Synth Tricks: The Yamaha DX-7 and MiniMoog Voyager with Shooter Jennings 

Yes, I agree, it's my first (owning it since 1986) and favourite synth too.

Daniel LaPel nearly impossible to program.

Erik Lauri Kulo ????

The reel-to-reel (tape machine) on his right, has a tape holder that looks like eyes, and a tape-head reader that makes it look like a sad mouth /flies away

Because it hasn't been used in a while.

His late father Waylon Jennings (1937-2002) never went down such a career path.

ClassicTVMan1981X country music suxx.

... and sounds marvellous :)

nichttuntun exactly the same also!

Any idea on patches for this sound

@@chunkylover54 Couldn't help you, but remember that using operators with feedback on 6 can allow you to create really close aproximations of analog synth waveforms! madFame on youtube makes great tutorials on programming the DX7, check them out.

Yes, the DX7 MK1 is an awesome synth, producing amazing analog-like sounds as well as breathtaking strings, pianos, brass, choir etc. I own my Dx7 since 1986 and it'll be my best synth forever.... Long live the DX7!

Lavish Deluna DX7 had the worst interface ever. So happy that knobs are back now!!

James Reeno the dx7 has a pretty good interface for programming, it's just not suited to doing it real-time. But for performance it has real time input from breath controller, pitch bend, mod wheel, foot expression, and aftertouch, so pretty good control.

Isn't vaporwave pretty dead now

The whole time he was talking I was like "How old Is CURRENTS now?"

Yes, in terms of functionalities and features, the DX7 II is better than the DX7 MK1. The DX7 II has a stereo output with 16 bit DA converters and it can have a dual mode with unison, layering etc. It also can store 64 patches (doubling the memory). I guess I grew up with the DX7 MK1 (I have mine since 1986), so I feel far more comfortable with the DX7 MK1 interface (I know a lot of people hate it!!!!!) and I really love the DX7 MK1 12 bit DA converter with low-fi analog circuit!!!!!!!

And the beauty of the DX7 MK1 is the mono 12 bit DA converter with the low-fi analog circuit. It can really sound like analog synths with plenty of low frequencies. You can make fat and thick basses by adding extra sine waves too. I've managed to do all that with my DX7 MK1.

I think the difficulty that a lot of people are having is that they tend to think every synth in VCO, VCF and VCA. The DX FM synthesis is very different and you need to get your head around that first. As I've owned my DX7 since 1986 and it was my first synth, my brain is kind of wired to think in the DX FM synthesis. That really helps me to make amazing sounds that can rival modern hybrid synths. I've seen some tutorials but they don't cover the fundamental and how that thinking can be applied to make great sounds. I'm thinking of making some tutorial videos as my subscribers requesting them.

Power DX7

I have a nice Jupiter 8 string patch on mine that sounds really nasty

there's thousands of patches here homepages.abdn.ac.uk/mth192/pages/html/dx7.html

Do you know how to program a sy99 thoroughly?

you "snagged" one for $300? LOL I don't think they've sold for more than $300 since about 1988. I had probably close to 10 of them from the mid 90s to the early 2000s. haven't had one in a long time.

300 is expensive for a cheap synth ;) i payed 600€ for a jd800 in perfect shape +string card

Aaron Smithey that was the first thing I saw too, and I’m pretty sure that it is.

Yes, you will be surprised how powerful the DX7 is. I own my DX7 MK1 since 1986 and I still get surprised by it even now. It can produce amazing analog-like sounds as well as breathtaking choir, strings, pads, brass, piano etc. Long live the DX7!

Did you not see that they don't have the actual DX7 keyboard?

Yeah I think thats it, thanks mate!

I have a very tatty one if you are interested.

I agree with the inequality. However, as Shooter mentions the modules contain what fundamentally is the DX7's synthesis board/brain. The "less I monotimbral the better" sort of DX7, but it's number one rather than two.

No, it's 5 x DX7's in a rack.

I appreciate the original article, but I admit how irrational a notion it may be. The advantages tend to be less technical. Some of my favorite aspects of the DX7 (Mark I) in person: - The design of the instrument: the 'cutting-edge' shape of it, the fascinating and unmatched palette with dark brown and thoughtful and colourful arrangement of membrane switches - The physical interface: It uses a minimalist physical control set to a wonderfully versatile end, with quite charming character. It is certainly not oriented toward real-time modification. Despite that, the compatibility of the interface and its synthesis is tight "as bark on a tree", and brings focus and sensory to the forefront of patching for me. - The DX7 circuitry and components: it is vintage, most often noted is the 12-bit DAC. Arguably, the audible output of the DX7 maintains persistently fine detail and depth. Would the 12-bit threshold be of effect, it can account for a warmer tone. Software can handle the DAC, but something could be said about having historical accuracy. - Controls: Breath Controller, then pedal inputs for Modulation, Portamento, Sustain, and Volume. - The DX7's keyboard: Aftertouch-enabled, full, dynamic, and rather percussive in itself. I enjoy all of my 'keyboard-feels', though that of the DX7 delivers a distinct and very powerful feeling. - You can modify the instrument quite easily physically (and virtually), which can be a fun and personal experience which I have not found elsewhere. - You can install Grey Matter Response E! in it.

@TacoTacoTacoTaco Can I also say, the whole "Dx7 is hard to program!!!" is so stupid. It just requires patience! I can't do the math but I've made plenty of cool patches. Also the JX3P is a DCO synth so according to some people. that's a digital synth!!! "bit crushing it's bad for audio!!!" what are you talking about? the original dx7 has 12 bit DACs which don't come anywhere close to bit crushing

Digital Audio has a noise floor 20 decibels lower than analog audio. Analog audio is inherently an inferior medium!!!! It's so frustrating to see people spread this nonsense

@@yallimsorry5983 Are you a musician?

@@dachanist Yes, though a very amateur one. I also know some very basic things about audio tho, enough to know that high quality digital audio isn't "bitcrushing". Bit crushing is an effect of down-sampling that hasn't been part of digital audio since the late 80's (and really was never something involved in how the Dx7 works). Nobody is saying a Jupiter sounds bad, or that a Rhodes sound bad, or that you have to like how a DX7 sounds, etc. Just don't spread misinformation to make yourself feel better about your opinion.

@@yallimsorry5983 It's not about bitcrushing. It's about response. It's like driving a car with rack and pinion steering vs electric steering vs just a video game. Trust me dude there is a huge difference between a tube amp and a class D solid state amp and there are advantages to each. Likewise, there is a huge difference between an analog modelling synth and a fat analog synth. I don't care for the dx7, but not on some religious digital vs analog basis. I just don't like it, I won't write off all FM but really it doesn't play well live in my opinion. I don't like 80's cheese. Video did kill the radio star and it was the loss of real music. We live in a world of cyborg music now. That said, I wouldn't claim that analog is great for recording as I don't have experience there and in such an environment the noise floor would matter I suppose. Noise floor doesn't matter on stage. Tubes are noisy, Class A is noisy, microphones are noisy. What I'm saying is that analog gear - as played by musicians - is superior. I can say that as a musician. You won't find a pianist who prefers a Nord to a Steinway. You won't find a real lead guitar who prefers a solid state amp and digital effects. In my case, I won't trade in my trumpet for a D50 or whatever plugin the ableton crowd is using to make their Zimmerman knockoffs. To be clear, I use both tube and solidstate. I use a 50's tube hifi reel2reel as my center channel and a solidstate 2.0 for the highs and lows. Tube gear has no lows and no highs - tube gear has shit frequency response... but... tube gear has amazing amplitude response. A 3 watt tube amp with highly sensitive speaker will make the guitar, or rhodes sound like it is actually in the room with you. It's not misinformation dude, I'm a musician. I have a day job, but I am recorded for pay and credited.

James Reeno Absofruitly. All Yamahas suck. Technics and Casio are infinitely better in every way.

Try the Native Instruments FM8. Mind blown.