Is FM Synthesis really that hard to program

[JXC]

I am into playing around with hardware synths. Right now, I only have a Korg DSN-12 (for the 3DS), a Korg M01D (also for the 3DS), and some VSTs. I originally thought of getting a Korg Minilogue or a Waldorf Blofeld for my first hardware synth, but I found out that FM synths such as the DX 7 and TX81Z are cheaper than these. However, I heard that many of these FM Synths are hard to program. The only FM synths I know that are easy to program are the Korg DS-8, Yamaha Reface DX, and the Korg Volca FM. The problem with these is that the DS-8 is not that unique (maybe limited) and lacks a sequencer, the Reface DX is 4-op with 4 voices and lacks a sequencer, and the Korg Vocla FM has 3-voices (fortunately has 6 op). Any suggestions?

[Remilia Scarlet]

Once you understand the terminology and how things work, no. FM is pretty easy.

[Ed]

If you're hell-bent on FM as your first hardware rig, the DX200 is IMO the best FM machine ever put on the market. I'm a big Volca fan, but if I were to designate studio space for a FM rhythm synth, the DX200 is leaps and bounds ahead of the Volca on every front.

Polyphony - 16 voices on FM engine, 32 voices on AWM2 sample-playback engine
Oscillators -

MAIN SYNTHESIZER: FM - DX7 compatible, 6 Operator FM, 32 algorithms;

NOISE: 16 variations in 5 categories - white, up, down, pitch, variation;

SUB SYNTHESIZER: AWM2 (Rhythm Section Sounds)

Filter - MAIN SYNTHESIZER (FM): Filter + (FEG) ADSR env; 12dB, 18dB, 24dB; Low-, high-, band-pass, band-reject

VCA - AEG: ADSR envelope to control Amp; FREE Envelope Generator: 4 tracks per pattern

LFO - Speed/Depth control, 6 waveform types: triangle, saw down/up, square, sine, sample-and-hold

Keyboard - 16 rubber pads

Effects - 13 types: Distortion, delays, reverb, flangers, chorus, phasers, overdrive

Sequencer - 16 step sequencer with 4 parts per pattern; 1 track for Synth, 3 tracks for AWM2 drum sounds; 10 songs capacity

Memory - 256 preset patterns, 128 user patterns; Scene Memory (2 memories per pattern)

Control - MIDI IN/OUT (1-part multitimbral FM, 3-part multitimbral AWM2), MIDI CLOCK (Int/Ext)

I've owned two TX81Zs and bought them only for the low price point. A two line LCD is going to be seriously off-putting if you're still learning the ropes.

If you're looking to get your first piece of hardware, subtractive synthesis is the way to go IMO. One of the new Electribes, Volca or Minilogues would be your best bet.

[JXC]

Ed said:

If you're looking to get your first piece of hardware, subtractive synthesis is the way to go IMO. One of the new Electribes, Volca or Minilogues would be your best bet.

I already have a Korg DSN-12, so I have some experience in subtractive synthesis. Maybe I should play around with the Dexed VST before deciding on what to buy.

[lazygecko]

The myth that FM is hard to program stems from the Yamaha DX7, which was a bitch to use because the interface was horrible compared to the older analog synths with knobs everywhere which synth programmers were used to. Instead all you had was this tiny LCD display, where you could only edit one parameter at a time, and you had to input values using the keys. It had none of the instant feedback which you got from programming traditional synths and the whole workflow got very abstract instead.

If you use something modern like FM8 it is a world of difference. The matrix window gives you a much more approachable overview of the algorithm setup. You can edit amplitudes, envelopes, multipliers etc on the fly and hear the changes instantly in real time.

It's all about the interface. Has almost nothing to do with FM synthesis in itself, which is the big misconception.

[Noiser]

Well, of course it's not the same thing, but the Adlib Tracker II have a lot of options to edit and make new sounds and it's pretty simple to do whatever you want. On a real hardware, I agree that the key element is the interface, not the fm synthesis per se. As already said, popular synths like the DX7 (and your derivatives) have a really poor interface and everything feels limited or clunky.

[JXC]

Noiser said:

Well, of course it's not the same thing, but the Adlib Tracker II have a lot of options to edit and make new sounds and it's pretty simple to do whatever you want. On a real hardware, I agree that the key element is the interface, not the fm synthesis per se. As already said, popular synths like the DX7 (and your derivatives) have a really poor interface and everything feels limited or clunky.

I have Ad-lib Tracker II, but you can only make retro music with it.

[Noiser]

JXC said:

I have Ad-lib Tracker II, but you can only make retro music with it.

?

You can make fm music.

[JXC]

Noiser said:

?

You can make fm music.

But it's limited

[Noiser]

Uhm, I didn't notice too much difference (considering only dry sounds). But yeah, the real hardware is better for other reasons too, principally for live modulation.

Even so, the Adlib Tracker II offer a lot of customization. It's somehow very powerful and flexible when you learn some tricks:

[JXC]

Noiser said:

Uhm, I didn't notice too much difference (considering only dry sounds). But yeah, the real hardware is better for other reasons too, principally for live modulation.

Even so, the Adlib Tracker II offer a lot of customization. It's somehow very powerful and flexible when you learn some tricks:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=meGu4RkiWT8

Isn't the Sound blaster/Adlib inferior to Sega Genesis?

[Noiser]

JXC said:

Isn't the Sound blaster/Adlib inferior to Sega Genesis?

Yes, it is. But mostly because of its sample reproduction (the drum sound is a great example) and the number of oscilators (4 - 2). Even so, the OPL have more channels (9 - 6) and it's very hard to see a OPL track exploring its full capacity. Just listen the video that I posted, it doesn't sound remotely "OPL-ish".