bx_oberhausen from Plugin Alliance has landed

VST, AU, AAX, etc. plug-in Virtual Instruments discussion
kmonkey
KVRAF
4002 posts since 17 Aug, 2004

Post Mon Apr 15, 2019 7:27 am

yehboy1 wrote:
Mon Apr 15, 2019 7:23 am
This is amazing technology. Can we pay above the list price if we want the plugin now?
:hihi:

User avatar
ew
KVRAF
9175 posts since 23 Jul, 2002 from Pequot Lakes, MN

Re: bx_oberhausen from Plugin Alliance has landed

Post Mon Apr 15, 2019 8:03 am

fmr wrote:
Mon Apr 15, 2019 6:34 am


Since you had the originals, I would like to pose a question: They could be programmed as slight variations of each other or as completely different sounds. How was polyphony managed? Let's say that we would want to have half of the modules in an EVS to produce a percussive sound and another half of them to produce a sustained sound. Could we do that? How would they play?
You could program them either way; the SEM panels were the main programming interface. As far as managing polyphony went, you had your choice of voice modes. My favorite was rotate, where it would rotate through each voice in order.

ew
A spectral heretic...

User avatar
ew
KVRAF
9175 posts since 23 Jul, 2002 from Pequot Lakes, MN

Re: bx_oberhausen from Plugin Alliance has landed

Post Mon Apr 15, 2019 8:07 am

ENV1 wrote:
Mon Apr 15, 2019 7:05 am
ew wrote: The Four-Voice and Eight-Voice had an optional programmer module, but all that did was save the states of the individual SEMs so you could call them up at the flick of a switch.
Curious. What was the set of module controls used for then? To me it looks like they would be used to control either 1 single or multiple modules depending on the position of the switches below, you know, like an 'override' to the controls on the modules themselves. (Which would go back to their respective actual values when used/turned again, like other programmable synths.) Thats not how it works?

Image

Image from http://www.siliconbreakdown.com/ob3.html
That's how they were supposed to work in theory, and I've played a couple where the programmer worked as intended. However, most of the ones I've played didn't - hence my description.

ew
A spectral heretic...

chk071
KVRAF
19391 posts since 11 Apr, 2010 from Germany

Re: bx_oberhausen from Plugin Alliance has landed

Post Mon Apr 15, 2019 8:11 am

yehboy1 wrote:
Mon Apr 15, 2019 7:23 am
This is amazing technology. Can we pay above the list price if we want the plugin now?
Depends whether you pay in nature or not.

User avatar
fmr
KVRAF
8565 posts since 16 Mar, 2003 from Porto - Portugal

Re: bx_oberhausen from Plugin Alliance has landed

Post Mon Apr 15, 2019 11:29 am

ew wrote:
Mon Apr 15, 2019 8:03 am
fmr wrote:
Mon Apr 15, 2019 6:34 am


Since you had the originals, I would like to pose a question: They could be programmed as slight variations of each other or as completely different sounds. How was polyphony managed? Let's say that we would want to have half of the modules in an EVS to produce a percussive sound and another half of them to produce a sustained sound. Could we do that? How would they play?
You could program them either way; the SEM panels were the main programming interface. As far as managing polyphony went, you had your choice of voice modes. My favorite was rotate, where it would rotate through each voice in order.

ew
This mean that we could allocate the modules in an EVS as if they were two FVS, and have each group with its own setting? That's what I was wanting to know, and something that, in software, we could only achieve if we had individual panels for each of the eight voices (which we currently can only achieve - sort of - with the Arturia emulation)
Fernando (FMR)

User avatar
ew
KVRAF
9175 posts since 23 Jul, 2002 from Pequot Lakes, MN

Re: bx_oberhausen from Plugin Alliance has landed

Post Mon Apr 15, 2019 12:44 pm

fmr wrote:
Mon Apr 15, 2019 11:29 am
ew wrote:
Mon Apr 15, 2019 8:03 am
fmr wrote:
Mon Apr 15, 2019 6:34 am


Since you had the originals, I would like to pose a question: They could be programmed as slight variations of each other or as completely different sounds. How was polyphony managed? Let's say that we would want to have half of the modules in an EVS to produce a percussive sound and another half of them to produce a sustained sound. Could we do that? How would they play?
You could program them either way; the SEM panels were the main programming interface. As far as managing polyphony went, you had your choice of voice modes. My favorite was rotate, where it would rotate through each voice in order.

ew
This mean that we could allocate the modules in an EVS as if they were two FVS, and have each group with its own setting? That's what I was wanting to know, and something that, in software, we could only achieve if we had individual panels for each of the eight voices (which we currently can only achieve - sort of - with the Arturia emulation)
Sort of, but not really. There weren't anything like actual splits, if that's what you're asking.

ew
A spectral heretic...

ENV1
KVRAF
2446 posts since 31 Aug, 2011

Re: bx_oberhausen from Plugin Alliance has landed

Post Mon Apr 15, 2019 12:46 pm

ew wrote: That's how they were supposed to work in theory, and I've played a couple where the programmer worked as intended. However, most of the ones I've played didn't - hence my description.
I see.

Thanks for clearing that up.

klinik
KVRist
205 posts since 24 Apr, 2004

Re: bx_oberhausen from Plugin Alliance has landed

Post Mon Apr 15, 2019 6:48 pm

This mean that we could allocate the modules in an EVS as if they were two FVS, and have each group with its own setting? That's what I was wanting to know, and something that, in software, we could only achieve if we had individual panels for each of the eight voices (which we currently can only achieve - sort of - with the Arturia emulation)

Sort of, bu not really. There weren't anything like actual splits, if that's what you're asking.

ew
I had mine moded so I could disengage one of the sems from the asign in the programmer and control that voive thru independent CV. That way ie. I coud have a bass + 3 note chord.

Sold mine in 2011, still miss it. Have arturia and is not a bad emulation but lacks the soul. Repro-5 ITOH captured the soul for the prophet5 (that I sold in 2011 too). Need to try the BX emulation but if there is no different panel or “patch” for each voice then it lacks half of the fun an one of the features that makes the FVS So special.

v1o
KVRian
1498 posts since 2 Oct, 2004

Re: bx_oberhausen from Plugin Alliance has landed

Post Mon Apr 15, 2019 7:04 pm

Plugin Alliance’s Thorn has a similar list price at $199. I’m sure that’s good sign that this isn’t a throwaway $29 piece of software.
Orion Platinum, Muzys 2

User avatar
zerocrossing
KVRAF
9431 posts since 26 Jun, 2006 from San Francisco Bay Area

Re: bx_oberhausen from Plugin Alliance has landed

Post Mon Apr 15, 2019 7:47 pm

I had a go with it today...

Sounds good. Great... no. But very good. I have no SEM to compare it to, but I do have an ATC-X with a SEM filter, and I was surprised at how different the resonance range seemed to be. My ATC can still get pretty resonant, almost in the self resonant range. Second thing I noticed was how good my ATC’s VCOs sound, all sweet and beaty against each other. I had to mess with fine tuning to get that kind of effect on the software. To me they sounded more like DCOs in that respect.

Right off the bat, I’m annoyed that there’s no mixer. WHY IS THERE NO MIXER ON THIS DESIGN! More importantly, why propagate it? Put in an osc mixer, and if you really want to make me happy, make it so that you can overdrive the filter behind a point. Put some sort of display to let the user know it’s happening. Again, that’s me. I’m the guy who wants the spirit of the hardware but not a 1:1 copy. (Which this isn’t anyway...)

The presets are mostly horrible. Not really an issue... but eech. I mean... the FM in some of those horn sounds was wrong sounding. That said, what it really needs is a third envelope to damp that FM amount down so it’s just at the attack of the horn, and that’s not happening on this synth. Yes, it can happen on my ATC. (OK, well it doesn’t do FM, but it does have cross mod) I guess I have the SEM filter in my Pro 2 as well, which will do FM (both linear and non linear), but I didn’t go there.

The effects... I’m not sure what the hubbub is all about. I mean, they seem fine for built in effects. They’re not RePro level, but let’s face it, RePro is an outlier there. Most synths just don’t have great built in effects. I’m happy they’re there, though. Nice for when all you want is a hint of reverb or a delay. I didn’t experiment too much with the distortion.

The mod matrix is fine, nothing special there. So stupid you have to turn on a slot. If I’ve got a source and destination and amount is more than zero, just turn on. Mod slot amounts are not available destinations. Boo. Oh, and why not make your synth accept both channel and polyphonic aftertouch? Come on, people!

I do think it sounds better than Arturia’s SEM V. Like so many of the Arturia stuff, it just sounds a bit dull to me. The BX had an overall wider sound to me, like the emulation just had more detail and spectrum range. That said, it didn’t seem like I could open up the filter all the way without modulation. I had a good time playing with the demo, but I’m not eager to get my credit card out.

So... maybe if this went on sale or came up used, but for $179... I’m with the people who say that that’s too much. I got RePro for $99, which is a bargain and a half, but also I’d say it was an overall better emulation and where it strayed from the original it did in very interesting ways.
Zerocrossing Media

4th Law of Robotics: When turning evil, display a red indicator light. ~[ ●_● ]~

User avatar
ATS
KVRAF
6363 posts since 21 Dec, 2002 from MD USA

Re: bx_oberhausen from Plugin Alliance has landed

Post Mon Apr 15, 2019 9:32 pm

I do not really feel tempted by this one at all. It sounds pretty good though.
my music: http://www.alexcooperusa.com
The purpose of art is washing the dust of daily life off our souls ~ Pablo Picasso

db3
KVRAF
2057 posts since 22 Aug, 2012

Re: bx_oberhausen from Plugin Alliance has landed

Post Tue Apr 16, 2019 6:14 am

Whoop heavy hitter price ($99) and April voucher make a no brainer :party:
-dthree-

User avatar
sqigls
KVRAF
3649 posts since 25 Dec, 2004 from Melbourne, Australia

Re: bx_oberhausen from Plugin Alliance has landed

Post Tue Apr 16, 2019 6:22 am

$74 is a "no-brainer"?

db3
KVRAF
2057 posts since 22 Aug, 2012

Re: bx_oberhausen from Plugin Alliance has landed

Post Tue Apr 16, 2019 6:24 am

sqigls wrote:
Tue Apr 16, 2019 6:22 am
$74 is a "no-brainer"?
No, but $24 is :D
-dthree-

User avatar
sqigls
KVRAF
3649 posts since 25 Dec, 2004 from Melbourne, Australia

Re: bx_oberhausen from Plugin Alliance has landed

Post Tue Apr 16, 2019 6:42 am

you obviously hit a bit harder than me :P

Return to “Instruments”