Obxd synthesizer

[fluffy_little_something]

the files wont play here...

I guess it is the player, whichever it is. Had the same issue with the second example, and often with Peter's examples in the OP-X threads.

[fluffy_little_something]

Is that called acid because it sounds like acid bubbling away in the lab?

No idea to be honest (and i got a Dr. in Chemistry...).

The patch is called "Acidic Bass" because it is influenced by the 303 but on the other hand is not identical. If it would be a perfect emulation i maybe would choose a different name...


Ingo

Oh, you have strayed from your profession quite a bit, should have studied physics instead

[Ingonator]

Oh, you have strayed from your profession quite a bit, should have studied physics instead

Actually i already had teached physics at school...

For that i also had to built simple circuits like e.g. this:
http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/D%C3%A4mmerungsschalter


Ingo

[fmr]

The Obxd is a bit of a divergence from the OBX it seeks to emulate

he's trying to emulate the OB-Xa isnt he...? diff synth...

As fas as I can tell (I never owned either of them but I studied both manuals when this started) it's a mix. Not quite the OB-X but not quite the OB-Xa either.

[Breeze]

he's trying to emulate the OB-Xa isnt he...? diff synth...

I'm pretty sure it's mainly the OB-X with OB-Xa features. The X didn't have 24-dB and the Xa didn't have X-mod; neither had a multimode filter, so it's a bit of a mix! The X used discrete filters while the Xa used Curtis chips, but I don't think 2DaT went down the circuit-modelling road yet though I do think his intention was to emulate the instability of the X's oscillators and filters. Good overview here and on wiki pages.

Here comes my Sunday morning mullings... Oberheim prices were simply out of reach when I was a kid. It was one of those synths you just got to look at at the music store without waving some cash around. If you know anything about electronics, you can download the schematics and take a look at the complexity of an analog build... and stand amazed that we can get practically the same thing now in a few megabytes of code!

[Ingonator]

he's trying to emulate the OB-Xa isnt he...? diff synth...

I'm pretty sure it's mainly the OB-X with OB-Xa features. The X didn't have 24-dB and the Xa didn't have X-mod; neither had a multimode filter, so it's a bit of a mix! The X used discrete filters while the Xa used Curtis chips, but I don't think 2DaT went down the circuit-modelling road yet though I do think his intention was to emulate the instability of the X's oscillators and filters. Good overview here and on wiki pages.

With the latest version that with the 24dB button on could morph between 1 and 4 filter Poles there is also a bit of Matrix 12 inside now so basically there is a mix of different Oberheim synths like OB-X, OB-Xa OB-8, SEM and Matrix 12 where this is true mostly for the filter while the rest of the synth is closer to the OB-X and OB-Xa.


Ingo

[Ingonator]

I am close to finish correcting my own patches now. For that i used the latest version published yesterday (the one before should not be a difference for those corrected patches).

Here is what i found:

- With patches using Unison i had to either increase the Spread amount
- With some Unison patches i had to increase both the Spread amount and Osc 2 detune
- with some pad sounds (especially Strings) i had to increase the Osc 2 detune
- the Brass, Bells and some other patches usually did not need any correction (even if they were detuned too like those pads mentioned above)
- With 2 patches that used the 24dB filter i had to set the Multi knob to 0 which for som rteason was in the middle position. In earlier versions this was no problem as with the 24dB mode the knob had no function but with the latest the knob controls the filter slope.

Conclusion:
First i thought it is only about Unison patches but there does not seem to be a general rule for the corrections (and even with the Unison patches there are differences).
On the other hand there are several patches that don't need corrections (but ther does not seem to be a general rule for those too).


Ingo

[Numanoid]

The Obxd is a bit of a divergence from the OBX it seeks to emulate

he's trying to emulate the OB-Xa isnt he...? diff synth...

Cool, one of the advantages the OB-Xa has over the OB-X I just learned, is that OB-Xa allows for splitting and layering of voices.

But how do I get to do that with Obxd?

[Ingonator]

allows for splitting and layering of voices.

But how do I get to do that with Obxd?

Use your host/DAW ?

While the rest of the synth is close to the OB-X the filter seems to be based on OB-X OB-Xa and also SEM and the latest version with switchable/morphable filter poles maybe also a bit on a Matrix 12.


Ingo

[Numanoid]

Obxd allows a choice from 1 to 8 voices in the global setting, but I guess the only variation of these voices can be obtained by tweaking the voice panel, can't do more to modify the individual voices?

[Ingonator]

Obxd allows a choice from 1 to 8 voices in the global setting, but I guess the only variation of these voices can be obtained by tweaking the voice panel, can't do more to modify the individual voices?

The voice panning actiually is a feature included with the real OB-X, OB-Xa and OB-8.
Here is a picture from an OB-8:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/jobenbelgi ... /lightbox/

Another possible option could be voice detune like in Diva. Maybe it would be possible to add a switch to choose between voice pan and voice detune.

BTW i updated mylast post a bit while you posted.


Ingo

[Funkybot's Evil Twin]

Here's 7 patches...

https://www.dropbox.com/s/5zxuw5r46rvzk ... 2-2014.zip

[Ingonator]

I am close to finish correcting my own patches now. For that i used the latest version published yesterday (the one before should not be a difference for those corrected patches).

Here is what i found:

- With patches using Unison i had to either increase the Spread amount
- With some Unison patches i had to increase both the Spread amount and Osc 2 detune
- with some pad sounds (especially Strings) i had to increase the Osc 2 detune
- the Brass, Bells and some other patches usually did not need any correction (even if they were detuned too like those pads mentioned above)
- With 2 patches that used the 24dB filter i had to set the Multi knob to 0 which for som rteason was in the middle position. In earlier versions this was no problem as with the 24dB mode the knob had no function but with the latest the knob controls the filter slope.

Conclusion:
First i thought it is only about Unison patches but there does not seem to be a general rule for the corrections (and even with the Unison patches there are differences).
On the other hand there are several patches that don't need corrections (but ther does not seem to be a general rule for those too).

Here is the update of the patches colection based on the corrections mentioned above:

UPDATE (02.02.2014):

Here is the next update v1.04:
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/532 ... 0v1.04.zip

This includes the corrected patches of Breeze and myself (updated for the latest version published yesterday).
One new bass patch from me is included ("Acidic Bass 3 IW")

I also added this to my first post at the first page of this thread:
http://www.kvraudio.com/forum/viewtopic ... 8#p5428868

At that placfe it will be easier to find until there is a better solution.

Here's 7 patches...

https://www.dropbox.com/s/5zxuw5r46rvzk ... 2-2014.zip

Many thanks,
just downloaded. Will add to the next update of the collection.


Have fun,
Ingo

[olikana]

[d "Pitch" is what it says on the OBX

nope.
that knob is clearly and precisely labelled "Depth" on the OBX . (and "Frequency" is the generic "title" for the whole row.... or are you arguing the rate knob is infact labelled LFO ? lol)

[Breeze]

[d "Pitch" is what it says on the OBX

nope.
that knob is clearly and precisely labelled "Depth" on the OBX . (and "Frequency" is the generic "title" for the whole row.... or are you arguing the rate knob is infact labelled LFO ? lol)

You're right! For the record, I agree it should be "depth"... I sort of remember it being discussed at some point but it might have been overlooked... or it fell in the crack between the discussion about the location of the controls and the one about the width of the buttons... someone please correct this or we'll all have to stop using Obxd as the offense to our sensibilities is simply unbearable...