Markyboard

[video:youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LUrBE38cseA

I totally agree - very confusing . I blame Craig.

No worries. Always happy to read your posts and know that you're keeping us in check.

Catchy.

No, all Opertor Levels are independent - the cool thing about the Opsix interface is that each Operator has a dedicated Knob for Ratio and Slider for Level, plus the Red/Blue LED lightning to let you know if tit's a Carrier or Modulator. Very quick editing access for core timbre tweaking. Manny How do you independently control the amount of a modulator feeding 2 carriers with one slider?

Thanks MIDI2XS. I was aware of the device ID used with Sysex but was referring to this: Universal system exclusive messages There are two universal IDs that can be used by system exclusive messages instead of the specific manufacturer IDs above. Since these two IDs are not specific to a manufacturer, but universal, all MIDI devices should consider responding to those. These IDs are as follows. Hexadecimal value Decimal value Description 0x7E 126 Real time 0x7F 127 Non-real time In other words, 0x7F is carried by system exclusive messages to which all MIDI devices should respond to in real time (immediately) and 0x7E is carried by system exclusive messages to which all MIDI devices will respond to, but not in real time (not necessarily immediately). For example, the MIDI full frame message is a system exclusive message with manufacturer ID 0x7F. This message prompts all MIDI devices to immediately cue up to a certain point in time. The first byte after the real time / non-real time ID is the "system exclusive channel". Normal system exclusive messages do not have a channel, but universal system exclusive messages do have a channel that could be from 0x00 to 0x7F (from 0 to 127). Normally, the system exclusive channel will actually be the manufacturer ID in the table above (e.g., 0x41 for Roland), so that the message can be sent to a specific MIDI device. If the system exclusive channel is 0x7F then this message is for all MIDI devices. The two bytes after the system exclusive channel are sub-IDs and describe what the message is about. For example, the two bytes '0x01 0x01' show that the message is the MIDI Full Frame message and that the rest of the data should be used to discern time to which the MIDI device should cue.

After posing the question I did a quick search. My understanding (such that it is) is that Sysex can be further channelized. But it"s not the same channelization that we think of with standard midi channels. And iirc it"s something referred to as universal sysex that has this feature. I may have gotten this completely wrong.

Isn"t Sysex midi channel agnostic?

With the Opsix it appears the operator level is applied equally to all operators per the algorithm. I forgot or maybe never thought about this with the original DX series. Or is there another parameter I"m forgetting here?

OK - thanks.

Does it improve music software performance? For example does it allow for lower buffer settings without audio pops or allow for running more VSTs concurrently?

Where are you guys at with OC and/or Turbo mode? Good? Bad? No advantage? I remember reading you want steady clocking speeds but I"m wondering if this really matters for DAWs and VSTs. For example does Word Clock change when the CPU speed changes?

Hmm...that sounds about right considering my Aurora converter died on me yesterday morning. Again .

Very much enjoyed that Craig!

Hi Deldor- If you"re still interested in foldable keyboards I would refer you to this thread. Lots of really good info and advice.

I liked the concept but I think some of this could easily be cited in the overplayer thread.

This expert agreed with me:

All these monoliths are pieces of poop. I use the mono button on my polylith which is just as good.

I just offered up my observations here based on what I heard yesterday. Having recently refurbed a rev2 I thought I might compare the new and old. What does 'vintage sound' mean? Most of the time I have no idea. But in this case I remember the old sounding different and applied the term vintage. More importantly I attempted to identify what may contribute to that difference. Figured this may be of interest to those considering purchase. Otherwise I"m with you AC and couldn"t care less about 'vintage'. I just want awesome sound and to enjoy the experience getting there.

I got to spend a bit of time with the P10 earlier today. I think the vintage knob is somewhat overblown. It does exactly what you described above, but I didn't think it really made it sound or play "vintage". More like it's due for a calibration and somewhat artificial. Admittedly I didn't deep dive the envelope effects but I think the "slop" tuning component sounded almost artificial and unnecessary. More to point when you calibrate a vintage board and it's well tuned it doesn't lose what I think of as it's vintage sound. I worked the vintage knob in combination with the rev 1/2, 3 filter button. I'm sure it will thrill many but for someone not looking to recreate a specific sound or that past "magical" experience I'd mostly keep it set between 3 and 4. For someone looking to recreate the rev 2 experience that really knows and remembers what a Rev 2 sounds like, they may be disappointed. Overall however it did sound quite wonderful. And despite my clinical and maybe pompous comments regarding the polymod capability it really does bring the sound alive. In no time I got some wonderful audio rate modulation happening and ...WOW!

Imo his story (not your recant of it Mike) always sounds somewhat contrived and maybe a bit twisted. Why anyone's lifelong dream is to have their name on copied work? If this is truly one's passion wouldn't you at least want to pay tribute to the creators? I'm not disputing the business/financial/legal or even ethical aspect of this. Everyone draws their own line and acts accordingly.

Thank you! This is the confirmation I've been seeking. Translating to Prof speak...there is no magic spice in the FM pantry that will magically transform this exotic dish into something both my kids and wife will like. Btw your sample is wonderful. I'm really glad you presented the dry version which reeks fm in the finest sense. Re the filter sweep comment that was my bad Jerry. Totally missed your point the first time. And shame on me as I spent yesterday doing something I rarely do; trying to match up 2 different synths; Voyager and K-Odyssey. All because I thought I was hearing the Odyssey when it was actually the Voyager which I failed to mute while controlling the Odyssey via CV. Turns out on the particular sound I had dialed up the Voyager's 1 pole filter got pretty damn close to the Odyssey although still lacking some fizz. That and the envelope distinguished some of their unique character. But it was creating a filter sweep that told a broader story. Anyway time to move on and I just wanted to thank you guys for this discussion. Imo we don't talk nearly enough about really using these synths as synthesizers. This has been great.

I originally layered the high frequency contributing operators with an Andromeda patch. I liked that. But I wanted a stand-alone patch for the demo so I added a couple of operators just for a lower pad sound. Nothing too spectacular compared to using a good analog. I don"t recall ever attempting a lead sound like you would get from a mini or ARP. Until you mentioned it the term filter sweep never really entered my thoughts with fm. Envelopes are used judiciously to shape the timbre over time, but filter sweep? Not really. Those tinkly highs are one of fm strengths. As my buddy Harry says, a synth"s gotta know it limitations.