The Yamaha AN1x Synthesizer mailing list

Hi! I just joined. I don't have an AN1x but I actually DO have the Yamaha EX7. Is it true that the VA section of the EX7 is identical to the AN1x? If so, maybe I can learn things by tuning in to this group.
First of all, I have the EX7 not its bigger brother the EX5. The EX5 supposedly has physical modeling on top of a VA section (AN1x engine) and also the ROM-based synth engine. Now, I see that the AN1x has been referred to as a physical modeling synth...so how does all this pan out, considering what is said about the EX7 and EX5? I currently use a Z1 as my physical modeling synth. It does great strings, great basses, decent brass, and some cool bells and percussion sounds (i.e. marimbas and steel drums). I also think the Z1 is a great VA. So why does virtual analog and physical modeling seem to get put in the same box so much with these synths? Is there a difference? How does the AN1x fit in to all this and physical modeling and comparison to my Z1?

Op 16-6-2010 3:30, brofjw schreef:

> Hi! I just joined. I don't have an AN1x but I actually DO have the Yamaha EX7. Is it true that the VA section of the EX7 is identical to the AN1x? If so, maybe I can learn things by tuning in to this group.

Well, yes and no. Yes, they have the same virtual analogue engine, but
no, whereas the AN1x has ten voices, the EX7 has only one.

So yes, you can pick up things here, but it's pretty much AN1x and AN200
here. The AN PLG board and the EX5/EX5R/EX7 get very little mention here.

You could also have a look at EX5tech, although I think most would use
an EX5 (as I do).

> First of all, I have the EX7 not its bigger brother the EX5. The EX5 supposedly has physical modeling on top of a VA section (AN1x engine) and also the ROM-based synth engine. Now, I see that the AN1x has been referred to as a physical modeling synth...so how does all this pan out, considering what is said about the EX7 and EX5? I currently use a Z1 as my physical modeling synth. It does great strings, great basses, decent brass, and some cool bells and percussion sounds (i.e. marimbas and steel drums). I also think the Z1 is a great VA. So why does virtual analog and physical modeling seem to get put in the same box so much with these synths? Is there a difference? How does the AN1x fit in to all this and physical modeling and comparison to my Z1?

Strictly speaking, virtual analogue or analogue modelling is a form of
physical modelling. But with physical modelling, people usually mean
acoustic modelling.

The reference physical modelling synth is still the Yamaha VL-1, and
it's also a great (monophonic) 'analogue' synth. The AN1x (and the
others) is a very specific implementation of modelling, so that you can
get more voices out of the same processing power. But you will never be
able to do acoustic sounds with a Yamaha AN-synth.

The virtual acoustic in the EX5 is cool, but somewhat limited, because
you can't use it together with analogue modelling or FDSP. But the
effects system of the EX5 and EX7 is a lot more elaborate than on the AN1x.

Hopefully, this has given you a bit more insight into the Yamaha AN and
VA synths.

- Peter

brofjw a écrit :

>
> Hi! I just joined. I don't have an AN1x but I actually DO have the
> Yamaha EX7. Is it true that the VA section of the EX7 is identical to
> the AN1x? If so, maybe I can learn things by tuning in to this group.
> First of all, I have the EX7 not its bigger brother the EX5. The EX5
> supposedly has physical modeling on top of a VA section (AN1x engine)
> and also the ROM-based synth engine. Now, I see that the AN1x has been
> referred to as a physical modeling synth...so how does all this pan
> out, considering what is said about the EX7 and EX5? I currently use a
> Z1 as my physical modeling synth. It does great strings, great basses,
> decent brass, and some cool bells and percussion sounds (i.e. marimbas
> and steel drums). I also think the Z1 is a great VA. So why does
> virtual analog and physical modeling seem to get put in the same box
> so much with these synths? Is there a difference? How does the AN1x
> fit in to all this and physical modeling and comparison to my Z1?
>

Both "physical modeling" and "virtual analog" are digital techniques
aimed at the emulation of the analog synths of yesterday. To say it
quickly the classic triangle - square - sine - sawtooth waveforms are
stored in a ROM and cross a DSP that does all the filtering,
amplification ... effects job. With its physical modeling Yamaha claims
to reproduce the minor flaws, imperfections and instabilities of a pure
analog synth, imperfections that have of course an effect on the sound.
For exemple the saw can be more "triangular" or a bit rounded on high or
low notes with a real analog oscillator, a digital oscillator will issue
a perfect saw on all its frequency range. On the AN1x you have for
example an "edge" parameter, giving a more or less vertical edge.I
suppose others manufacturers use similar tricks with different names
...or not.
I don't know your synths, but i have an AN1x. IMHO it is very close
soundwise to the "pretty old things", at least those that i have heard
live (Juno and Prophet 5), with more polyphony but less user friendly.
Cheers.
J.F.

>
>
>

Hi, I have an EX5 and AN1x. But before I got an AN1x, I wrote an AN1x to EX5 (and 7) converter in ex.factory that converts AN1 files to S1V files.

Whilst the EX5 and AN1x share the same AN engine there are differences that make them sound either subtly or vastly different depending on the patch. The effects architectures on both synths are also very different which makes quite a marked difference in sound. Some patches sound better on the EX5 than the AN1x although it's hard to say why, and then that is also true the other way around. I wouldn't be without either the EX5 and AN1x.

The AN1x is a very good complement to the SY77 as well!

As already mentioned the EX5 AN engine can be duophonic or dual layered, the EX7 is monophonic. In the EX5/7 AN is focused on leads/basses but you can also have AWM elements in the voice as well.

The EX5 also has Virtual Acoustic (VL) modelling that primarily emulates acoustic instruments (wind and string), but it also has some "synth" type models as well which can give some good results. Virtual Acoustic modelling can create some very realistic wind sounds, especially if you use a breath or wind controller. So the AN model and VL are geared towards different emulations. Having them all in one box makes the EX5 quite powerful, but it was a little ahead of its day and whilst there are no apparent limitations in Voice Mode there is not enough DSP horsepower in Performance mode to run more than one "complex" model type in the performance (and it hits the number of parts that can have insert effects as well which drops from 4 to 1).

Can't comment on how it compares with the Z1 as I'm not a Korg man ;-)

Cheers
Derek

--- In AN1x-list@yahoogroups.com, "brofjw" <brofjw@...> wrote:
>
> Hi! I just joined. I don't have an AN1x but I actually DO have the Yamaha EX7. Is it true that the VA section of the EX7 is identical to the AN1x? If so, maybe I can learn things by tuning in to this group.
> First of all, I have the EX7 not its bigger brother the EX5. The EX5 supposedly has physical modeling on top of a VA section (AN1x engine) and also the ROM-based synth engine. Now, I see that the AN1x has been referred to as a physical modeling synth...so how does all this pan out, considering what is said about the EX7 and EX5? I currently use a Z1 as my physical modeling synth. It does great strings, great basses, decent brass, and some cool bells and percussion sounds (i.e. marimbas and steel drums). I also think the Z1 is a great VA. So why does virtual analog and physical modeling seem to get put in the same box so much with these synths? Is there a difference? How does the AN1x fit in to all this and physical modeling and comparison to my Z1?
>