DCB stands for Digital Circuit Behavior;
DCB technology uses software to faithfully reproduce sound generation methods
that were originally implemented using digital circuitry.
Our programming is based on the specifications of the IC chips that were used at the time
and on the CPU source code.
We also check the actual output waveform in order to determine what type of processing is being done.
This is how we reproduce the original sound engine.
Our port of the D-50 using DCB technology
goes back to the development of the VC-1 expansion card for the V-Synth, which was developed in 2004.
The D-50 plug-in and the Boutique series D-05 port
are based on technology that we developed at that time.
In spite of being digital,
the technology itself is evolving significantly from day to day and month to month.
The digital IC chips of each era have specific idiosyncrasies
due to their distinctive calculation precision and calculation methods.
Old ICs are no longer in production,
and it's difficult for us today to reproduce the calculation method of that time.
Today, even if you wanted to create a product using the same components as the D-50,
many of the components would be difficult to obtain, and it would be impossible to reproduce the product.
However, due to the dramatic evolution of digital technology,
it's now possible to develop software that accurately reproduces the behavior of an IC or CPU.
Furthermore, this also allows us to port the instrument to new hardware platforms,
such as to a DAW plug-in or to compact hardware such as the D-05.
In the dawn of digital sound engines,
the various manufacturers competed to develop their own proprietary sound engines
within the limits of calculation power and precision.
In addition to the LA sound engine that we reproduced this time,
other sound engines that were developed include the SA sound engine that was used in the RD-1000
and the DI sound engine that was used in the S-50,
while another manufacturer developed an FM sound engine.
Of these, the LA sound engine differed from earlier digital sound engines
in that it featured a "linear arithmetic" method that allowed the sound to be edited intuitively.
In developing DCB,
our greatest struggle was the repeated cycle of hypothesizing and then verifying the internal operation.
The other thing was that we faithfully reproduced the internal calculation precision.
Today's CPUs are easily capable of high-precision calculation,
but in order to be satisfied with the quality that we sought,
we deliberately refrained from using all of this high precision,
and limited ourselves to reproducing the calculation of that time.
Since some engineers from that time still remain in the company,
we able to hear directly from them about the struggles that they faced, the idiosyncrasies of the sound engines,
and the various things that they would have liked to do but were unable because of technological limitations.
The way in which small things that would not appear in the circuit diagram
could have a decisive impact on the character of the product
was something that we also experienced during the development of ACB.
The same is the case for digital;
I think that the sounds reproduced using DCB are completely different than those reproduced by other companies.
Thanks to this DCB technology and ACB technology,
we now have the means to implement behavior and personality for electronic musical instruments as well.
In the future, I think that by combining these and developing them even further,
we will be able to create a new generation of synthesizers.
I would like to create electronic sounds that have their own life, just like a living organism.