haitex@pnet01.cts.com (Wade Bickel) (01/14/88)
I'm looking for an inexpensive synthesiser module, such as a
Yamaha DX7 or Esoniqs unit. Any comments or suggestions?
The unit will have to work in conjunction with a Yamaha KX88
midi-keyboard. A sampling type unit would be prefered.
Thanks,
Wade.
PS: sorry to post this in amiga/comp-amiga, but I could not figure
where else to post. Any suggestions?
UUCP: {cbosgd, hplabs!hp-sdd, sdcsvax, nosc}!crash!pnet01!haitex
ARPA: crash!pnet01!haitex@nosc.mil
INET: haitex@pnet01.CTS.COMpmy@boole.acc.virginia.edu (Pete Yadlowsky) (01/15/88)
In article <2368@crash.cts.com>, haitex@pnet01.cts.com (Wade Bickel) writes: > I'm looking for an inexpensive synthesiser module, such as a > Yamaha DX7 or Esoniqs unit. Any comments or suggestions? Neither of these could really be called inexpensive. Maybe Yamaha's TX81Z or Roland's MT-32. > The unit will have to work in conjunction with a Yamaha KX88 > midi-keyboard. A sampling type unit would be prefered. Well, the ones you mentioned above are synths, not samplers (though the distinction can be fuzzy). > PS: sorry to post this in amiga/comp-amiga, but I could not figure > where else to post. Any suggestions? Try rec.music.synth. See you there. -- Pete Yadlowsky Academic Computing Center University of Virginia e-mail: pmy@vivaldi.acc.virginia.EDU
wtm@neoucom.UUCP (Bill Mayhew) (01/18/88)
While the FB-01 is not a sampler device, it can make same very
interesting/entertaining sounds when attached to a computer. The
chipset in the FB-01 is reputedly teh same chip set that is being
used on the synthesizer board that IBM is marketing.
I bought an FB-01 about a year ago. I don't remember the precise
price I paid -- I think around $350, but the deflation of the
dollar's value has probably changed that.
Breifly here are some FB-01 features, etc:
1. Uses Yamaha's inscrutible "algorithmic synthesis". What
can I say, it's only $350.
2. Has stereo output, which can be mixed if desired.
3. Up to 8 notes can be played can be played simultaneously.
The notes can be assigned in very complex fashions. From
1 to 8 voices can be active at once. Any voice can be
assigned any number of notes, as long as the total is less
than or equal to 8. The voices can be assigned to any
desired midi channel, or to odd/even on the same channel.
The FB-01 is probably the most flexible device I've seen
in this department.
4. There are 4 algorithmic operators. That can be programmed
into 8 pre-defined synthesis algorithms. You need a patch
editor to access the operators. But...
5. There are 240 predefined sounds in ROM. 96 user-defined sounds
can be stored in battery-backed RAM. 16 FB-01 configurations
can be stored in RAM.
6. The output signal quality is amazingly good for such an
inexpensive device; there is less residual noise than in
my DX-7s.
7. In hallowed Yamaha tradition, the manual omits underlying
technical information on how the algorithms really work,
but does give a complete listing of all the standard and
system-exclusive codes.
Ir you want a really good sampler, the Yamaha TX-16W is the
instrument of choice offering 12-bit sampling at rates up to 50
KHz. There all sorts of digital filtering parameters. The loser
is that you better have a fat wallet since the TX-16W costs a
couple of grand. I haven't been able to bear the thought yet of a
sampler that costs quite a bit more than my computer.
If you just want to play around, you can get Mimetics' Pro Midi
Studio and the Mimetics sampler that plugs into the Amiga for a
couple hundred bucks. The limitation is that the sampling is 8
bits and plays back through the Amiga's D/A. Actually, it isn't
all that bad, and it lets you do a heck of a lot of learning of
what sampling is all about before you drop big bucks. I can
heartily recommend it.
Applied Visions also makes a sampler called Futresound, but it
offers only minimal soffware support, allowing you to save an IFF
sound or 8SVX sound. It doesn't do nice decimation, etc like Mimetics.
--Billandy@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (Andrew M. Milburn) (01/31/88)
In article <135@dsacg2.UUCP> nor1675@dsacg2.UUCP (Michael Figg) writes: > > How about some comparisons/comments from others on these two > digitizers (or PerfectSound also). I find the Mimetics approach to sampled sound very frustrating. Their software and sampler have a fixed (10K?) sampling rate, and arbritrary restrictions on sample size. Although this apparently makes it easier for them to write software to manipulate these sounds, I balk at these limitations. PerfectSound and FutureSound seem largely equivalent in behavior as far as my simple A/B testing could determine. PerfectSound, however, comes with a nice hunk of public domain source which is much better than the FutureSound black box drivers.