From: JROSSI@EAGLE.AAMRL.WPAFB.AF.MIL
Newsgroups: rec.music.synth
Subject: Regarding Marc Webster's K2000/SY99 comments
Date: 27 Jul 92 21:35:00 GMT


On the synthesis side it does not surprise me that the K2000 and SY99 are
distinguishable in sound or color.  Although I am by no means an FM expert,
people who know and understand FM tell me that the K2000's FM-like algorithms
were nixed due to leagl conflicts with Yamaha's owning of rights to FM.  So,
although there are several FM-like algorithms which can be used on a K2000
(again this is heresay since I am about as FM-naive as you can get), the
K2000 is not as robust in the FM synthesis department as it presumably could
be.  On the other hand, subtractive (i.e., analog like) synthesis is
implemented to an extrordinary level, and variants on additive and additive/
composite synthesis techniques are also well represented.  So, as an out-of-
the-box synthesizer, the K2000 and SY99 should be about as different as
any two synths where one is FM and one isn't.  Similarly, in synth-section
treatment of samples one would also expect the K2000 and SY99 to behave
differently simply because of the differences in their synthesizer archi-
tectures.  The usage of the term 'warmer' in description of the K2000's 
processing of samples extends only to those samples processed with the
subtractive algorithms where the K2000 is actually functioning as if it were
a real analog synthesizer (and accordingly imparts that 'warmer' analog
color to the sample treatment).  Clearly, at least in my mind, the processing
of samples with some of the more esoteric alhortihms which combine overdrive
and distortion as well as harmonic injection can lead to some incredibly
bright (some would almost say 'tinny') sounds which transend the 'metalic' or
clangorous sounds usually associated with traditional FM.  At any rate,
I would be very surprised if you couldn't make a K2000 sound as 'light' as
an SY99 in sample treatment by judiciously choosing and implementing the
correct algorithm.

My main point of confusion comes from the description of how the samples,
themselves, sound on the two instruments.  First of all, a K2000 (with the
sampling option) is a 16 bit true stereo sampler.  Assuming that the SY99
has a mode where the samples can be played back untreated, it would be very
surprising to me if the same samples would sound different played back on
the two machines.  Clearly, if you were to sample the SY99 with the K2000 you
should get an identical sound back if you dont process it at all on the
K2000.  The fact that the acoustic piano samples sound different on an SY99
and K2000 is probably the result of the samples being different.  The K2000
piano is pretty much the same as the piano on the 1000 Px (although, I don't
think it is composed of as many multisamples).  Further testimony to the
fact that the K2000 doesn't change the color of samples is that samples which
I have taken from my EPS-16+ library sound identical (IDENTICAL) when played
back through the K2000 or the EPS.  Additionally, some experimenting I did
ad Ace with their S1000 sampler (the K2000 directly reads S1000 disks)
demonstrated to me that a sample file created on an S1000 sounds identical
on a K2000 when it is read from a diskette and played through the same
amplification equipment.  Of course, this is what you would expect, but I
did get the impression that Marc was suggesting that samples played back on
a K2000 are somehow inherently 'warmer' than samples played back on an SY99.

Of course, unless you are worried about sampling per se, the fact that the
K2000 functions like a 16 bit stereo sampler is moot.  The fact that you can
take those samples and use them as inputs to the VAST system make the K2000
what it is.  While it is easy to dismiss the power of VAST after routine
perusal of the ROM sounds in the K2000, a few hours of working with the
system will convince anybody but the totally ear-dead (brain dead?) individual
that there is no more powerful a synthesis system available (at least, not for
under $50K, and even then I'd wonder if it can be touched).

My best advice to anybody contemplating spending between $2K and $5K on a
synthesizer or sampler is to run a K2000 through its paces.  Don't allow your
decision to be made solely on the basis of the ROM sounds/programs.  It
would be definately best if you obtained the K2000 manual from Kurzweil
(or borrow one from a dealer) and read about VAST for about a week before
you actually play with the machine.  While VAST is not hard to use, it is
very complex and deep.  A little understanding of how the algorithms at your
disposal differ as well as the sonic possibilities of stacking algorithmic
treatments will make your evaluation a little easier.  At that point, I
would be hard pressed to imagine a LOGICAL reason for purchasing anything
else, providing, of course, you are willing to pay about $2500 for a
music box.

John
Newsgroups: rec.music.synth