The DX is essentially a specialized graphing calculator that outputs its functions as audio signals instead of visual graphs, cleverly disguised as a keyboard instrument for the convenience of musicians. If music is math, then 80s music is trigonometry.
Hi, thanks for watching! Ha, that's very clever. I never saw it this way, but you're kind of right. From the 70s to the 80s, music got more "formulaic" indeed. But well, it was a beautiful formula :) I remember people complaining about this when I was a kid, but nowadays the evaluation of 80s music has gotten much more positive, and many of those formulaic songs (and sounds!) are now regarded timeless classics. Best regards!
Excellent video, the right level of details - not too much, not too superficial - and with an oscilloscope! Great 👍🏽 this really helped me levelling-up my understanding
Wow..this video really pumps the GAAS on buying a DX because its first time I have understood what FM Synthesis is...and what the patterns on the DX 7 are indicating about the Operator Algorithms.
Thanks! I think the Reface DX is one of the best FM synths at the moment. It can have feedback on every operator and each operator has it's own envelope and LFO. That's worth way more than having 6 operators.
Phase modulation! Now that makes sense! I used to do RF technology and FM therefore FM syntheses didn’t make sense to me at first glance. Shifting the phase does! I can’t wait to get into “FM” synthesis.
Floyd Steinberg but with modulating the frequency with just another sine wave you get a wobble in frequency. In that case you’d need a lot of operators to have Fourier analysis working.
FM and PM both gives the same spectrum. The difference is: with a "real" FM you have to adjust the modulation depth to the audio frequency, so the synthesizer has much more math to do. With a PM, the spectrum is exactly the same (Bessel functions!) but it scales "automagically" with the frequency, no additional math needed, and then the PM is much easier to implement in the CPU. That's why all of these "FM" synths are in reality PM. Casio did something called Phase Distortion, which is PM, but done in the different way, which gives different sound spectrum than classic PM/FM - en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phase_distortion_synthesis
Thank you for the knowledge and all the hard work that you & your team put into making this channel possible. Really spoken in a easy way to understand. Good sound &visual Great work. Could not have done a better job.
Thanks for your kind words! Well, I think I have to thank my family for tolerating this (if you think about it, sitting alone in a room talking to a camera is a rather weird thing to do ;-) )
Excellent video. Just got a dx7 , I had a Casio cz5000 and cz1, that I regret selling, but the term phase distortion, makes sense now. I want to try all this on my modular now.
Hi, thanks for watching and your flattering words ;-) I'm far from being an academic, and if I recall correctly, this is senior high school level mathematics (that is a long time ago... :)
You have the first part a bit backwards: Operator 4 modulates Operator 3, and the result modulates 2, which then modulates 1. The other stuff is right. It's a bit confusing even when you've been doing it for a while.
1:50 OK, I already grasped the basics of FM, but was struggling when working in software synths like Operator in Ableton. I thought (algorithm 1) that 2 modulated 1, and that 3 modulated 2. But here it shows that it's different: 3 is not modulating 2 (the result of which is modulating 1), but 3 is modulating the result of 1 being modulated by 2. Apparently that's something different. In notation 3-> (2->1) and not (3->2) -> 1. There is a priority that IMO does not show in the notation.
I guess you're right and I'm wrong. It should be the other way round (I don't have my DX here at the moment to check) You can check by turning off the operator. If you don't hear sound any more, it was the carrier. :-)
@@mr_floydst Thank you for your quick response. I'm using Operator, DX7V and have Dexed ready to practice (as well as a scope). But reproducing what's in the video does not go smoothly (no critique ;-)). I'm also in doubt about the phase modulation (do these apps use that too(I ask myself)). Anyway, I guess in the video the Reface uses phase modulation next to FM, doesn't it? BTW I try to approach things 'the other way around', not trial and error to find nice sounds, but trying to grasp which operations will lead to desired results (like you do). Very insightful was importing the (famous) Yamaha DX7 Factor Sysex in an app like Dexed and see what elements determine the sound.
@@fritsvanzanten3573 The main difference between the Reface DX and other FM synths is that every operator can feed back into itself in 2 directions (saw / square). The DX7 couldn't do that, so you'll have to find workarounds. In Dexed, algorithm 3 is a good point to start with. There are two branches with 3 operators each, so you could approach some of the sounds here.
Everybody goes around saying that the dx family does phase modulation, not frequency modulation, but no one explains the difference. For what I've read both techniques are almost equivalent when the modulating signal is a sine wave.
Hi, thanks for watching! Hm, I thought I explained the mathematical difference. Frequency Modulation is f(x)=sin(x*sin(x)) and Phase Modulation is f(x)=sin(x+sin(x)) . You can play around with these on this page: www.mathe-fa.de/en I think in the end the sound will be quite similar, but you need to adjust the parameters in other factors. Best regards!
A really nice presentation, but it is frustrating that so most fm tutorials cover exactly these same basics, and never go much further. Honourable mention goes to madfame, element 433 and power dx7.
Thanks for watching! Well, I made a lot of more in-depth videos after this one, for example, this one: ruclips.net/video/ZGtPTEpyGTw/видео.html ;-) Best regards!
@@mr_floydst amazing - I'll be watching these - especially the cymbal one. No idea why, but I love programming FM - I have a TX7 and TX81Z, 6 & 4ops and always looking for good tutorials - your content quality is really high, I'm looking forward to more of your classes. Thank you!
Interesting topic, I consider terms are right. Frequency modulation is the result of modulating the phase and vice versa. To explain to someone what it does (without scope, just by listening), I like to set the ratio of a modulator very low so that it sounds like a vibrato. As you clearly hear the pitch is changing, it would make sense to call it FM. Either way, this type of synthesis isn't for everybody anyway, let alone the maths behind it. Wouldn't worry too much about it :)
@@tehedx hello, thanks for reply. Frequency modulation is the result of modulating the frequency, as it says. PM - modulating the phase, as it says. From the point of view of the math these are two different results, as phase and frequency is two separate (different) parameters of one (lets say) sinusoidal equasion. Thus changing two different parameters can't be exactlly the same. Technicaly it can give us same result, but only with exact parameters set. Same as two functions that intersects in some point with exact given set of (x; y), but functions itself are not totally overlaping each other... From the point of view of sound, of course, these two methods of modulations (or more, as much as many parameters can be modulated) give different sounds in general. We will clearly hear some pitch floating up and down using FM, and harmonic saturation using PM. We can't make siren or vibrato (as you said) with PM... Sadly, I don't know any PM vst except Blue2, that is FM and PM, so you can use either first one ot second method, and hear kinda different "style" of sounds... Also there are some videos on youtube (can't remember) containing great visualization for PM, after wich one can be certain that FM != PM
@@hostlitd112 thanks for your reply, good explanation! I was focussing only on the mild modulator volumes, but when it is set higher (where it starts to wrap the sine and adds harmonics) it is clear that FM != PM. Out of curiousity, since I don't have a Yamaha to play with, can't one make a vibrato? The Korg Opsix does it. Though _something_ is odd or different about this synth, since the result doesn't seem to match what a DX does.
@@tehedx Yeah, that is it! Sine starts wrapping, while in FM sine goes faster or slower... Are you asking about Yamaha vibrato? I don't know, I didnt work with real device synth, only VSTs :( In theory you can't do vibrato in PM, but as you set modulator volumes lower (as you said), it tends to be more mistaken with FM. Thus in that moment you can achieve not vibrato exatly but something similar to FM with hight speed (frequency) modulator, where it would be something buzzy, and with PM you can also make something buzzy. Low frequency, or high volumed modulation is totally different though, just like you noticed
Floyd Steinberg I tried to read the equation.. is that f(x)= Asin(Bx-Csin(Dx) for a 2 operators? Not sure if I’m right with the minus. A and C are output levels, B and D the frequencies.. I just didn’t add pi, makes no difference in the idea. I’ve found clever from you to make that math, really worth the video!! Makes sense to develop a small app that could show a curve changing in real-time while changing A, B, C, D on some sort of sliders
Hi! Before I made this video, I looked the whole topic up in some old books I have, and Wikipedia of course, and then played around with those formulas on www.mathe-fa.de/en The basic formula is this wikimedia.org/api/rest_v1/media/math/render/svg/be237d5fab265d9c4ff2062aed5be96c0102880e while a more in-depth explanation can be found here: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frequency_modulation_synthesis
Floyd Steinberg thanks for the details. I’ve just read the Wikipedia page and it looks like the formula I’ve wrote in previous comment is about the same. I was wondering why is there a minus ( - ) in your video (on the map program) instead of the ( + ). On your video it looks actually be the right formula but I wanted to know how come that it is ( - ) instead of ( + ) .. :D but that’s a detail since you actually showed the reality inside FM synthesis :D
FM or PM as in this case is a bitch to learn intuitively. One needs an oscilloscope, frequently analyzer and or excellent ears. Good video, however I have hoped you would show more examples of different configurations.
Hi, thanks for watching! It's not _that_ hard , though. 🙂 The oscilloscope was for making the point of this video only, basically all you need to remember is "level of operator makes sound brighter". I have made plenty of example videos, here's a playlist: ruclips.net/p/PLN55_-YN4bzh8tMRJT6DtXV9jbO1t2Yxk Best regards!
Hi, thanks for watching! Hm, maybe I got you wrong, but isn't that what I've said there? 1 is the carrier, and it's signal gets consecutively modulated by the other 3 operators. Best regards!
Where is this modulation taking place? Is it applied post oscillation, and two sounds modulate each other or is one oscillator modulating other. Very interesting video!
Hi, thanks for watching! The "Oscillators" are modulating each other depending on the layout of the algorithm you chose. This all happens before sound output (this is a digital synth).
@@mr_floydst Thank you for answering! I must say, even after reading about this, I can't really wrap my head around of what digital actually means.... I know, its bits...Anyway, could this main function of oscillators modulating each other be applied also to actual sound signal? Also on digital synth there has to be at some point something, that produces an actual sound....
Hi Floyd, thanks for the helpful tutorial on the reface DX. I'm interested in supplementing mine with a DAW controller like you have with the Korg. Do you have any resources on how I can set this up to control my DX's parameters? Were you limited to only the levels and feedback control?
"The function of x is ..." - a fancy way of saying "the value of the function on the Y-axis at x is". In this case, you could also say "Y is". f(x) is a more general way of describing it, I guess.
Feedback works as the name implies, by feeding back the output of an operator as a modulator into the signal created in the first place. I guess we're looking at something similar to f(x)=sin(x+a*sin(x+b*sin(x+c*sin(x))) here with a being the amplitude / strength of the recursed signal. This will result in roughly the wave you're seeing there.
fm modulation dont work as you adding signal. But modulater modulate pitch of the carrier. So if you put 440... then modulator will oscilate this frequency number. So i dont understend dat one sine + modulator siny is higher amp... because its not sine + sine but very fast vibrato on freq of the carier where amp/vol of modulator is how far will oscilate the number of freq of carrier
Thanks for watching! I think the formula I'm showing here is correct, it's a bit "dumbed down", the actual formula is a bit more "theoretical": ringbuffer.org/sound_synthesis_introduction/Modulation/fm-synthesis-formula-spectra The modulator is (as its name implies) modulating the original signal produced by the carrier, so you can't make your sound louder by adding modulators. You'll have to stack carriers to achieve that.
@@mr_floydst yea, im programing my own fm synth now in pd so im watching on some content about algorythms of fm and staff to get some inspiration. And this video did give me some ideas so thx! :) It´s great time to dig in those stuff, so Im glad to see people making videos about theese stuff. Especially with hardware I dont have, but can see how it work a learn how somebody else did dat.
Hi, thanks for watching! No, not really. A ring modulator is a multiplication of two signals f(x)*f(x). While FM is f(x+f(x)) (changing the phase of the original signal)
The built-in effects (Reface DX) are quite good! You'll have to pay a lot more money to get something which sounds better. The FM engine has some unique features you won't find anywhere else (in the $3000 Korg Kronos, perhaps). :)
Floyd Steinberg thank you so much for your response it really means the world! I doubt I’d ever pay that much for the Kronos I’m a mediocre keyboardist but do you think the DX is pro level use for an actual industry album maybe?
@@Iwtbaf Sound-wise? Definitely. But if you're just planning to produce some tracks, a DAW with DEXED and some effects plugins may be the cheaper option (plus you're gaining time because you don't have to multi-track in real time). Nice thing about the Reface is you can take it anywhere because of it's size and it's batteries and built-in speakers. I found the mini keys are very playable. So yes, it's a great sounding, pro-level synth, but a small one. :-)
Floyd Steinberg thank you so much for your replies. I will go check out those resources. Your love for the synth world has help many of us and it truly helped me been trying to get this question answered for a few months after I bought the CP I really appreciate it!
how have you connected your synth to your ocilloscope? I'm looking to build a rig with all my volcas in a wooden stand etc and thought it might make a nice aesthetic edition if possible?
I had an old 3.5 mm audio cable I cut and dismantled and connected to the headphone out. I connected the oscilloscopy with some crocodile clips to that.
Hi, thanks for watching! The Nanocontrol settings are linked in the videos description 🙂 and the nanocomtrol ia connected with a USB host from hobbytronics.co.uk
Hi, thanks for watching! All Yamaha FM synths employ phase modulation. I think there were some Casio Synths which used another kind of modulation, but I don't know much about these.
I'm having a hard time get my Scope hooked up to my DX7. I can get it to read but only with a horrible buzz. I know im messing this up somehow. How does everyone get the audio in? is it just red to sleeve/ black to tip? new to this guys sorry.
Thanks for watching! In this video, I connected the oscilloscope to the headphone out of the Reface DX. I just "crocodile clamps" on a 6.35mm audio plug.
Hi! To be honest, I don't know. Yamaha's are, but on analog synths that have this feature, I'm pretty sure it's actual frequency modulation. Casio introduced phase distortion synthesis in the 80s, which is badly explained on Wikipedia en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phase_distortion_synthesis ;-)
@fru olli Well the "trick" here is changing the modulators frequency and amplitude with an LFO, while the carrier is tuned down to the lowest possible frequency. The formula should look something like this f(x)=sin(0.5*x+sin(3*sin(x)*x)).
I see, so basically when we are dealing with a single carrier and single modulator, we have frequency modulation. However, when we we stack another modulator on top of the modulator, we begin to have phase modulation. Which is not the same as Casio's phase modulation (used in CZ- and VZ-series), where the phase modulation means the variation of the readout time of the waveform. Not sure then why Yamaha and Casio supposedly had a conflict about Casio infringing on Yamaha's patents, since Yamaha's FM is quite different from Casio's PD synthesis.
Hi, thanks for watching! It's this one: amzn.to/2Qm65VM I updated the video description with some links. Edit: Sorry, link was broken in my first reply.
Yeah, isn't that crazy! For years Yamaha actually took competitors to court for making the same mistake. And they weren't even the first to make such instruments. Some early computer synthesizers where there first. Furthemore FM and AM where already possible on modular analog synths before that. The beautifull world of big business and its institutional abuse of the patent system, eh?!
Thanks for watching! I didn't know they did. I think the DX7 deserves the limelight it enjoys, as it made synths much more practicable for the everyday musician trying to play a gig without having to deal with detuned oscillators 'n stuff. Funny thing is 40 years later, there's still no FM synth with a hands-on interface. The Reface DX was good, but not perfect. I didn't look at the OP6 yet...
@@mr_floydst Oh, but I am not dissing the DX-series as such. I owned the DX7 when it was new and programmed the (beep) out of it. It cost me as much time as games cost people today. I still wlked away from FM later (to siny and harsh) but own some of the finest analog Yamaha 's. Only that the Chowning patents where used as a crowbar to force exclusivity keeps bugging me. By the way: There have been experiments to make FM=AM more accesible. If you do not yet know them you could have a look at the "programming systems of" the Yamaha PSR-36 and the Elka X1000. If one tweaks the synthesizer functions on a PSR-36 live one can even get some PPG 360 Wavecomputer like sounds by shoving it through its stepped, low resolution brightness parameter. I don't know if you can do that on the X1000 but it has a semi-filter control as well and a complete set of "filter" and VCA EG's. It basically puts a range of analog like controls in your hands with which you can modify and (re)store the presets. These sounds are produced by 4 operator Yamaha chips. If it wasn't that bulky and I hadn't run out of space years ago I 'd trace one down. It can be used as a sort of central workstation anyway (2 velocity and channel aftertouh sensitive keyboards, full midi, multitrack sequencer, programmable drums, etc.) :-)
FM ≠ PM Stop fricking spreadin BS and confusing people, frequency modulation is not phase modulation, and yeah, it's all nice 'n' stuff when you use sine waves, try anything different from that, you'll realize quickly that the two are very different, because fm cares only about the phase's position, when pm cares only about the phase's angle, wich is very different sonically speaking, and yeah, nobody talks about this, everybody just assumes that the two are virtually identical, and the fault of all this was Yamaha's ,when they released the DX series, marketing it as FM, when it's just simple PM and the reasons behind this were multiple, one of them being the simple fact that PM, in terms of sonic content, is richer, hell, I could even say it sounds better, and at the time, FM was getting popular, with radios and stuff so why wouldn't it sound cool, if it was called FM (said the Yamaha marketing department?), and, the most important reason, at least for the time, PM is less complex, calculus-wise, compared to FM, and in the 80's processing power wasn't good, at least for the consumer grade stuff... P.S. Can't remember if I'm correct or not, but I've heard people claiming that FM "cannot" do feedback looping, like PM does, for some mathematical reasons I just can't remember, so yeah, technically one more point in favor of PM...
Hi Robert, thanks for watching and commenting, but uhm, that was the point of the video. The math behind Yamaha's "FM" is quite simple and all I wanted to show is how to create other basic waveshapes (as used in sound synthesis) with that. The actual FM (as learned by electrical engineers and used in radio signal transmission) is a very different thing.
@@mr_floydst Then fricking make 2 videos about it instead of saying to me, that "you did", listen, I really enjoyed your tutorial, up until you started referring to everything as FM, and never cared to explain the difference, and when you said it's "basically phase modulation" wich makes me think, you know what? Imma go n make the explanatory video meself... Yeah, Imma do that...
No. FM is not phase modulation. FM modulates the frequency of the carrier. Four oscs in parallel are Additive Synthesis (AS), not subtractive, but you used a saw wave as carrier, while AS uses normally sine waves. You need a frequency spectral analyzer not a simple osc screen to visualize what really goes on. Does anybody study a topic anymore before putting out videos that just show him/her not understanding the topic? Did you ever study Fourier Transformation and Signal Theory? You should! smh
Hi! Thank you very much for your feedback. On Yamaha Synths, it's definitely Phase Modulation (you can look that up on google, there are many sources indicating this: www.google.com/search?q=yamaha+dx7+phase+modulation ).
According to Wikipedia, actually Yamaha's implementation is indeed a phase modulation synthesis: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frequency_modulation_synthesis (see the start of the history section: first couple of paragraphs).
I think "FM" is a very broad term. It's a term for "embedding a signal in another signal" (and I know that's a pretty unscientific description). "FM" is used in analogue radios or electromagnetic signal transmission in general. If I wanted to "decode" the FM'd signal then of course I'd need more advanced tools than a $20 oscilloscope ;-) I think that's what pcuimac wanted to say. But that was not my intention. I just wanted to show that Yamaha's implementation is phase modulation, and "stacking up sine waves just right" (again, very unscientific wording) results in other "standard" wave shapes. "Feedback" works exactly the same way, but instead of "stacking" multiple operators, it's feeding back the modulated signal into the same modulator multiple times, until the desired wave shape is created.
That's right. Also, the Reface DX has a high quality effects section, a much easier-to-use interface, better A/D converters, is battery powered an can easily be carried around or tossed into a suitcase while travelling. ;-)
9:38 this is called a "batman wave"
OMG, you're right - "It's not the wave we need, but the wave we deserve" :-)
@@mr_floydst great video though. thank you for your work!
Such an underrated comment!
😅😅😅
Batmen, to be more precise (but well spotted) ;-)
The DX is essentially a specialized graphing calculator that outputs its functions as audio signals instead of visual graphs, cleverly disguised as a keyboard instrument for the convenience of musicians. If music is math, then 80s music is trigonometry.
Hi, thanks for watching! Ha, that's very clever. I never saw it this way, but you're kind of right. From the 70s to the 80s, music got more "formulaic" indeed. But well, it was a beautiful formula :) I remember people complaining about this when I was a kid, but nowadays the evaluation of 80s music has gotten much more positive, and many of those formulaic songs (and sounds!) are now regarded timeless classics.
Best regards!
Excellent video, the right level of details - not too much, not too superficial - and with an oscilloscope! Great 👍🏽 this really helped me levelling-up my understanding
Glad it was helpful - thanks for watching!
Wow..this video really pumps the GAAS on buying a DX because its first time I have understood what FM Synthesis is...and what the patterns on the DX 7 are indicating about the Operator Algorithms.
Thanks! I think the Reface DX is one of the best FM synths at the moment. It can have feedback on every operator and each operator has it's own envelope and LFO. That's worth way more than having 6 operators.
Yup, this video was the best one among those I watched. Will just link this to someone next time I happen to talk about this. Thank you!
Thanks for sharing!
Phase modulation! Now that makes sense! I used to do RF technology and FM therefore FM syntheses didn’t make sense to me at first glance. Shifting the phase does! I can’t wait to get into “FM” synthesis.
Thanks for watching! I think Casio built some actual frequency modulation synths in the mid-80s. Can't remember the name of that instruments, though.
Floyd Steinberg but with modulating the frequency with just another sine wave you get a wobble in frequency. In that case you’d need a lot of operators to have Fourier analysis working.
FM and PM both gives the same spectrum. The difference is: with a "real" FM you have to adjust the modulation depth to the audio frequency, so the synthesizer has much more math to do. With a PM, the spectrum is exactly the same (Bessel functions!) but it scales "automagically" with the frequency, no additional math needed, and then the PM is much easier to implement in the CPU. That's why all of these "FM" synths are in reality PM.
Casio did something called Phase Distortion, which is PM, but done in the different way, which gives different sound spectrum than classic PM/FM - en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phase_distortion_synthesis
Thank you for the knowledge and all the hard work that you & your team put into making this channel possible. Really spoken in a easy way to understand. Good sound &visual Great work. Could not have done a better job.
Thanks for your kind words! Well, I think I have to thank my family for tolerating this (if you think about it, sitting alone in a room talking to a camera is a rather weird thing to do ;-) )
I was trying to explain this to someone the other day, I think i`ll point them here instead. Thanks!
Thanks. Just subscribed to your channel. There's a Facebook group named "hardware jams", you should join that if you haven't already!
Already there :D in fact I`m in this weeks "Bass Drop" competition, I`ll see if I can find you and send a friend request.
u have explained so much to me dude. When I am doing the things I have your accent in my head. Thanks brother.
Thanks for your kind words! Fact: In the last two years, I worked hard on my pronunciation, and now my accent is... slightly different. ;-)
Excellent video. Just got a dx7 , I had a Casio cz5000 and cz1, that I regret selling, but the term phase distortion, makes sense now. I want to try all this on my modular now.
Thanks for watching!
Are you a professor by trade? You made signal/wave theory make so much more sense with this real time demonstration. Bravo!
Hi, thanks for watching and your flattering words ;-) I'm far from being an academic, and if I recall correctly, this is senior high school level mathematics (that is a long time ago... :)
Great explanation on how the DX and FM works.
Thank you!
This is exactly what I was looking for. And you explained it so well. Thank you!
Thanks for watching!
Amazing. I love scientific approach to music.
Thank you very much!
Yep, it's phase modulation. Gold star!
I need to build one of those oscilloscopes, brushing up on my 4 op fm. thx Floyd
Thanks for watching! It's a fun project, but not really mandatory. It looks nice on video, though. :)
@@mr_floydst I have a semi elaborate plan for one. Once set up for a synth is it right to go every time it turns on or needs constant adjustment?
@@avrilcadabra As it's digital, it remembers the switch settings. No need for adjustments.
Thanks Floyd for your explanation!
Thanks for watching!
You have the first part a bit backwards: Operator 4 modulates Operator 3, and the result modulates 2, which then modulates 1. The other stuff is right. It's a bit confusing even when you've been doing it for a while.
Thanks for your feedback. Oh, didn't I say that? Shame on me. ;-)
1:50 OK, I already grasped the basics of FM, but was struggling when working in software synths like Operator in Ableton. I thought (algorithm 1) that 2 modulated 1, and that 3 modulated 2. But here it shows that it's different: 3 is not modulating 2 (the result of which is modulating 1), but 3 is modulating the result of 1 being modulated by 2. Apparently that's something different. In notation 3-> (2->1) and not (3->2) -> 1. There is a priority that IMO does not show in the notation.
I guess you're right and I'm wrong. It should be the other way round (I don't have my DX here at the moment to check)
You can check by turning off the operator. If you don't hear sound any more, it was the carrier. :-)
@@mr_floydst Thank you for your quick response. I'm using Operator, DX7V and have Dexed ready to practice (as well as a scope). But reproducing what's in the video does not go smoothly (no critique ;-)). I'm also in doubt about the phase modulation (do these apps use that too(I ask myself)). Anyway, I guess in the video the Reface uses phase modulation next to FM, doesn't it? BTW I try to approach things 'the other way around', not trial and error to find nice sounds, but trying to grasp which operations will lead to desired results (like you do). Very insightful was importing the (famous) Yamaha DX7 Factor Sysex in an app like Dexed and see what elements determine the sound.
@@fritsvanzanten3573 The main difference between the Reface DX and other FM synths is that every operator can feed back into itself in 2 directions (saw / square).
The DX7 couldn't do that, so you'll have to find workarounds. In Dexed, algorithm 3 is a good point to start with. There are two branches with 3 operators each, so you could approach some of the sounds here.
Nice work Floyd!
Thanks for watching!
Man you are BRAIN!
Thanks for watching 🙂
Good basic explanations. Thanks 🤩👍🏻
Glad it was helpful! :)
Everybody goes around saying that the dx family does phase modulation, not frequency modulation, but no one explains the difference. For what I've read both techniques are almost equivalent when the modulating signal is a sine wave.
Hi, thanks for watching! Hm, I thought I explained the mathematical difference.
Frequency Modulation is f(x)=sin(x*sin(x)) and Phase Modulation is f(x)=sin(x+sin(x)) . You can play around with these on this page: www.mathe-fa.de/en I think in the end the sound will be quite similar, but you need to adjust the parameters in other factors. Best regards!
this is so cool!!! thx a lot
Thanks for watching!
Amazing video! Thanks a lot!
Thanks for watching! :)
Great video!
Thank you very much!
A really nice presentation, but it is frustrating that so most fm tutorials cover exactly these same basics, and never go much further. Honourable mention goes to madfame, element 433 and power dx7.
Thanks for watching! Well, I made a lot of more in-depth videos after this one, for example, this one: ruclips.net/video/ZGtPTEpyGTw/видео.html ;-)
Best regards!
@@mr_floydst amazing - I'll be watching these - especially the cymbal one. No idea why, but I love programming FM - I have a TX7 and TX81Z, 6 & 4ops and always looking for good tutorials - your content quality is really high, I'm looking forward to more of your classes. Thank you!
finally, someone who understands that phase modulation is PM, not FM
Thanks for watching! :)
Interesting topic, I consider terms are right. Frequency modulation is the result of modulating the phase and vice versa. To explain to someone what it does (without scope, just by listening), I like to set the ratio of a modulator very low so that it sounds like a vibrato. As you clearly hear the pitch is changing, it would make sense to call it FM. Either way, this type of synthesis isn't for everybody anyway, let alone the maths behind it. Wouldn't worry too much about it :)
@@tehedx hello, thanks for reply. Frequency modulation is the result of modulating the frequency, as it says. PM - modulating the phase, as it says. From the point of view of the math these are two different results, as phase and frequency is two separate (different) parameters of one (lets say) sinusoidal equasion. Thus changing two different parameters can't be exactlly the same. Technicaly it can give us same result, but only with exact parameters set. Same as two functions that intersects in some point with exact given set of (x; y), but functions itself are not totally overlaping each other... From the point of view of sound, of course, these two methods of modulations (or more, as much as many parameters can be modulated) give different sounds in general. We will clearly hear some pitch floating up and down using FM, and harmonic saturation using PM. We can't make siren or vibrato (as you said) with PM... Sadly, I don't know any PM vst except Blue2, that is FM and PM, so you can use either first one ot second method, and hear kinda different "style" of sounds... Also there are some videos on youtube (can't remember) containing great visualization for PM, after wich one can be certain that FM != PM
@@hostlitd112 thanks for your reply, good explanation! I was focussing only on the mild modulator volumes, but when it is set higher (where it starts to wrap the sine and adds harmonics) it is clear that FM != PM. Out of curiousity, since I don't have a Yamaha to play with, can't one make a vibrato? The Korg Opsix does it. Though _something_ is odd or different about this synth, since the result doesn't seem to match what a DX does.
@@tehedx Yeah, that is it! Sine starts wrapping, while in FM sine goes faster or slower... Are you asking about Yamaha vibrato? I don't know, I didnt work with real device synth, only VSTs :( In theory you can't do vibrato in PM, but as you set modulator volumes lower (as you said), it tends to be more mistaken with FM. Thus in that moment you can achieve not vibrato exatly but something similar to FM with hight speed (frequency) modulator, where it would be something buzzy, and with PM you can also make something buzzy. Low frequency, or high volumed modulation is totally different though, just like you noticed
Brilliant video. From now on I'm calling it PM synthesis.
Thanks for watching :)
Great explanation . THANKSS
you are smart! thanks for the video!
Thanks for your kind words!
@@mr_floydst the video was intresting, helpfull and funny.
The only reface dx video to not feature electric piano preset
Thanks for watching! Dang! I broke the codex. I hope Yamaha's special task force won't storm my
Thanks for the clarification!!
Thanks for watching! :)
Floyd Steinberg I tried to read the equation.. is that
f(x)= Asin(Bx-Csin(Dx)
for a 2 operators? Not sure if I’m right with the minus. A and C are output levels, B and D the frequencies.. I just didn’t add pi, makes no difference in the idea. I’ve found clever from you to make that math, really worth the video!! Makes sense to develop a small app that could show a curve changing in real-time while changing A, B, C, D on some sort of sliders
Hi! Before I made this video, I looked the whole topic up in some old books I have, and Wikipedia of course, and then played around with those formulas on www.mathe-fa.de/en
The basic formula is this wikimedia.org/api/rest_v1/media/math/render/svg/be237d5fab265d9c4ff2062aed5be96c0102880e while a more in-depth explanation can be found here: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frequency_modulation_synthesis
Floyd Steinberg thanks for the details. I’ve just read the Wikipedia page and it looks like the formula I’ve wrote in previous comment is about the same. I was wondering why is there a minus ( - ) in your video (on the map program) instead of the ( + ). On your video it looks actually be the right formula but I wanted to know how come that it is ( - ) instead of ( + ) .. :D but that’s a detail since you actually showed the reality inside FM synthesis :D
Well, you can write x+n or x+(-n). Using a minus there will invert the function. I thinks it not wrong, strictly speaking. :-)
this man is smart
Thanks for watching!
Great vid thank you
Thanks for watching!
sehr gut wieder was gelernt.....welche Camera nutzt du denn?
Danke! Sony Alpha 7, 50mm f1.8 - helpful in times when the sun shines for around 4 seconds each day. :-)
I use 2 of these oscilloscopes
plugged into the headphone jack of the mixer, I can see both stereo channels.
Thanks for the info! I think I need to try that myself, havn't used this Oscilloscope for a long time now.
FM or PM as in this case is a bitch to learn intuitively. One needs an oscilloscope, frequently analyzer and or excellent ears. Good video, however I have hoped you would show more examples of different configurations.
Hi, thanks for watching! It's not _that_ hard , though. 🙂 The oscilloscope was for making the point of this video only, basically all you need to remember is "level of operator makes sound brighter". I have made plenty of example videos, here's a playlist: ruclips.net/p/PLN55_-YN4bzh8tMRJT6DtXV9jbO1t2Yxk Best regards!
1:49 isn't it the other way around?
Operator 3 is modulated by 4, 2 by 3 and the carrier 1 is modulated by operatior 2...
Hi, thanks for watching! Hm, maybe I got you wrong, but isn't that what I've said there? 1 is the carrier, and it's signal gets consecutively modulated by the other 3 operators. Best regards!
Where is this modulation taking place? Is it applied post oscillation, and two sounds modulate each other or is one oscillator modulating other. Very interesting video!
Hi, thanks for watching! The "Oscillators" are modulating each other depending on the layout of the algorithm you chose. This all happens before sound output (this is a digital synth).
@@mr_floydst Thank you for answering! I must say, even after reading about this, I can't really wrap my head around of what digital actually means.... I know, its bits...Anyway, could this main function of oscillators modulating each other be applied also to actual sound signal? Also on digital synth there has to be at some point something, that produces an actual sound....
6:18 for full understanding it would be handy to know the algorithm applied here ;-)
Once more, thanks for pointing it out. :)
Thanks Floyd.
Thanks for watching! :-)
How do you achieve the oscilloscope picture-in-picture effect? Does it have a video output?
Thanks for watching! No, I just filmed it with my smartphone - you can see that at 6:40 for example.
Thanks, very helpful
Thanks for watching! :)
Hi Floyd, thanks for the helpful tutorial on the reface DX. I'm interested in supplementing mine with a DAW controller like you have with the Korg. Do you have any resources on how I can set this up to control my DX's parameters? Were you limited to only the levels and feedback control?
Hi! It's one of the first videos I ever made (in which I talk slooooowly and wiz a stronk accent): ruclips.net/video/zzEOUFtKQAs/видео.html ;-)
@@mr_floydst You rock. Thank you :D
Nice and easy. You are awesome.
What does the 'f' and 'x' represent in the equation at 7:51?
"The function of x is ..." - a fancy way of saying "the value of the function on the Y-axis at x is". In this case, you could also say "Y is". f(x) is a more general way of describing it, I guess.
@@mr_floydst Thanks! Excellent video, btw.
Why doesn't the feedback-generated square wave look like a square wave?
Feedback works as the name implies, by feeding back the output of an operator as a modulator into the signal created in the first place. I guess we're looking at something similar to f(x)=sin(x+a*sin(x+b*sin(x+c*sin(x))) here with a being the amplitude / strength of the recursed signal. This will result in roughly the wave you're seeing there.
Is there a second part to this ?
Yes, there is! Here's a playlist of all my FM synthesis videos. ruclips.net/video/r3EQQ-XF3jA/видео.html
Oh thanks!
fm modulation dont work as you adding signal. But modulater modulate pitch of the carrier. So if you put 440... then modulator will oscilate this frequency number. So i dont understend dat one sine + modulator siny is higher amp... because its not sine + sine but very fast vibrato on freq of the carier where amp/vol of modulator is how far will oscilate the number of freq of carrier
Thanks for watching! I think the formula I'm showing here is correct, it's a bit "dumbed down", the actual formula is a bit more "theoretical": ringbuffer.org/sound_synthesis_introduction/Modulation/fm-synthesis-formula-spectra
The modulator is (as its name implies) modulating the original signal produced by the carrier, so you can't make your sound louder by adding modulators. You'll have to stack carriers to achieve that.
@@mr_floydst yea, im programing my own fm synth now in pd so im watching on some content about algorythms of fm and staff to get some inspiration. And this video did give me some ideas so thx! :)
It´s great time to dig in those stuff, so Im glad to see people making videos about theese stuff. Especially with hardware I dont have, but can see how it work a learn how somebody else did dat.
So is fm synthesis basically like ring modulation?
Hi, thanks for watching! No, not really. A ring modulator is a multiplication of two signals f(x)*f(x). While FM is f(x+f(x)) (changing the phase of the original signal)
what do you think of the sound quality vs something more expensive?
The built-in effects (Reface DX) are quite good! You'll have to pay a lot more money to get something which sounds better. The FM engine has some unique features you won't find anywhere else (in the $3000 Korg Kronos, perhaps). :)
Floyd Steinberg thank you so much for your response it really means the world! I doubt I’d ever pay that much for the Kronos I’m a mediocre keyboardist but do you think the DX is pro level use for an actual industry album maybe?
@@Iwtbaf Sound-wise? Definitely. But if you're just planning to produce some tracks, a DAW with DEXED and some effects plugins may be the cheaper option (plus you're gaining time because you don't have to multi-track in real time). Nice thing about the Reface is you can take it anywhere because of it's size and it's batteries and built-in speakers. I found the mini keys are very playable. So yes, it's a great sounding, pro-level synth, but a small one. :-)
Floyd Steinberg thank you so much for your replies. I will go check out those resources. Your love for the synth world has help many of us and it truly helped me been trying to get this question answered for a few months after I bought the CP I really appreciate it!
@@mr_floydst is it possible for them to add velocity to the CS through firmware update or is it just not possible?
how have you connected your synth to your ocilloscope? I'm looking to build a rig with all my volcas in a wooden stand etc and thought it might make a nice aesthetic edition if possible?
I had an old 3.5 mm audio cable I cut and dismantled and connected to the headphone out. I connected the oscilloscopy with some crocodile clips to that.
@@mr_floydst thanks alot!
how do you connect the korg nanocontrol to the reface dx? what are the connectors and settings for this to work?
Hi, thanks for watching! The Nanocontrol settings are linked in the videos description 🙂 and the nanocomtrol ia connected with a USB host from hobbytronics.co.uk
So, is the original DX-7 frequency or phase modulation?
Hi, thanks for watching! All Yamaha FM synths employ phase modulation. I think there were some Casio Synths which used another kind of modulation, but I don't know much about these.
@@mr_floydst Awesome, thank you!
I clicked your vid because of that gadget. I want one
Thanks for watching. I think the link is in the video's description.
I'm having a hard time get my Scope hooked up to my DX7. I can get it to read but only with a horrible buzz. I know im messing this up somehow. How does everyone get the audio in? is it just red to sleeve/ black to tip? new to this guys sorry.
Thanks for watching! In this video, I connected the oscilloscope to the headphone out of the Reface DX. I just "crocodile clamps" on a 6.35mm audio plug.
Pause at 4:03 :)
Glad someone finally noticed it ;)
Are all FM synths actually PM synths?.. :D
Hi! To be honest, I don't know. Yamaha's are, but on analog synths that have this feature, I'm pretty sure it's actual frequency modulation. Casio introduced phase distortion synthesis in the 80s, which is badly explained on Wikipedia en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phase_distortion_synthesis ;-)
Where can I buy that device?
Thanks for watching! Link is in the video's description: amzn.to/2Qm65VM Best regards!
At 3.50 sounds like wave folding
If you choose the frequencies of carrier and modulator "just right", you can create a wave which resembles a "folded" wave.
@@mr_floydst I actually studied this if you have the details. by just right you mean f= ?
@fru olli Well the "trick" here is changing the modulators frequency and amplitude with an LFO, while the carrier is tuned down to the lowest possible frequency. The formula should look something like this f(x)=sin(0.5*x+sin(3*sin(x)*x)).
I see, so basically when we are dealing with a single carrier and single modulator, we have frequency modulation. However, when we we stack another modulator on top of the modulator, we begin to have phase modulation. Which is not the same as Casio's phase modulation (used in CZ- and VZ-series), where the phase modulation means the variation of the readout time of the waveform. Not sure then why Yamaha and Casio supposedly had a conflict about Casio infringing on Yamaha's patents, since Yamaha's FM is quite different from Casio's PD synthesis.
I think the might be an interesting bit of history to uncover on Casio vs. Yamaha FM synthesis. Perhaps it's worth researching...
hammma!
Dannköö! :-)
@@mr_floydst werde versuchen selbst einen FM Synthesizer zu programmieren 🤓
wich oscilloscope is this? looks very useful
found it
JOY-iT Oszilloskop DSO138
Hi, thanks for watching! It's this one: amzn.to/2Qm65VM
I updated the video description with some links.
Edit: Sorry, link was broken in my first reply.
@@mr_floydst How is this thing connected to the sound source????
Both clips to the same stereo minijack???
'mispronunciation' . . . There's only one 'O' in the correct spelling.
Thanks for pointing that out. I'll do better next time. (and yes, I appreciate this kind of feedback).
Yeah, isn't that crazy! For years Yamaha actually took competitors to court for making the same mistake. And they weren't even the first to make such instruments. Some early computer synthesizers where there first. Furthemore FM and AM where already possible on modular analog synths before that. The beautifull world of big business and its institutional abuse of the patent system, eh?!
Thanks for watching! I didn't know they did. I think the DX7 deserves the limelight it enjoys, as it made synths much more practicable for the everyday musician trying to play a gig without having to deal with detuned oscillators 'n stuff. Funny thing is 40 years later, there's still no FM synth with a hands-on interface. The Reface DX was good, but not perfect. I didn't look at the OP6 yet...
@@mr_floydst Oh, but I am not dissing the DX-series as such. I owned the DX7 when it was new and programmed the (beep) out of it. It cost me as much time as games cost people today. I still wlked away from FM later (to siny and harsh) but own some of the finest analog Yamaha 's. Only that the Chowning patents where used as a crowbar to force exclusivity keeps bugging me. By the way: There have been experiments to make FM=AM more accesible. If you do not yet know them you could have a look at the "programming systems of" the Yamaha PSR-36 and the Elka X1000. If one tweaks the synthesizer functions on a PSR-36 live one can even get some PPG 360 Wavecomputer like sounds by shoving it through its stepped, low resolution brightness parameter. I don't know if you can do that on the X1000 but it has a semi-filter control as well and a complete set of "filter" and VCA EG's. It basically puts a range of analog like controls in your hands with which you can modify and (re)store the presets. These sounds are produced by 4 operator Yamaha chips. If it wasn't that bulky and I hadn't run out of space years ago I 'd trace one down. It can be used as a sort of central workstation anyway (2 velocity and channel aftertouh sensitive keyboards, full midi, multitrack sequencer, programmable drums, etc.) :-)
FM ≠ PM
Stop fricking spreadin BS and confusing people, frequency modulation is not phase modulation, and yeah, it's all nice 'n' stuff when you use sine waves, try anything different from that, you'll realize quickly that the two are very different, because fm cares only about the phase's position, when pm cares only about the phase's angle, wich is very different sonically speaking, and yeah, nobody talks about this, everybody just assumes that the two are virtually identical, and the fault of all this was Yamaha's ,when they released the DX series, marketing it as FM, when it's just simple PM and the reasons behind this were multiple, one of them being the simple fact that PM, in terms of sonic content, is richer, hell, I could even say it sounds better, and at the time, FM was getting popular, with radios and stuff so why wouldn't it sound cool, if it was called FM (said the Yamaha marketing department?), and, the most important reason, at least for the time, PM is less complex, calculus-wise, compared to FM, and in the 80's processing power wasn't good, at least for the consumer grade stuff...
P.S.
Can't remember if I'm correct or not, but I've heard people claiming that FM "cannot" do feedback looping, like PM does, for some mathematical reasons I just can't remember, so yeah, technically one more point in favor of PM...
Hi Robert, thanks for watching and commenting, but uhm, that was the point of the video. The math behind Yamaha's "FM" is quite simple and all I wanted to show is how to create other basic waveshapes (as used in sound synthesis) with that. The actual FM (as learned by electrical engineers and used in radio signal transmission) is a very different thing.
@@mr_floydst Then fricking make 2 videos about it instead of saying to me, that "you did", listen, I really enjoyed your tutorial, up until you started referring to everything as FM, and never cared to explain the difference, and when you said it's "basically phase modulation" wich makes me think, you know what?
Imma go n make the explanatory video meself...
Yeah, Imma do that...
@@robertolsen6797Still waiting on that video
@@tonbonthemon Jesus, you're relentless...😅😂
No. FM is not phase modulation. FM modulates the frequency of the carrier. Four oscs in parallel are Additive Synthesis (AS), not subtractive, but you used a saw wave as carrier, while AS uses normally sine waves. You need a frequency spectral analyzer not a simple osc screen to visualize what really goes on. Does anybody study a topic anymore before putting out videos that just show him/her not understanding the topic?
Did you ever study Fourier Transformation and Signal Theory? You should! smh
Hi! Thank you very much for your feedback. On Yamaha Synths, it's definitely Phase Modulation (you can look that up on google, there are many sources indicating this: www.google.com/search?q=yamaha+dx7+phase+modulation
).
Please also take a look at this video. ruclips.net/video/pdLAdojHVW8/видео.html
According to Wikipedia, actually Yamaha's implementation is indeed a phase modulation synthesis: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frequency_modulation_synthesis (see the start of the history section: first couple of paragraphs).
I think "FM" is a very broad term. It's a term for "embedding a signal in another signal" (and I know that's a pretty unscientific description). "FM" is used in analogue radios or electromagnetic signal transmission in general. If I wanted to "decode" the FM'd signal then of course I'd need more advanced tools than a $20 oscilloscope ;-) I think that's what pcuimac wanted to say. But that was not my intention. I just wanted to show that Yamaha's implementation is phase modulation, and "stacking up sine waves just right" (again, very unscientific wording) results in other "standard" wave shapes.
"Feedback" works exactly the same way, but instead of "stacking" multiple operators, it's feeding back the modulated signal into the same modulator multiple times, until the desired wave shape is created.
That's right. Also, the Reface DX has a high quality effects section, a much easier-to-use interface, better A/D converters, is battery powered an can easily be carried around or tossed into a suitcase while travelling. ;-)