The DX7 II sounds the same but more articulate and refined than the DX7. It's like the difference between 720 and 1080 video. Tbh, I probably couldn't tell the difference on most of these comparisons but I think you can especially hear it with the 'Q time 1AT' patch.
Pretty sure the difference is akin to the guitar "tonewood" debate, amp "digital vs. tube" debate, or "vinyl vs. cd". Experts might be able to tell the difference when given an isolated sound, but in the mix, after eq and processing, very few would know. That said, I like the Mk1 more in this test, even though I own a iiD and appreciate all the refinements. :P
for guitars yes, for vinyl vs CD there is a winner in sound quality. CD wins... (i own vinyls, quality is not what makes them great it's other things) you can hear the difference on a crappy system. but listening to this video on iPod speakers i can't hear any differences... 12bit DACs... 70dB of distance between maximum amplitude signal and the digital noise floor... the theory does not object as well. so yes the DX7 I was already enough in terms of quality.
AWESOME that you've gone through the trouble of comparing the two generations back to back. For lower frequencies, and busier sounds, the additional digital farts and squeaks of the MkI are hard to hear. However it's a pity you didn't do some playing that would really show up the sound differences. Had you put in an example with 1) high notes with more pure sounds, 2) slow pitch changes from bend wheel or pitch envelope, then anyone hear would be able to hear the difference. You don't even need fancy headphones or speakers as the digital noise is already very audible even in the 2-4kHz window. Anyone could hear the noise just by cranking the volume :-D
The Mk1 DX7 seems to have more low end on all the patches. The last patch the MKI and MKII seem pretty matched. I would say the MK1 is the winner from this video
Very useful - thanks. Just what I thought. Had the OG with an E-board and when it was stolen from me in 1991 I got the II FD - I never had any regrets over the shift ;)
True that. The DX7 two is two layer multitimbral. It offers layered mode, split mode and can receive on two midi channels for Part A and Part B. The layered sounds sound awesome.
booth ar so close than only on polysynth I ear a light difference in high note .... the patches ( sounds ) you use are really nice your DX7 sound like true analog Synth
Damn. I'm sure there's some stuff that DX7II can do better, but very pleasantly surprised with how good (warm 🤫) the standard DX7 sounds on a lot of these patches.
I love my dx7iid, it can be so subtle and alive, the bigger screen is better for editing too and Stereo dual mode- no contest. It's a huge improvement before you even talk about noise floor. I get the love for the original, but i think it's mostly nostalgia.
Hm, better is maybe a matter of taste… I had MK I, now have MK II and I kind of liked the hiss and buss, miss that a bit on the II. On many sounds that really adds to the texture… also beefier in the low ends, I find. The MK II is more bright and clear, which also has great sonic qualities.
If you are not listening super-carefully, yes, they're identical. But for serious recording projects the second generation is definitely superior. Also, the DX7II series has split and layer which is nice live.
Don't hear a relevant difference. The difference is even smaller if you consider the difference in velocity response. The DX7 is clearly more beautiful, but remember to never judge a book by its cover;)
Agreed, the first-gen should be in a design museum. Gorgeous. The MkII is blah. But if you listen carefully you'll hear a big difference, especially on higher notes with slow pitch envelopes.
MKI sounds awesome! Very warm and musical. Somehow they've misses it with MKII, it's gritty, more digital and less musical. Shame MKI lacks MKII featured, especially the dual voices and performances
Agreed: Paul's demonstrated that for at least these types of patches, there's practically no difference for amateur listening. In a recording studio, quiet room, with high-end monitors or headphones, and the right patches, you'd definitely hear a night and day difference.
This is the best comparison video I've seen so far. Great job keeping it simple, and great playing, too!
They both sound very similar but MK2 sounds crisper and better. thanks for the vid.
The DX7 II sounds the same but more articulate and refined than the DX7. It's like the difference between 720 and 1080 video. Tbh, I probably couldn't tell the difference on most of these comparisons but I think you can especially hear it with the 'Q time 1AT' patch.
Great comparison. More subtle than I remembered.
Such an amazing patches!
Pretty sure the difference is akin to the guitar "tonewood" debate, amp "digital vs. tube" debate, or "vinyl vs. cd". Experts might be able to tell the difference when given an isolated sound, but in the mix, after eq and processing, very few would know.
That said, I like the Mk1 more in this test, even though I own a iiD and appreciate all the refinements. :P
for guitars yes,
for vinyl vs CD there is a winner in sound quality. CD wins... (i own vinyls, quality is not what makes them great it's other things) you can hear the difference on a crappy system.
but listening to this video on iPod speakers i can't hear any differences... 12bit DACs... 70dB of distance between maximum amplitude signal and the digital noise floor... the theory does not object as well.
so yes the DX7 I was already enough in terms of quality.
Exactly what I was looking for! Thank you for your time and efforts.
It seems to me that one instrument sounds here - DX7IID )
MK-I sounds warmer and less digital. I prefer it by much over the MK-II.
With the exception of the last patch
CS80 DRWHO, I actually liked the less refined sound of the DX7 over the DX7II. Nice video, thanks for posting.
DX7 MKI has a warmer, organic sound. Noticed right away.
I am a DX7 programmer to see my patches on my channel. Well, the DX7 mk1 seems to be a bit more aggressive.
AWESOME that you've gone through the trouble of comparing the two generations back to back.
For lower frequencies, and busier sounds, the additional digital farts and squeaks of the MkI are hard to hear.
However it's a pity you didn't do some playing that would really show up the sound differences. Had you put in an example with 1) high notes with more pure sounds, 2) slow pitch changes from bend wheel or pitch envelope, then anyone hear would be able to hear the difference. You don't even need fancy headphones or speakers as the digital noise is already very audible even in the 2-4kHz window. Anyone could hear the noise just by cranking the volume :-D
Thanks for doing this!
The Mk1 DX7 seems to have more low end on all the patches. The last patch the MKI and MKII seem pretty matched. I would say the MK1 is the winner from this video
Very useful - thanks. Just what I thought. Had the OG with an E-board and when it was stolen from me in 1991 I got the II FD - I never had any regrets over the shift ;)
True that. The DX7 two is two layer multitimbral. It offers layered mode, split mode and can receive on two midi channels for Part A and Part B. The layered sounds sound awesome.
Super video the DX7 and the DX7IID are awesome for the sound very very close (with my ears : no differences) but you can load MK1 patchs in the IID ?
booth ar so close than only on polysynth I ear a light difference in high note .... the patches ( sounds ) you use are really nice your DX7 sound like true analog Synth
Damn. I'm sure there's some stuff that DX7II can do better, but very pleasantly surprised with how good (warm 🤫) the standard DX7 sounds on a lot of these patches.
I love my dx7iid, it can be so subtle and alive, the bigger screen is better for editing too and Stereo dual mode- no contest. It's a huge improvement before you even talk about noise floor.
I get the love for the original, but i think it's mostly nostalgia.
I'm listening on nice headphones. There is such a small difference that to say the Dx7 mk1 is "warmer" is just silly
But it is. I own both.
Lots of silly people here,
The whole point of the IID is the patch layering / stereo capability, which you won't get using mark 1 patches
It also sounds better.
Hm, better is maybe a matter of taste… I had MK I, now have MK II and I kind of liked the hiss and buss, miss that a bit on the II. On many sounds that really adds to the texture… also beefier in the low ends, I find. The MK II is more bright and clear, which also has great sonic qualities.
DX-7 IID is better due to the perfected Midi Capabilities.
Sounds pretty much the same. I just got the mk1 tho cuz I liked the way it looks
If you are not listening super-carefully, yes, they're identical. But for serious recording projects the second generation is definitely superior. Also, the DX7II series has split and layer which is nice live.
Thank you very much! :-)
0:51 maaan I'm in love with those strings
Any chance you would be willing to share the sysex files of these with us? They're all really great sounds.
Hey Melvin, sorry for the late reply. I found all the sounds in the 'All The Web' collection. Unfortunately, I didn't store them anywhere seperately.
MKI, 12 Bit magic🍻
where i can get this presets from?
DX7 MK1 is the winner. Sounds more musical and has that magic old DAC quality that cannot be replicated. Sits better in a mix being mono too.
lol, you have no idea what you are saying. I can tell you're not an audio engineer.
@@lqr824 You are right.
Your comment triggered 2 putzes.
The mk2 is Mono unless you press the stereo button
Dx7II sounds better
Please share these patches?
They can be found in the 'All The Web' collection.
Dx7 II has some more fat and its stereo give more atmosphere of sound
Sounds great! How do I find the Delete Vou patch??
I found it in the 'All The Web' collection.
Hi Paul! Haven’t seen you in a while anyway Hi!
the suggestion power....
I don't hear real difference.
Don't hear a relevant difference. The difference is even smaller if you consider the difference in velocity response.
The DX7 is clearly more beautiful, but remember to never judge a book by its cover;)
Agreed, the first-gen should be in a design museum. Gorgeous. The MkII is blah. But if you listen carefully you'll hear a big difference, especially on higher notes with slow pitch envelopes.
So fm sounds like fm. Great. Confirmed.
Is the DX7 IID only in Stereo in dual mode?
It's been a while, but I'm certain I would have kept it in mono to match the MK I.
@@Paul-pc9qr I'll be getting a DX7 IID in the future as the sound is that bit cleaner and be able to dual sounds. I'll still be keeping my mk1 though.
The DX7MKII can be in stereo or mono in both single and dual voice mode!
Litlle bit differenc
MKI sounds awesome! Very warm and musical. Somehow they've misses it with MKII, it's gritty, more digital and less musical. Shame MKI lacks MKII featured, especially the dual voices and performances
I have found that the dx7-2 sounds cheesy while mk1 sounds timeless
I have found that you have no idea what you talking about, cheesehead.
DX7 MK 1 WIN.
MK2 is brighter and crispier like a washed and waxed car, MK1 is darker and organic ... more real
No point in this video. They sound exactly the same on every patch. C'mon! It sounds like midi from the top into the bottom one. Ridiculous
If all you learned was that they sound the same, then you still learned something.
Agreed: Paul's demonstrated that for at least these types of patches, there's practically no difference for amateur listening. In a recording studio, quiet room, with high-end monitors or headphones, and the right patches, you'd definitely hear a night and day difference.