Daft Punk Gear Query - TX81Z or Otherwise?

Hi all,

Just doing some digging into some of the Synth sounds on Discovery. One which I see brought up alot is the Lately Bass patch heard on Face To Face, as well as the Flute 2 & Pipes 2 sounds heard on Verdis Quo.

I currently have no direct source which states "They used a TX81Z or DX7", but you can clearly tell that these sounds were used on the album.

As such, I want to get some advice on this, and perform a "process of elimination" method of which synth they actually used for these sounds. So far, I have determined that they most likely didn't own two separate Yamaha FM synths. My breakdown so far is:

• They most likely didn't own a TX81Z, as this wouldn't run DX7 patches; and
• Didn't have a DX7 as this wouldn't have the Lately Bass patch on it

Were there any other Yamaha FM synths released prior to 1998-ish that had the capability of playing both TX81Z patches and DX7 patches, or is my theory of only owning one Yamaha FM synth flawed?

Thanks and let me know if you have any further questions!

not directly, but starting in 90 the sy series had lots of dx7 and/or tx81z patches as presets depending on if the fm section was 4op (ie sy22) or 6op (ie sy77)... theres a version of lately bass on all of those symths, sometimes by another name, but it's basically the same. it became a yamaha staple following its use on so many dance hits. the tx81z was wildly popular.

Finley!

Good to hear from you.

Right now, I think I might need this question even more than you need the answer. :D

I've been pondering this one over breakfast...

I think we can break this up into 2 fundamentals:

1. Which synths could actually produced the "famous Yamaha FM preset" sounds heard on Discovery?

2. Did Todd Edwards + DP actually record the Yamaha synths in-question, or did they just show up to the studio sessions with these classic Yamaha DX/TX samples on a Zip disk?

Re: #1: Which synths could Lately Bass?

We're talking about this section of the song.

The "true" Lately Bass patch requires Yamaha FM architecture with at least 4 operators AND the multiple operator waveforms that were introduced with TX81z/DX11/TG5/V50... strangely there weren't many Yamaha products in that era or later that were patch compatible with the TX81z and it's 4-op multi-waveform siblings. The earlier 6-operator DX7/DX7II lacked the multi-waveform capability to be fully compatible, as did many other 4-op offerings like DX100 and FB-01. Yamaha (and the rest of the world) mostly focused on DX7 patch compatibility with FM-capable products in the 90s and beyond.

All that said, you can produce the VERY similar Solid Bass factory patch on pretty much any Yamaha synth that has at least 4 operators, as that patch doesn't use any of the extra operator waveforms that are unique to the TX81z and siblings.

Lately Bass vs. Solid Bass

Solid Bass reproduced on DX7

...and you can re-create Lately Bass by leveraging some of the extra waveforms available on the later SY series workstations (as Jim mentioned) fairly well, even though you can't import TX81z patches into those workstations.

Lately Bass reproduced on SY77

In my personal experience, Lately Bass and Solid Bass are VERY sensitive to both input velocity and the DAC quality/resolution of the synth they're being played on. The same patch with the exact sequencing might sound bright and smooth out of one old yamaha synth and dark and gritty out of another -- and that's before you've messed with any of the patch parameters... so even these YouTube direct comparisons can over AND under-sell similarities between Solid Bass and Lately Bass, depending on the units being used to demo each.

So... IF you believe the sound you're hearing in Face to Face is indeed a Lately Bass patch that used some of those non-sine waveforms, then it must be either TX81z/DX11/TG5/V50 or the later SY77/SY99.

IF you belive what you're hearing could be a Solid Bass patch with some EQing, then damn near all of Yamaha's FM synths are in-play as potential perpetrators, with the DX100 and FB-01 being among the most popular choices for SolidBass duties.

(note, the 1998 Yamaha FS1-R could load DX7 patches (but not TX81z type patches) and is theoretically in-play for Discovery -- just barely -- but I owned one of those back in the day and the output quality was very distinctive, it imparted it's own flavor to any DX voice you tried to recreate. The bass sound on F2F doesn't sound anything like the ultra-hi-fi sound of FS that I remember).

Re: #2: What if they just used a sample?

We're talking about a song famously made up of dozens and dozens of samples, as you are probably even more aware of than me. By the late 90s, there were all manner of factory sample CDs and early internet resources giving you pretty easy access to famous DX sounds. I don't hear any velocity-based sound modulation in the Lately Bass sound on F2F -- to me, this sounds like something that could have been achieved with just a single clean Lately Bass or Solid Bass sample.

Given this is a song that was born from DP and Todd Edwards loading "70 samples each" into a brand new Akai S6000 beast and having a go at it, what are the odds that this DX/TX "house bass" sound was just a sample they had floating around from a factory sample CD, internet FTP find, or sampled right off a Detroid techno track from the early '90s?

solid bass, that's the sine only version! I could not remember this morning! I'm not the biggest fan of those patches despite having multiple machines that do one or the other. I think my ex5 might feature BOTH, I can't recall. I so seldom use it and when I do its for the mighty sound design capabilities.

I think you made a lot of good points. I do not think its impossible that DP had a tx81z or borrowed one for that patch, they sold so many of them and by that point everyone knew about that patch. It's like the spx90. If you want lately bass or symphonic it's always been pretty easily attainable, I can't turn around without tripping over a tx81z or a spx90 or both. When yamaha hit on a good thing they cranked them out at scale and they're hyper reliable workhorses. I also wouldn't be surprised at all if they sampled someone's or had a sample lying around they got from somewhere else. I think its least likely that its sampled from a vinyl record because it would need to be soloed and even if there was a solo bass section to sample from you would probably notice the mix/master processing that was then processed some more... its possible it was sampled from a cd version of something though, that might be a little more transparent than cheaply pressed techno vinyl of that time.

Finley!

Good to hear from you.

Right now, I think I might need this question even more than you need the answer. :D

I've been pondering this one over breakfast...

I think we can break this up into 2 fundamentals:

1. Which synths could actually produced the "famous Yamaha FM preset" sounds heard on Discovery?

2. Did Todd Edwards + DP actually record the Yamaha synths in-question, or did they just show up to the studio sessions with these classic Yamaha DX/TX samples on a Zip disk?

Re: #1: Which synths could Lately Bass?

We're talking about this section of the song.

The "true" Lately Bass patch requires Yamaha FM architecture with at least 4 operators AND the multiple operator waveforms that were introduced with TX81z/DX11/TG5/V50... strangely there weren't many Yamaha products in that era or later that were patch compatible with the TX81z and it's 4-op multi-waveform siblings. The earlier 6-operator DX7/DX7II lacked the multi-waveform capability to be fully compatible, as did many other 4-op offerings like DX100 and FB-01. Yamaha (and the rest of the world) mostly focused on DX7 patch compatibility with FM-capable products in the 90s and beyond.

All that said, you can produce the VERY similar Solid Bass factory patch on pretty much any Yamaha synth that has at least 4 operators, as that patch doesn't use any of the extra operator waveforms that are unique to the TX81z and siblings.

Lately Bass vs. Solid Bass

Solid Bass reproduced on DX7

...and you can re-create Lately Bass by leveraging some of the extra waveforms available on the later SY series workstations (as Jim mentioned) fairly well, even though you can't import TX81z patches into those workstations.

Lately Bass reproduced on SY77

In my personal experience, Lately Bass and Solid Bass are VERY sensitive to both input velocity and the DAC quality/resolution of the synth they're being played on. The same patch with the exact sequencing might sound bright and smooth out of one old yamaha synth and dark and gritty out of another -- and that's before you've messed with any of the patch parameters... so even these YouTube direct comparisons can over AND under-sell similarities between Solid Bass and Lately Bass, depending on the units being used to demo each.

So... IF you believe the sound you're hearing in Face to Face is indeed a Lately Bass patch that used some of those non-sine waveforms, then it must be either TX81z/DX11/TG5/V50 or the later SY77/SY99.

IF you belive what you're hearing could be a Solid Bass patch with some EQing, then damn near all of Yamaha's FM synths are in-play as potential perpetrators, with the DX7, DX100 and FB-01 being the most popular choices for these types of bass duties.

(note, the 1998 Yamaha FS1-R could load DX7 patches (but not TX81z type patches) and is theoretically in-play for Discovery -- just barely -- but I owned one of those back in the day and the output quality was very distinctive, it imparted it's own flavor on any DX voice you tried to recreate. The bass sound on F2F doesn't sound anything like the ultra-hi-fi sound of FS that I remember).

Re: #2: What if they just used a sample?

We're talking about a song famously made up of dozens and dozens of samples, as you are probably even more aware of than me. By the late 90s, there were all manner of factory sample CDs and early internet resources giving you pretty easy access to famous DX sounds. I don't hear any velocity-based sound modulation in the Lately Bass sound on F2F -- to me, this sounds like something that could have been achieved with just a single clean Lately Bass or Solid Bass sample.

Given this is a song that was born from DP and Todd Edwards loading "70 samples each" into a brand new Akai S6000 beast and having a go at it, what are the odds that this DX/TX "house bass" sound was just a sample they had floating around from a factory sample CD, internet FTP find, or sampled right off a Detroid techno track from the early '90s?

Wow, incredible stuff, thank you so so much for this one!!! Im glad to have opened some discussion on this, as its been bugging me for ages now.

For starters, thanks for that video of the breakdown of Lately v Solid. I think for the longest time I was under the impression that 'BASS 2' from ROM A (Take my breath away bass) was the Solid bass patch, so its great to know that it is (Somewhat) possible to recreate this on a DX7! Also, insane to discover the different tonality of each device, I think this has deffo swayed my choice for which FM synth to look into when I finally have enough to get one.

That aside, your point of the velocity being identical for each hit is a detail I think I glossed over, and that being a sample is deffo not one to rule out for Face To Face (Especially now with the recent findings of them using lots of different sample CDs on Discovery too), however, Id like to turn back to the usage of 'FLUTE 2' from ROM 2A and 'PIPES 2' from ROM 3B in Verdis Quo. Based on the above, and from your experience, would you say these were TX81z/DX11/TG5/V50/SY77/SY99 adjacent? I did try doing a side by side comparison with the original track and Dexed and came out inconclusive in the end.

Also, I know my claim of them only having one FM synth is a bit of a shot in the dark, but I feel like these types of synths were 100% one-trick-ponies (In a positive way!) so I find it very unlikely that they would have/had/rented more that one.

solid bass, that's the sine only version! I could not remember this morning! I'm not the biggest fan of those patches despite having multiple machines that do one or the other. I think my ex5 might feature BOTH, I can't recall. I so seldom use it and when I do its for the mighty sound design capabilities.

I think you made a lot of good points. I do not think its impossible that DP had a tx81z or borrowed one for that patch, they sold so many of them and by that point everyone knew about that patch. It's like the spx90. If you want lately bass or symphonic it's always been pretty easily attainable, I can't turn around without tripping over a tx81z or a spx90 or both. When yamaha hit on a good thing they cranked them out at scale and they're hyper reliable workhorses. I also wouldn't be surprised at all if they sampled someone's or had a sample lying around they got from somewhere else. I think its least likely that its sampled from a vinyl record because it would need to be soloed and even if there was a solo bass section to sample from you would probably notice the mix/master processing that was then processed some more... its possible it was sampled from a cd version of something though, that might be a little more transparent than cheaply pressed techno vinyl of that time.

Very interesting point on the sources maybe being from a Sample CD as opposed to a techno record. I think based on that, you've deffo narrowed down the search a little bit more do being 1 of 1000 different Yamaha FM synths, or a Sample CD hahaha

Yeah -- I don't remember having any trouble getting a near-mint TX81z around the year 2000 -- they were everywhere then and still everywhere now. Cheap then, cheap now. I'm sure Yamaha sold even more DX7s, but not all of those DX7s survived into the next century -- the TX81z, on the other hand, is about as un-killable as synths get.

In terms of provenance for the sample we're hearing in the song, I'd say the highest likelihood is that it came straight from a TX81z, followed by DX100 then perhaps DX7 -- but it seems nobody has any evidence to rule out any of the many Yamaha synths that were capable of such a sound.

In terms of likelihood of DP sequencing a real TX/DX synth for that song, vs. using a sample one of them had lying around: what's the likelihood a 1990s NYC house producer shows up to a session with "70 samples", and none of them are LatelyBass/SolidBass? I mean... what are the odds of that? :D

I have it on unimpeachable authority that trent and co. smashed a ton of dx7es on the downward spiral tour because they prefered them as their midi controllers because of cheapness and the nice keybed. They probably destroyed dozens, maybe hundreds, and that took the population down a lot LOL

I wouldn't be surprised if Todd Edwards brought tx81z samples he made himself from his tx81z. Odd are he owned one at some point. We all have. Everyone born before like 1985 that is! That's not fair though. My dad and his brothers were dx7 owners, but its mostly accurate. Every musician recording between the release of the dx7 and say 2010 in america had or has a yamaha synth that does lately or solid bass even if they never used it, Full Stop. I don't know todd so I can't reach out. Not one of my brooklyn aquaintances.

yeah, take my breath away and take on me first popularized that fm bass sound, or at least it was my first awareness of it as a kid

... Id like to turn back to the usage of 'FLUTE 2' from ROM 2A and 'PIPES 2' from ROM 3B in Verdis Quo. Based on the above, and from your experience, would you say these were TX81z/DX11/TG5/V50/SY77/SY99 adjacent? I did try doing a side by side comparison with the original track and Dexed and came out inconclusive in the end.

I will put in some time on this one ASAP. Out of time to circle back on the others for today -- but I'll enjoy the hunt when I get to it.

Also, I know my claim of them only having one FM synth is a bit of a shot in the dark, but I feel like these types of synths were 100% one-trick-ponies (In a positive way!) so I find it very unlikely that they would have/had/rented more that one.

The TX81z and DX7 cover enough different ground that many producers opted to have both. They're of the same family, but having both would be like having both a rackmount Alpha Juno and a JX-8P: same company, same general synthesis type, some ability to cover the same ground, but each capable of sounds the other can't come close to making.

(But I do know exactly what you're getting at, many people were allergic to making their own patches on any of the DX/TX family)

That said, I spent quality years with the TX81z, and it's hard for me to imagine Thomas and Guy-Manuel being that excited to have one. Despite my personal attachment to them, they're relatively cold, nerdy and not-that-immediately-gratifying -- at least compared to the hands-on analog joy machines DP tended to favor. I'd have an easier time believing they picked up a DX7 for the 80s nostalgia factor. There are many more "ahhh, that's my childhood" patches right out of the gate on a DX7, and the keyboard has a unique and satisfying clicky kind fo feel that makes you want to keep playing.

...but I don't know any of those folks personally, obviously... so I'm just guessing here.

for the record, I'm really experienced with yamaha's FM/AWS synths of my youth... I've owned numerous DX7es, a DX7IIfd, SY77, SY99 and currently own a TX7, TX81z, SY22 and an EX5r. I also grew up with a DX7II that belonged to my dad and uncle when it was brand new. I often service DX7Is and IIs because the problems are usually minimal. Its not weird to have one in my house even though I'm done with the keyboard. I kept the 4 synths I own because each one covers a specific iteration of the DA conversion with what I find to be the most useful feature-set in the most practical form factor at the most cost effective price at the time of purchase. There's not a good interface on any of them, so I go for small unless its the 22 where the vector joystick makes more sense with a keyboard... don't get me started on the annoyance of owning an argon8m over a keyboard version. I should midiox my patch library and trade that up. I just don't know where I would put it, I have keyboards everywhere. The less used ones are lined up in closets... hence why I liquidate periodically.

I just confirmed Ken's statement that many producers opt to have a 7 and an 81z... I just took it further!

just a thought, what if the static velocity is just because they were triggering from a sequencer and they left the velocity static?

since its daft punk the sample theory is more plausible, but just an ssumption

just a thought, what if the static velocity is just because they were triggering from a sequencer and they left the velocity static?

since its daft punk the sample theory is more plausible, but just an ssumption

That is 100% why the velocity is static, my point was that IF there was some velocity-based modulation of synthesis-related parameters, we could more easily rule out a sample being used.

just a thought, what if the static velocity is just because they were triggering from a sequencer and they left the velocity static?

since its daft punk the sample theory is more plausible, but just an ssumption

That is 100% why the velocity is static, my point was that IF there was some velocity-based modulation of synthesis-related parameyers, we could more easily rule out a sample being used.

I was thinking the other direction that they might just be lazy programmers and in a digital synth every hit is the same at the same velocity, say, from a sequencer. The TX81z is particularly mechanical. It potentially supports both hypothesese and is therefore irrelevant.

by the way, this thread is nerd catnip

Id like to turn back to the usage of 'FLUTE 2' from ROM 2A and 'PIPES 2' from ROM 3B in Verdis Quo. Based on the above, and from your experience, would you say these were TX81z/DX11/TG5/V50/SY77/SY99 adjacent? I did try doing a side by side comparison with the original track and Dexed and came out inconclusive in the end.

OK, day 2 -- here we go.

Concerning the opening flute lead and chords tones of Veridis Quo:

I've got FLUTE 2 and PIPES 2 open in Arturia DX7V right now, they're both sounds that use all 6 operators to get the job done. There's probably a way to make a simpler 4-op version of the patch that's a bit flatter and a bit less animated on the TX81z or DX100, but there are no common-knowledge nearly-identical equivalents of these 2 patches for the 4-op DX/TX synths that I'm aware of.

Also, there is the matter of the harp sound on Voyager, which the internet thinks is the DX100's 20 SOFT HARP preset. There is no more proof that this is a DX100 patch than any of the other Yamaha-FM-sounding tones on Discovery, but Reverb Machine makes a decent case.

Given that we're talking about a DX100 patch (4 sinewave-only operators), you can re-create 20 SOFT HARP on the DX7 (as Reverb Machine does via Arturia DX7V). The DX7 mk1 has a smoother & fuller-sounding output architecture than the DX 100, so the patch is maybe going to be a little tubbier on DX7 and lack a little top end grit... but it would be very close, regardless.

So, in total we have:

Sounds that require 6 operators (DX7, TX7, TX816, SY77, SY99):

• FLUTE 2
• PIPES 2

Sounds that can be achieved with 4 sinewave-only operators (Nearly all DX and TX products):

• 20 SOFT HARP
• SOLID BASS

Sounds that require 4-operators + non-sine waveforms (TX81z, DX11, V50, TQ5, SY77, SY99):

• LATELY BASS

It would seem the SY77 and SY99 were the only synths available before 1998 that could produce versions of all the above patches, but (like all the Yamaha products of the era) they are going to impart their own character to those patches, which may or may not take you close to what you're hearing on Discovery (Jim is our most credible source for the SY77/99's fitness for this task, of course).

IF you can accept some version of SOLID BASS in place of LATELY BASS, and perhaps a slightly less gritty/noisy 20 SOFT HARP than a real DX100 can give you, then the DX7/TX7 could (theoretically) have handled all the Yamaha FM-family sounds heard on Discovery.

That said, the most straightforward assumption would be that the two 6-operator sounds we hear on Discovery were recorded with (or sampled from) a DX7/TX7, the slightly gritty harp on Voyager was recorded/sampled from a DX100, and the house bass sound on Face to Face was recorded or sampled from a TX81z or DX100. If one is not that into programming and patch-converting on Yamaha FM and you're just sticking to the presets that shipped with these machines and their factory ROM carts (as many MANY people did), sourcing from 2-3 separate synths is how it would have been done.

I can't rule out that a single DX7 (or SY 77/99) created all the sounds in question on Discovery, nor can I rule out that they obtained each of these 4 tones from the many many factory and third party sample libraries floating around in the late 90s.

Personally, I'd wager that what actually went down was some combination of the "most staightforward assumption" above and the "it all came from sample libraries" theory.

by the way, this thread is nerd catnip

Truth.

okay, the 77 and 99 can do anything in any prior yamaha FM but they have better converters and the sound is deeper, flatter and more crisp and open up top than anything that came before, no grit whatsoever, HIFI

that might not help since everything is EQed and compressed to hell on daft punk which mitigates some of the DA converter tone

okay, the 77 and 99 can do anything in any prior yamaha FM but they have better converters and the sound is deeper, flatter and more crisp and open up top than anything that came before, no grit whatsoever, HIFI

Is this why you didn't hang on to your 77s/99s, or was it just a size & space concern?

I'm jealous of your TX7, BTW. I wish I'd scooped one up on craigslist before people started fetishizing the mk 1 DX7's output stage.

That said, if I can't get what I'm looking for from Arturia DX7V (or the excellent & FREE Dexed), jumping back to the hardware isn't likely to be the thing that enables me to move forward.

that might not help since everything is EQed and compressed to hell on daft punk which mitigates some of the DA converter tone

Agreed re: DP's signature heavy-handed EQ + compression + multi-generation-track-assembly-process is big factor here. Even though these are very likely factory preset tones, there are layers of production and mixdown processing that obfuscate many of the telltale sonic clues that would help us discern (for example) a DX100 from an FB01 from a DX7/TX7/SY77/SY99 running a converted preset patch.

Finley knows all of the following quite well, but for everyone else's benefit, per the infamous 1999 Japanese interview:

Thomas Bangalter: “In the first step when making music with hardware, it goes through the mixer and the compressor and is recorded on the DAT. After that, effects are put on the sound source before going into the mixer to be recorded. We don’t use the AUX on the mixer."

“The second step is directly putting the sounds from the DAT into the S-760 sampler and editing/cutting the two tracks into however many pieces, like hard disk recording.

“Lastly, we recorded it directly from the S-760 to the DAT. From here we do the rest with the Macintosh.”

Given the above reveal, I'm amazed S-760s don't sell for more than they currently do.

Is this why you didn't hang on to your 77s/99s, or was it just a size & space concern?

welp, I discovered that the EX5 has the full sy99 engine with better fx (its like a full spx engine) and even more upscale conversion... oh and it has the virtual wind thing where you can model a wind isntrument the size of a building... so I had a 77, bought a 99 and then found out about the EX5 rack and sold both the 77 and 99 when I had the EX5r shipping to me.... the ex5r has some wonky midi implementation but the way I use it its not a problem, I'm not a workstation guy. The 99 was a better workstation implementation with tighter midi response, the 77 was the best with midi, but its neither here nor there for me creating sound fx... I like the low rent sy22 a lot, got mine for 100 bucks I think and I usually use it over the tx81z because the AWS and the joystick that can swing through sampled waves and FM stuff is just a trip. I think Dave Smith was involved in the vector joystick. But the EX5 gives you the biggest AWS engine, multiwave 6op FM and a mono physical modelling engine too... plus an spx990 type fx section with crystal clear conversion. It's hard to deny. The midi just isn't super tight on punchy ptches if you send it a sequence. Its fine from a keyboard and fine for pads and stuff... the workstation stuff like the internal sequencer can be weird but I don't use it, not my thing and too much menu diving. I don't think there's another machine that does all the things the ex5 does. I might be missing something, its insane. The keyboard EX5 is ENORMOUS, probably bigger than their current flagship motif or whatever.

I'm jealous of your TX7, BTW. I wish I'd scooped one up on craigslist before people started fetishizing the mk 1 DX7's output stage.

that was a lucky break when I was sick of having mk1s leaning around like stale bread, they're polysix heavy too and the membrane buttons are always wearing out whereas the TX7 has solid tac switches... there's no data slider, just +/- buttons, but its not like the slider isn't heavily stepped in real time, so sweeping it has limited utility and is more of a 1 time novelty trick... even when I remove a bad battery on a mk1 and do the socket mod for people I get it back as quick as possible these days... I can just keep the TX in a drawer and by the way it can also be programmed from dexed, same synth, the mk1 is unnescasarily big and heavy

That said, if I can't get what I'm looking for from Arturia DX7V (or the excellent & FREE Dexed), jumping back to the hardware isn't likely to be the thing that enables me to move forward.

can't argue either, I also have no beef with FM8 and FL Sytrus (which doesn't even attempt conversion coloration but is insanely powerful with an easy to grok matrix page)... I would feel weird without a mk1 or mk2 around but don't want the bulk, so I have the TX... you can't give a tx81z away, I've had it FOREVER, the sy99 is fast, fun and has converter coloration with the AWS engine as well as the vector stick... and the ex5 is insanely powerful and cannot be mimiced by any plugin I've tried

Finley knows all of the following quite well, but for everyone else's benefit, per the infamous 1999 Japanese interview:

Thomas Bangalter: “In the first step when making music with hardware, it goes through the mixer and the compressor and is recorded on the DAT. After that, effects are put on the sound source before going into the mixer to be recorded. We don’t use the AUX on the mixer."

“The second step is directly putting the sounds from the DAT into the S-760 sampler and editing/cutting the two tracks into however many pieces, like hard disk recording.

“Lastly, we recorded it directly from the S-760 to the DAT. From here we do the rest with the Macintosh.”

Given the above reveal, I'm amazed S-760s don't sell for more than they currently do.

never read that b4, mind blown, I'm not even sure what that process entails precisely, it seems so convoluted that there's unnescasary steps before hitting the macintosh

I'm glad to hear the EX5r is such a gem! I am pretty ignorant of that machine, but it's Yamaha, it's rackmount and it's got the classic green display... so I am intrigued and will do some homework.

Re: Daft Punk's convoluted DAT > 760 > DAT > Macintosh flow in the late 90s, it makes some sense if you roll your mind back to how limited/expensive sampler memory and hard disk space was in 1995. The S-760 maxed out at 32MB, which was probably like 3-ish minutes max... if they only had the stock 2MB, we're talking about seconds, not minutes.

So... you jam away all night on your gear, recording everything to $20 DAT tapes that hold like 180 minutes each. Review the tape in the morning for the good bits you like and sample that into the 760 with first round of FX treatment, then sequence the 760 with the Mac via MIDI, and record the multi-track sequences you love into hard disk or back to DAT.

You were alive back then too. I remember when a 1GB Jazz discs were over $100 each, in 1997 dollars...

Also, this was from a translation of a little blurb inside a graphic outlining DP's process in a Japanese magazine. if the facts got slightly twisted in the process, I wouldn't be surprised.