FM4 in the shop!

[SebAudio]

Before I use up my trial unnecessarily, can someone tell me a particular reason I would get this if I already have PX7? For example, is it truly "a breeze" to create sounds?

Enveloppes and key tracking are easier to set. And when you have set 4 operators, your sound is ready whereas with PX7 you have 2 more ops to set !

[Soundcells]

I have produced this little track during beta (it only uses - especially for this track designed - FM4 single patches with some additional fx & drums):

https://soundcloud.com/soundcells-reaso ... oul-of-fm4



Regards,
Harald | Soundcells

[Soundcells]

" … Enveloppes and key tracking are easier to set … " - yep - i noticed this too. FM4 is more fun to program / edit  …

[dvdrtldg]

Yeah this is an absolute killer. Insane sounds, I've just been running some presets thru the Synapse AF-4 filter with some added drive and a bit of the hi end rolled off, and it sounds like something from the BBC Radiophonic Workshop circa 1973. I trialled PX7 a while back and it just left me scratching my head, this one's a lot more user friendly.

Agree with whoever said it could use a noise wave option for the oscillators, just to wig things out a bit more. And is there a manual? Can't seem to find one. I think I get what's going on with this synth, but always like to be able to read thru a manual anyway in case I'm missing something.

[ScuzzyEye]

Enveloppes and key tracking are easier to set. And when you have set 4 operators, your sound is ready whereas with PX7 you have 2 more ops to set !

You don't have to set all 6 ops on the PX7. If you want to emulate sounds of the 4-op series, you leave them inactive. Though, 6-ops does allow for a more refined sound.

That said I now own the FM4, and don't own the PX7.

[Andreas@Primal Audio]

Hello reason folk,

awesome to read your comments about the FM4! I already see a few good suggestions for extra features/improvements. 

About the noise it's 100% deliberate and part of the whole FM4 concept. The reason why it's there is because the FM4 engine is made the same way as the old 4 op DX synths. If any of you have tried, say the DX100 you know how dirty and noisy it sounds! We decided to leave a bit of grit/noise in even the cleanest model, Model I. A clean mode would just sounds identical to every single fm soft synth on the market! That's not in our interest.

We have a manual for the FM4 iPad version. They are pretty similar: http://primal-audio.com/fm4/manual.html

Br, Primal Audio

[bitley]

Couldn't have been better timing as I just sold my 5th or 6th (in life) TX81Z just last week. I figured PX7 could satisfy my TX needs but 4-op has its own nice things going on. Great user interface. What about sysex import? Would be awesome as I made soundbanks for 81Z that I still have on disk!

[Tincture]

Thanks Primal Audio! Great synth and very affordable. I loved the preset YouTube clips, had me sold already, some very nice quirky riffs too! Just played with it for 1/2 hr and know it's going to be a favourite

[emef]

Before I use up my trial unnecessarily, can someone tell me a particular reason I would get this if I already have PX7? For example, is it truly "a breeze" to create sounds?

i own PX7, but some great reasons for me to get FM4 as well are

automation for every knob and slider
the unison sounds lovely
pitch bend goes up to 24 

[MDTerps2015]

Before I use up my trial unnecessarily, can someone tell me a particular reason I would get this if I already have PX7? For example, is it truly "a breeze" to create sounds?

i own PX7, but some great reasons for me to get FM4 as well are

automation for every knob and slider
the unison sounds lovely
pitch bend goes up to 24 

That unison like on the monopoly eats up dsp like a fly on you know what. I bought it anyway and actually looking into the PX 7 because that looks and sounds like a beast. 

[joeyluck]

This is a great compliment to PX7. PX7 is indeed a beast and capable of sounds I haven't heard elsewhere in Reason.

On the topic of Combinators. I'm not a fan of a too much focus on Combinators in presets or ReFills. I like a few included as a bonus, but prefer to build my own. And I feel there can be more attention to quality patches for the device itself when the patches are made with only the device itself. Making much better building blocks. And it makes it easier to be cohesive without having twenty different reverbs all over the place.

Navi Retlav's PX7 ReFill is a great example. Outstanding patches for the PX7 using just the PX7. The kind of ReFill I really appreciate

[joeyluck]

I'm really enjoying this, but it's a little CPU heavy...and it's confusing as to why?

For instance, the "Take On Me" patch is a fun, simple patch. But when I play the melody with nothing else in the rack, it is taking up 5 bars of DSP    I guess that's the unison? With it off it's still at 3 bars occasionally jumping to 4. 

Great synth otherwise. I assume there is plenty of room for performance improvement...

It's interesting the trend of some of the more perceivably simple synths being CPU heavy. Another example being Chip 64...

[EnochLight]

I bought it.  And it was the Combis that made me decide to do so.  With synths like these that have no integrated effects, no arp, nor sequencer, etc - it really needs Combi to make it come alive IMHO.  Anyway, bought.  For $25, it's a deal.  That's less than I'd spend to fill my gas tank up, and it will last far longer.  

[joeyluck]

Yeah, I understand it's different for different folks. I just prefer SOLID, good device patches.

I can make anything sound great with some RV-7000 But it's even better when the starting point is given more attention in order to sound good on it's own. And I imagine most Reason users have enough imagination. But it's true that many do not.  Many times I've had to defend the PX7 to users saying it's too harsh, and then show them patches with some RV-7000 or Echobode applied! "Whoa!" Lol. And I even use presets from those devices as well! Just so they see exactly how simple it is. 

But you should know this from my recent pitch about ABL3 distortion patches. That effort is not so much just to supply folks with great patches, but to open the eyes of some users who may seem unwilling to even try applying their own effects...of what is available and just how simple it really is

[Exowildebeest]

Most of those Combi's are pretty simple and uninspiring imo... The device patches are a gazillion times better!

[Rice]

Love it...incredible RE!

[geronimo]

Tried it - bought it - love it!

The combinator presets are a minor dissapointment in my point of view.
I wish they had a special FM4 backdrop and more assigned macro controls.

A quickly example + a Combinator _

 

[mind2069]

It's interesting the trend of some of the more perceivably simple synths being CPU heavy. Another example being Chip 64...

Im curious about this too, I mean PH re synths are quite efficient, even antidote, my guess is theres something in the sdk framework logic that some dev are not using right (the relation between GUI and code maybe) because the c++ dsp should run relatively the same as vst's. Or is the vst version also cpu heavy

Well dissapointed to hear about the cpu, but at 25$, I will get it anyway and hope it gets better, I guess not all the patches are that heavy.

[Tumble]

Antidote? Efficient? Hahah! It uses a ton more resources than Dune2 does.

[eXode]

Antidote? Efficient? Hahah! It uses a ton more resources than Dune2 does.

Afaik DUNE2 uses optimisations that aren't, or at least weren't available at the time Antidote was coded, so it's not really a valid comparison. However if you compare Antidote to some of the other RE offerings, it is indeed very efficient.

[Ostermilk]

I couldn't find a single reason why I shouldn't get this, so now it's mine...

The bang for buck ratio is well off the end of any previous scale.

Great job by the Devs.

[Kategra]

I immediately bought it after hearing the pads/ strings youtube demo.

[bsp]

Very nice synth, tried+bought FM synthesis with waveforms other than sine is much more fun!

The FM4 is very CPU hungry, though. Why ? FM synthesis basically boils down to table lookups, doesn't it ?

Interestingly, a simple patch in Unison 2x mode raises the DSP load to 2 bars while two (edit: even three) instances of FM4 playing the same patch never use more than one bar. Something ain't right here

Btw: Is the "Operator Phase Sync" feature implemented, yet ? I'm asking because I cannot hear a difference between the three settings (rand/free/sync).

I've setup a simple 8th test pattern with slightly overlapping notes and I hear random phasing, even in sync mode ?!

[riemac]

Now that PX7 is on sale I'm struggeling if to buy FM4 or PX7.
I've no triel on PX7 left so I cannot compare it with FM4.
Could you give me some advise. Is PX7 also very cpu intensive?
Normaly I would like to buy FM4, but cpu usage is very importand to me.

Thanks

[mrj1nx]

PX7 is good cpu wise AFAIK, also Thor can do quite a bit of FM as well, 3 FM pairs is pretty much a 6 OP FM Synth, and you can do custom routings as well using the programming/matrix section (as well as the ability to use whatever waveforms you want out of very many, etc, and realize why you probably dont want to ).

This was done with Thor: 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uDFuCYwmwUY