Conference napalm::commusic_v1

    ALTERNATIVE TUNINGS!!!
    
    How I've waited for this!!  Another restriction removed!!!
    
    Edd

    Oh boy ! Alternate tunings ! Move over, Wendy !

    
       How much is this new sexy DX7 gonna cost us ?? It sounds as if
    Yamaha is trying to compete with the ESQ-1 doesn't it ?? I like
    the idea of real-time modulation other than just vibrato.
    
    
    
    Frank

    All the article said regarding price was that the DX7IID is 258,000
    yen, and the DX7IIFD is 298,000 yen.  (The second one is obviously
    the one with the disk drive).
    
    Anyone know a conversion from Jap. yen to bucks?

    
    yen to bucks? on what day? hour?
    
    alternate tunings hm? maybe. but only on that unit.
    well, now how would you send that info over midi to
    another unit? note plus a pitch bend amount? not enuf
    resolution, and the reciever range may be different.
    
    whassa big deal? who can play the number of keys
    we got now? (besides you Moeller).
    And you want more notes?
    
    You should master your pitch bend wheel and right hand.
    
    viola.
    
    Oh, this isnt a restriction lifted. It was one imposed by
    guess what, MIDI. Even the first synths like Arp2600 
    allowed micro or macro tonal intervals set with the kbd.
    BFD, youngsters.  :-}
    
    wockin_juan
    
    
    wahnny. 

    Here in Germany they have been announced with the following prices:
    
    Yamaha DX7 II (without floppy) about 2,200 $
    Yamaha DX7 II FD (floppy)      about 2,700 $
    
    I the States they should be much cheaper !!!!!
    
    Harry

	Hold on, folks.  There appears to be a possible error in Keyboard's
report on the TX81Z:  They informed us it would be 16-note polyphonic.  Two 
stores I called on it says it's only eight-note.  *Big difference*!

	I'm sure Ron Ross is calling every retail outlet now to find out for
sure. 8^)~

	Dan

     About the assertion in .5 to the effect that MIDI imposes
    a restriction on the pitches you can play;
     I've heard that one before, but is it literally true? Does
    MIDI specify that note 60 = middle C and all other notes are
    tempered half-tones away? Or is that just the way the sound-
    producing pieces are built?
     Anybody have the official answer?
    
    -John

    The MIDI standard defines note numbers which are nominally assigned
    to correspond to the pitches of the even tempered scale.  E.g.,
    note number 60 is defined as "middle C", and notes 12 note numbers
    apart are an octave apart.  This is really just a convention, just like
    the convention that "real" instruments use.  The convention does not
    make other interpretations of the "note number" impossible, it's just
    a way of guaranteeing that in ordinary circumstances all the
    instruments are in tune with one another.  The MIDI standard *does
    not* define a way of communicating "nonstandard" tunings among
    instruments, and any mechanism to do so would have to resort to
    the "system exclusive" escape, which is by definition manufacturer-
    specific.  But there's no technical reason that a particular instrument
    could not interpret the 127 note numbers to mean microtonal tunings
    within a single octave, for example.  Just don't expect any other
    instrument to interpret note numbers the same way.
                 
    len.
    

I read the report in the new issue of Keyboard (Feb. 1987) and am really
confused.  It looks like the new functionality in the DX7-II can't be found in
any of the modules!  Is this true?  Is a KX88 plus TX816 or TX81Z NOT equivalent
to a DX7-II?

If this issue is not resolved by the time my money comes in later this spring
or early in summer, I will hold off purchase of any Yamaha equipment until it
becomes clear to me.

The RX-5 is more reasonable priced than LaSalle suggested at $2K.  Actual price 
is $1100.  Not that I'm interested, although it is the functional equivalent of
the Korg in many ways.  Still, at least this drum machine is upgradeable and
expandable, so it isn't a "dead" purchase like the drum machines that came out
before the KORG and the new RX-5.  The real fun will be watching the price fall
on this, and seeing how they top themselves next year.


				Mark

    As best I can tell from reading the rags, there is no keyboardless
    equivalent of the DX7-II.  I expect a TX7-II to come out someday,
    but probably not until the order rate of DX7-IIs declines below
    the production rate of their LSI chips.  I'm going to wait for it.
        John Sauter

If Yamaha is to be as consistent as you suggest, then there should also be a 
TX816-II and a keyboard with TX81Z internal to it.  Somehow I doubt it, but 
maybe that's what they've planned and maybe the current crop of new products 
is the only new technology we'll see for awhile while they repackage it in 
various ways like they did the previous level of technology.

Either way you look at it, it looks like the TX81Z is the wisest purchase of 
all Yamaha equipment, new and old.


				Mark

    
    no, no, no.
    
    Depends. First, DXII .NE. KX88 .AND. TX_whatever.
    	1. Kx88 weighted piano-like 88 note kbd. DXII isnt.
        2. the DXII features like microtonal tune are not on TXn16's

    If you have an apropros computer and voicing software already,
    why spend $$$ on a "Fancy FB01 in a rack"? 
    
    Especially if it only has 8 voices. (If 16, I recant...)
    
    Agree that we're getting some re-packaging here, but they're
    clever enuf to make it 'just a bit better...'
    
    ron
        
    

    
    Re .-1.
    
    I agree. I can't think of anything in Yam's range or for that matter
    any other person's range which compares with the FB01. Mark what
    have Yamaha ever repackaged without significant improvements. Even
    the QX21 had improvements on th QX7 and didn't really cost more.
    
    					Paul.
    

    When I was in a music store on saturday, what should just arrive
    - non other than the TX81Z. I persuaded the salesman to get it out
    for a quick demo. Trouble was my wife was with me and got bored
    very quickly. As far as I can remember though its * EIGHT* voice
    polytimbral, microtonal, 19" rack mount, sound editing from the
    front pannel, about 128 presets. Sounded much like the FB01 to me,
    but I wasn't concentrating that hard ! price 399 pounds. Thats 100
    pounds ,more than they were selling the FB01 for. Seems to me the
    only *REAL* advantage is front pannel editing at the expence of
    lots of presets. I think my money will go on the FB01, but I'm waiting
    to see if the price drops !!
    
    Andrew

RE Note 677.15 by RDGE00::NORTON 

>    Sounded much like the FB01 to me,

	I was speaking with a salesman at LaSalles in Boston about the use of 
alternate waveforms in the TX81Z last week.  He said he believed the preset 
sounds did not employ them.  So simply listening to what the module comes with
may give the false impression that it's 'just like the FB01'.  From what I
heard, no-one yet knows how much better it will sound.

	Dan

    There's a separate NOTE on new Yamaha products; I only found this
    NOTE today!  I tried both the new DX-7 and the TX81Z at Daddy's,
    Salem NH recently.  First, prices (as best I remember:
    		TX81Z 	$499
    		DX7-II	$2295 add $200 for model w/ Floppy
    
    Since the store was really busy/noisy, I didn't get a chance to
    REALLY try these units out.  One thing for sure, the TX81Z is only
    EIGHT (8) voice - not 16!  Misprint in Keyboard article, I gues
    ...
    It lets you store 24 'performances' - where splits are, what voice(s),
    relative detuning, etc.  I think the FB01 only had room for 12 of
    these.
    
    The new DX-7 was nice, from what little use I gave it.  32
    'performance' memories, much like those for the TX81z.  Each cartridge,
    as well as the DX-7 II's internal memory, holds 64 voices WITH function
    parameters, 12 detuning, 32 performances, and 2 'syste
    something-or-others' (MIDI channesl, etc).
    
    What I wonder, is ... are these new instruments voices (presets
    on TX81z, and factory patches in DX-7 II), really taking full advantage
    of the new possiblities with the new features?  For example, are
    the sounds on the TX module really using the multiple-waveform
    Operators the way they could be used, or did they just stuff old
    FB01 boices in there, all using the sine-only waveform?  Like, the
    FB01 has most patches that don't have velocity-sensitivity programmed
    in, so you don't get to hear the real potential.  I wonder how much
    of this is true of the DX/TX new machines ... maybe the 3rd party
    patches that will start to filter into the marketplace could BLOW
    AWAY the ones that Yamaha gives ... lets hope so, I think there
    must be a LOT of potential inside these new units!
    
    -Jim @ FGVAXU::LAING

    Re: .17
    
    The FB-01 stores 20 'perfomances' referred to as 'configurations'.
    A configuration includes how the 8 voices are assigned to patches,
    tuning, midi channel, volume, stereo pan placement, etc. 
    
    Dave

    
    I actually had a TX81Z at home for the weekend to put it through
    it's paces. There is no doubt that there is some extra clarity in
    the voices (if that's possible with FM) and that they had a little
    extra Zazz. How's that for subjectivity ?
    
    However the big plus that this machine has is the performance memories
    which allow you to select some internal effects, either MIDI-DELAY,
    Autopanning or, chord pre-sets. All of these effects are used in
    the pre-set configurations and I suggest you give these a listen
    if you get a chance to try out the BOX. Apart from this the box
    has pretty much the same capabilities as the FB01. My view is that
    if I were buying now I would go for the TX rather than the FB. The
    extra capabilities are probably worth the money. However if the
    FB price falls significantly due to the TX introduction then the
    Fb01 is still a good buy.
    
    One feature I did notice on the TX which is not available on the
    FB is that when changing parameters on the TX the appropriate SYS-EX
    message is output from the Midi out port. This does not happen on
    the FB01. Which is why it is so important to have the ability to
    edit midi data in a sequencer.  (see the note re Midi-DJ's, MC500's)
    
                                   Paul.

    Re .19
    
    Since you had some time with the unit, and it seems you've used
    an FB-01 as well, can you give a judgement as to whether the voices
    in the TX81Z are just copies of FB voices, i.e. did they really
    take advantage of the multi-waveform operators?
    
    -Jim

    re .19 and editing MIDI data in a sequencer - I feel compelled to
    note that while you can see and delete system exclusive data on
    the MC500, you can't insert it or edit it - it doesn't know how
    to interpret the data, and as far as I can tell won't let you insert/
    edit octal or hex strings.  I may be wrong about this, I'd have
    to check the (incomprehensible) manual.
    
    len.
    

    My recollection of the MC500 manual is that it will permit you
    to edit system exclusive data in "microscope" mode.  I didn't
    actually try this, but I did examine system exclusive data using
    "microscope" mode.
    
    I found it quite a challenge to read and understand the MC500 manual
    while sitting too close to an electric guitar player who appeared
    to be checking out the distortion effects he could get from a very
    expensive amplifier.  I learned something about concentration that
    day, but I may still be mistaken about the MC500's ability to edit
    system exclusive data.
        John Sauter

    For what its worth:
    
    You can definitely insert system exclusive data in the MC500.  I
    created a measure with a patch change event and a single "request 
    current patch dump" sysex for a DW8000.  I then replicated this
    measure 63 times using COPY and hand editted the 63 patch changes
    to count up from 1 to 64.  This was done on track 1.
    
    Now doing a real-time record of the DW8000 on track 2, 3, or 4 will
    do a patch dump of the entire machine, with a single patch in each
    measure.  This is a really convenient way to handle patches, since
    to retrieve what used to be patch 33, simply enter MEASURE 33,
    press Play and hit stop before the measure concludes.
    
    Guido

    The DX7II(FD) come with 11 tuning schemes onboard and 2 user defined
    micro-tuning memories...
    
                         1. Equal Temperament
                         2. Pure (Maj.)
                         3. Pure (min.)
                         4. Mean Tone
                         5. Pythagorean
    			 6. Werckmeister
    			 7. Kirnberger
    			 8. Vallotti & Young
    			 9. 1/4 shifted equal
       			10. 1/4 tone
    			11. 1/8 tone
    
    They're also claiming higher fidelity due to faster DAC.
    
    The multi-mode LFO sounds like a great idea. Instead of one LFO
    cycle applied to all keys regardless of when they were depressed,
    Multi-mode starts the LFO at a predermined point after the key is
    pressed, giving effectively 16 LFOs.
    
    Edd
    

    
    There was quite an interesting philosophical issue raised locally
    about the new DX7 claims for higher fidelity. How can a synthesizer
    which is a source of sound be more faithful. Fidelity has to have
    a relative point for comparison. Yes No ?
    
    					Paul

    re -1.. 
    
    How can signal-to-noise ratio be a philosophical point?
    
    There are two separate issues in synthesizer 'fidelity';
    signal-to-noise ratio, and the second, murkier one in the sense
    of 'being faithful to the original'.. there one is on shaky ground
    due to the nature of synthesis.. unless, of course one is discussing
    one of the billions and billions of FM 'Rhodes' and 'Clavinet' patches.
    
    Yecch..

    
    
    I have always thought of fidelity (faithfullness?) as in High Fidelity
    as a reference in terms of getting close to the original sound.
    In the case of a synth which generates the sound then surely that
    is the ultimate in HiFi. 
    
    Whether it sounds like a Rhodes or not
    I am not sure is an issue. I think what Yamaha actually mean is
    that they have cleaned up the FM sound generation process. They
    even claim higher fidelity on the new DX7 for Roms you could buy
    for the old version. Now if your patch was based around all the
    nasty aliasing and other extraneous noise you can get out of a DX7
    if you really try, then you might not think that the cleaned up
    version is very faithfull to your original patch.
    
    					Paul

Having seen all the literature on the Yamaha RX5 rhythm programmer, I am about 
to reconsider my forswearing of drum machines.  Not that I don't think selling 
my RX11 in January was the right thing to do; far from it!

The RX5, though, accepts MIDI velocity info, seems to have a fairly full MIDI 
implementation, accepts alternate sounds, has even better human interface than 
the RX11, file naming conventions for songs, fairly advanced sequencing 
capabilities.

Built-in are two levels of accent.  No touch-sensitive pads - Yamaha obviously 
thinks most users will hook up a MIDI keyboard controller if they want greater 
dynamic sensitivity.

Well, I don't need to say more because I think this beast has probably already 
been covered in-depth in this notes file.  My main point is that it seems like 
a piece of equipment that is expandable enough to be a good investment and not 
be "outmoded" six months from now.  Not to mention that the on-board 
sequencing capabilities seem good for gigs and home use, even if one already 
has a sequencer or microcomputer.

Maybe around September or January I'll buy one.  Not until I've bought congas 
and a soprano saxophone, though!  Even a DX7 can't capture those instruments 
all that well (at least, with currently available programs and parameter 
settings).


				Mark

    re:-.?  Somebody asked a while back (somewhere in here I think)
    about whether the TX81Z presets use the new waveforms.  The answer
    is that it does.  In fact, when you select waveforms the display
    even draws little pictures of the waves as you step through them.
    The manual encourages the user to find a sound in the presets that
    resembles the sound you want, copy it over to an internal position, 
    and then diddle with the waveforms and such until you get the sound
    you want.  The thing is easy to program interactively because all
    you need to do is hit a note on the keyboard while you're diddling
    until it sounds right.  I can't imagine it being much easier, even
    with a computer.  The idea with some of teh presets was to show
    the user how to use the new waveforms, but I don't think many of
    them really explore the possibilities.  Rather, I think they
    demonstrate that you can get 'neat' sounds using the new waveforms.
    
    Steve