Yamaha DX7 - Classic or Dud?

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

This is one of the bestselling synths ever, it completely changed the way synths sounded and were programmed. A lot of people consider it a classic because of it, but to me, it's a dud and nothing but a dud.

My main problem with the DX7 is that it was neither fish nor flesh. It doesn't sound like a synth in the traditional way, is unable to create the warm analog sounds that synthpop fans such as me had gotten used to love. On the other hand, it isn't sampling based, and whatever "real" instruments it tried to ape didn't sound "real".

Plus at least two of the presents quickly became cliches, used in about half of all keyboard based music. One was the electric piano sound, which is a wonderful electric piano sound if only used for glossy ballads, but sounding way uninteresting when used as a replacement for traditional synth bells etc.
The other cliche preset is the bass sound that sounds slightly like a funky slap bass, but only slightly. It was used on "You Spin Me Around" by Dead Or Alive, and then on about every possible pop song during the end of the 80s. I think more or less every track on Madonna's "True Blue" album utilizes the sound, for instance (listen to "La Isla Bonita" as a very typical example).

So, who won? Obviously, today, late 80s music sounds very dated particularly because of the use of those DX7 sounds. Simply, FM synths aren't in use anymore. They have been replaced either by old analog (or vitual analog) synths and softsynths, or by more sample based PCM synths.

For me, a lot of what was wrong with late 80s pop can be summed up in the DX7. FM synths R.I.P.

― Geir Hongro, Sunday, 22 April 2007 15:23 (eighteen years ago)

FM synths have become popular again recently and there are now FM soft synths. Another area where they were popular was in Detroit Techno where they made good use of the buzzy bass sounds from DX-100s and other cheaper FM synths. You can create great synthpop sounds if you want, the real problem with FM synths is that they were hard to program and their architecture didn't make as much sense as the subtractive analog synths that preceeded it. I think it's mostly a dud because I never liked programming it, but just wanted to correct the idea that FM synths aren't in use anymore.

― dan selzer, Sunday, 22 April 2007 16:14 (eighteen years ago)

dud. the main selling point of the dx7 was the ease and rapidity with which one could access a particular sound, e.g., you didn't have to spend 10 minutes between songs changing all the settings as you sometimes did with an analog synth. the problem was, all of the sounds sucked, and were pretty much impossible to really fuck with on-the-fly once you got there. i mean, just look at all the great synth artists: bernie worrell and allen ravenstine never used dx7s, and once stevie wonder got ahold of digital synth technology his work went into permanent decline.

on the other hand, there's something to be said for the fact that sun ra made the dx7 halfway tolerable.

― Lawrence the Looter, Sunday, 22 April 2007 21:49 (eighteen years ago)

And Brian Eno. But it was a glassy, thin, trebly sound that was nowhere near as wonderful as the hype made out at the time. Another FM synthesis synth used by Detroit types that is worthy of mention is the Korg DS-8. I still use mine, many years on, and it's a lovely sound, crystalline but smooth. The DX100 is a classic for basslines.

― moley, Sunday, 22 April 2007 21:55 (eighteen years ago)

you didn't have to spend 10 minutes between songs changing all the settings as you sometimes did with an analog synth

That's not really true...there were plenty of analog synths predating the DX7 that were fully programmable and had large patch memories. Sequentials, Oberheims etc in which with a touch of a membrane pad you caould select any of a hundred sounds. I think with the DX7 it was more the fact that at the time, that bright FM sound as used on the infamous rhodes patch and some horns and bells seemed more realistic than analog. In hindsight, it's just better at emulating certain natual/acoustic sounds than analog was, and worse than analogs at other sounds.

Along with the DX100 and Korg don't forget the Casio CZ series...FM style programming/sound with easier programming.

― dan selzer, Sunday, 22 April 2007 22:10 (eighteen years ago)

My first synth was a Korg Poly 61, which was also an FM synth. And I was never fully satisfied with that synth because it didn't sound like the synths in those early 80s synthpop albums I loved. At the time, I thought it was the limited number of parameters for programming, but I have realized later that the FM sound technology was what I disliked about it.

And, btw, there are exceptions. Prefab Sprout, Thomas Dolby, Yello and Scritti Politti are just some examples of acts who have managed to use FM technology in a wonderful way, but generally, the old analog synths sounded better, while it took PCM synths such as the Korg M1 and Roland D50 to give full "band-in-a-box" opportunities if you wanted to use a synth and get an impression of how your song would sound with a "real" band. Analog synths and PCM technology are both very great and very useful in different ways, while I feel FM technology (also including more recent developments such as the Wavestation) doesn't sound the right way.

― Geir Hongro, Sunday, 22 April 2007 22:16 (eighteen years ago)

The Poly 61 is not an FM synth. It is a subtractive synth with digital oscilators. Big difference. Vintagesynth.com compares it to the DX-7, but it's just poorly written, they're talking about the fact that it uses the slow "select a parameter then edit it" style of programming instead of having tons of knobs and faders.

What made the M1 special wasn't just that it had a lot of sample-based sound, but it had a pretty serious sequencer for it's time, making it the reigning king of the "workstation". Predecessors like the DX-7 and D-50 didn't have sequencers.

What mad ethe D-50's sounds popular is that it combined FM-style digital sounds with the samples, in one sound, so you'd get best of both worlds. It also had subtractive style programming with filters and such, which the DX-7 didn't have.

The Wavestation had nothing to do with FM as well.

― dan selzer, Sunday, 22 April 2007 23:17 (eighteen years ago)

That's not really true...there were plenty of analog synths predating the DX7 that were fully programmable and had large patch memories. Sequentials, Oberheims etc in which with a touch of a membrane pad you caould select any of a hundred sounds.

i stand corrected. and if i'm not mistaken, wasn't the memorymoog in that family too?

― Lawrence the Looter, Sunday, 22 April 2007 23:40 (eighteen years ago)

Yes...even the Moog Source, which despite being a little monophonic analog synth, really lays the groundwork for that annoying system of programming by selecting one parameter at a time that dominated throughout the 80s.

― dan selzer, Monday, 23 April 2007 00:03 (eighteen years ago)

The problem with the DX synths is that you need to know how to program them and process them in order to get a good sound. You can do quite a bit with a DX7 and a decent multi effects processor. The thing that messed people up with the DX series is that they do not have filters. You had to cut out the frequencies when you set up the operators.

The big deal about the Prophet 5 was the first polyphonic synth with patch memories.

― Display Name, Monday, 23 April 2007 00:41 (eighteen years ago)

Hmm, interesting point.

― Mark G, Monday, 23 April 2007 01:56 (eighteen years ago)

Seems to me that any instrument who's sound we can recall so vividly will be fondly re-examined soon enough, even if it's at it's nadir of acceptability right now.

― bendy, Monday, 23 April 2007 02:54 (eighteen years ago)

as mentioned, it's been fully re-examined and is far from it's nadir...when this came out:

http://www.native-instruments.com/index.php?id=fm8_us

(actually the early version, the FM 7)

there was a lot of hype about FM being hot again.

― dan selzer, Monday, 23 April 2007 04:08 (eighteen years ago)

I don't think FM was ever not hot. FM7 simply had the distinction of being the best synth from that era of Native Instruments vst synths. It stomped the hell out of PRO52, Absynth or Reaktor. It had the best balance of sound, features and workflow out of any of those products. FM7 is truly a great instrument.

80's adult contemporary rhodes sounds and bad legacy sysex banks will always be out of style. The heavily processed techno DX sound never went out of style. It just became much easier to use when FM7 came out.

― Display Name, Monday, 23 April 2007 06:12 (eighteen years ago)

The DX7 is a massive dud not because of FM synthesis itself, but because its interface ushered in a wave of preset-based synths and preset-based music made with them. Yamaha decided to save money by not outfitting it with the usual knobs and sliders to control its functions, and so it was extremely difficult to make new sounds - you have to move through endless submenus and enter in parameter values on a tiny screen, instead of just grabbing a knob and turning. Thus, most people who bought one just used the sounds it came with: the DX7 piano etc.

The success of the DX7 in the marketplace led to other manufacturers copying this crap approach to interface design, and it was only in the mid 1990's when things started to turn around - as dance music exploded, producers wanted filter and resonance knobs to tweak.

FM synthesis itself is cool though; my FS1R rocks... the last great hardware FM synth.

See this for a modern analog interpretation of FM synthesis. I can't wait to get one when my MOTM arrives.

― DougD, Monday, 23 April 2007 08:06 (eighteen years ago)

Well, I hate and will always hate the hard FM sounds. Synths are supposed to have a soft and warm sound, and FM synthesis is pointless (and that goes for sampling too, unless used to recreate real instruments or create percussive effects)

― Geir Hongro, Monday, 23 April 2007 08:09 (eighteen years ago)

ugh.

synths aren't "supposed" to have any sound. The point is you can do what they want with them. If you want to be comfortable while sleeping you use a pillow...if you want to hammer nails you use a hammer. You don't complain that hammers are supposed to be soft and fluffy. Likewise sampling is a tool that can be used in a thousand different ways.

― dan selzer, Monday, 23 April 2007 14:22 (eighteen years ago)

John Chowning, inventor of FM synthesis, was refused tenure by Stanford because they didn't understand what he was up to. several years later Yamaha came knocking on Stanford's door to inquire about Chowning & Stanford's patent on the technique and Stanford realized they'd dismissed the only person who understood the patent & came crawling back to hire him, it brought Stanford millions

his disc of 60's / 70's FM synthesis & computer music is fantastic, you can hear the seeds of the later DX7 sounds before they calcified into the dull immobile presets we grew to hate in bad 80's pop:

http://www.amazon.com/Chowning-Turenas-Stria-Phone-Sabelit/dp/B00008G1SW
http://mixonline.com/mag/audio_talk_john_chowning_2/

other records by people who took the time to master FM that I like: Laurie Spiegel's Unseen Worlds, Brian Eno's Shutov Assembly, John Bischoff's The Glass Hand & Bischoff / Perkis' Artificial Horizons. that's all abstract soundscapes though, no pop.

as DougD mentions, the only really bad thing about the DX7 was the interface which made tweaking impossible in real time, so the sounds had no flexibility or variance when playing leads, and as Dan said the FM7 & FM8 soft synths which actually restore this flexibility are two of the best sounding synths out there -- everyone complaining about the DX7 on this thread is probably digging on new records that use that synth without even realizing what they're hearing

― Milton Parker, Monday, 23 April 2007 15:59 (eighteen years ago)

I used to have the TX7, the MIDI module version of the DX7, I fucking loved it. I used to program it using a Steinberg editor on my Atari ST, and I got pretty good at it at one point (I fear I've probably forgotten most of it now) The best thing it did was these spacy sounding pad/chord wash sounds that evolved slowly if you held a chord down. I used to put it through a TC spatial expander, put headphones on a fart around for hours with it. Total 100% classic!

― Pashmina, Monday, 23 April 2007 16:06 (eighteen years ago)

i stand corrected. and if i'm not mistaken, wasn't the memorymoog in that family too?

Yes, it was. When it actually worked, that is!

― Pashmina, Monday, 23 April 2007 16:06 (eighteen years ago)

The DX7 is a massive dud not because of FM synthesis itself, but because its interface ushered in a wave of preset-based synths and preset-based music made with them. Yamaha decided to save money by not outfitting it with the usual knobs and sliders to control its functions, and so it was extremely difficult to make new sounds - you have to move through endless submenus and enter in parameter values on a tiny screen, instead of just grabbing a knob and turning. Thus, most people who bought one just used the sounds it came with: the DX7 piano etc.

OTM -- see famous anecdote about 99% of the DX7s that were returned to Yamaha for repairs having the factory patches completely unchanged. I think hating the DX7 itself is a fair position to take, thanks to its overused presets and the aforementioned interface problems, but extending those complaints to FM synthesis in general is kinda unfair.

― bernard snowy, Monday, 23 April 2007 21:05 (eighteen years ago)

The only thing with that famous anecdote is that it's become somewhat distorted over the years - the actual instrument it was originally told about was the Prophet 5 (which had loads of knobs & switches on the panel, obv!) Sequential kept a log of how many instruments came back w/the original presets untouched and I forget the exact percentage, it was in the upper 70's. There was some related anecdote where Peter Gabriel was socialising w/Phil Collins, they got to talking about the Prophet 5, which they both owned. Gabriel explained to Collins about how you could change the sounds using the controls, Collins had no idea that that was what they were for.

I bet most Hammond organ players back in the day probably used the preset keys to select sounds, and I bet some of them never even wondered what the funny little slider were for.

I've always, always preferred editing sounds on the computer, mainly because you can see a graphical representation of the envelope curves.

As far as Yamaha "saving money" goes, the DX7 with a full set of parameter controls would have been at least twice as big, probably four times as expensive or more (see the jellinghaus DX programmer, or the top of the range DX1).

It's easy to forget, and there's surely some misinformation/speculation by people who are either ignorant of what it was like at the time the DX range came out, just what a revolutionary instrument the DX7 was back in the '80's (this refers to "out in the world", not ilx people!), how fresh it seemed, and just how popular and desired it was by players. It was back-ordered for at least a year, IIRC when they brought out the MK2 version, the original was still back ordered in some places. It was revolutionary to be able to buy an instrument that made that hard, bright, clear sound, which was associated with the Fairlight or the Synclavier (10s of thousands of dollars) for that kind of money. People also forget to mention the price point the '7 came in at. I remember Memorymoogs, Chromas, Oberheims, Prophet 5s and so on costing 3000 uk pounds and upwards - the DX7 cost 1100 UK pounds on release, it's contemporaries at the same price were instruments like the Korg Polysix and the Juno 60. No wonder people bough so many of them!

― Pashmina, Monday, 23 April 2007 21:41 (eighteen years ago)

Well, I guess it was welcomed by people who didn't like synths because synths weren't "hard" enough. But then, they might have gone for an electric guitar instead.

― Geir Hongro, Monday, 23 April 2007 22:00 (eighteen years ago)

Geir, everything you say there after the words "well it was welcomed by people..." is totally wrong! I and my friends used to hang around the local music shops every weekend, playing on the memorymoogs and prophets, and we were tremendously thrilled by the DX7! The specialist electronic music monthlies - "Electronics and Music Maker" and "Electronic Soundmaker and Computer Music" were breathless about the thing when it came out, and there were loads of magazine features about how to program the thing. Yamaha put out a little booklet "secrets of FM synthesis", or something like that, I remember picking a copy up (I think I still have it somewhere) and reading it over and over again, trying to understand how it worked, all before I even laid eyes on an actual unit. Back then, the only instruments that made sounds like that were the Fairlight, the Synclavier and its ilk, and who could afford them? It cost less money to buy a house!

― Pashmina, Monday, 23 April 2007 23:54 (eighteen years ago)

OK, it was different. But it didn't take long for people to realize the difference wasn't a good thing. There was a reason why the old synthpoppers started returning to the good, old analog synths by the early 1990s.

― Geir Hongro, Tuesday, 24 April 2007 00:03 (eighteen years ago)

and to such success! You can actually give about 100% of the credit of the return to analog to dance music makers, btw. It was the techno fans during the 90s who got the old Roland's market values to go up-up-up and finally make the manufacturers realize the value of adding knobs and analog modeling.

― dan selzer, Tuesday, 24 April 2007 00:35 (eighteen years ago)

A hell of a synth to program if you go into it blindly. Plus it's HEAVY. I borrowed one from the studio I worked at for a month or so and it gave me a headache. However, I swear by my CZ-101 and its ability to create the most sub of sub bass sounds.

I always wanted a DX-100 'cause Derrick May used it.

― Capitaine Jay Vee, Tuesday, 24 April 2007 00:37 (eighteen years ago)

Pashmina's perspective about how desireable these synths were at the time is definately interesting. I didn't get into synths until the 00's, so for me the DX7's and their ilk were the sort of shabby, cheap things you'd find in used shops, which no one wanted because they sucked to program.

― DougD, Tuesday, 24 April 2007 02:36 (eighteen years ago)

Retardedly classic.

― billstevejim, Tuesday, 24 April 2007 03:40 (eighteen years ago)

I got into synths as a very young one, around 85 or 86, I remember a statistic that DX-7s outsold every every synth 10 to 1. Years later I interned at a recording studio and saw a DX-1. That thing was HUGE.

― dan selzer, Tuesday, 24 April 2007 04:06 (eighteen years ago)

It was the techno fans during the 90s who got the old Roland's market values to go up-up-up and finally make the manufacturers realize the value of adding knobs and analog modeling.

But the techno people also happily used FM synthesis and sampling.

― Geir Hongro, Tuesday, 24 April 2007 07:22 (eighteen years ago)

Yes, but it wasn't synth-poppers and prog-rockers who made the TB-303 a 1000 dollar device and kept the market value of a Juno 106 consistently around 400 bucks when other synths from that period were practically being given away.

― dan selzer, Tuesday, 24 April 2007 15:35 (eighteen years ago)

For me, a lot of what was wrong with late 80s pop can be summed up in the DX7.

Geir, you'd be surprised how much you and I agree on some key issues itrw, but the way you apply it to your constant agenda is what keeps us seperated (stating both a surprise/unwanted comment and the obv about 10 years too late).

My issue w/ the DX7 seems simialr to yours -- low bitrate combined w/ stock sounds.

Cold.
As.
Fuck.

So, yes, in short, dud, but dismissing it is dismissing an entire generation's nostalgia, even if many don't realize this was the driving sound of their nostalgia.

― PappaWheelie V, Tuesday, 24 April 2007 15:59 (eighteen years ago)

For my personally taste and/or nostalgia, the ultimate dichotomy is between the Fender Rhodes and the DX7, which just practically shows my age...

― PappaWheelie V, Tuesday, 24 April 2007 16:02 (eighteen years ago)

one year passes...

I'm usually of the opinion that there's some truth to what Geir says, even if it seems way, WAY off the mark most of the time. But he's just spouting garbage here.

― Naive Teen Idol, Monday, 5 January 2009 08:05 (seventeen years ago)

fourteen years pass...

Branching from Post a controversial music opinion

There's a technological reason too, I think. The eighties got the flood of affordable digital gadgets, and it took a while to sort out how to use them most effectively.
The default patches built into the Yamaha DX7 were so pervasive throughout the 80s precisely because programming your own was so incredibly difficult. The DX7's 11. E.PIANO 1 and 15 BASS 1 *is* the sound of the 80s in my head.
― Elvis Telecom, Thursday, July 27, 2023 7:55 PM (three days ago)
I remember reading that the keyboard sound on Miles Davis's Star People was literally preset A1 on the Oberheim synth.
― but also fuck you (unperson), Thursday, July 27, 2023 8:20 PM (three days ago) bookmarkflaglink
Did New Order ever use DX7? For a band that probably had the chance to toy with every gadget coming out in the 80s, their records don’t really have the awkward 80s textures and timbre even while sounding quintessentially 80s. I don’t know much about their gear though!
― Terrycoth Baphomet (bendy), Friday, July 28, 2023 5:40 AM (two days ago) bookmarkflaglink
Dunno about NO but Prince certainly did! I was surprised to read that he was also a big preset user and only made minor tweaks on his synth patches.
― SQUIRREL MEAT!! (Capitaine Jay Vee), Friday, July 28, 2023 5:50 AM (two days ago) bookmarkflaglink
creating new sounds in FM synthesis is insanely complicated and frustrating and time consuming
― Blues Guitar Solo Heatmap (Free Download) (upper mississippi sh@kedown), Friday, July 28, 2023 6:09 AM (two days ago)

One factoid I like about Brian Eno's Apollo (which turned 40 today) is that Eno got a DX7, instantly mastered the odd FM programming, releases Apollo with it and then mic drops out.

― Elvis Telecom, Sunday, 30 July 2023 08:18 (two years ago)

I thought the story was that he was recuperating from illness and spent the time mastering FM synthesis? So not instant, but yes he did get his voluminous bonce around the thing unlike everyone else.

Geir otm by the way

― moribund new dance craze (Matt #2), Sunday, 30 July 2023 10:59 (two years ago)

Every time I see this thread I think of the most DX7 record I know, Sleeps With the Fishes by Pieter Nooten and Michael Brook.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_mM1JElHWSQ

― assert (matttkkkk), Sunday, 30 July 2023 11:14 (two years ago)

I don't know what's wrong with using presets anyway tbh.

― Continuous Two-Tone Warble (Tom D.), Sunday, 30 July 2023 13:17 (two years ago)

auteur theory

― corrs unplugged, Sunday, 30 July 2023 13:34 (two years ago)

absolutely nothing

― Blues Guitar Solo Heatmap (Free Download) (upper mississippi sh@kedown), Sunday, 30 July 2023 13:46 (two years ago)

it's like no one expects you to mod a violin or get in an mess around with the guts of a Hammond

― Blues Guitar Solo Heatmap (Free Download) (upper mississippi sh@kedown), Sunday, 30 July 2023 13:46 (two years ago)

some guitar players are very on about pedals though

― corrs unplugged, Sunday, 30 July 2023 13:48 (two years ago)

nothing wrong with using presets. certainly lots of classic recordings used the DX7 presets in particular. but none of the DX7 presets would give you Apollo.

― c u (crüt), Sunday, 30 July 2023 14:04 (two years ago)

^^ bingo!

― SQUIRREL MEAT!! (Capitaine Jay Vee), Sunday, 30 July 2023 21:24 (two years ago)

I mean, the stops and switches on a Hammond or Lowrey organ could technically be called “presets,” so I imagine early DX7 adopters didn’t feel lame for using presets. Hell, “Baba O’Riley” is hailed as advanced synthesizery for its time, but it’s literally just the “marimba repeat” setting on a Lowrey Berkshire Deluxe TBO-1:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BgPtksNqbCk

― Montgomery Burns' Jazz (Tarfumes The Escape Goat), Sunday, 30 July 2023 21:43 (two years ago)

I never had a DX7 but I had a TX81Z which was a rack mount FM synth of same linage. Really could never make heads or tails of programming the thing, it was really easy to make a sound get nasty sounding aliasing (which is unpleasant distortion).

That type of synth though even in standard form is really good for certain kinds of sounds. I thought certain bass sounds were really good, especially the deep sine stuff. The sounds made to be like electric pianos have a nice timber too and anything bell like were really lovely.

The thing I thought it was cool was to use certain sounds in a layer on the same MIDI channel as another sound, as that hard bass or those bell like sounds would sound good paired with something else.

― earlnash, Sunday, 30 July 2023 21:48 (two years ago)

Oh yeah and woody sounds like the marimba or wood blocks were interesting too...did not sound like the real ones but they were tonally interesting.

― earlnash, Sunday, 30 July 2023 21:49 (two years ago)

I wish I picked up a Reface DX when you could occasionally find one for under $300 used.

― Elvis Telecom, Sunday, 30 July 2023 23:37 (two years ago)

Wow, never knew that about Baba O'Riley.

Btw I just replaced a track that I had recorded using the Korg Opsix with the Volca FM playing a similar patch, because it sounded way better. Weird (but I do love that little Volca).

― Random Restaurateur (Jordan), Monday, 31 July 2023 01:38 (two years ago)

Eno got a DX7, instantly mastered the odd FM programming

instantly mastered the programming by using bespoke DX7 programming hardware maybe: https://i.imgur.com/H6L6XN4.jpg

see https://spheremusic.com/Bargaindtl.asp?Item=4626

― butch wig (diamonddave85), Monday, 31 July 2023 02:27 (two years ago)

that baba o'riley vid is stellar!

kinda deserves an xpost to a who thread

― corrs unplugged, Monday, 31 July 2023 07:37 (two years ago)

OTM

― Continuous Two-Tone Warble (Tom D.), Monday, 31 July 2023 08:22 (two years ago)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=niFGy1ecwig

― J. Sam, Monday, 31 July 2023 14:36 (two years ago)

I believe New Order did use Yamaha FM synths starting about the mid-80s. I recall from Hooky's New Order book (highly recommended!) a point where they replaced their "clunky American analog synths" for "more reliable Japanese ones" (roughly paraphrasing).

I had a Reface DX for a moment. If you're either looking for DX type sounds, and/or a Microkorg type thing I would seriously check it out. I'm a big fan of digital stuff without screens (all hail holy DL4) but I think that's the only Reface that has one, lol. Hard to program FM without it.

I also had the elusive FS1R for another moment (I guess FM is not really my thing). I found it in a music store in nowheresville CA hours north of SF, the kind of place that feels out of Frontierland and sells banjos and mandolins. I think it was like $80 cause they didn't have any idea what the heck they had. I was always intrigued by that thing and there are some -BEAUTIFUL- presets in there. I even got one of the editors to still work. That one has formant synthesis too, and you could have it re-synthesize a sample too (was supposed to be use for speech but I sent it drum loops and it was pretty wacky). Overall only slightly less tedious to program than a traditional FM synth, it probably was much more sophisticated than a DX7. Was very happy to flip that one for many times what I paid and still a good price for the buyer.

― Reeves Gabrels' Funko Pop (majorairbro), Tuesday, 1 August 2023 02:56 (two years ago)

incredible sounds in that TX7 video.

― stirmonster, Tuesday, 1 August 2023 10:30 (two years ago)

eight months pass...

Contemporary composition for DX7 orchestra?

https://anderspjensen.bandcamp.com/album/det-foranderlige-instrument

― Jordan s/t (Jordan), Wednesday, 10 April 2024 15:32 (one year ago)

I’m up for it

― brimstead, Wednesday, 10 April 2024 15:36 (one year ago)

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.