| T.R | Title | User | Personal
Name | Date | Lines |
|---|
| 2443.1 | I wrote a simple patch load for Amiga,but will buy | MILKWY::JANZEN | | Tue Sep 11 1990 14:47 | 34 |
| > <<< Note 2443.0 by HAMPS::POORE "Stuart Poore, IM, STG, @BST, U.K." >>>
> -< TX81Z Family tree & patch interchangeability questions >-
>
> I have entered in some 'paper' patches via the front panel & I now want
> to use my Atari ST to do some of the hard work for me. Assuming I can
> get DUMP (or is it BULKDUMP) to work, I need to find some patches to
> download. There are some in the midi mibrary, but also some for the
> DX100. How compatable are these ?
The tx manual tells you. I think the old ones (VCED messages)
go in OK, but the tx has
additional parameters (ACED messages).
>
> If I can get hold of a PD patch editor for the DX100, could I use it
> for my TX81Z ?
Yes, for most parameters on a voice, but the tx has additional
parameters. Read the manual.
There are TX81Z patch editors, at least 2 for the Amiga, and they must
be ported to the Amiga as well. One is from dr. t and the from sound
design or somebody. They are both probably $110 on the market.
>
> What is the relationship between the TX81Z and the DX100, and all the
> other 'old' boxes I hear mentioned in the same breath, i.e. DX27, DX21,
> FB01, YS200 etc. How interchangeable are the patches ?
The TX81Z has more parameters, such as different operator waveshapes,
then the dx7 and dx100. I don't know about fb01 ys200. Maybe the
manual gives details on those.
>
> I guess I need a family tree of the Y range.
>
> Stuart P.
>
Don't we all.
Tom
|
| 2443.2 | some history | MAIL::EATOND | In tents | Tue Sep 11 1990 15:43 | 66 |
| The 1st 4-op FM synthesizer was the DX9. It came out alongside the
(in)famous and had a short life. It had a patch format that is not
compatible with any other synth, DX or otherwise.
The first real successful 4op synth was the DX21. It began what
has come to be the standard 4op format. It has a few areas in its
patch format (and in its sysex string) forparameters that are not found
in many later synths (Pitch envelope generator, chorus, etc).
On the tail of the DX21 came the DX100 and the DX27. These were
simplified versions of the DX21, without the PEG and chorus, they were
mono-timbral (the 21 was bi-timbral). Yamaha later added speakers to
a version of the DX27 (DX27S).
Around this time came the FB01. It was a great breakthrough in
affordability and functionality. It had a healthy number of patches
(the most that was available from any one synth at the time - something
like 445). It was eight-voice multi-ttimbral and had performance
setups that you could flexibly arrange any of the eight voices into
splits layers and multi-channel instrumentation. Its patch format,
though, was incompatible with any other synth, with the possible
exception of the Yamaha music computer (can't remember the name).
Later came the TX81Z. It was the first FM synth to allow patches
to be built with anything other than sine waves. It was similar in
function to the FB01, but much cleaner, due to higher resolution DAC.
It remains, in my mind, Yamaha's best bang-for-buck rack-mount. It
didn't have as much memory as the FB01. It's patch memory was
compatible with the configuration made standard by the DX21.
The DX11 came out not long afterward, and was pretty much a
keyboard version of the TX81Z. It may have added back in the PEG from
DX21 days. If I'm not mistaken, this may have been the first Yamaha
4op to offer a simplified patch modification interface. You could make
a patch more or less "bright" or change the envelopes without having to
muck with the actual FM parameters. Theis feature became popular on
the more consumer oriented (as opposed to Pro-oriented) keybaords.
The next major contribution that comes to mind is the V50
workstation. It sported the TX81Z's enhanced 4op FM implementation,
but added a sequencer, drums and digital effects. Still, the patches were
backward compatible (is that the right term?) with the DX21 standard.
There is a set of three or four units that rode the line between
pro and consumer keyboards. They are the YS100, YS200, B100 and the
table-top version whose name eludes me at this time. These were
somewhat simplified workstations that had digital FX and a minimal
sequencer (with the exception of the YS100, which also lacked
aftertouch).
There have been numerous other versions in the consumer market that
have used the standard 4op format, and I could well have missed some in
the pro arena. The newer synths, namely the SY55 and the SY22 do not
use the same format. I believe the "22" is more of a sample player and
the "55" uses sampled waveforms in a kind of FM synth implementation.
I hope this helps.
Dan
DX100 DX27 DX27S (standard 4op format)
FB01 (non-standard 4op FM)
DX11 TX81Z
|
| 2443.3 | the tx is somewhat special | MILKWY::JANZEN | | Tue Sep 11 1990 16:34 | 2 |
| I was wrong to say dx parameters would go into a tx.
Tom
|
| 2443.4 | | DCSVAX::COTE | To play, turn bottom up... | Tue Sep 11 1990 20:36 | 12 |
| Dan's geneology just about hits it right on the nose...
Most 4-op machines can swap patches directly. I regularly sys-ex
from my DX-21 to my TZs. Any non-compatable parameters react smartly
and predictably. (The TZ even has a "chorus on" switch, but since it
lacks the circuitry it doesn't do anything...)
I consider myself extrememly fortunate to have accidently stumbled on
this architecture when I first got into synths, especially when one
considers the short life cycles of that R-word stuff...;^)
Edd
|
| 2443.5 | TX81Z with ATARI computer | LEMAN::BRACONNIER | | Wed Sep 12 1990 12:45 | 8 |
|
Hi,
You can edit on your TX81Z by using SYNTHWORKS TX81Z software with your
ATARI computer !
Robert
|
| 2443.6 | Variety is the Spice of Roland | DRUMS::FEHSKENS | len, EMA, LKG2-2/W10, DTN 226-7556 | Wed Sep 12 1990 17:54 | 9 |
| re .4 - My R-word stuff is still alive and kicking...
It's just that R*land never understood the notion of family. The
farthest they ever took that notion was to make a keyboard and a
rackmount version that were more or less compatible, but even then,
they couldn't resist the opportunity to "improve" the rackmount.
len.
|