Yamaha DX7 vs. Korg M1 vs. Roland D-50 | The 3 Horsemen of the Digital Apocalypse

[@ekummel]

The M1 has these grandiose sounds that are just so inspiring. Makes you wanna experiment and just push all it's buttons. The DX7 on the other hand is like a favorite sweater. You hear the dulcet tones of the DX7 and you think "I'm home". There's a comfort that the DX7 sounds give you that no other synth does. The D50 is like an exotic neighbor. You're curious but afraid to be too forward to introduce yourself to them. There's a distinct "tingle" listening to the D50 like you're doing something wrong, but it feels to good to feel guilty about it!

[@xinjoy6236]

good review! could you do that with Yamaha CS50-60-80 series too? 😉

[@madness8556]

These 3 instruments were the industry standard at their release. If you had all 3 keyboards at that time, along with a dedicated sampler like an Akai, Ensoniq or Emu and an analogue synth such as a Jupiter 8, Prophet 5 or Oberheim OBX, you covered every possible sound palette at the time.

[@NikoNoxious]

:O

[@digitized_music]

Totally agree

[@georgefromgreece4119]

Nothing beats the Korg M1 as a realistic all-rounder, and beyond. The others are good, only if you have the basics covered. M1 has it all~ realistic instrument sounds, top pads, depth in sound.

[@RaymondCastile]

The M1 is getting beat up here. It's a very powerful synthesizer that can generate terrific sweeping analog-style sounds, or warm pads, if that's what you want. It can also create ethereal digital pads and interesting leads. It set the template for the next 20 years of digital workstations, before analog made a comeback. The M1 is a classic with a unique sound and personality.

[@georgefromgreece4119]

As a non expert I heard that exactly. It gets the closest to subtractive synthesis' timbre.

[@danjacobson9881]

I totally agree, although using that small window and scrolling through parameters made designing sounds a challenge.

[@TomatoFettuccini]

Zach hates the M1 because of the music he heard growing up; he literally says exactly this in his M1 review video. He's hardly objective. If he was, the only conclusion to come to regarding his question of "Which is the most relevant today?" is "The M1". It's still powerful and useful today, and is still used by many musicians. Zach doesn't know what he's talking about.

[@leonevski]

I agree with the judgement though, I have tried a few Korg, among one the Pa3XLe and consumed clips on Korgs, they all have a sound, but its just not my flavour. The Rolands and Yamaha vintage lines are the ones that gets my motor running. This depends probably on music style.

I have all three of them. Love them all. Probably D50 is my favourite.

[@fochtyu2694]

In terms of synthesis appraoch, M1 and D-50 are similar(Kawai K1 also), while DX7 is totally its own. They are all really outdated from current perspective, but if you can only have 1 synth for life out of these 3, it'll be a no-brainer to pick M1 for its versatile usability, followed by OK D-50, then the nerdy(oops) DX7.

[@iwanttocomplain]

Nerdy oops makes you sound really bad. Are you cool because samples are cool. I suppose you record and engineer your own.

[@fochtyu2694]

@@iwanttocomplain No, what I meant is to fully understand FM you have to know Fourier Transform, which I first learned in Advanced Engineering Mathematics.

[@iwanttocomplain]

@@fochtyu2694 you can never fully understand fm. There's too much to know. Like in any music, you just experiment. Unless you are a highly specialised and rare professional patch maker.

[@fochtyu2694]

@@iwanttocomplain That's the knowledge required, and hence I called it 'nerdy'.

[@iwanttocomplain]

@@fochtyu2694 if you want to make a custom patch in FM you must learn what sounds happen when you adjust certain parameters. Not possible in PCM where you must choose a patch and maybe change adsr. FM is the same. You choose a patch maybe change adsr. But the difference with FM is that you have the option of doing sound design and yuo don't need to understand the theory to twiddle a knob.

[@pneptun]

not enough people are saying this in the comments - DX7 is _early_ 80s, older than the _late_ 80s M1 and D-50. by the late 80s, when synths could do sample-based tone generators, of course yamaha had a horse in the race too - SY77 for example, which could do both: FM and sample-based AWM. so this comparison isn't entirely fair ;)

[@ubrhsjvrkskbdkabaoehdnxk-xh5bq]

@pneptun Who cares, dx7 is a garbage. sounds like a toy

[@iwanttocomplain]

@@ubrhsjvrkskbdkabaoehdnxk-xh5bq it was the most sophisticated sound in this video I watched it all the way through. Richest, deepest, warmest, most dynamic. It was the clear winner. You probably think the SNES has a better sound chip than the SMD. People say samples replaced tone generation when that isn't the case.

[@guinhomusico9504]

@@ubrhsjvrkskbdkabaoehdnxk-xh5bqessa é a tua opinião. Você é um anônimo. Os famosos criaram incríveis músicas com o DX7 emitidos ainda o usam.

[@Ashfaq1999]

Great video zach. All of these keyboards are classics and have their own special sounds.

[@FranciscoDiazMusic]

The M1 is not being appreciated in this video I think. The M1 has a sequencer! The DX7 and the D50 didn’t. You were able to make a demo of your own music just by using this board. I feel this is where it stands out from the DX7 and D50. Don’t get me wrong I love the other 2 boards as well. I feel like they were unique in their own way and brought different things to the table. If you had all 3 back in the late 80s you were musically unstoppable!!

[@asoundlab]

I’ve seen a lot of folks with pictures of the gigging racks with these three - must have been epic!

[@MacXpert74]

Although that's true, the built-in sequencer of the M1 wouldn't be an important feature for most users today, with much easier and more powerful DAW based options for sequencing.

[@mississippimeatloaf1637]

Peavey's DM series boards(which were released around 1988) rivaled all three of these, they had the exact same functionalities but they also had a legit piano sample, 35 note polyphony, MIDI capabilities and a sequencer, not only that but they were almost half the price of the m1, DX7 and d50, there are hardly any videos of these boards online which is a real shame because those were hidden gems of the synth and digital piano world, the DPM 4 was the 61 key version and the DPM-488 was the 88 key version which was basically an upgraded version of the kurzweil k250, they also competed with and rivaled as well korg's T-Series boards

[@mississippimeatloaf1637]

@@MacXpert74 but it was a very important feature back then which is what that keyboard was aimed for, people in 1987

[@Am71919]

@@mississippimeatloaf1637 holy cow!!!!!! I remember those boards, you're right, there are hardly any videos of those online, real shame, I remember seeing a lot of bands with those in 1989 and 1990, those boards were particularly popular among studio musicians and the church crowd, very tough boards, the 88 key didn't sell as well as the 61 key did because the 88 key version was prohibitively heavy, close to 100 lb, but boy were those things incredible

[@apreviousseagle836]

Ironically, my favorite sounds in all of existence are FM "DX Rhodes" style Electric Pianos: The M1: "11:E.Piano", "51:DWGS EP", and from the 01/W "B:81:DynoPiano", "Digi Years (forget the patch #), and from the Yamaha SY99 "08: Classic EP" Which are all ironically most likely custom DX7 patches, sampled into those ROMplers. (The SY99 of course did the FM in realtime)

[@soamericandad]

Just by the title I can see that this going a greeeeeeat video!!!! bravo!!

[@Krunoslav-if7km]

All are great instruments. If you have limited budget and want vintage synth I think Kurzweil K2000 is very good option. You can get more or less all sounds from DX7, D50 and M1 and much more because Kurzweil can read samples.

[@Venatt1]

I have the D50 and the TX802 which I understand it is equivalent to two DX7 MKII. In my personal opinion the Roland D50 has the most unique sounds for the time it came out, it is my favorite synth of all time.

[@teknical100]

Had all three still have the D50.

[@kyma1999x]

korg m1 is the one betwen threes with less synthesis capabilities, few modulations, lowpass with no resonance (just a stereo treble control), no such things like ring modulation or sync....but, very good quality big samples at time, combination mode, a very good fx processor with up 4 fx at time, such a super sized mellotron with fx! in a stage/studio keyboard dimension for traditional keyboardist, it wins....however it has some of the most beautiful sample synth waveforms of all time, very pure and pristine.

[@UncleMilty]

I like that you as a music retailer with no “skin in the game” have done this video. Shows me you are more than just a retailer. I just got a Casio CZ-5000 and love these vintage instruments. Next on my list is a D50 then a DX7.

[@anthonyptak8650]

I remember a friend telling me his value as a session musician went way up in the 1980s because he had a D50 synth keyboard and he knew how to program it.

[@FurtiveSkeptical]

In all fairness, I used an M1 sequencing and live play for over 12 years, I had to tweak every sound I ever used practically, to sound better through speakers. All the factory presets were a starting point, but all of them required some adjustment and eventually turned into some lovely sounding patches. I still cringe to this day when I hear certain M1 snare drums and the "bonk piano" sound....and I love the M1. It really shone for me with 4 assignable outs when sequencing as you could bypass the deep chorus/reverb on your synth patches and send the bass and drums out dry to a mixer for separate EQ and effects. I still use mine today, although more often for the nice aftertouch keybed that still feels natural for outboard synth and hammond organ. I noticed you went towards the "bonky" sounding M1 patches in your demo....😢 the M1 has some lovely analog inspired warm strings and some amazingly true sounding brass and sax section patches and great synth entries. Thanks for the vs. demo👍

[@ArcadeSynth]

Have you thought about sharing your patches online?

[@xmodrecordshypersyncrecord843]

I have had all three. I like them all. The one I still have and use to this day is the M1. To be fair I have a MODX so I have the DX7 sounds. The D50 is great but you were using a programmer that cost as much as the synth. Not all of us can afford that. So basics of the D50 are nice but I feel I get more I need out of my M1. I produce house, techno, pop, and trance and it still to this day is used on all of those. Still three great synths and maybe again will have all three. :D

[@monokalamos]

Great selection of DX7 patches. I wasn't expecting the demo to be that interesting.

[@Jesoteric]

They are all personal favorites, but the D-50 is just so good

[@michaelmitchell8218]

Sorry you cannot compare these synths. They are all unique in their own right. They all can be programmed to do things people have never heard. But at the end of the day all three stand up to their own sounds they can make. Yes they have aged now but still have their own sounds which made them all great.

[@tonywillans7556]

This comment is more relevant than comparing/rating these synths. Because these synths came out 83-88 many people want to compare and pick holes. No point. Each has its own unique place in the music/sound production landscape. They all do different things very well. I had a D50 and what made it for me was the addition a PG1000. That changed completely how I was able to really get into sound designing. Like all menu laden synths the D50 was a pain in the ass to really get into, so most people (me included initially) just stuck with the presets. Probably why the M1, DX7 and D50 sounds got to be so ubiquitous and just a little annoying. 80's live performances were all done with presets. No real time tweaking going on like 70's synth users.

[@WarriorEsoteric]

Love them all

[@peterldelong]

I still have all three of these synths, plus an original DX7. I can’t tell the difference in sound between the DX7 and DX7IIFD and the II is just a better synth all the way around. Built like a battleship.

[@jimmyjakes1823]

"in sound between the DX7 and DX7IIFD and the II is just a better synth all the way around." Correct. I've listened head to head with the same presets and the II sounds maybe a little more refined and articulated but most of the time there's no difference at all. In a mix? Forget it, they're the same. People who claim the mark I is warmer or more authentic or whatever because of its lower res 12 bit dac are being very silly. I think the mark I does look cooler, though.

[@stevehofer3482]

Don’t sell the DX7-II short. The changes were responsive to the complaints by owners of the original.

[@mohq9573]

Great video, Zach. Always learn a lot from you, I'm just getting into this wonderful world of synths!

[@asoundlab]

Thank you!

[@fochtyu2694]

Not a good review. He has no idea what M1 can really do and usually reviews a digital synth with analog bias.

[@ytpremium7649]

Non beat the pure organically sonic DX7 which is capable of anything and everything fabulous and just needs an external effects processor to bring its sounds alive

[@GeraldGreen-s4x]

I have a Dx7ll, M1, A D50& ENSONIQ ASR 10, WITH A MPC2000XL with sp1200-- what else do l need??

[@grthbrenaman]

How do these sound guys hold up to or surpass Arturia’s Dx7, korg’s online version of their M1, and Roland’s version? Did they do a boutique D50?

[@AdamElteto]

The M1 had a lot of the "ancestors" of current Korg patch offerings. Just overall great sounding patches and especially the combinations and multis. Just think of the ubiquity of Universal Choir. Different musicians have different preferences, of course, but Korg always happens to have sounds that "just work" when dropped into any arrangement in any music genre. To be fair, the M1 also had a few years of industry evolution experience, since it came out years later. In synth technology, a few years can mean a lot.

[@georgefromgreece4119]

Excellent comment

[@DarrenGlen]

if Yamaha wants a hit again, just make a DX7 with every parameter and adjustment on sliders and knobs on the panel. Like a JD800 panel. Programmable to the max. Instant success. Id buy one

[@alanwolverine346]

Korg already done something like that... called 'opsix'

[@DarrenGlen]

@@alanwolverine346 yeh well not really its a half-size and only a few controllers...when they make a full-sized version then yes...they will have done it. Im sure its comin! im excited ill be first in line!

[@matthewgaines10]

Or just get a Yamaha MODX. There is no need for a modern DX7 with the MODX far surpassing it in operators, feedback, and algorithms. It also adds sequencing, DSP, and better controls. Can't think of think of a thing the DX7 has as an advantage beside heritage and more hit records. Even a Reface DX has improvements over the DX7 while missing a full size keyboard, operators, and algorithms. Why another DX7 when you have low price and high feature set alternatives available from Yamaha already?

[@subwaygaragemusic]

Wait until Behringer came out of the blue with the BX7...

[@ElijahRock92]

@@DarrenGlen This is why as much as I crap on Nords, I do appreciate the physical controls of their keyboards. I wish someone would do a modern synth with all the parameters located physically on the board in it's own section. I understand something like that would be huge (a la the JD-800), but the hands on control would be a more than fair trade off. Yeah, there's the JD-08, but it's just not the same with those small controls.

[@madness8556]

I owned and loved a Korg T3EX for over 25 years which is basically an M1 on steroids. I did a lot of sound programming and found that by far its weakest area were it's grainy sounding low pass digital non resonant filters. If only the Korg synths at that time had better filters, it would have taken their synth capabilities to another level IMHO. The Trinity released in 1995 was the first Korg synth since the 1985 DW8000 and 1986 DSS1 with resonant filters that weren't only low pass but true multi band filters that sounded great. I disagree however that the M1 was more or less a preset rompler. I created dozens of very unique programs and combinations that went way beyond factory rompler territory and one of the 1993 editions of Keyboard Magazine actually dedicated an entire issue to the thousands of third party M1 sounds available at that time.

[@stevehofer3482]

I believe the Jupiter-4 was MSRP $2895 in 1979. The PolySix was MSRP $1995 to start in 1981, but when Roland came out with the Juno 6 and Juno 60, the price went down. Roland only sold about 4000 Jupiter 4, but Korg sold 30,000 PolySix. The Polysix is cheaper today because there were a lot more of them sold.

[@asoundlab]

Thanks for the info!

[@cnfuzz]

I'm pretty shure a lot of polysixs went to scrap ,up until the m1 only the poly 800 was very reliable , korg upped their game on the hardware quality, i bet a lot more juno 6/60s survived than poly 61 s

[@tylenolpringle2040]

That was like a million dollars back then, only the pros could get those

[@richman_music_inc]

Started off with a Juno 60. Then got an 01/wfd. Currently looking for a dated synth with instant 80s for under $150 (rack version). Enter the Roland U-20. A sampler/player only, had some killer patches like Fairlight breath sounds. D50 type sounds. This synth is a beast!

[@erikt211]

17:50 I am almost certain that was in the Futurama into

[@scrollingmadness]

Had all 3. D-50 was best. Emu Proteus 1 slayed 'em all in 1990.

[@ferenclucas2842]

When I was a kid and got a new m1 I was lucky enough to get the ex upgrade which adds the T1 rom and patches into it. That package is a beautiful synth. Still have it since 1988

[@lovemadeinjapan]

Nice one indeed. I found a ex-board on Ebay, and thanks to a video here on YT I managed to get it working. It was no easy upgrade.

[@spazkong]

This is a very focused analysis of an era and a very valid point. If I could interrupt, I would say horses for courses on this one. They're all great as you know

[@worldmusicarchives7950]

What is the patch at 22:47?

[@alanwolverine346]

Its' a combi of Bell and Karimba

[@worldmusicarchives7950]

@@alanwolverine346 I have the VST version of the Korg m1 where would I find it?

[@alanwolverine346]

@@worldmusicarchives7950 I replaced preset with my own, so I don't know where it is. Just layer both to create it

[@worldmusicarchives7950]

​@@alanwolverine346Thanks

[@fredericportal4209]

I have the 3 synths among many others and I don't think we can compare them to each other... everyone will have their preferences... it's like comparing a Gibson LP and a Fender strato in guitars. ..

[@fredericportal4209]

but the video is very interesting ... thanks a lot !

[@Arthur-hg7ny]

Synths were progressing like lightening through the 80’s Hard to compare through that decade. Each one is progressively better than the one before.

[@matthewgaines10]

My personal ranking: 1) Yamaha DX7 - Beacuse it has a synthesizer engine in the most strict sense of word and it started the revolution. 2) Roland D-50 - Personally, I like the presets better than any of the others. A very close 2nd to the DX7 in my heart. Probably even outside of the presets, the one I most like to hear. Sonically #1 in my book. 3) Korg M1 - The 1st workstation synth. Probably the most impactful as far as features. Mostly likely deserves the title of the world's best selling synth of all time. Sure, a modern synth can smoke these. The Reface DX has effects, modulator feedback, and a cleaner sound than the DX7. The MODX takes all those bonuses and adds more operators and algorithms. The D-05 has all the D-50 and D550 presets and sounds cleaner too. In addition, it adds goodies I don't remember over the D-50. But these three vintage units are very special. Nice to see them all together.

[@n8goulet]

My personal ranking: 1) Korg M1 - A synth so revolutionary, more than 30 years later it's still the best selling synth of all time, bare none! 2) Yamaha DX7 3) Roland D50 All are great synths to have, but I feel the M1 is far more useful than the other two. But I'll take my Yamaha MODX over any of them as it is very capable, and extremely light weight too. The first modern synth that has excited me in years. Basically, "Montage JR". "If" I ever get around to making a KZbin video of the greatest M1 patches, you'll better know why I loved the M1 so much. I haven't really heard a good demo online of the best of M1 sounds. The M1 was clearly the most useful synth to the largest number of users, hence why it sold in "record" numbers.

[@matthewgaines10]

@@n8goulet From what I recall, the difference in sales between the M1 and DX7 is small. It holds the record but not by much. Not a dominating lead.

[@n8goulet]

@@matthewgaines10 I'm not sure. I've had both, and I feel the M1 was a much more significant invention, but the DX7 (TX7) was good too. My DX7 was replaced by a VST synth, and now I can import DX7 sounds into my MODX. I have my M1's, but prefer using Korg's VST of it.

[@ShallRemainUnknown]

@@matthewgaines10 About 230,000 DX7s and 260,000 M1s sold.

[@matthewgaines10]

@@ShallRemainUnknown 30,000 units isn't a large lead (14%) over the DX7 particularly when you had other Yamaha FM synthesizers like DX9, DX11, DX21, DX27, and DX100 diluting DX7 sales with lower prices. What similar, cheaper digital synthesizers was the M1 competing within the Korg brand?

[@JozeatTxb]

I was a budding session keyboardist in the mid 90's and had the good fortune to play all those keyboards across the bands who hired me. The DX7 in my opinion remained superlative as an all-rounder, nothing to beat those iconic pre-sets, added to good cross-genre adaptability (raggae, jazz, house, afrobeat, etc) and of course that versatile FM synthesis system. The MI had that singular piano sound always going for it, but often didn't blend well across certain genres, and generally sounding "definitely a keyboard" while the DX could reproduce common instruments with great authenticity ( If you tweaked the FM synthesis well). The D50 I remember was less intuitive , with even less-authentic sounds and (to me) a rather a niche acquired taste overall. Good memories, great to see.

[@neilkendall5499]

Wouldn't it be the case that the M1 was better and more realistic than the DX7 for actual instrument sounds, since the M1 used actual samples of instruments rather than just synthesized versions?

[@mrstephenpariah]

​@@neilkendall5499Synthesized sounds can actually be more realistic in practice.

[@johnnydiggs4276]

All are great! Out of the three, I care least about the M1 sound in modern days compared to the other two. To be honest, the Ensoniq SQ-80 has a very unique sound that could be used in modern day music in addition to these. Of course the Ensoniq is hybrid. These older synths depend on good effect processors also of course.

[@toomuchtoofast4533]

1000000% agreed DX7 mark 1 and the Ensoniq for the win

[@Sonikbytes]

I would take my d-50 to the deserted island if i was forced to live there. Love that crystalline, ethereal sound, it can also scare the crap of you too if you program it to do so. Great at emulating some 80's analogs. M1 is the least exciting for me and will never own one. It would work good in a live band setting but sound-wise I would choose my Wavestation EX any day.

[@n8goulet]

I'll take my M1 over my D50 & DX7 any day of the week.

[@fredtillman3050]

@@n8goulet me too, M1 can do it all

[@SeverityOne]

About the D-50: "...and you find it in a lot of music from the nineties..." Actually, if you look at big hits featuring the D-50, they are concentrated in the years 1987 to 1989. After that, there's a drop-off (although it was used in EDM, but with less obvious hits). Probably, people had moved on, presumably to the M1. Regarding these three, or more likely their rack counterparts (TX802, M1R and D-550), it's not very likely that they'll end up in my retro-rack. Somehow, their sounds have been used so much in so many hit songs, that you feel almost embarrassed to use them because it immediately turns to cheese. For the DX7, it's the e-pianos; for the M1, it's the pianos and organs; for the D-50, it's pretty much every single preset. Still, they take up a considerable part of our collective musical memory, and should be acknowledged as such.

[@2kBofFun]

That must also be the reason most D50's look mint. Like they did not get much use. One-year-fly.

[@SeverityOne]

@@2kBofFun Still, that doesn't stop people asking silly prices, especially for the D-550.

[@missingwestcoast]

This, Roland had to step up with the JV series to be able to compete there. I think the JV-1080 sounded better than the M1, but the M1 pianos and organs are iconic and second to none during that era.

[@iwanttocomplain]

I think it was a bit unclear in this video but the Korg M1 uses tone generation in all it's patches if not all of them. It is a misnomer that the M1 is a rompler. It's just like the D-50 with an attack sample then maybe a loop point, all supported with generated tones to add dynamic range and clarity.

[@georgefromgreece4119]

As a non expert, I loved the M1 and the Roland cause to my ears they may sound closer to subtractive synthesis' timbre, they have those low partial harmonics, on the other hand you can't beat FM synthesis for crystalline metallic sounds.

[@thebarnboys4508]

Very nice video. Quick question, how can I use my iPad with my original DX7? I just got mine yesterday and I’m unfamiliar!

[@fusheren]

I NEED ALL

[@park171]

The height of the digital synths when hardware was priced to affordability, a departure form having to own a sampler which was a very costly option.

[@SEOTeamBerlin]

informative video, just the tone loudness needs to be 10dB higher - I have D-50 + M1R + M3R + Modal Cobalt

[@granturismo5742]

DX7 is a real synthesizer, while M1 and D-50 are basically Rompler. However in that perspective M1 did a better job than D-50. People overly focused on the real-sounding instruments of M1, and neglected the potential of its Digital 1-5 and DWGS Analog waveforms, which IMO are more articulate than that of D-50, allowing creating both VA and PPG style of tones.

[@2kBofFun]

They are all synths, but maybe not in your analog perspective. The beauty of M1 sounds is in complex layering, detailed envelopes and effects, not trying to be a virtual analog synth. The D50 has a very unique and great sound digital low-pass filter with resonance, although on the factory presets only 47 Spacious Sweep uses it, which makes it the killer patch to define its synth qualities (forget about Fantasia and such). Legowelt shows us the true beauty of the D50. The DX7 is the granddaddy of FM synthesis, which only recently is fully understood thanks to Dexed. Back in the eighties the DX7 was mostly a preset machine as well.

[@granturismo5742]

@@2kBofFun No, I'm not looking at it from analog synth perspective. FM synth is like starting with flour, butter, sugar, etc, and make different types of cake from those, while Rompler is like given, say, a cheesecake, then you shape it into different forms, but it still tastes like a cheesecake.

[@2kBofFun]

@@granturismo5742 I would say FM synth is like a crate of pans, pots, spoons, tools, and then you try to make it not sound like metal.... The M1 maybe cheese, but not cheesecake. It has room to become Domino's Pizaa, or Macaroi and cheese, or cheesecake....

[@granturismo5742]

@@2kBofFun Not really. DX7 sound is derived from algorithmic modulation of only 1 waveform type, Sine, which is why I said it's real synthesis. On the other hand, M1 and D-50 comes with all kinds of PCM sounds in the box, from piano to slap bass to drums, and no need to trying synthesize them. For me M1 is a power+ version of D-50, which is why I bought it instead of the other 2.

[@2kBofFun]

@@granturismo5742 Heck, I have them all three and love them all three. And unlike the Polysix here, which might make real synth lovers drool, they just work when you plug them in. The analog machine is really demanding on maintanance.

[@larslevinberget9558]

Thanks for using the DX7mkII as it is superior to the original one. Many used it as a master keyboard with the D550, the same as that on the KORG M1

[@2kBofFun]

The MK1 has a nicer keybed. OK, as master keyboard it is a bit awkward being limited to max 100 velocity instead of 127, but the feel is the best, and if you really have a problem with it, get a rom-patch. The DX7kmII and M1 have the same keybed and that bed is the worst of the bunch, the D50 is feeling better, but less than a MK1. That makes it weird to see the picked versions in the video, the brown MK1 plays the nicest.

[@BrooseWayniac]

Is it possible to put own drumsamples into the M1? I Like all Ur Videos Sir!

[@LeventeZone]

I almost stopped at the headline. There is no "vs" when comparing fundamentally different synthesis methods and instrument categories. M1 was a full-blown workstation, the others are synths. Whilst workstation features have nothing to do with the audio signal processing/synthesis, they bring vast contributions to the entirety of that instrument (think of effect routings, capabilities, sequencer etc. etc.). Then... FM "vs" subtractive-like sample-based (S&S) synthesis? It is like saying ultramarine vs. chrome yellow. They are both colours and particular types of paint in very different places on the palette used by a painter - any "vs" debate between them is completely nonsensical. There is no "vs". Sure, keen-eyed reader may spot that in this analogy yellow contains blue as primary colour, so the analogy is not precise - but hopefully clear. It is frankly tiring to see polemic like this that tries to animate audience in commendable ways but it starts from a fundamentally flawed and/or vacuous premise. At least it is admittedly subjective, because author hates M1 sounds that were ubiquitous. This, in itself, is not a criteria when comparing instruments. Again, as in many such videos, the relationship between user and instrument/tool is completely turned upside down and causality chains violated. How one keyboard was used in what ways is not in any way a reflection on its (digital) synthesizer features, abilities, characteristics. And so on. But... I was lost as audience as soon as I saw FM (DX7) "vs" the other two. One can pretty much predict what comes after that headline and indeed, that's exactly what we get here, too.

[@WISAM_MAHMOUD]

D 50 is best in pads and orchestral sounds ... dx7 is best in E pianos and vibs

[@stuartduncan2772]

I started with a Juno 60, then the DX7 came out but I couldn't afford one. By the time I could, I bought the M1. I ended up with various lower end DX synths, my favourite being a DX11. I also have a string of D synths but never the D50. I just didn't like it. I loaned my M1 to a friend around 20 years ago and have only just got it back this week. You need to play the sounds to get the best from any keyboard. If you only play one way, you'll never get what the keyboards are capable of.

[@jasonbeatty831]

That D-550 is the standout for me.

[@robertduszczakowski6813]

Roland D50 gniecie konkurencję. Najsłabiej chyba wypada Korg M1. Moje zdanie. Dzięki za fajny materiał. Dodam że miałem kiedyś D50 ale sprzedałem bo miał sporo wad. Dziś posiadam Roland Jd-xi oraz sysyem 8 - genialne oraz korg wavestate. Bardzo fajne syntezatory.

[@Am71919]

I'll still take a Roland Jupiter 8 over all three of these

[@idioma.ideall]

Were you playing ART Wilson on the D-550??

[@subwaygaragemusic]

DX7 pad and strings and M1 sax sample. Nuff said

[@n8goulet]

I'm glad you explained that one of the M1's greatest strengths was realistic instrument sounds. Exactly why many of us wanted the M1. The M1 has been the DNA for modern rompler based synths like the Kronos and Montage. Correctly stated that the M1 to many was largely a preset synth, but it was very easy to tweak the sounds and modify them to your needs. Having used all three of these synths, I don't really consider any of them easy to program. The D50 may program a bit more like a traditional subtractive synth than the M1, but also doesn't sound that much like one. I've always paired my M1s with other synths like Yamaha FM and subtractive analog style synths. None of these synths are complete by themselves, but the M1 clearly the most capable. The M1 preset sounds you used in your video were not very good examples. I really need to make my own M1 demonstration video, but aren't really setup for making KZbin videos here. If you go through a lot of M1 sound collections, you'll find some really great synths. I'd recommend you get a hold of an M1 with the fantastic Invision "Plus 1" board internally installed, which would would be one of the best sound collections for the M1 and also double wave rom memory. The electric & acoustic guitar patches are still some of the best I've heard. The Hammond organ patches are fantastic, and the M1's real-time Leslie effect can be assigned to a foot pedal which I used for many years for very realistic B3 rock sounds. Many great orchestral sounds exist in the M1 I haven't heard anything better out of Kronos or Montage as good for some of the patches. We learned through Microsoft, that it's the programming and compatibility of sounds "as a platform" that is often more important than better or more advanced technologies. And good programming is more likely to come to platforms with a lot of users. The M1 was advanced for the time it came out, and the combination of a lot of users and advanced hardware made the M1 appealing for good programmers too.

[@asoundlab]

Thanks for the feedback - I’ll look for some patch banks to continue exploring!

[@n8goulet]

@@asoundlab It's the quality patches made for sysex that really made the CZ series.Those are what sold the DX7, and the Korg M1. I had all 3.

[@georgefromgreece4119]

Agreed.

[@1AB2CD3EF]

Anyone who played all 3 knows M1 is the best and most versatile. D50 is good for new age airy sounds, and... I didn't find much use out of DX7.

[@dvamateur]

I don't think this is a fair comparison. DX7II vs. D-50, yes. But the M1 should be compared to its competition, which were the Roland D-20 and Yamaha V50.

[@2kBofFun]

LOL, the doorstopper synth. The D20 was more like a Portasound made by Roland.

[@dvamateur]

@@2kBofFun I must say I quite like all three, the D-20, V50, and the M1. All excellent instruments for keyboard players.

[@PixelNotesMusic]

What DX7 app is he talking about?

[@toomuchtoofast4533]

It’s called Patch Base. Within the app, you can buy midi synth programming tools specifically created for your vintage synth. I use the DX7 template with my 1983 DX7… it’s the best $30 I’ve ever spent - the sounds are unreal that I can create now.

[@jazzualdo]

D50 for a lifetime!

[@GeraldGreen-s4x]

This was at the time when Roland & Yamaha both owned korg ,Yamaha had the technology--Roland had the sounds & the M1 benefitted.

[@milk_bath]

Which has the best keybed?

[@asoundlab]

All of these needed some work on the keybed, so hard to say. I’d defer to someone who owns all three in good condition!

[@ShallRemainUnknown]

DX7, DX7II, and M1 had essentially identical Yamaha FS keybeds, used by both Yamaha & Korg in their top synths until about 2007, when Yamaha tweaked the design a bit and Korg started making its own keybeds.

[@milk_bath]

@@ShallRemainUnknown Thank you.

[@peterldelong]

I just completed an M1 restoration and when I started tearing apart the keybed I’m saying “this looks really familiar”. Then I spy Yamaha Corporation printed on the keybed PCB. Did not know Korg was using the DX7 keybed and when you clean and re-grease everything, it has excellent action. My fingers are happy.

[@klaassiersma4892]

I don't own the other two but I recon the DX7 mk1 the gold standard ( I own a very early one and I believe they have a alternative key bed than the later ones and the two ) , I think it feels better than the one on the Dx7 2 witch i have also played.

[@SamLee300SL]

DX7 is like a great engine, and D-50 is like a fine engine with 2 wheels; M1 is like a fine engine, but with 4 wheels. Well, now you have a car!

[@davidjazay9248]

Apples and oranges.

[@Pintosonic]

My least favourite is definitely the M1, like you said it’s a proto rompler. I understand that some people like it but I’m pretty sure it’s because of the nostalgia of the 90s and not because it’s a good synthesizer. My favourite is the DX7 because the underlying synthesis method is still relevant today if you do not use those DX7 presets that are so overused that you music becomes an instant cliché as soon as you use them. Unfortunately Yamaha never gave us a proper sound design interface for any of their FM synths and it took Korg with their OPSIX to finally give us a 6 operator FM synth that has a proper sound design interface and at $800 new, I wouldn’t bother messing around with a DX7 if it was more than $200 and even then I’m not sure I would. I’m pretty sure I still have ptsd from having tried to modify a DX7 patch in the 80s so it wouldn’t dare touching a DX7 ever again in case it makes something flip in my brain 😆.

[@asoundlab]

The opsix is v lovely 😊

[@k1ttyF158er]

Interesting opinion (I guess). But your apparent "style" (from all the videos I've seen) is very piano-player-like, which makes huge sets of sounds on synths like this useless (and therefore uninteresting) to you. - I can see why you like what you like, but a bunch of the sounds on the M1 were designed to be played quite differently. (More percussively or manually arpeggiated). - Kinda think you should broaden your playing style so you can fully grock these synths.

[@daeone1514]

M1 easily is the one relevant for today.

[@TomatoFettuccini]

"....and find out which one is most relevant today" That'd be the M1. Unless you're going for obviously cheesy 80s synth sounds, then either of the other two will suffice.

[@davidriddle6798]

I have a D50 for adding sparkle stacked on analogue synths like a Prophet or Oberheim. The DX7 sounds a lot better stacked and detuned with itself. A lot of producers in the 80's used a Yamaha TX816 which was 8 DX7's in a rack box. Check out Madonna's 'Live to Tell' for a good example of stacked DX7 sounds from a TX816. kzbin.info/www/bejne/p6PPqqeYmbyjqpIsi=EgUOQ6x0-U1qQhSl Composer/Producer Patrick Leonard had a TX816 and used it all over that track.

[@smokey90]

D50#1

[@cmaynes]

all these are totally iconic instruments. the Digital synths from that era all are excellent instruments in the hands of a good player/composer.

[@zdravkozdravka4313]

1.D-50!!! 2.DX7!! 3.M1!

[@OscillatorCollective]

Yikes…I don’t really like any of those… The DX7 offers cool FM weirdness, if you can program it, but I can’t stand those presents. The D-50 sounds the best by far, and the M1 just sounds flat …it’s incredible that these are what killed off the analog synths. Of the digital synths of the 80s, these aren’t even the most interesting of them, the D-50 does sound good though.

[@georgefromgreece4119]

Kind of agreed...

[@mike.thomas]

I know what you are saying, but everything is contextual. These synths were so very different at the time, they really caught your ear. Now we can have them, and 1 million other things. We live in pretty amazing synthesizer times, I have to say!

[@2kBofFun]

If you go for looks in this video, the M1 wins. How could you show a D550 and a DX7-2? Yikes! The best of the era is the in-between, the DW8000, it is a monster that swallows D50's for breakfast. It has that perfect Knighrider look, also I do fancy a true D50 for looks too. It also was the synth that came before the D50 with digital effects, so the D50 was definitely not the first. Maybe not a true reverb option, but the delay, chorus, flanger is sounding very nice. The one I put in the livingroom is the T2ex though. An enlongated M1. Why? You can actually use it to make music with it in one package. Forget about that on the DX7 or D50. It is cheaper than the M1, yet 100% same engine. Thanks to the floppy drive you can store your work easily, and load samples to expand the sound palette, for example 808 drums to feed in the M1 engine. If you add the double 10s reverb to some 808 bass or rim shot, it sounds totally awesome. Why am I writing all this? I have all 5. No need to choose!

[@iwanttocomplain]

The M1 is just recordings to me. It could be 2MB piece of software to my ears. People just wanted realistic instruments. That's all. But now we have that, it's redundant. The D-50 has no bass and is a gimmick. The DX7 is a synthesizer which is an instrument with unlimited potential.

[@uh7385]

Talking, talking, talking.... 15:38min

[@bcitral]

Blimey, could you have chosen the worst sounds on the M1?

[@PierreVonStaines]

John Lennon looks a bit different these days.

[@handel1111]

M1 isn't really a synth, it's just a Rompler

[@mike.thomas]

back in the day I wanted an M1 *so badly*, but I could not afford it. I ended up with a Kawai K4 - the very poor man’s M1. I never loved the DX7’s sound, and still don’t, though I recognize it as synth royalty, and its built-in patches were very “of the time”, so they sound dated now. The M1’s patches suffer similarly, again IMO. I may still get a rackmount version at some point for old time’s sake. The D50 was not on my radar(I’m sure I couldn’t have afforded it anyway), but IMO maintains the most natural sonic relevance today, to my taste anyway. I realize any of them can still go *very* far with creative patching, just like my lowly K4 😊.

[@jamescuttsmusicjcm5013]

While they are all undoubtedly iconic... the DX7 is maybe THE coldest sounding synth I think I have ever heard. If cold is what you want, get yourself a DX7. Haha. EDIT: I agree D-50 for the win! Love the D-50!!! :D.

[@pinocarella_00]

D-50 win

[@ExilesGate]

Bare in mind the DX7S is not as good as the original DX7.

[@JoelBlackman.]

Hi

[@andreaschristodoulou4274]

Do not know if this video refers to older or younger music fans. I am not so evil but is there any other guy older than Zacharia to show us those great keyboards. Well its like an old saying ..''The grandson says, come grandpa i will show your land''

[@lovemadeinjapan]

This video has serious issues. That is no DX7, it is a DX7II. That is a huge difference. The brown one is the one to have. It has the best keybad of the three (the II has a M1 keybed), and it looks so sexy. Same with the D50. You may never ever get the rack! The D50 is the machine to own. If you can't make space for a true one with keybed, you don't deserve to have any synthesizer at all. It is the epitome of Japanese synth manufacturing. But the question, which is best, has to be the M1. If you may have a single device in your house, you can only choose the M1, because you can make music on it. The DX7/D50 are handicapped on their own. The M1 brough excellent drums, massive reverbs and delays, and a bare bones sequencer. The average wear-and-tear says the same. DX7's and M1's have user patina. D50 are always in mint condition, that says enough. It had only a single cool patch, 47 Spacious Sweep. It was until the D05 mini remake came out in 2017 and LegoWelt freaked the hell out of his PG1000 that we finally saw the true potential of a synth the D50 had. It sucked as the preset machine people used it in that single year 1987 until the M1 came. And don't forget Korg already bettered their lifes 1 year later. Get a remote island vacation home, and a T2ex, and you can do lots of music composing.

[@FinSynthMusic]

Everybody can see it's a DX7 II and not mk1, why rage over the title.

[@lovemadeinjapan]

@@FinSynthMusic If there is something to rage about in the title. it is the "acopolypse" thing. The digital transformation was a godsend. From flaky non reliable machines hard to use on stage, to reliable multi-talents. We never went back to analog (except maybe some Eurorack freaks).

[@georgefromgreece4119]

@@lovemadeinjapan who never got back to analog? Semi pros. Not the big studios albums were recorded.

[@lovemadeinjapan]

@@georgefromgreece4119 Yet every analog machine they have got a digital brain implant at some point.

[@georgefromgreece4119]

@@lovemadeinjapan it's not the gear, it's the ear, cheers from Greece mate.

[@thingserik7269]

Anyone over the age of 40 might think you were on the phone

[@klaassiersma4892]

I think the DX7 aged best of the 3, people still finding new sounds on these while the M1 and D50 begin to sound dated.

[@lovemadeinjapan]

The brown one at least is the most expensive today. The money for a single DX7 can fetch you both an M1 and a D50.

[@klaassiersma4892]

@@lovemadeinjapan I was lucky, I got a like new one for 200 euro's about 10 years ago.

[@lovemadeinjapan]

@@klaassiersma4892 Here the same, but the actual price is much higher nowadays.

[@helio1055]

@@lovemadeinjapanare you kidding? 1 D-50 is worth like 2 DX7s lol

[@lovemadeinjapan]

@@helio1055 No, here in Netherlands/Germany expect to pay 700-800€ for a decent DX7 and 350-400 for a D50. Edit, it changed a little, they both do 500 now apparently. Roland-tax may finally have found its way to the D50, which was always inmune to it.

[@Azzalto40]

this guy look like from 70s

[@1ladiferencia1]

Very boring to listen to you. For me, all three are good. Each one offers you something for the music. To date, the M1 has improved to the DX-7 and the Roland D-50. More people use the M1.

[@jonhallstein33]

I owned the M1 back in the late 80's and, after watching this video, I clearly prefer the sound of the DX7 over both the D-50 and M1. Apparently, I bought the wrong synth all those years back :)

[@wolfgangkowalik6]

Well I'm sorry but you still have a long time to learn how to play ??