{"id":29821,"date":"2024-05-18T06:00:00","date_gmt":"2024-05-18T04:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/greatsynthesizers.com\/?post_type=test&p=9787"},"modified":"2025-08-26T02:09:15","modified_gmt":"2025-08-26T00:09:15","slug":"generalmusic-gem-s2-s3-the-forgotten-ingenious-workstations","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/greatsynthesizers.com\/en\/review\/generalmusic-gem-s2-s3-the-forgotten-ingenious-workstations\/","title":{"rendered":"GeneralMusic GEM S2 \/ S2R \/ S3 – ingenious pro-synthesizers"},"content":{"rendered":"

Maybe you\u2019ve heard some of those ever-persistent murmurings about the GeneralMusic S-Series: “The S2 synthesizer \u2013 a secret sound weapon”<\/em>, “GEM S2 and S3 are among the best master keyboards on the market”<\/em>, “great polyphonic aftertouch”<\/em>, “some intriguing sounds” <\/em>… and on and on.<\/p>\n

L<\/span>et’s have a look at that GeneralMusic S-Series. Are these synthesizers from the early 90s as innovative as rumours have it?<\/p>\n

\"GeneralMusic<\/a><\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

GEM: A respectable name in the home organ\/keyboard\/e-piano market<\/h2>\n

G<\/span>eneralMusic unfortunately filed for bankruptcy some time ago. It was among the last Italian keyboard manufacturers, along with Ketron (Solton). The company had grown substantially, especially in the late 80ies \/ early 90ies. But let’s start even further back and have a look at Crumar first. When the Italian keyboard & organ manufacturer closed its doors in 1987, it was taken over by LEM. The latter itself was taken over by GEM a few years later, as was ELKA.<\/p>\n

1994 GEM changed their company name to GeneralMusic, but kept GEM as a brand. That meant that GeneralMusic now hosted GEM, LEM and ELKA. GEM was still a name to take seriously in the portable keyboard, workstation and e-piano market. LEM produced mixing consoles and loudspeakers, while ELKA offered guitar\/bass amplifiers and portable P.A. systems.<\/p>\n

\"GeneralMusic<\/a><\/p>\n

In the early 90ies, GEM\/GeneralMusic had some 500 employees in five locations. The R&D (Research and Development) department alone employed 25 technicians. That’s where, among other things, some of the S-Series custom chips were developed.<\/p>\n

The S-Series actually was one of the last products ELKA began. After its collapse in 1988, GEM\/GeneralMusic took over the plans and brought the innovative “S” synthesizer project to realization. S2 and S3 were both released in 1992. The rack version S2R – factory-fitted with the Turbo upgrade – followed in 1994. Sadly, the success of the S-Series was limited, so GEM\/GeneralMusic cancelled the whole product line once the Turbokit had been released. A few years later, another “S”-like synthesizer appeared, the GEM Equinox. It closely resembled the S2\/S3 and was GeneralMusic’s last delving into high tech synthesizers.<\/p>\n

\"GeneralMusic<\/a><\/p>\n

A quick side note. I bought the GEM Equinox Pro 88 in 2010 and, to be honest, I can tell you the old S2 \/ S3 is much better (\u2026 it\u2019s mainly the quality and originality of the sounds which is much better and a lot more inspiring).<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

In 2007, towards the end of the story, GeneralMusic’s product line focused on arranger-keyboards (once again …), multimedia workstations, e-pianos, mixing consoles, loudspeakers and p.a. systems. But there was a time in the early 90ies when the Italian company could easily have competed with any Japanese or American hi-tech synthesizer manufacturer. That was in the days of the S-Series …<\/p>\n

Meanwhile, GeneralMusic closed its doors. In February 2009, Generalmusic fired all workers and immediately filed for bankrupt which has been declared in 2011. Very sad.<\/p>\n

\"GeneralMusic<\/a><\/p>\n

We repeat: GeneralMusic made its first serious move into high tech with the GEM S2\/S3 in 1992. Looking at the S2\/S3, these instruments seem like any ordinary sample + synthesis keyboard workstation. But they were professional, genuine synthesizers with some fresh new functions and – best of all – a wonderful keyboard and<\/em> wonderful sounds. Physically speaking, they toted some outstanding features: The enormous, deeply sunken aquamarine LCD, the two moulded (freely programmable) wheels, the masculine 61-note\/76-note poly-aftertouch feature, the many physical controls.<\/p>\n

\"GeneralMusic<\/a><\/p>\n

The panel, although crowded with knobs, doesn’t seem cluttered. Most knobs have a specific function, such as EFF. BYPASS, CLIPBOARD or MIDI OFF. The S-Serie’s flexible (open) operating system (called MIOS) lets you move about the instrument in a free-flowing computer-like style. Ultimately, the GeneralMusic Sample Translator (S2 Direct) allowed you to transfer samples of any format into your S2 \/ S2R \/ S3.<\/p>\n

\"GeneralMusic<\/a><\/p>\n

The early 90ies: Birth hour of many respectable S+S workstations<\/h2>\n

T<\/span>he field of highly professional S+S (sample + synthesis) concepts was quite crowded back in the early 90ies. Actually, the story should start back in 1988 with the all-time classic Korg M1. Its successor, the 01\/W, had a bigger screen, more samples, double polyphony and a new “crazy” feature called waveshaping. It remains a very popular workstation up to this day.<\/p>\n

\"GeneralMusic<\/a><\/p>\n

Roland tried to continue the success of the D-50 and released a PCM sample-based synthesizer called D-70. Sadly, it was too complex to program – a real pain, once you began delving beneath the surface! Yamaha’s SY77 (and its rack version TG77) equally suffered from a too-complex operating system. Although they could have been milestones in synthesizer history (as was the DX7), those wonderfully sounding synthesizers were a pain to operate. Not even the more flexible flagship SY99 got rid of those inherent complexities.<\/p>\n

\"GeneralMusic<\/a><\/p>\n

In 1991, Roland’s JD-800 should have been the big seller, but it wasn\u2019t! Too many knobs! People were too easily intimidated by all those sliders and buttons – although synthesizer designers in their turn must have found it pretty nerve-wracking, trying to figure out what synthesizer-programming concept people were actually looking for. 1991 was the birthday of Kurzweil’s K2000, too. This highly respectable instrument was the beginning of a whole bunch of professional synthesizers. One year later – in 1992 – GEM (later GeneralMusic) hit the market with the GEM S-Series.<\/p>\n

\"GeneralMusic<\/a><\/p>\n

S2, S3 and the rack version S2R were hi-tech instruments, but the company name was by no way an asset. Not many pros knew GEM\/GeneralMusic to be a producer of studio synthesizers. The Turbokit for 32-voice polyphony, equipped with an expanded ROM sound bank, didn’t help to turn the S-Series into a pro’s instrument, either.<\/p>\n

\"GeneralMusic<\/a><\/p>\n

\"GeneralMusic<\/a><\/p>\n

GEM\/GeneralMusic stopped its production and support as soon as it became obvious that the whole range would turn out to be a flop. Completing the list of outstanding early 90ies professional synthesizer \/ workstation concepts, we should mention the Roland JD-990 and Ensoniq TS-10. Both were introduced in 1993. Finally, there was another innovative workstation from home keyboard producer Technics. The WSA-1, released in 1995, was a fully professional, future tech synth with acoustic modelling synthesis. Once again, the missing reputation in the pro user segment was GeneralMusic’s biggest hindrance to establishing the instrument on the market.<\/p>\n

\"GeneralMusic<\/a><\/p>\n

GEM S2\/S3\/S2R were pro synths with some first-rate sounds, innovative editing procedures and a rarely-to-be-seen polyphonic aftertouch. The only limit was the professionals’ willingness to accept a new name. And maybe rumours were still around that the Italians could not manufacture a proper synthesizer. In its days, Crumar, for example, flooded the market with cheaply built instruments. Many of them toted serious sounds and were based on innovative concepts, but the hardware tended to be low quality (… buy a Japanese synthesizer and you know what you get!) …<\/p>\n

\"GeneralMusic<\/a><\/p>\n

But history tells us that there were some great pro synths that the Italians definitely got out on the market. The Synthex, for example, is better constructed than the Jupiter-8 or any Oberheim OB-8\/Xa\/X. That\u2019s not to say that it’s more reliable, but the whole concept and construction is more professional than any of its competitors\u2019 products! And the GEM S-Series is at least at the same hardware level as a Yamaha SY77\/99, or any Korg or Roland workstation.<\/p>\n

\"GeneralMusic<\/a><\/p>\n

The implementation of polyphonic aftertouch (with release velocity!), however, afforded high GEM\/Generalmusic production costs. And the S-keyboard panels were covered with a special finish (a sort of rubber-encased plastic) that looks very elegant. GEM even produced a Turbokit for the S2\/S3 which boosts polyphony up to 32-voices and expands the ROM bank to over 500! If<\/em> GEM\/Generalmusic had kept producing instruments like this, we might be listing the company name right next to Roland, Yamaha and Korg today – who knows!<\/p>\n

\"GeneralMusic<\/a><\/p>\n

Music Processor<\/h2>\n

L<\/span>et’s have a close look at the S-Series. Basically, the instruments are sort of expanded workstations. What\u2019s new about them? The flexible operating system allows you to use the S2, S3 as a MIDI merge center. Without using the internal sound engine, you can take advantage of the sequencer or control sliders, route and control any external MIDI device in any way you desire. There are two (!) independant Midi busses \u2013 that\u2019s a rare one on most workstations, isn’t it? But, sure, nowadays you don’t buy a S2, S3 solely because of its sequencer or MIDI functions. Today you might be interested in these synths because of their intriguing sounds.<\/p>\n

GEM did everything to make the S-Series as userfriendly as possible. For instance, there\u2019s a row of seven sliders and buttons next to the display, foolproofly marked with volume, attack, release, filter, pan, etc. Although the good point is, you\u2019re not locked into these functions. Switching to “user” mode, you may use the sliders and buttons to control any functions within the overall S2, S3 patch. There’s 6MB of sample material to start with, and the two 2 pole 12dB filter can be combined to a single 4 pole 24dB state variable multimode-filter.<\/p>\n

\"GeneralMusic<\/a><\/p>\n

Two independent effect machines are “standard” for this type of workstation concept, but here again, there’s a little bonus: the global rotary effect is not only nice, but extremely useful. I wish more instruments featured this function. The two wheels can be used for standard pitch\/vibrato performances, or can be assigned to any other function you wish. Boy, it spells real fun playing a cutting leadsound while changing its attack with the modulation wheel! As with the wheels, the CV\/Pedal-IN ports are freely programmable. You\u2019re probably getting an idea of how powerful these instruments are!<\/p>\n

Reliability<\/h2>\n

B<\/span>y chance, I got to know Lothar Jenske, who worked for many years as a repair man in the German GeneralMusic compartment. “S2\/S3 hardly break down” he said. “Generally, they are very reliable instruments”<\/em>.<\/p>\n

\"GeneralMusic<\/a><\/p>\n

Sure, as with all electronic gear, some people have less favourable reports. In 2002, a user posted the following bloq: “During my last gig the S3 suddenly caught fire. The audience was excited – they thought it was a pyro-effect and part of the show – but it was anything but funny to me”<\/em>.<\/p>\n

Hardware details. The instrument’s display is breathtaking<\/strong>, it’s extremely bright due to special neon background lights. The wheels have a rough surface and are very good to use…<\/p>\n

\"GeneralMusic<\/a><\/p>\n

Fader and switches are <\/strong>pretty good quality<\/strong> as well, though some of the switches are very petite. While programming, you need to concentrate in order to make those adjustments exact …<\/p>\n

Last but not least, it’s the brilliant keyboard action<\/strong> that turns the S2, S3 into a potential master keyboard. The lightly weighted action (to use GEM’s own phrase) combined with polyphonic aftertouch<\/strong> sensitivity (with release velocity!) shows the great master key\u2019s potential. I think polyphonic aftertouch opens a whole new world to the creative musician. Sadly, this great feature was among the most unpopular ones in the S-Series’ history. Maybe keyboard (not piano!) players weren’t skilled enough to use the polyphonic feature correctly. To be honest, IT IS NOT EASY to control different keys with independent finger pressure.<\/p>\n

\"GeneralMusic<\/a><\/p>\n

Turbokit<\/h2>\n

I<\/span>n 1992, when the S-Series was released, the press immediately pointed up several missing or improvable features. 16-voice polyphony wasn\u2019t sufficient, important sequencer functions were missing, some day-to-day functions needed to be improved, etc. GeneralMusic, still trying to establish its synthesizers on the pro market, didn’t hesitate and released a respectable Turbokit.<\/p>\n

Some of the improved features:<\/p>\n