Minimoog Softsynth Shootout: Diva MiniV3 Monark Legend Minimonsta vs Model D

[egbert101]

<delete>

[waltercruz]

OB-X is the SEM filter, OB-XA is curtis filter. The CEM3320 chip that is used on... Pro-One and Prophet-5 rev3.

[chk071]

Judging from that vid, i'd say the OB-Xa. There's also some sound demos here: https://www.amazona.de/blue-box-oberheim-ob-xa/ Sounds freaking awesome IMO. Would love to see a more recent emulation of that.

[EvilDragon]

The original OB-X, for sure. Discrete circuitry, closest to the sound of a polyphonic SEM, without needing to program each voice separately like on Voice synths.

[Mutant]

Comparison video between Oberheim OB-8 and Oberheim OB-Xa. Strictly for nerds.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7s1dCQ6X4f8

My internal nerd tells me that to compare 2 synths, you need to record them directly to your audio interface and that if you put any other synth through the same amp/speaker/room/mic combo - it will sound the same.

[DuX]

My internal nerd, in my experience, tells me they don't sound the same, but when you mix, "master" it in a "modern way", encode it into MP3 and then listen to it on "Thing-Chew" Ultra High Quality $5 PC speakers, everything sounds the same. Even your fart.

[egbert101]

<delete>

[egbert101]

<delete>

[waltercruz]

I'm just a curious man, but from my reading, CEM3320 doesn't seems to be a chip implementation of the SEM circuit - seems to be two different things.

Some random reading about fixing these synths:

https://sites.google.com/site/jlonanost ... heim-ob-xa
http://www.retrosynth.com/~analoguedieh ... index.html

In the second article there's some rambling about Tom Sawyer filter sweep and how the analog imperfections of OB-X contributes to the sound.

[egbert101]

<delete>

[Mutant]

I'm pretty sure I made this sound from this video which used a Moog Taurus pedal:

The main problem is that Geddy did NOT use any delay on that patch.
Now go and try doing the sound without the delay and without the OB-X sloppy voice cards, you will get a very nice and well behaved, but also a very boring, one dimensional resonance sweep.

Listen here:
https://app.box.com/s/qwzr8ajl7e9n856nk5pklz43enfc43lo
First my sound on one side and the original on the other, then turned around 180 degrees.

[egbert101]

<delete>

[Mutant]

I'm not using any delay on the patch I created.

Here is the patch I created, no effects added:

https://soundcloud.com/tony-781205439/r ... ampler-001

1 resonance sweep channel.
That is exactly what i said in my previous post.
Same patch on the OB-X would result in 8 individual, different sweeps, layered on top of each other and spread in the stereo field, which is what made the sound so epic, compared to yours.
And it is not your or even the Taurus' fault, the Taurus simply can't do that because it is monophonic.
BTW On Tom Sawyer the Taurus had nothing to do with the sweeps, it only added its texture to the lows.

Your sweep sounds very nice, but it is not a TS sweep.

[whyterabbyt]

I'm just a curious man, but from my reading, CEM3320 doesn't seems to be a chip implementation of the SEM circuit - seems to be two different things.

correct. AFAIR, the SEM was a 2-pole 12db/oct filter, with no self-oscillation, whilst the CEM is capable of 24db/oct, and will self-oscillate. As a filter core chip, rather than a full filter design, the CEM was somewhat reconfigurable toplogy-wise...

http://electricdruid.net/cem3320-filter-designs/

[Chris-S]

EDIT: Post moved to sound design.