ElmerJFudd Posted June 27, 2023 Share Posted June 27, 2023 Quote Yamaha CP88, Casio PX-560 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ElmerJFudd Posted June 27, 2023 Author Share Posted June 27, 2023 Thomann says $1999 with another $400 to get it in platinum. Did they not realize Yamaha has a killer DX engine in the MODX+ at $1279? Quote Yamaha CP88, Casio PX-560 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed A. Posted June 27, 2023 Share Posted June 27, 2023 I like the opsix SE better than the Wavestate SE, platinum is nice, but I still don't know why they didn't go with their original opsix SE design: Though I am getting used to the new panel layout. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ProfD Posted June 27, 2023 Share Posted June 27, 2023 24 minutes ago, ElmerJFudd said: Did they not realize Yamaha has a killer DX engine in the MODX+ at $1279? Again, there is a MOD-7 engine in the Nautilus currently selling for the same price (73 key) and less (61 key). Granted, the Opsix and Wavestate are different from a Nautilus but Korg clearly knows something better in releasing these seemingly overlapping KBs.😎 Quote PD "The greatest thing you'll ever learn, is just to love and be loved in return."--E. Ahbez "Nature Boy" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TJ Cornish Posted June 27, 2023 Share Posted June 27, 2023 I think this conversation illustrates the difference between musicplayer.com folks and GearSpace folks - as a gigging keyboard, this is hard to justify when essentially the same engine has been available in workstations for forever (OASYS added it in like 2007?), but on the synth enthusiast side, this is potentially attractive as a super FM synth, and where owning two dozen keyboards is a badge of honor. From Korg’s perspective, why not sell 3 synths instead of one? 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GovernorSilver Posted June 27, 2023 Share Posted June 27, 2023 1 hour ago, ElmerJFudd said: Thomann says $1999 with another $400 to get it in platinum. Did they not realize Yamaha has a killer DX engine in the MODX+ at $1279? MODX+ does not have aftertouch while Opsix SE does. Opsix SE also comes with a hard case. It's reasonable though for some musos to decide that paying less for a 61-key MODX+ has priority over aftertouch, hard case, and even specifics of FM synthesis. The implementation of FM synthesis is also different. The differences in FM implementation in MODX+ vs. Opsix vs. Digitone vs. MegaFM vs. EssenceFM are significant enough for hardcore FM lovers to choose one over the others, or even get multiple. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ElmerJFudd Posted June 27, 2023 Author Share Posted June 27, 2023 I see the marketing, aluminum build, aftertouch, unique ui for an fm synth. There are a lot of Opsix 37 (one of the most quickly discontinued synths we’ve ever seen) floating around for about $450. The desktop OS version is sold at $199. While the SE is neat. I can’t see carrying one for a gig when we can get FM synthesis with all the AWM2 stuff one would need in an MODX+ for the same or less money. The metal build and color scheme do vibe like a DX7. I guess we’ll see who bites and if Korg got this right after killing the 37 key version. I would expect a premium action at this price point. Including the hard case in the pricing… interesting. Quote Yamaha CP88, Casio PX-560 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ElmerJFudd Posted June 27, 2023 Author Share Posted June 27, 2023 side note: DB has an SY77 up for the taking if you don't mind going in to replace the battery. https://forums.musicplayer.com/topic/186061-free-sort-of-yamaha-sy77/ Quote Yamaha CP88, Casio PX-560 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GovernorSilver Posted June 27, 2023 Share Posted June 27, 2023 You'd think all FM synths would be the same but based on the conversations I've been seeing, some people will choose on FM synth over another based in the user interface/workflow. Some prefer the Opsix UI over the MODX's. I'm sure there's somebody who likes it the other way around. Yet another think the MegaFM is the best ever UI for FM synthesis. What if the Opsix SE turned out to have a significantly better feeling keybed than the MODX+? I think that would sway some folks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ElmerJFudd Posted June 27, 2023 Author Share Posted June 27, 2023 4 minutes ago, GovernorSilver said: You'd think all FM synths would be the same but based on the conversations I've been seeing, some people will choose on FM synth over another based in the user interface/workflow. Some prefer the Opsix UI over the MODX's. I'm sure there's somebody who likes it the other way around. Yet another think the MegaFM is the best ever UI for FM synthesis. What if the Opsix SE turned out to have a significantly better feeling keybed than the MODX+? I think that would sway some folks. Yes, I believe that Korg believes that there is value in their UI for this FM synthesis engine. If they didn’t cheap out on the action I’d say they may have gotten the release price right. The market will decide. 1 Quote Yamaha CP88, Casio PX-560 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GovernorSilver Posted June 27, 2023 Share Posted June 27, 2023 I'm satisfied with the Opsix I picked up on the cheap during the infamous Korg warehouse clearance sale last year. It's just interesting to see Korg R&D in California is still active and doing new stuff, as well as seeing what other folks have to say about the new stuff. The MODX FM-X engine should be more sophisticated in theory with its 8 operators and 66 or whatever algorithms. But seems like users just rely on AWM and classic FM tones - not a lot of original sound design going on. As much as folks complain about the Opsix - the size, the keybed, etc. - peeps seem to innovate more, sound-wise, on it. The user algorithm feature helps. The Effect operator mode also helps. Those combined with the UI might account for most of the innovation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CyberGene Posted June 27, 2023 Share Posted June 27, 2023 I understand the analog craze and how even the best VA-s and plugins can’t quite make it. And how real physical controls are a big deal. But this is digital synthesis and plugins are there. And FM-synthesis is not about real-time physical controls. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RABid Posted June 27, 2023 Share Posted June 27, 2023 I'm happy with my original Wavestat. It fills the desire for a wave sequencing synth, and can cover many other areas as a ROMpler. Is the OpSix as flexible as the Wavestat? Quote This post edited for speling. My Sweetwater Gear Exchange Page Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CHarrell Posted June 27, 2023 Share Posted June 27, 2023 2 hours ago, CyberGene said: nd FM-synthesis is not about real-time physical controls. That's what I like about the opsix interface though, is that it asks the question: why not? Why can't FM have real-time physical controls? 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GovernorSilver Posted June 27, 2023 Share Posted June 27, 2023 I like moving the sliders and knobs on my Opsix sometimes. Depends on the preset. For those who have a Wavestate and are wondering whether to get an Opsix, my answer is "I don't know". Maybe with more info about what you would like to accomplish... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Emm Posted June 27, 2023 Share Posted June 27, 2023 When you play some analog patches outside their sweet spot, you often get squeals or garbling. With the FM playing I've done, its more often a chance to get some useful added synth weirdness, because operators and modulators clearly handle things differently. Its downright smooth in this form. The "problem" in the KC is that we tend to think in loftier terms than noobs or total EDM-ers. I'm loving Wavestate Native, but if I was still using hardware, I'd have an SE with one of the OG 3-octave synths in one of those welcome panel spaces. This is the most sensible approach to FM I've seen. Its a bit surprising that more people don't seem to see how much juice this range has, even when contrasted with bigger synths like a Waldorf Quantum. GovernorSilver has it right about the player's goals. I'd never give one of these to a beginner, because each one presupposes X amount of knowledge they don't have yet. These come from the other end first. The Wavestate takes a lot of the sting out of fighting my old Wavestation and anyone who has tolerated FM's difficult structures would surely appreciate having it laid out so clearly on the Opsix. They seem like serious player's synths to me. 1 Quote "You seem pretty calm about all that." "Well, inside, I'm screaming. ~ "The Lazarus Project" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fleer Posted June 28, 2023 Share Posted June 28, 2023 Kinda reminds me of my old Korg DS8. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Schmieder Posted June 28, 2023 Share Posted June 28, 2023 Looks almost like a Yamaha VL1 (especially if that bronze color is accurate). Quote Eugenio Upright, 60th Anniversary P-Bass, USA Geddy Lee J-Bass, Yamaha BBP35, D'angelico SS Bari, EXL1, Select Strat, 70th Anniversary Esquire, LP 57, Eastman T486, T64, Ibanez PM2, Hammond XK4, Moog Voyager Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ElmerJFudd Posted June 28, 2023 Author Share Posted June 28, 2023 1 minute ago, Mark Schmieder said: Looks almost like a Yamaha VL1 (especially if that bronze color is accurate). Ah yes yes. 1 Quote Yamaha CP88, Casio PX-560 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jerrythek Posted June 28, 2023 Share Posted June 28, 2023 9 hours ago, TJ Cornish said: I think this conversation illustrates the difference between musicplayer.com folks and GearSpace folks - as a gigging keyboard, this is hard to justify when essentially the same engine has been available in workstations for forever (OASYS added it in like 2007?), but on the synth enthusiast side, this is potentially attractive as a super FM synth, and where owning two dozen keyboards is a badge of honor. From Korg’s perspective, why not sell 3 synths instead of one? The Opsix is a very different engine than the Mod7 in the Oasys/Kronos/Nautilus. 8 hours ago, GovernorSilver said: I'm satisfied with the Opsix I picked up on the cheap during the infamous Korg warehouse clearance sale last year. It's just interesting to see Korg R&D in California is still active and doing new stuff, as well as seeing what other folks have to say about the new stuff. Korg Japan did the Opsix, not R&D. The CA group did the Wavestate and the Modwave. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zephonic Posted June 28, 2023 Share Posted June 28, 2023 I like the retro design! I think I'd pick the WS SE over this, but they're both sexy. I do wish Korg would have stuck with their regular bend/mod joystick, though. Quote local: Korg Nautilus 73 | Yamaha MODX8 away: GigPerformer home: Kawai RX-2 | Korg D1 | Roland Fantom X7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CyberGene Posted June 28, 2023 Share Posted June 28, 2023 8 hours ago, CHarrell said: That's what I like about the opsix interface though, is that it asks the question: why not? Why can't FM have real-time physical controls? How does that work? Not nagging, genuinely interested. Since I have a masters degree in Physics and I understand how FM-synthesis works both from math and physics standpoint, I'm also very well versed with analog synths and recreating patches that I imagine, yet I struggle making any meaningful FM-patches. It just doesn't follow any logic... 😕 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ElmerJFudd Posted June 28, 2023 Author Share Posted June 28, 2023 3 hours ago, CyberGene said: How does that work? Not nagging, genuinely interested. Since I have a masters degree in Physics and I understand how FM-synthesis works both from math and physics standpoint, I'm also very well versed with analog synths and recreating patches that I imagine, yet I struggle making any meaningful FM-patches. It just doesn't follow any logic... 😕 13 minute video chat on basics of programming opsix. 2 Quote Yamaha CP88, Casio PX-560 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vonnor Posted June 28, 2023 Share Posted June 28, 2023 No internal power supply will always be a deal breaker for me. Always. ~ vonnor Quote Gear: Hardware: Nord Stage3, Korg Kronos 2, Novation Summit Software: Cantabile 3, Halion Sonic 3 and assorted VST plug-ins. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CHarrell Posted June 28, 2023 Share Posted June 28, 2023 10 hours ago, CyberGene said: How does that work? Not nagging, genuinely interested. Since I have a masters degree in Physics and I understand how FM-synthesis works both from math and physics standpoint, I'm also very well versed with analog synths and recreating patches that I imagine, yet I struggle making any meaningful FM-patches. It just doesn't follow any logic... 😕 Honestly when I first got into FM synthesis almost 10 years ago (my first type of synthesis!), I would go to my university library all the time and read all about Bessel, harmonic sidebands, overtone series, etc., hoping it'd give me the ability to create cool FM tones...and it didn't do a damn thing. 😂 While it can be cool to understand the physical/mathematical backbone behind this, ultimately it wouldn't be a very cool way to create timbres if you had to have this deep theoretical knowledge just to make some patch. When I was a kid learning how to ride a bicycle, I didn't need to know how all the parts interlocked and interacted with gravity, centrifugal force, etc. etc....I just got on and rode! Similarly, I actually got way more proficient at FM synthesis, when after knowing some of the basics (ie stuff like "high number for ratio makes higher pitch"), I actually, you know, made patches. I would think of a sound I wanted to create, and would deconstruct it in my mind. Think of a typical Rhodes. You have the "body" of the sound and the tines, to make it very very simple and basic. From there, I'd just focus on each "component" of the sound and designate them to different operator stacks: tines would be harsher, higher pitched, short ADSR, yada yada, and I'd tweak an operator stack to create that aspect of the sound. Repeat for the other(s). Now do you always get the result you originally aimed for? Of course not, the same can happen with subtractive. But you can find some hella cool sounds in the process! What's great about the opsix, with its very tactile interface, is that it makes that whole process much more intuitive and quick: in a lot of interfaces, you have to be very precise with your goals. "I want a higher pitch kind of sound, so let me try an 8:1 operator ratio in this stack here". With the opsix, it's more like: "I want a higher-pitch kind of sound, let me twist this knob to the right until I get the sound I want." This is obviously just one example, but I hope you understand the ultimate point I'm making here. The approach the interface provides is much more open to trial-and-error, experimentation, and relying almost purely on your tastes, rather than trying to conform your imagination into some assembly line workflow. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ProfD Posted June 28, 2023 Share Posted June 28, 2023 29 minutes ago, CHarrell said: While it can be cool to understand the physical/mathematical backbone behind this, ultimately it wouldn't be a very cool way to create timbres if you had to have this deep theoretical knowledge just to make some patch. When I was a kid learning how to ride a bicycle, I didn't need to know how all the parts interlocked and interacted with gravity, centrifugal force, etc. etc....I just got on and rode! What's great about the opsix, with its very tactile interface, is that it makes that whole process much more intuitive and quick: in a lot of interfaces, you have to be very precise with your goals. Bingo. IMO, the better technology allows folks to jump on and start riding immediately while reserving the nerd-level stuff for those who choose to deeper dive. FM synthesis went straight from ear candy (presets) to for most users, there's no way I'll ever create my own sounds. The Opsix definitely makes FM programming more accessible and instantly gratifying than its predecessors who were not so kind enough to offer one data slider and membrane switches. I'm slightly curious to hear cool sounds and music being created by a new generation of synth programmers using FM and other forms of synthesis.😎 2 Quote PD "The greatest thing you'll ever learn, is just to love and be loved in return."--E. Ahbez "Nature Boy" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CHarrell Posted June 28, 2023 Share Posted June 28, 2023 4 minutes ago, ProfD said: Bingo. IMO, the better technology allows folks to jump on and start riding immediately while reserving the nerd-level stuff for those who choose to deeper dive. FM synthesis went straight from ear candy (presets) to for most users, there's no way I'll ever create my own sounds. The Opsix definitely makes FM programming more accessible and instantly gratifying than its predecessors who were not so kind enough to offer one data slider and membrane switches. I'm slightly curious to hear cool sounds and music being created by a new generation of synth programmers using FM and other forms of synthesis.😎 It's been my belief and conviction that the last several years, from the mid-ish 10s on, is the first time FM synthesis has truly been popular. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sam Mullins Posted June 28, 2023 Share Posted June 28, 2023 35 minutes ago, CHarrell said: It's been my belief and conviction that the last several years, from the mid-ish 10s on, is the first time FM synthesis has truly been popular. Hmmmm....DX7 was the best selling synth in the mid-80's. 1 Quote Yamaha CK88, Arturia Keylab 61 MkII, Moog Sub 37, Yamaha U1 Upright, Casio CT-S500, Mac Logic/Mainstage, iPad Camelot, Spacestation V.3, QSC K10.2, JBL EON One Compact www.stickmanor.com There's a thin white line between fear and fury - Stickman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bfields Posted June 28, 2023 Share Posted June 28, 2023 31 minutes ago, Sam Mullins said: Hmmmm....DX7 was the best selling synth in the mid-80's. Well, I think there's a distinction to be made between "FM synthesis being popular" and "a lot of FM presets being popular". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sam Mullins Posted June 28, 2023 Share Posted June 28, 2023 15 minutes ago, bfields said: Well, I think there's a distinction to be made between "FM synthesis being popular" and "a lot of FM presets being popular". sure if "FM synthesis being popular" means "creating FM synthesis programs is more popular" rather than "using FM synthesis is more popular" ...I didn't take it that way. Television programs are popular but most people don't make TV programs. So if that was what was meant, then I have no opinion on whether more people are creating FM synth programs. Quote Yamaha CK88, Arturia Keylab 61 MkII, Moog Sub 37, Yamaha U1 Upright, Casio CT-S500, Mac Logic/Mainstage, iPad Camelot, Spacestation V.3, QSC K10.2, JBL EON One Compact www.stickmanor.com There's a thin white line between fear and fury - Stickman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.