Wondering, have one “compared” it to Yamaha FS1R?
Besides obvious differences (like better display and interface on Kodamo ) what are benefits of having one or another?
2 Likes
Didn’t the FS1R also have the formant synthesis stuff along side the FM? I always thought the formant stuff was a big attraction for people.
3 Likes
Yeah it has it, but somehow it’s so hard to program that it seems like it doesn’t have it at all : )
Really like my FS1r and still use it a lot, but thinking to switch to Kodamo for better control.
1 Like
Haha yeah I would probably be thinking the same, kodamo looks super fun to use. Isn’t there some old software to help program the formant? Maybe I am thinking of some Japanese software that was for the formant expansion for those Yamaha rompler units…
1 Like
If you’re into the FS1R, get ready for their next synth, from what I understand this will deliver the goods 
2 Likes
You can randomize a bunch of parameters individually or all at once on a given voice. Its a very easy process of just checking or unchecking what you want to be effected.
2 Likes
There’s an app and it still works surprisingly well, but still it’s SUPER complex, nothing close to the experience of real hardware control.
And another thing - the whole architecture of FS1r is so complex that each time I use it I have to read manual again just to understand how the multi mode works, what is a signal flow and how to assign outputs… they definitely have to get the prize for the most „headf@&k“ synth design ever : )
1 Like
Yes really sad, the FM engine of the FS1R sounds so good tho’
2 Likes
Such and awesome sounding engine. Lots of great takes on the FM thing over the years. For me, the EssenceFM is a sort of ‘best of’ compilation of a few different FM giants. The UI really sets it apart though. With all the polyphony and multi timbral stuff it’s really fun to stack sounds for days
4 Likes
a bit annoying but nevermind
9 Likes
1 Like
So… he just doesn’t like FM synths, I guess? That’s fair. But kind of weird to be, like, “I invested all this money in the ultimate expression of a thing I don’t even like and now I feel bad.” Did he think expensive FM would somehow not be FM?
3 Likes
I didn’t get that impression at all. He had a lot of wonderful things to say about some of the amazing capabilities of this machine but the limitations just seem to outweigh any possible advantages. I don’t know enough about this particular synthesizer to know how shortsighted those cons were but his argument seemed well reasoned.
1 Like
I guess the “limitations” he saw all struck me as the kinds of things a subtractive synth player new to FM thinks they need.
Like LFOs. Each operator is literally a wave form made to modulate something. An LFO is nothing but a slow operator. The kind of movement one would add to a patch via LFO in a subtractive synth is inherent to FM. One could make the argument that, with a 2 op or even 4 op synth, you don’t have the ops to spare or the algos to make use of them. But with a generous 6 ops and extremely flexible algo system, I have trouble seeing the issue.
Or his weird desire for ADSR envelopes. That might work fine for your carrier, but chances are you don’t want your ops’ levels to follow the rise and fall of an adsr — and certainly not in time with note on and off. Many times you don’t want your op levels to ever zero out, which is the antithetical to the idea of an ADSR.
I don’t know. He kept saying he “really wanted to like it” but I don’t understand why. What did he think it was going to be for him? Because I got the impression he thought he was getting a bajillion oscillator polyphonic supersaw with resonant multimode filters or some such. Thus his disappointment with the presets (I won’t even go in to the lunacy of judging a synth by its presets).
The thing is, the EFM really is a world-class multitimbral powerhouse with game-changing UI — but that was built around the same principles of synthesis as the DX7 that he probably also didn’t understand. And no bones about it, its one heck of an expensive starter synth. So in that hypothetical I get his disappointment.
But then why not say, I need to learn more before I understand this? Or, this isn’t what I thought it would be? Or even, to someone with my background, this is a hard synth to learn?
But the hubris of his “this should have been a completely different thing of the sort I’m comfortable with and thus isn’t living up to its potential” really rubs me the wrong way. Especially in a self purported “review”.
Anyway. End rant. 
13 Likes
I can definitely see the validity of your reasoning here.
The lfo thing is easily worked around. The adsr quibble seems a minor annoyance.
It seems he has a lot of experience and a sound designer and when you are used to working in a specific manner any disruption to your methodology is going to feel like a shortcoming.
I am curious about his noise complaints though. That doesn’t seem like it should even be a thing. Have others had a similar experience?
I’d really like to buy one of these but can’t afford the investment at this point. Perhaps I was hoping someone would talk me out of wanting one.
1 Like
Spot on!
I’d argue it’s not even crazy expensive considering what it is. With just the EFM and a sequencer I’ve made a ton of tracks I’m happy with. Decent value if you ask me
6 Likes
I did a track recently that was super noisy. Might be due to the extreme bit crushing I did
I’ve had my EFM for around a year and I’m still over the moon for it
2 Likes
Yeah, I agree. But also (and this is the last thing on this, I promise) but the whole thing is it’s not a work around or a quibble. It’s just done differently in FM because FM works completely differently.
It’s like saying “This modular rig is trash for as expensive as it is; look at all the exposed cables going everywhere!” When, of course, the cables are the point. They’re what make that particular method of building patches even possible.
And if someone doesn’t understand that, that’s cool. It can all be super confusing. We’ve all been there.
But if someone doesn’t even try and just assumes it’s broken because it’s not what they’re used to? That’s a pretty small and closed-minded person. And one not particularly well suited to penning reviews, IMHO.
4 Likes
Word!
There’s a smaller update for the EssenceFM that resets envelopes to an ADSR-like shape for quicker editing after clearing a voice etc.
Features / UI
- [Mono outputs] In performance mode, parts can now be assigned to any mono output (1L, 1R, 2L, 2R, 3L, 3R, 4L, 4R) in addition to the stereo pairs. In mono mode, panning is ignored.
- [Envelopes] Moving the first point doesn’t scroll the display anymore (prevents unwanted scrolls)
-
[Envelopes] Clearing a voice resets all volume envelopes to an ADSR-like shape for quicker editing. Pitch envelopes are reset with a segment before and after sustain. Units made with this firmware pre-installed come with all empty voices configured with these envelope shapes. If you want to get this on your updated EssenceFM you need to clear a voice then copy-paste it to all other empty voices. To make the process easier you can:
- Press Dec then Paste multiple times to quickly overwrite all 128 voices from a bank
- Copy whole banks by doing Copy-Paste in In Global > Sorting > Voice BankOnce you’ve overwritten all empty voices press the Voice button to get to the voice list, then press Save two times to save all edited voices. Note: saving a lot of edited voices can take a few seconds.
Bug fixes
- [Panning] Panning can now go to 100% right
- [Startup] Fixed a bug that could freeze the EssenceFM at startup
- [Patch] Modifying the Round Robin parameter when the patch isn’t edited yet do not reset its value to 1 anymore
- [Misc] Display bug in Patch > Effects and Voice > Effects introduced in v5.3
5 Likes