Conference napalm::commusic_v1

    
    I would ditch my DX-7 and the following to a DX7-II
    
     8 operators with varying waveforms
     8 voice multimbrality
    32 note polyphony with dynamic allocation
       hard splits 
    
    I figure Yamaha should be able to develop one of these in less
    than six months with a end user price tag of about $ 1500-1700.
    
    _sjz.

	To me, this subject seems to shift a lot, but in the last half a year
I have settled down a lot more.  No more selling everything off and buying a 
whole different arrangement.

	If I had my druthers...

	I'd build a performance oriented system that was able to do o.k. in the
studio.  But most of it would have to be portable enough (or have a suitable
portable substitute) to take on the road.

	I'd keep my RD200 - I just like it.
	I'd keep my TX81z, and probably buy another.
	I'd keep my MKS-7 until a better sounding unit that did the same thing
		came along (i.e., drum sounds, analog multi-timbral voices).
	I'd get an Oberheim anything (love that analog).
	I'd pick up a versatile synth controller.
	I'd probably get more rack modules - a D-110, a Sampler, a TX802...
	I'd want a flexible MIDI patcher.
	I'd keep my MIDI DJ, but add on a MIDI Merger (since it doesn't echo
		THRU... 8^( )
	I'd trade my C64/Glasstracks for a MAC/whatever-is-best.
	I'd get a MIDI-controlled roadie to carry it all to my shows.  8^)

	That's all that comes to me off the top...

	Dan

    My ideal MIDI system...
    
    for performance:
    
     GK-1/GM70
     K5
     K1000
     TX-7
     several midiverbs
     Yamaha DMP-7 mixer
     ADA MP-1 with footswitch
     
    
    dbII

RE < Note 1500.1 by NYMPH::ZACHWIEJA "Substitution Mass Confusion" >

	I should have explained better - what would you get of things available
right now?

	Dan

    I think the thing that's limiting the move to 8 op FM, especially
    with nonsinusoidal waveforms, is the problem of relating algorithms,
    frequency ratios and operator levels to actual sounds.  I've been
    looking into this question of complexity of FM algorithms, and the
    rate at which things get difficult is just staggering.  I have
    succeeded in fully analyzing the 2 operator case (!), where there
    are 20 distinct algorithms possible.  For the 6 op case, there
    (2^36)*((2^6)-1) configurations, i.e., 2^42 - 2^36, a very large number,
    roughly 4*10^12, some undetermined number of which are equivalent.
    So yeah, an 8 op FM synth could readily be built, but could anybody
    program it?  And which of the gazillion algorithms possible should
    Yamaha actually provide?
    
    len.
    

    Since I am not a software engineer who started working in the mid-70's
    when wage inflation was high, I don't have to money to do this:
    
    get 3 Y SPX-90 IIs and one each of the new effects that do
    ring modulation, vocoding, and pitch change, and a SRV2000,
    and a big mixer, all computer controlled with computer-controlled
    lighting/slides/film and a nice grand piano micd with a PZM on the lid
    and a concert hall with
    great quadraphonic house amplification.
    
    The audio part was my plan from about 1977, but in February I quit music,
    so I'm even trying any more.
    Tom

    Re: .6
    
    I like it, I like it! Especially the 70's SW engineer bit. 
    
    I expect there are a few 70's sw engineers who are already trying
    it!
    
    Richard.

    Uhh, why try and decide ahead of time what algorithms to provide
    to the end user?
    	
    Just give him eight operators and a mixing matrix, let him figure
    it out for himself.  Sure, there are a lot of equivalent algorithms,
    but that's OK.  Why should the user have to move envelopes and gains
    around just to stick an additional operator somewhere.
    
    -----
    
    What_I_Would_Ditch_if_I_had_my_druthers (in order)
    
    		HR-16
    		DX-100
    		Octapad
    		(tie)	ESQ-1
    			Oberheim Xpander
    
    I expect you all are going WHAT- HE WANTS TO DITCH AN HR-16?  IS
    HE CRAZY?
    
    Yes, I'm serious. Here's why: It's incredibly accurate, it sounds just
    like real drums.  Which is NOT what I want.  I want the HR-16's
    sequencer backed up by 16 ESQ-like voice generators, so I can design my
    own percussive instruments instead of 49 _perfect_,_indistinguishable_
    samples of real percussive instruments. 
                     
    Call me incorrigible, call me reactionary, but when I do "electronic
    music" I want it the way Cecil, Margoleff, and Fast want it- pure. None
    of this "I got this sample from a tiger eating a zebra in Kenya"
    B.S.  
                                            
    	-Bill (barely-recovered-from-a-rough-mix)

    Bill,
    
    If found not only your would-be intentions with the HR-16 odd, but your
    reasons behind them odd as well.
    
    First of all, it sounds like what you are looking to do should be done
    with a sampler.  Using a drum machine for that is like trying to use
    a spoon to cut or pierce.
    
    Second, despite what I've just said, I have found lots of ways to get
    unique sounds from the HR-16.  So I don't even find the HR-16 
    nearly as limiting as you've described.
    
    Have you tried adjusting the tunings?  The tuning of each voice is
    variable over a wide range - wide enough to make the extremes barely
    unrecognizable.
    
    Have you tried blending several voices together?  I've had lots of fun
    both simulating real drums and techniques (such as a hand damped crash
    cymbal, flams, better sounding rim shots) by using two voices as if
    they were part of the same percussive elements.
    
    You can get some very weird sounds by combining voice layering with
    exotic tunings.  
    
    I just wished it had the "reverse playback" that I've seen on some
    other drum machines.  Reverse cymbals and things can be very effective.
    
    	db

    Well, for lots of folks, the ideal setup is tons and tons of stuff.
    
    For me, it's as little as possible.  I find the number of voices
    I have to be more limiting than the variety of synths.
    
    So I suppose my system might be something like this:
    
    	RD-300 MIDI controller with builtin MKS-20 digital piano
    
    	SQ-80 with a bunch of ESQ-M's for backup voices
    
    	Roland S-550
    
    	HR-16
    
    	SRV-2000 for realistic reverb
    
    	Eventide H-3000 (probably 3 or 4) for harmonizing and other 
    		digital effects like delay, chorus, flange, echo, 
    		sample and hold, etc.
    
    	Symetrix compressor
    
    	DMC Midi patch bay
    
    	The new Roland 16 channel mixer.
    
    The nice thing about this system is that it's almost attainable.
    
    Now, going absolutely hogwild, I might add the following items but
    these are minor one pluses:
    
    	Kurzweil PX - for absolute best piano sound
    
    	D-550 - for variety in synthesis
    
    See, I'd rather completely delve into one synth (like the SQ-80)
    than have to deal with several different architectures (FM, Digital
    Wave table, LA, etc.)
    
    	db

    One more thing:
    
    A Mac II for patch librarian, sample editing, and transcription.
    
    NOT for sequencing.  I've now sequenced stuff using both a fine
    PC-based sequencer and the ESQ-1's builtin sequencer, and I greatly
    prefer the convenience of the ESQ-1 to the flexibility of the PC
    sequencers.
    
    I rarely need to do step mode editing which is the only limitation
    I have with the ESQ-1 sequencer.  The advantages are that all the
    keys are literally at my finger tips.  The mean-time between takes
    on the ESQ-1 is almost nil, whereas when I'm moving back and forth
    between the keyboard and the mouse and the screen, I find I lose
    time and energy.
    
    	db

    Dave:
    
    Of course my opinions are odd, they're mine, aren't they?  :-)
    
    Yes, I do use the tunings.  I have a rather nice "bongo set" patch
    with the Octapad. Lots of fun, good timing and beat sense exercise.
    (and yes, I _do_ sit down and practice drumming from drum music)
                      
    How do you "layer" two sounds together on the HR-16?  
                 
    -----
    
    It's just that the percussive type sounds I often want are really
    synthetic sounds, not accurate samples.
    
    That doesn't mean that your artistic objectives can't be satisfied
    with a sampler; it's just that _mine_ are different (not necessarily
    better, probably worse, but certainly different).
                         

    > How do you "layer" two sounds together on the HR-16?
    
    Hit two different pads simultaneously, or do the equivalent thing
    with the step editor.
    
    	db

    
    ahh, we are never satisfied, are we?
    
    I think that I am closing in on this year's ideal setup (totally
    subjective since it's IMHO)
    
    I'd trash:
    			ESQ-1
    			MidiBass
    
    I'd keep:
    
    			EPS
    			Atari 1040ST
    			HR-16
    			Octapad
    			MidiVerb
    			SPX90
    			Roland 16 channel mixer
    			DMC Midi patchbay thingie
    
    I'd add:
    
    			TX7 or D550 or Akai K1m
    			MidiBass PRO
    			Some better MIDI software for the Atari
    
    
    For performance I'd add a LINC keyboard.
    
    I agree with dbII about not mixing too much technology. I'm finding
    that I am spending way too much time futzing with parameters and
    not enough time making music. 
    
    Software I'd like to add or at least see is:
    
    			More memory for the 1040 and that
    			   task-switching thing that lets you
    			   use more than one piece of s/w at a time
    
    			A decent librarian
    
    			A sequencer that lets me merge disk files
    
    			-------------------------
    			A universal patch editor.
    			-------------------------
    
    I'd really like to see a patch editor that was data driven (i.e.
    you could just tell it your box's SYSEX parameters and it would
    adapt, sort of an LSE for synthesizers....
    
    
    /pjh
    
    p.s. Happy Fiscal New Year (or is it Happy New Fiscal Year?)
    
    

    Examples:
    
    	Crescendo Ride cymbal roll:
    
    		! Buildup
    		!
    		Do I=1 to 7 do
    		   hit ride cymbal with velocity I
    		end do
    
    		! Last hit
    		!
    		Add ride cymbal hit with velocity 8 and at the same
    		interval add crash cymbal hit with velocity 1
    
    		!+
    		!  For the last hit, the ride hit overpowers the crash
    		!  cymbal hit, but decays quicker so you get the attack
    		!  of the ride sound cross fading to the shimmer of the
    		!  decay of the crash.
    		!-
    		
    	Hand damped crash cymbal
    
    	 	Put crash cymbal AND foot closed HH on two of the HH pads
    		(which share one voice).
    
    		Hit crash cymbal pad immediately followed by foot closed
    		HH.  Sounds like a crash cymbal being struck and then
    		muted by hand (used as an accent).
    		
    
    I find the rim-shot sound not to have enough "snare" in it for my
    tastes so I just layer a loud rimshot hit, with a soft ambient
    snare hit.
    
    This technique also makes rim-shot flams sound much better (I have
    a very realistic sounding rim-shot flam (don't know the "proper" name
    for it) but I don't remember the details about it.
    
    	db

	What I'd trade-up with (get rid of):

			MT32
			360 systems MIDIpatcher

	What I'd keep:

			D-50
			Atari ST (which i'd expand and put a HD on)
			MTP by Passport

	What I'd add:

			S-550
			S-330
			TX-7
			TX-81Z
			a good analog tone module
			maybe a drum machine...
			D-110 (replaces MT32)
			good Atari Software to support the above
			various and sundry FX boxes
			M 160 mixer by Roland
			a good multi-track recorder
			a good MIDIpatchbay/router/etc/etc/etc
			maybe K5m

   I like layering patches and therefore need lots of available voices.
   

   Chad

    > I like layering patches and therefore need lots of available voices.
    
    Me too.  That drives a lot of my decisions on equipment.
    
    I "sorta" like to vow that I wouldn't buy any more equipment that
    doesn't have at least 16 voices and does layering (and splitting
    although the DMC MX-8 mitigates that requirement somewhat) but
    I know that I probably would be able to keep that vow given what's
    available TODAY.
    
    	db

    I would trash everything (except my Oberheim and my M160), including:

	ESQ-Ms, TX7s, KX76 & KX5, MIDIverb II, Atari ST etc

    I would build the following:

	Kurzweil MIDIboard 
	LINC remote kybd
	2 PX1000s (for piano and other orchestral samples)
	2 S-550s or EMU IIIs (for samples, not sure which units)
	2 S-330s (for percussion samples)
	2 MKS-80s
	1 Quadverb for each synth module
	Mixers/MIDI patch bays/mergers as needed
	Largest MAC workstation possible
	All applicable digidesign s/w
	MIDI h/w Interface from whoever to allow addressing of at least
	  64 MIDI Channels
	MAC based sequencer that will address 64 MIDI channels

    Of course, if I had that kind of money, I'd buy 4 Xpanders and have 2
    pairs of cascaded units squished and put into racks.  I'd also pay to
    have complete SYSEX patcher/librarians written for the MAC. 

    That's for starters.  I'm sure I could think of a few other things
    after I got bored (and it seems I always do ...). 

-b

    re .8 - I agree 100%.  That's what Yamaha should have done with
    the DX-7, and trash the notion of algorithm completely.  Just a
    matrix of modulation coefficients and a vector of output coefficients.
    The "cost" is a big increase in the number of programmable parameters,
    but if we "real men" programmers can handle it, so what?  (i.e.,
    there are now n^2 + n levels, instead of n; for the 6 op case, that's
    42 vs. 6, and for the 8 op case, it's 72 vs 8).
    
    len.
    

    
    Why not keep it simple folks?  How bout just one little Synclavier
    with direct to disk recording?  Should be around 100 g's or so.
    A friend of mine does some of the soundscores for the PBS show
    "Nova" and uses only the Synclavier.  He has proved to me that this
    one instruement can handle the complete task of providing soundtracks,
    or writing complex orchestrations  with ease.  Who wants to spring
    for one?
    
    Vinnie.
    
    B.T.W  I would still be happy with a concert grand piano.

    Talk about simple:  the rig that I will be gigging with is now
    down to 3 pieces:
    
    	1) Ensoniq SQ-80 for synth sounds, sequencing, system controlling,
    	   	data storage
    
    	2) Roland RD-300 for piano sounds and MIDI keyboard controller.
    
    	3) Roland JC-120 amp.
    
    C'est toute.  
    
    	1) No mixers (JC-120 has 4 inputs, SQ and RD go right into
    	   the amp - PA feed is via pre-amp out + direct box)
    
    	2) No racks (JC-120 reverb/eq/chorus is enough for these gigs),
    
    	3) Two audio connections, three power connections, one MIDI
    	   connection (RD OUT to SQ IN), two sustain pedals.
    
     As far as I'm concerned, this rig *IS* ideal for this project
    (Top-40 band): It's small, simple to setup and breakdown, and leaves
    lots of stuff safe and sound at home... and yet, does everything that
    needs to be done quite easily and quite well.
    
    Now of course, if I had roadies, and wasn't afraid of damage/theft,
    etc.... well, I might go for something less modest.
    
    	db

    OK, forgot one thing: keyboard stand

re .18

Brad -

You pretty much described the system I have just been upgrading to. I sold off
all of my old gigging equipment and moved into some new studio gear. Being an
old 70's software type (when DEC stock was cheap) and gigging for 12 years
paid for the equipment, for the most part. This is the setup I have now, after
several hundred visits to music stores, read all the mags, COMMUSIC reviews,
clinics, etc....

Kurzweil MIDIboard 
Kurzweil PX1000 (for piano and other orchestral samples)
Roland MC500 sequencer
MAC with Performer and Composer
S550 (for samples)
D50 (for fat LA)
D110 (for multitimral LA)
TX81Z (for FM)
MKS20 (for SA)
M216 Mixer
Roland M160 rack mount mixer
Fostex M80 8 track
Tascam 234 4 track cassette
Tascam 112 2 track cassette
4 DBX 150X for 8 channels of noise reduction
JLC midi patcher (8 ins, 8 outs)
DSP128 (multieffects)
2 SRV2000 (reverb)
2 SDE2500 (delay)
2 Carver 1.5L amps
1 Rane headphone amp (6 channels)
3 PB32 patch bays

    Next time I'm up north, I'll be knocking on your door.  Sakes.

-b

    Keep:

    KX88, 
    Kurzweil 1000PX, 
    EMax sampler, 
    512K Mac

    Trash:
    
    YMC-10 FSK-MIDI sync box (no SPP ya know)
    MIDIverb/fex
    Performer v1.0

    Obtain:
    
    Hard disk for EMax
    Tascam MIDI sync box w/SPP
    Performer v2.n for 512K Mac
    New 50-sound 'block' ROM for Kurzweil 1000PX
    ??? MIDI DJ or equivalent for LIVE performance
    Higher-fi digital effects ... reverb/digidelay etc.
    More muscle to move the rack
    
    karl