is very nearly PERFECTLY replicated via software.

yeah I don't get this either.

Sure, analog synths do things that your computer can't.

but a digital synth is just a computer in a big heavy metal box isn't it? Why not just use a softsynth instead?

edit: or am i missing something?

  maus said:

it always surprises me that people are willing to pay money for a (very heavy) antiquated digital synth that is very nearly PERFECTLY replicated via software.

 

NI's FM7 loads and plays back DX7 patches with astounding accuracy. i helped set up more than a few touring musicians who wanted to dump their DX7s / TX816/Z units because they were completely eclipsed by software.

 

there indeed was one specific function of the DX series operators that is not replicated in the FM7/8 code - but it escapes me at the moment, and it was high level enough that for practical purposes it wasn't remotely necessary.

 

beyond that, the only reason that comes to mind would be some form of luddite masochism whereupon the prospective user would enjoy programming via one of the most frustrating user interfaces known to man.

 

but that's just me.

Yeah, thats true, but the DX7 is an excellent performance keyboard as well as an excellent controller. Very solid. For 50 bucks thats a deal. I don't think I would pay 500 though. Also thought I should mention the freeware software emulation of the DX7, Hexter (loads patches and stuff, FM7 could be more accurate though). http://dssi.sourceforge.net/download.html#hexter

i had one and i couldn't program on it. it was like an expensive paper weight so i sold it

edit: the presets were dope though 8-)

Logarithmic negative keytracking on the modifiers across the upper octaves can make a more organic bassier sound, also learning which level and rates in the envelope you have to tweak for a regular ASDR can help although programming with that tiny LCD screen requires a lot of patience.

The MkII's and 'S' models had a slightly nicer programming layout and sharper 16bit sound as opposed to 12bit on the MkI's.

Get some slow sweeping envelopes with some slighty detune operators, a splash or reverb and welcome to Eno land!

  maus said:

it always surprises me that people are willing to pay money for a (very heavy) antiquated digital synth that is very nearly PERFECTLY replicated via software.

My $50 DX-7 was cheaper than the software. And I can resell it for a lot more. And no vst synths in my music - just a preference.

Love the FM8. Making patches is really intuitive in that plugin.

The Yamaha DX-7 (and other DX series) won't sound exactly the same as NI FM7 (or any other software FM synth) due to their unique digital to analogue converters which gave them a bit of a slightly rougher, "warmer" sound than you'd get straight from a soundcard. This varies with each Yamaha FM synth though, I've been told by a friend who owns one that the DX100 sounds particularly good.

Whether one sound is better than the other is up to personal taste, but they won't sound exactly the same as their software equivalent. Also having the actual keyboard in front of you will influence your programming and the way you feel about the sound, you'll use it in a slightly different fashion than you would the software on its own (or even with a midi controller).

One other thing is that you could use the DX-7 without turning on your computer, maybe you might have a hardware sequencer, MPC etc. I don't like staring at a computer screen when making music and for this reason would prefer a DX-7 over FM7. Once again this is down to personal taste and there is no right or wrong "FM7 is better than a DX-7" style answer here.

Yeah I've noticed some aliasing on my DX-7.

I also like running it through analog effects (spring reverb, delay, chorus etc.). I don't have enough outputs on my sound card to do that with vstis.

Actually I was going to buy FM7 when they were blowing it out for $75, but $200 is too much for the FM8 - I could buy a real synth for that much. I know everyone uses cracked copies, but I try to keep it legit.

I also like the old MDA DX-10 FM soft synth which you can't really find anymore, but honestly I never use it on my tracks.

There was a DX programmer that's very rare and very expensive however a cheaper alternative in the Doepfer Drehbank that comes with a really good DX7 preset.

Yeah Brian Eno had one of those programmers.

  Rbrmyofr said:

The Yamaha DX-7 (and other DX series) won't sound exactly the same as NI FM7 (or any other software FM synth) due to their unique digital to analogue converters which gave them a bit of a slightly rougher, "warmer" sound than you'd get straight from a soundcard.

I understand your other points, but I can't find any info on the digital-to-analogue converters - what was special about them?

the brown ones had 12 bit DACs for a slightly rougher sound. The mk IIs have 16 bit DACs

and how to the 16-bit DACs differ to the ones in, say, a 16-bit soundcard?

(I don't know much about DACs)

they dont - apart from being 20 years older. hence it's only the 12bit ones that are reputed to have a crunchy sound

ok, but I'm interested in why Rbrmyofr thinks that this digital synth cannot be simulated in software due to its unique DAC?

Couldn't I just take the software version and run it through a 12-bit bitcrusher?