The Differences Between the Ensoniq SQ-80 & VFX

This one is via Paul McLean on the AH mailing list, posted here with his permission. Someone on the list asked how the two compared and Paul chimed in.  It's a fascinating insight on two synths from someone that worked closely with both at Ensoniq:

"I have both an SQ-80 and VFX and was working at Ensoniq in those days (both are prototypes actually), so I feel qualified to chime in. They sound very different.

First off the wave samples are all different and there are a lot more in the VFX. That being said, there are a number of total junk samples in the VFX (guitar sting, duct tape pull, really?). So what does this mean?

For what its worth, the organ samples come from my 1950s Hammond M2. Unfortunately they were hacked up and had all their charm removed by the sound designer in charge of the wave table and given meaningless names (ORGAN1, ORGAN1....) instead of the drawbar number names that I gave him (ORG888000000, ORG888880000....).

Second, the resolution of the samples are different. The SQ-80 is based (like the ESQ-1) on technology from the Mirage (first-generation DOC chip, MC6809), so the samples are 12-bit with no interpolation on playback. The VFX is based on the technology in the EPS (DOC2, MC68000) and so uses (if I recall correctly) 13-bit samples with linear-interpolation on playback.

I suppose the over-used cliches are true, the SQ-80 sounds "grittier" and the VFX sounds "smoother".

Third, the filters. The SQ-80 uses CEM 24db/oct resonant filters for each of its voices. The VFX implements its filters on the DOC chip for 2 filters per voice and they have a variety of cutoff rates and types (lowpass/highpass). They DO NOT offer resonance. This isn't as much a problem as you might think due to the "Transwaves" in the VFX (of which more later). I asked Bob Yannes (founder and some sort-of technology executive at Ensoniq) why they dropped the resonance, he answered (as I recall) that it came down to a cost trade-off for the silicon and as mentioned would be mitigated by the wave-samples and Transwaves. I think also that that sort-of filter sweep sound was considered to be pretty dated at the time and so maybe not so important.

Transwaves. These are sets of single-cycle samples that can be swept through giving wonderful moving sounds. Things like pulse width modulation which wouldn't normally be possible on a wavetable-based synth can be emulated here. I've also gotten wonderful 'resonant' sweeping sounds with these. That said they don't quite replace filter resonance. I don't think the transwaves in the VFX, or TS series ever lived up to their promise. I haven't tried a FIZMO though.

Miscellany: The VFX lets you layer up to 6 voices (complete synthesis chains) per key, the SQ-80 mixes 3 oscillators into a VCF-VCA chain. The VFX has many more and much deeper modulation options. The SQ-80 voice has a ring modulator, none on the VFX. The effects on the VFX are mostly wonderful (8-voice chorus is a dream, the Leslie sim is bloody awful).

I'm sure I'm forgetting stuff.

Conclusion? I'm afraid its the same AH conclusion. Get both if you can, they really do not overlap. I like that the VFX makes me seriously rethink my approach to sound design. It has been my main keyboard since 1989, though recently retired for a TS-12 which unfortunately also does not replace it! I still use both the SQ-80 and VFX for recording.

The good thing is, they are both insanely cheap. (and the poly-pressure keyboard on both is to die for!)

Regards,
Paul McLean
Denver CO / San Jose CA"