FM synth with UI similar to Operator

[zerocrossing]

Another option could be Aparillo by Sugar Bytes.

Only 2OP FM, but that's the point. It's a more musically approach to use FM....

Aparillo is outstanding in its concept, the versatility and range of sounds it can produce. Actually it is 16 x 2 FM operator synth in unison mode with crazy per voice modulations, which is second to none. However, I am not really impressed by its overall sound quality, as sounds often get somewhat muffled and 2d (together with pan modulation) when multiple modulations occur, lacks of low frequencies, etc.

I remember my favourite old DX7 could produce very exciting harsh overtones from the 12-bit aliasing D/A, and was more appearing for the ears with its sometimes noisy character, but always delivered that great oomph. Ok, it was overhead to edit it from its front panel...

I have the same problem with both FM8 and Dexed - they all have exciting and easy-to-use editing capabilities, but the raw sound is not very convincing in comparison to a DX synth. And yes, I admit there are softsynths with excellent sound quality, like Repro 1 or some Reaktor 6 Blocks.

Do you know any software FM instrument where the sound quality is on par (or better) with the original DX7?

I don’t mind the clean sound of modern FM, but I’m curious as to whether or not you’ve tried Arturia’s DX7 V. It sounds a lot better to me than Dexed (which is still awesome for a free plugin) and it’s really the only plugin that blatantly touts itself as a DX7 emulation. There are two DAC modes, modern and vintage. To me it sounds very authentic, though I’ll admit that I’ve not had a DX around to put it up against in a long time, and when I did, it was the DX200, which doesn’t use the same DAC as the original DX7.

[zerocrossing]

I went through a FM “renaissance” of sorts. For years I believed that FM was just too complicated for my poor little head. I’d tried editing hardware DXs in the past and I just never got a handle on what I was doing. I finally made a concerted effort to figure it out, and it was a huge revelation. It wasn’t really that complex at all. Mostly my confusion came from not being able to get a handle on what the envelopes were doing in relation to each other.

So, all my FM synths became more than the preset machines that they’d been to me for all those years. I find myself actually using FM8 and DX7 V the most. For me, the look of the UI is less important than the design. What really helps me is if I can see all the envelope curves at the same time. It’s even better if they’re superimposed upon each other. DX7 V really shines here. What I love about FM8 is all the distortion effects and filters you can use. I almost pulled the trigger on a Digitone, but after an afternoon of messing with FM8, I’m convinced that it can do everything I need and more.

The demo tracks of Flow sounded interesting. I may pick that up. I didn’t have time to demo it because work was exploding (why don’t milestones ever seem to take into account that everyone’s gone during Christmas?) but when I get back I may have a proper demo of it.

[tripleflows]

Thanks for the Arturia DX7 tip, I have not tried it at all, will check it out.

I remember NI FM7 also had this DAC emulation, which seem to be missing from FM8, it only has a "high quality mode" or so.

What about u-he Bazille quality?

Update: just saw this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hlMwd4dqStA not sure if that's biased or not..but DX7 is the winner here too. Strange that modelling a digital synth to VST does not seem to be easier than modelling an analogue...

[Fernando Carvalho]

https://www.plogue.com/products/chipsynth-portafm.html

This is a little nice FM synth.

[fmr]

Update: just saw this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hlMwd4dqStA not sure if that's biased or not..but DX7 is the winner here too. Strange that modelling a digital synth to VST does not seem to be easier than modelling an analogue...

I think this guy made the same mistake others did when comparing DX7 V with the hardware DX7. It happens that the hardware DX7 velocity only goes from 1 to 100, while the DX7 V goes from 1 to 128, although you can switch it to respond to just 100 too. If you play DX7 presets converted to DX7 V and do not scale the velocity, some presets may sound distorted or with too many harmonics because of velocity influence in the modulation index. That's probably what caused the "artifacts" the guy is complaining.

Unfortunately, people start doing comparisons without knowing all the things they have to take into consideration. They should give more credit to programmers, and when noticing "artifacts" investigate what may be causing them, instead of assuming that, just because it's software, it has to be wrong.

DX7 V can do everything DX7 could, as well or even better, and way more than it could too. It was mentioned already since the third post, BTW, including by me, which means you weren't paying attention

[Lotuzia]

Update: just saw this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hlMwd4dqStA not sure if that's biased or not..but DX7 is the winner here too. Strange that modelling a digital synth to VST does not seem to be easier than modelling an analogue...

I think this guy made the same mistake others did when comparing DX7 V with the hardware DX7. It happens that the hardware DX7 velocity only goes from 1 to 100, while the DX7 V goes from 1 to 127, although you can switch it to respond to just 100 too. If you play DX7 presets converted to DX7 V and do not limit the velocity, some presets may sound distorted or with too many harmonics because of velocity influence in the modulation index. That's probably what caused the "artifacts" the guy is complaining.

Unfortunately, people start doing comparisons without knowing all the things they have to take into consideration. They should give more credit to programmers, and when noticing !artifacts" investigate what may be causing them, instead of assuming that, just because it's software, it has to be wrong.

DX7 V can do everything DX7 could, as well or even better, and way more than it could too. It was mentioned already since the third post, BTW, including by me, which means you weren't paying attention either

Typically the author of the video is what I'd call a passionate fanboy, with all the advantages (trying to make you share his passion with enthousiasm), and the minus points : Distording reality to prove his statements. I dont know if he compared the sounds after 'import', because it's well known that all the FM synths don't import DX sysex with the same quality/accuracy by far (actually most are faulty regarding that). But clearly he did not make any effort to make the virtual synths to match the sound of his MK1 (it would have been pretty easy though). Also when he declares that FM7 is a good, portable alternative for the MK1 : All those that I played had a terrible S/N ratio, making them more suitable to produce white noise than music. There are other errors in his video, and he omitted a lot of things as well. I feel a bit sad for the guy who certainly invested a lot of time into the making of this video, but honnestly, if you want to spare an hour of your life, there are other videos that will show you much more about FM synthesis in all its forms. But if you want to spend one hour seeing how MK1 sounds after import or dialing of identical parameters on several machines, just go for it.

[tripleflows]

Thanks the valuable input for all of you!

[nilhartman]

Bazille is a stunning synth : sounds stellar, is incredibly versatile and is a FM/PD beast (and much more). I’ve spent the last couple of years learning it and it’s so freaking rewarding. I love how FM & PD become a part of the synthesis palette rather than something rigid / idiosyncratic.
And it sounds lush as f***.

[zklaus]

Thanks all. With the holiday I wasn't able to respond back. All of these are great choices. I forgot to add that I'd also like to use VST's inside Max 8....(I know I can build fm synths inside Max 8 but it's way more involved than I'd want to do)....someone mentioned about that the DX7 is not as CPU heavy if you don't run the patches with all of the modulations and he is right. So I ran DX7 inside of Max and it runs perfectly. For me, the DX7 interface is very minimal to me so I'm really liking this as a possibly choice. Other ones I need to try out are Styrus, Phantom, Aparillo.

I wonder if you can buy Arturia's plugin's "used"? I know some companies don't like it some doing care. I am sure the answer is here on this forum so I will do the research and find out as well. Thanks again!

[nachenko]

I know nothing about Arturia's DX7, but the videos look like this is the real deal. Way more friendly than Sytrus or FM8, top quality.

I am a big fan of Sytrus, but this one is very tempting. If I had not spend my budget on Dune 3 and Evolution (now Drumvolution), I would be probably thinking of buying it.

EDIT: I've been testing FM8. For today's screens, the interface is too small. On an iMac 27 retina, desktop zoomed at 125%, it's still quite small.

[tlkmx]

I'm curious if anyone know of alternatives nowadays ?

[egbert101]

Korg Opsix Native

[Examigan]

I've never used Operator, but you may want to check out FM Lab from Steinberg.
OPS7 is another great one.
Also, Synthmaster 3 will have good FM capabilites.

[IvyBirds]

I'm curious if anyone know of alternatives nowadays ?

I am an FM nut. Many of the suggestions in this thread from a few years back still hold true

For ease of use Arturia's DX7 V is probably the most user friendly. Everything is displayed nicely and it's built from the classic Yamaha FM paradigm

If you are open to a different FM paradigm then IMHO Synclavier V also from Arturia is the way to go especially for people who are new to FM. Allow me to explain why

When you really get into FM programming on Yamaha DX style FM Synths you will start stacking the operators for different parts of the sound. Think of the classic DX7 electric piano sound. It works and is iconic because it is really creating three sounds. You have the percussive attack then a sustain then a release that are all separate sounds. What gets hard and confusing is managing all 6 operators to have them work like that. You essentially have 3 pairs of two FM Operators flowing from one to another

With Synclavier FM you get two operators, a modulator and a carrier. So you use them to create the first part of your timbre. You can use additive to make whatever waveforms you want on both the carrier and the modulator or use one of the preset ones

Once you have the first part of you sound you can then create the second. These are called frames and the synth will morph from one to another. Once you have that you can create the third frame then the fourth etc. You can have up to 99 frames and move between them at any speed you want

The you can then layer up to 12 timbres each made up to 99 frames

[Ah_Dziz]

I don't really have much experience with operator, but fm8 is my go-to for making PM sounds from scratch. It's as simple or complex as one may want. I use the arturia dx if I want to use MTS ESP micro tuning. Outside of spending time figuring out mathematically what modulations and frequency ratios will generate which specific timbres, most digital PM synths are about the same to my ears. If I want to do other wacky things then I tend to go into a modular environment (bazille is great for many strange PM/FM/PD setups that also have nicely modelled analog filters. I don't remember what host the OP said they used but all the hosts I have include a decent FM synth.