Yamaha CS80

Have you got any idea why the great CS60 was not popular ever? With 
it's monophonic aftertouch, initial velocity, lovely ribbon 
controller , ring modulator and 8 polyphony, it should at least be a 
tough competitor against the Prophet 5.

I have owned a P5 for about 9 years and although it sounds interesting 
and powerful, the rough pitch and modulation wheels, rather poor 
keyboard and lack of velocity and aftertouch makes the precise 
controlling of musical expression quite impossible. And it's limited 
polyphony makes the P5 a real looser against the CS60 at sustaining 
sounds. To me the P5 is not as musical compared to the CS60/80

The mighty CS80 makes the CS60 look a small limited synthesizer. But if 
we take the CS60 on it's own, it is an incredible synthesizer still.

I am a lucky owner of a CS80. The CS60 is going to be my next purchase 
with it's easier portability for my stage performance. 

BTW, I old my P5 last summer and never miss it.

Hi Mert,

> Have you got any idea why the great CS60 was not popular ever? With
> it's monophonic aftertouch, initial velocity, lovely ribbon
> controller , ring modulator and 8 polyphony, it should at least be a
> tough competitor against the Prophet 5.

It never was, just because when compared with a P5 the CS60 sounds extremely
thin, and it reveals its appeal on second sight only. With all its
idiosyncratic terminology on the envelopes, the rather under-achieving
filters, and its more "Japanese" sound it had no chance to woo potential P5
buyers who were accustomed to Mini Moogs and ARP Odysseys most of the time.
The P5 came up with that "American" sound which the CS60 just couldn\ufffdt do.
And you mustn\ufffdt forget that Yamaha had no real reputation for building
synthesisers at that time, people were rather suspicious of something called
"combo synthesiser", especially when their first encounters with
synthesisers bearing a "Yamaha" tag were the SY-1 or SY-2 (which are no bad
instruments, but a little flimsy when compared with its competitors from the
USofA). Even the GX-1 was passed off as an Electone organ, and this type of
poor marketing coupled with initially not very convincing sounds certainly
added to the fact that Yamaha didn\ufffdt have much success with their
synthesisers *before* they put out the CS80.

>
> I have owned a P5 for about 9 years and although it sounds interesting
> and powerful, the rough pitch and modulation wheels, rather poor
> keyboard and lack of velocity and aftertouch makes the precise
> controlling of musical expression quite impossible.

That\ufffds right, but at that time it was exactly what people needed. Not to
forget its biggest selling asset was its programmability. 40 patches versus
one on the CS60? Apart from that, people were used to Moog-style wheels, and
like Richard Luebbing once put it "people like Chick Corea were used to the
Moog wheels, so off went the ribbon controller". That\ufffds marketing. Read the
"Vintage Synthesizers" review of the CS80 in Mark Vail\ufffds book, it\ufffds indeed
very enlightening.

And it's limited
> polyphony makes the P5 a real looser against the CS60 at sustaining
> sounds. To me the P5 is not as musical compared to the CS60/80

I would replace "musical" with "organic" and I\ufffdd subscribe to your view.
Curtis- or SSM-based synthesisers tend to have a less animated sound because
they are more stable and more "phase-locked" while the CS60 or CS80 benefit
enormously from each oscillator card going its own way. Which might lead to
a minor reliability issue or two...

>
> The mighty CS80 makes the CS60 look a small limited synthesizer. But if
> we take the CS60 on it's own, it is an incredible synthesizer still.

Definitely. But we should bear in mind that both CS60 *and* CS80 are pretty
limited when compared to a Prophet 5 or an Oberheim OB-Xa in terms of
modulation and such. No VCO sync, no PWM through the EGs, no Polymodulation,
no unison mode, no autotune, no RAM memories. The CSs excel at expression,
richness of tone, and performance power but not in timbral variety. Like
Brian Eno once put it, "the CS80 has just six sounds on it, but these are
gorgeous".

>
> I am a lucky owner of a CS80. The CS60 is going to be my next purchase
> with it's easier portability for my stage performance.

Agreed, and the CS60 seems to be less temperamental when it comes to tuning
stability, probably because the internal cooling is more effective as there
are less components installed.

>
> BTW, I old my P5 last summer and never miss it.

I\ufffdd miss it, I know that, as they are both like apples and oranges :-). One
can do tricks the other can\ufffdt do. And I for one would love to add a Rev. 3
P5 to my setup some day or other. Just like I\ufffdd love to add an Oberheim Four
Voice to it someday...

Stephen.

>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
____________________________________________________________________

"Ambition makes you look pretty ugly." (Thom Yorke/Radiohead -- "Paranoid
Android")


Now available: "Tektonik" and "Gronland", two new ambient music albums by
Stephen Parsick.
Each album is limited to 25 copies and will come in a special packing and is
hand-numbered.

It\ufffds out: "doombient.two -- a declaration of war", the new [\ufffdramp] album,
recorded live in 2003.
Limited to 100 copies only so get it while you still can.

For info and audio, please visit the official [\ufffdramp] website at
www.doombient.com

To me the 60 has something different, I can't say it better than
"aggressive", I don't know if the only CS60 I could hear live was not
calibrated or not but I found that the filters sound a little more dirty and
screaming. Of course you miss something , like the Subosc's Speed modulation
by aftertouch but  you gain something with a little less weigh, a generally
more stable behaviour etc. .I know the 60 used by the Germans "Testrauschen"
and it sounds wonderful....
PS: you lucky chap....
M
----- Original Message -----

From: "Mert Topel" <mert@...>
To: <yamahacs80@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Saturday, April 29, 2006 10:48 AM
Subject: [yamahacs80] Your opinion on CS60


> Have you got any idea why the great CS60 was not popular ever? With
> it's monophonic aftertouch, initial velocity, lovely ribbon
> controller , ring modulator and 8 polyphony, it should at least be a
> tough competitor against the Prophet 5.
>
> I have owned a P5 for about 9 years and although it sounds interesting
> and powerful, the rough pitch and modulation wheels, rather poor
> keyboard and lack of velocity and aftertouch makes the precise
> controlling of musical expression quite impossible. And it's limited
> polyphony makes the P5 a real looser against the CS60 at sustaining
> sounds. To me the P5 is not as musical compared to the CS60/80
>
> The mighty CS80 makes the CS60 look a small limited synthesizer. But if
> we take the CS60 on it's own, it is an incredible synthesizer still.
>
> I am a lucky owner of a CS80. The CS60 is going to be my next purchase
> with it's easier portability for my stage performance.
>
> BTW, I old my P5 last summer and never miss it.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

Hi Stephen,
Although it is impossible not to agree what you say, I d like to add 
two points:

You can not edit the sound of an acoustic instrument but instead, 
inorder to get your sphesific sound out of it, you customize your 
playing.
So, eventhough some fancy modulations are not present on the CS 
series, the expression possibilites open up many musical possibilites.
I believe that the US and Yamaha approaches are two different 
approaches so synthesizer music. Maybe I am too much addicted to 
responsive synthesiers like the DX7 and the VL1. So, realtime 
expression power means a lot to me.

I try to overcome the lack of autotune by altering the footage on my 
CS80 when the tuning gets unpleasant. Not quite like the MKS-80 or P5 
autotune but it helps up to a degree.


--- In yamahacs80@yahoogroups.com, "Wavecomputer360" 
<wavecomputer360@...> wrote:
>
> Hi Mert,
> 
> > Have you got any idea why the great CS60 was not popular ever? 
With
> > it's monophonic aftertouch, initial velocity, lovely ribbon
> > controller , ring modulator and 8 polyphony, it should at least 
be a
> > tough competitor against the Prophet 5.
> 
> It never was, just because when compared with a P5 the CS60 sounds 
extremely
> thin, and it reveals its appeal on second sight only. With all its
> idiosyncratic terminology on the envelopes, the rather under-
achieving
> filters, and its more "Japanese" sound it had no chance to woo 
potential P5
> buyers who were accustomed to Mini Moogs and ARP Odysseys most of 
the time.
> The P5 came up with that "American" sound which the CS60 just 
couldn´t do.
> And you mustn´t forget that Yamaha had no real reputation for 
building
> synthesisers at that time, people were rather suspicious of 
something called
> "combo synthesiser", especially when their first encounters with
> synthesisers bearing a "Yamaha" tag were the SY-1 or SY-2 (which 
are no bad
> instruments, but a little flimsy when compared with its competitors 
from the
> USofA). Even the GX-1 was passed off as an Electone organ, and this 
type of
> poor marketing coupled with initially not very convincing sounds 
certainly
> added to the fact that Yamaha didn´t have much success with their
> synthesisers *before* they put out the CS80.
> 
> >
> > I have owned a P5 for about 9 years and although it sounds 
interesting
> > and powerful, the rough pitch and modulation wheels, rather poor
> > keyboard and lack of velocity and aftertouch makes the precise
> > controlling of musical expression quite impossible.
> 
> That´s right, but at that time it was exactly what people needed. 
Not to
> forget its biggest selling asset was its programmability. 40 
patches versus
> one on the CS60? Apart from that, people were used to Moog-style 
wheels, and
> like Richard Luebbing once put it "people like Chick Corea were 
used to the
> Moog wheels, so off went the ribbon controller". That´s marketing. 
Read the
> "Vintage Synthesizers" review of the CS80 in Mark Vail´s book, it´s 
indeed
> very enlightening.
> 
> And it's limited
> > polyphony makes the P5 a real looser against the CS60 at 
sustaining
> > sounds. To me the P5 is not as musical compared to the CS60/80
> 
> I would replace "musical" with "organic" and I´d subscribe to your 
view.
> Curtis- or SSM-based synthesisers tend to have a less animated 
sound because
> they are more stable and more "phase-locked" while the CS60 or CS80 
benefit
> enormously from each oscillator card going its own way. Which might 
lead to
> a minor reliability issue or two...
> 
> >
> > The mighty CS80 makes the CS60 look a small limited synthesizer. 
But if
> > we take the CS60 on it's own, it is an incredible synthesizer 
still.
> 
> Definitely. But we should bear in mind that both CS60 *and* CS80 
are pretty
> limited when compared to a Prophet 5 or an Oberheim OB-Xa in terms 
of
> modulation and such. No VCO sync, no PWM through the EGs, no 
Polymodulation,
> no unison mode, no autotune, no RAM memories. The CSs excel at 
expression,
> richness of tone, and performance power but not in timbral variety. 
Like
> Brian Eno once put it, "the CS80 has just six sounds on it, but 
these are
> gorgeous".
> 
> >
> > I am a lucky owner of a CS80. The CS60 is going to be my next 
purchase
> > with it's easier portability for my stage performance.
> 
> Agreed, and the CS60 seems to be less temperamental when it comes 
to tuning
> stability, probably because the internal cooling is more effective 
as there
> are less components installed.
> 
> >
> > BTW, I old my P5 last summer and never miss it.
> 
> I´d miss it, I know that, as they are both like apples and 
oranges :-). One
> can do tricks the other can´t do. And I for one would love to add a 
Rev. 3
> P5 to my setup some day or other. Just like I´d love to add an 
Oberheim Four
> Voice to it someday...
> 
> Stephen.
> 
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> ____________________________________________________________________
> 
> "Ambition makes you look pretty ugly." (Thom Yorke/Radiohead --
 "Paranoid
> Android")
> 
> 
> Now available: "Tektonik" and "Gronland", two new ambient music 
albums by
> Stephen Parsick.
> Each album is limited to 25 copies and will come in a special 
packing and is
> hand-numbered.
> 
> It´s out: "doombient.two -- a declaration of war", the new [´ramp] 
album,

> recorded live in 2003.
> Limited to 100 copies only so get it while you still can.
> 
> For info and audio, please visit the official [´ramp] website at
> www.doombient.com
>

I was impressed with the CS60 the first time I got it.  I was expecting limited sounds, thin, terrible patches...But it was the opposite.  I appreciate the smoothness of the sound compared to my OB-Xa.  Yes it does not have auto-tune, and the mod capabilities of the OB but it is a great synth.  My CS60 is at the techs shop for maintenance and I added unison to it, can't wait to get it back.....About the tuning, well my CS60 traveled from NY to FL and surprisingly when I turned it on (had to wait about 30min to warm up) it was in tune!!!!  I was scared about this since a lot of people complain about the stability issue.  I talked to my tech about this, he was working on the OSC trying to make then a bit more stable, I asked about this and he replied that more than moving it around temperature is the main factor for instability.  He recommended to have it in a room with a constant temperature.  
   
  I don't know if I could compare it to a P5 though they are so different....I know I replaced my Jup6 with the CS60 mainly due to the fact that I already had a CEM based synth and was looking for something different....Still the Jup6 (Great synth BTW) very different from the CS60....
   
   

		
---------------------------------
Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. PC-to-Phone calls for ridiculously low rates.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

> The mighty CS80 makes the CS60 look a small limited synthesizer. But if
> we take the CS60 on it's own, it is an incredible synthesizer still.

Yes it is.  It's all because of the CS80.  People tend to praise the pinacle in a line of synths.  The Jupiter 6 vs. 8 is another example.

> I am a lucky owner of a CS80. The CS60 is going to be my next purchase
> with it's easier portability for my stage performance.

I had a question on the 80 vs. 60.  I finally got the chance to check out an 80, although for a very limitted time.  What surprised me was that it was a two OSC version of the 60 plus more but it seemed more like two independent 60s in one box that you could layer over eachother.  You basically picked on patch for one synth engine and a second patch for another synth engine and then layered them.  The two patches could be different and each one was edited separately.  Can you also just have one patch using all OSCs for both engines or is it literally just two CS60s in one box that you can layer on top of eachother or split along the keyboard?

cheers,
matrix

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

>when I turned it on (had to wait about 30min to warm up) it was in tune!!!!  

Mine is the same.  I turn it on and just let it sit for a while before I touch it, but once it's in tune it pretty much stays in tune.  It's a beautiful synth and probably one of the most expressive synths I've ever played.  The Rhodes Chroma is a close second and of course there was the CS80...

cheers,
matrix

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

I had a yamaha CS70m (Digitally controlled Analog)and It had alot of
these features that P5 was hot on.....the eg in vco and multiple
instances of lfo in different areas.......It was programable....with
seperate storage presets for mix one and mix 2 two (BTW the mix 1
defined the footage of the two mixes and whether mix 2 was a modulator
of mix one  or just a regular mix.....)the six oscillators per mix could
be split into key halves.....two/four or four/two each calling on
individual presets...and there was an Omni mode making one hell of a fat
dual/mono synth..There were 16  storage points in each mix row and two
panel...thus the two mix rows lended to a combination of  256 plus
sounds...There also was a booklet of dual bank magneto strips which one
could save and load single presets and bank presets....the two filter
(Hpf Lpf) was reduced to the American single filter but had 3
modes....lowpass....bandpass....highpass.....On the back was a blue
rectangle connector which allowed connectivety to other Yamaha CS
instruments...(precurser to midi)...PolyAT was gone....reduced to
channel-aftertouch which was applied by a  single pressure
point(seemingly hardwired across all the keys....very annoying in the
key bed)Velocity and portamento/glissando changed from the KAS
perspective and so did the Ring modulation as it was assignable as to
what it effected.....[Image]


The CS80 with its limited programibility is by far the better keyboard
and CS70m which Americanised the Yamaha people thus churning out
Prophets and raking  in "profits" was born.....programability won over
musicality.........and the rest of us were left with a hollowness only a
CS80 could fill...............

Mert Topel wrote:

>  Hi Stephen,
> Although it is impossible not to agree what you say, I d like to add
> two points:
>
> You can not edit the sound of an acoustic instrument but instead,
> inorder to get your sphesific sound out of it, you customize your
> playing.
> So, eventhough some fancy modulations are not present on the CS
> series, the expression possibilites open up many musical possibilites.
>
> I believe that the US and Yamaha approaches are two different
> approaches so synthesizer music. Maybe I am too much addicted to
> responsive synthesiers like the DX7 and the VL1. So, realtime
> expression power means a lot to me.
>
> I try to overcome the lack of autotune by altering the footage on my
> CS80 when the tuning gets unpleasant. Not quite like the MKS-80 or P5
> autotune but it helps up to a degree.
>
>
> --- In yamahacs80@yahoogroups.com, "Wavecomputer360"
> <wavecomputer360@...> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Mert,
> >
> > > Have you got any idea why the great CS60 was not popular ever?
> With
> > > it's monophonic aftertouch, initial velocity, lovely ribbon
> > > controller , ring modulator and 8 polyphony, it should at least
> be a
> > > tough competitor against the Prophet 5.
> >
> > It never was, just because when compared with a P5 the CS60 sounds
> extremely
> > thin, and it reveals its appeal on second sight only. With all its
> > idiosyncratic terminology on the envelopes, the rather under-
> achieving
> > filters, and its more "Japanese" sound it had no chance to woo
> potential P5
> > buyers who were accustomed to Mini Moogs and ARP Odysseys most of
> the time.
> > The P5 came up with that "American" sound which the CS60 just
> couldn´t do.
> > And you mustn´t forget that Yamaha had no real reputation for
> building
> > synthesisers at that time, people were rather suspicious of
> something called
> > "combo synthesiser", especially when their first encounters with
> > synthesisers bearing a "Yamaha" tag were the SY-1 or SY-2 (which
> are no bad
> > instruments, but a little flimsy when compared with its competitors
> from the
> > USofA). Even the GX-1 was passed off as an Electone organ, and this
> type of
> > poor marketing coupled with initially not very convincing sounds
> certainly
> > added to the fact that Yamaha didn´t have much success with their
> > synthesisers *before* they put out the CS80.
> >
> > >
> > > I have owned a P5 for about 9 years and although it sounds
> interesting
> > > and powerful, the rough pitch and modulation wheels, rather poor
> > > keyboard and lack of velocity and aftertouch makes the precise
> > > controlling of musical expression quite impossible.
> >
> > That´s right, but at that time it was exactly what people needed.
> Not to
> > forget its biggest selling asset was its programmability. 40
> patches versus
> > one on the CS60? Apart from that, people were used to Moog-style
> wheels, and
> > like Richard Luebbing once put it "people like Chick Corea were
> used to the
> > Moog wheels, so off went the ribbon controller". That´s marketing.
> Read the
> > "Vintage Synthesizers" review of the CS80 in Mark Vail´s book, it´s
> indeed
> > very enlightening.
> >
> > And it's limited
> > > polyphony makes the P5 a real looser against the CS60 at
> sustaining
> > > sounds. To me the P5 is not as musical compared to the CS60/80
> >
> > I would replace "musical" with "organic" and I´d subscribe to your
> view.
> > Curtis- or SSM-based synthesisers tend to have a less animated
> sound because
> > they are more stable and more "phase-locked" while the CS60 or CS80
> benefit
> > enormously from each oscillator card going its own way. Which might
> lead to
> > a minor reliability issue or two...
> >
> > >
> > > The mighty CS80 makes the CS60 look a small limited synthesizer.
> But if
> > > we take the CS60 on it's own, it is an incredible synthesizer
> still.
> >
> > Definitely. But we should bear in mind that both CS60 *and* CS80
> are pretty
> > limited when compared to a Prophet 5 or an Oberheim OB-Xa in terms
> of
> > modulation and such. No VCO sync, no PWM through the EGs, no
> Polymodulation,
> > no unison mode, no autotune, no RAM memories. The CSs excel at
> expression,
> > richness of tone, and performance power but not in timbral variety.
> Like
> > Brian Eno once put it, "the CS80 has just six sounds on it, but
> these are
> > gorgeous".
> >
> > >
> > > I am a lucky owner of a CS80. The CS60 is going to be my next
> purchase
> > > with it's easier portability for my stage performance.
> >
> > Agreed, and the CS60 seems to be less temperamental when it comes
> to tuning
> > stability, probably because the internal cooling is more effective
> as there
> > are less components installed.
> >
> > >
> > > BTW, I old my P5 last summer and never miss it.
> >
> > I´d miss it, I know that, as they are both like apples and
> oranges :-). One
> > can do tricks the other can´t do. And I for one would love to add a
> Rev. 3
> > P5 to my setup some day or other. Just like I´d love to add an
> Oberheim Four
> > Voice to it someday...
> >
> > Stephen.
> >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Yahoo! Groups Links
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > ____________________________________________________________________
>
> >
> > "Ambition makes you look pretty ugly." (Thom Yorke/Radiohead --
> "Paranoid
> > Android")
> >
> >
> > Now available: "Tektonik" and "Gronland", two new ambient music
> albums by
> > Stephen Parsick.
> > Each album is limited to 25 copies and will come in a special
> packing and is
> > hand-numbered.
> >
> > It´s out: "doombient.two -- a declaration of war", the new [´ramp]
> album,
> > recorded live in 2003.
> > Limited to 100 copies only so get it while you still can.
> >
> > For info and audio, please visit the official [´ramp] website at
> > www.doombient.com
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
> SPONSORED LINKS
>
    Music sampler                  Unit       Sampler

> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
> YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
>
>    +  Visit your group "yamahacs80" on the web.
>
>    +  To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>       yamahacs80-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
>    +  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
>      Service.
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

the CS80 is "like" 2 CS60s each with independent patch rows and footage
selectors which are mixed..and then modulated .giving you dual CS60
(Plus One) programability and flexibility....and then combining them at
the control center with common ring mod,   portamento/gliss,sub osc....
key assign control and dual control over brilliance and
resonance.....Even with the limited six player programmable panels,there
exists 225 combinations of the two rows of fifteen which again  have 36
footage combinations giving a mixable pallet of 8,100 (at hand)
sounds...
Then you have the beautiful playability and control  of the polyAT which
allows differences amongst the 16 oscillators,and then the "quad"
control of overall brilliance and resonance......Have we reached
infinity yet folks????

matrix wrote:

>  > The mighty CS80 makes the CS60 look a small limited synthesizer.
> But if
> > we take the CS60 on it's own, it is an incredible synthesizer still.
>
> Yes it is.  It's all because of the CS80.  People tend to praise the
> pinacle in a line of synths.  The Jupiter 6 vs. 8 is another example.
>
> > I am a lucky owner of a CS80. The CS60 is going to be my next
> purchase
> > with it's easier portability for my stage performance.
>
> I had a question on the 80 vs. 60.  I finally got the chance to check
> out an 80, although for a very limitted time.  What surprised me was
> that it was a two OSC version of the 60 plus more but it seemed more
> like two independent 60s in one box that you could layer over
> eachother.  You basically picked on patch for one synth engine and a
> second patch for another synth engine and then layered them.  The two
> patches could be different and each one was edited separately.  Can
> you also just have one patch using all OSCs for both engines or is it
> literally just two CS60s in one box that you can layer on top of
> eachother or split along the keyboard?
>
> cheers,
> matrix
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
> SPONSORED LINKS
>
    Music sampler                  Unit       Sampler

> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
> YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
>
>    +  Visit your group "yamahacs80" on the web.
>
>    +  To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>       yamahacs80-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
>    +  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
>      Service.
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

--- In yamahacs80@yahoogroups.com, "Mert Topel" <mert@...> wrote:
>
> Have you got any idea why the great CS60 was not popular ever?

It seems to me that the CS-50, 60, and 80 all suffered from somewhat
being the last of their kind. They all fell in that timeframe of
post-minimoog, relatively non-programmable, cheaper analog synths and
right on the cusp of polyphonic, digital, programmable, networkable
sampler/synths (both cheap and expensive).

I think the Moogs & ARPs of the world were failing, the Rolands and
Korgs and Sequential Circuits were rising (with MIDI), Synclaviers and
Fairlights were blowing everyone's minds. Yamaha was too outside to
compete in that marketplace. 

I never even saw a CS-series synth until 1983, a CS-80 in a famous
disco producer's studio in NYC. They weren't in the music stores I
visited in the mid-late-'70s. So maybe bad distribution too.

My CS-50 was a music store demo that was never sold, taken by the
music store owner's daughter from Colorado to Kansas City, stored and
eventually bought by a local collector for the price of a gas bill,
stored, and bought by me when he needed some cash. It looked like it
had just come out of the music store.

It blows my mind that this beautiful and beautiful sounding synth had
to travel that path into my hands, but I question why someone else had
not valued it's sound and appeal up until I got it?

Would I have preferred the CS-50 to my Juno-6 back in '82? Doubt it.
Would I trade the CS-50 before trading my Juno-6 today? No way. It's
priceless and so individual and so special.

I just recorded a piece that used a CS-80 patch on a Roland JD-800 and
I overlayed a comparible CS-50 patch on top of it. The CS has a growl
and edge to the sound whereas the JD patch was smooth and compressed.
The CS just wants to dominate the soundspace. Who needs chords when a
couple of notes on a CS fills things up?

-Jim
www.touchxtone.com
www.myspace.com/jimcombs

Musicians were given presets as were the synths........
We were programmed to believe through trade mags (payed for by
manufacturers) that we wanted an easy way out of patching  our
sounds.....Quickly...
We needed the ability to change sounds back and forth throughout our
songs to stay current....
We needed an interface......MIDI
Patch Chords became dials switches and faders....
Dials switches and faders became presets...
Presets couldn't move switches  faders and dials .....so....
Switches  faders and dials reduced to become menu, knob  and
parameter......and included Edit Store and recall to birth "presets"
Menu knob and parameter went to scroll menus and soft switches....and
more presets.....
"Two handed Polyphonic Aftertouch players" became "One handers with a
D-beam/Joystick" as the alternative......Ten fingers become thousands
with all the layering and sequencing.....
This is what "WE Wanted".....That is why I am so much richer in my
musicality.................poof.......huh.....
Sorry ....Where was I.....
What I meant to say was the Companies gave us some things but at our
musical expense.....and they have benifited from this hugely.......
I am no longer in their market target as a consumer, as I know what I
want....
They sell so much more to people who don't know what to look for that
all good history gets lost in the cover-up......Check out the Yamaha
site ...They have a  glossary of terms.... try it next time you go on
line.....try to find the mythical Polyphonic Aftertouch.......Little do
they know they carry the Arturia CS80v which supports it.......

Presets couldn't move switches and faders and dials...Jim Combs wrote:

>  --- In yamahacs80@yahoogroups.com, "Mert Topel" <mert@...> wrote:
> >
> > Have you got any idea why the great CS60 was not popular ever?
>
> It seems to me that the CS-50, 60, and 80 all suffered from somewhat
> being the last of their kind. They all fell in that timeframe of
> post-minimoog, relatively non-programmable, cheaper analog synths and
> right on the cusp of polyphonic, digital, programmable, networkable
> sampler/synths (both cheap and expensive).
>
> I think the Moogs & ARPs of the world were failing, the Rolands and
> Korgs and Sequential Circuits were rising (with MIDI), Synclaviers and
>
> Fairlights were blowing everyone's minds. Yamaha was too outside to
> compete in that marketplace.
>
> I never even saw a CS-series synth until 1983, a CS-80 in a famous
> disco producer's studio in NYC. They weren't in the music stores I
> visited in the mid-late-'70s. So maybe bad distribution too.
>
> My CS-50 was a music store demo that was never sold, taken by the
> music store owner's daughter from Colorado to Kansas City, stored and
> eventually bought by a local collector for the price of a gas bill,
> stored, and bought by me when he needed some cash. It looked like it
> had just come out of the music store.
>
> It blows my mind that this beautiful and beautiful sounding synth had
> to travel that path into my hands, but I question why someone else had
>
> not valued it's sound and appeal up until I got it?
>
> Would I have preferred the CS-50 to my Juno-6 back in '82? Doubt it.
> Would I trade the CS-50 before trading my Juno-6 today? No way. It's
> priceless and so individual and so special.
>
> I just recorded a piece that used a CS-80 patch on a Roland JD-800 and
>
> I overlayed a comparible CS-50 patch on top of it. The CS has a growl
> and edge to the sound whereas the JD patch was smooth and compressed.
> The CS just wants to dominate the soundspace. Who needs chords when a
> couple of notes on a CS fills things up?
>
> -Jim
> www.touchxtone.com
> www.myspace.com/jimcombs
>
>
>
>
>
> SPONSORED LINKS
>
    Music sampler                  Unit       Sampler

> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
> YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
>
>    +  Visit your group "yamahacs80" on the web.
>
>    +  To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>       yamahacs80-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
>    +  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
>      Service.
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Quoting each single word, Laurie...
M
----- Original Message ----- 

From: "laurie" <laurie@...>
To: <yamahacs80@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Saturday, April 29, 2006 10:59 PM
Subject: Re: [yamahacs80] Re: Your opinion on CS60


> Musicians were given presets as were the synths........
> We were programmed to believe through trade mags (payed for by
> manufacturers) that we wanted an easy way out of patching  our
> sounds.....Quickly...
> We needed the ability to change sounds back and forth throughout our
> songs to stay current....
> We needed an interface......MIDI
> Patch Chords became dials switches and faders....
> Dials switches and faders became presets...
> Presets couldn't move switches  faders and dials .....so....
> Switches  faders and dials reduced to become menu, knob  and
> parameter......and included Edit Store and recall to birth "presets"
> Menu knob and parameter went to scroll menus and soft switches....and
> more presets.....
> "Two handed Polyphonic Aftertouch players" became "One handers with a
> D-beam/Joystick" as the alternative......Ten fingers become thousands
> with all the layering and sequencing.....
> This is what "WE Wanted".....That is why I am so much richer in my
> musicality.................poof.......huh.....
> Sorry ....Where was I.....
> What I meant to say was the Companies gave us some things but at our
> musical expense.....and they have benifited from this hugely.......
> I am no longer in their market target as a consumer, as I know what I
> want....
> They sell so much more to people who don't know what to look for that
> all good history gets lost in the cover-up......Check out the Yamaha
> site ...They have a  glossary of terms.... try it next time you go on
> line.....try to find the mythical Polyphonic Aftertouch.......Little do
> they know they carry the Arturia CS80v which supports it.......
> 
> Presets couldn't move switches and faders and dials...Jim Combs wrote:
> 
> >  --- In yamahacs80@yahoogroups.com, "Mert Topel" <mert@...> wrote:
> > >
> > > Have you got any idea why the great CS60 was not popular ever?
> >
> > It seems to me that the CS-50, 60, and 80 all suffered from somewhat
> > being the last of their kind. They all fell in that timeframe of
> > post-minimoog, relatively non-programmable, cheaper analog synths and
> > right on the cusp of polyphonic, digital, programmable, networkable
> > sampler/synths (both cheap and expensive).
> >
> > I think the Moogs & ARPs of the world were failing, the Rolands and
> > Korgs and Sequential Circuits were rising (with MIDI), Synclaviers and
> >
> > Fairlights were blowing everyone's minds. Yamaha was too outside to
> > compete in that marketplace.
> >
> > I never even saw a CS-series synth until 1983, a CS-80 in a famous
> > disco producer's studio in NYC. They weren't in the music stores I
> > visited in the mid-late-'70s. So maybe bad distribution too.
> >
> > My CS-50 was a music store demo that was never sold, taken by the
> > music store owner's daughter from Colorado to Kansas City, stored and
> > eventually bought by a local collector for the price of a gas bill,
> > stored, and bought by me when he needed some cash. It looked like it
> > had just come out of the music store.
> >
> > It blows my mind that this beautiful and beautiful sounding synth had
> > to travel that path into my hands, but I question why someone else had
> >
> > not valued it's sound and appeal up until I got it?
> >
> > Would I have preferred the CS-50 to my Juno-6 back in '82? Doubt it.
> > Would I trade the CS-50 before trading my Juno-6 today? No way. It's
> > priceless and so individual and so special.
> >
> > I just recorded a piece that used a CS-80 patch on a Roland JD-800 and
> >
> > I overlayed a comparible CS-50 patch on top of it. The CS has a growl
> > and edge to the sound whereas the JD patch was smooth and compressed.
> > The CS just wants to dominate the soundspace. Who needs chords when a
> > couple of notes on a CS fills things up?
> >
> > -Jim
> > www.touchxtone.com
> > www.myspace.com/jimcombs
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > SPONSORED LINKS
> >
>     Music sampler                  Unit       Sampler
> 
> > -----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
> >
> >    +  Visit your group "yamahacs80" on the web.
> >
> >    +  To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> >       yamahacs80-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> >
> >    +  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
> >      Service.
> >
> > -----------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> 
> 
> 
>  
> Yahoo! Groups Links
> 
> 
> 
>  
> 
>