bx_oberhausen from Plugin Alliance has landed

[waltercruz]

Look I'm just going off what the creator of the plug said. He said in the video he didn't model a particular synth. And the SEM didn't have unison. So if we're playing that game why are we playing it halfway?

did we watch the same video? from 50 seconds onwards, he says that them measure a lot of circuits to do. And when they tell that they didnot model a particular synth, it's because they measured probably some SEM units.

and about the unison, people used to join SEM units to create poly synths and to to unison, like the two voice pro (https://www.soundonsound.com/reviews/to ... -voice-pro) or the awesome eight voice.

watch the following video, around 8:20 there's a powerful example of unison.

Unison is one of the most requested features on the Arturia SEM.

[waltercruz]

Arturia vs Bx

Really good comparison. So they're remarkably close when it comes to the basic "synth" bits like the oscillators, filter etc. The bx has a few features the Arturia lacks, and vice versa. If any of those features are important to you, that should guide your purchasing decision in favor of one or the other.
Personally, as I already have the Arturia version, this video just re-affirms my feeling that it's not worth it for me, especially at the asking price.

pretty much on pair with this comment from choralriff (viewtopic.php?p=7368805#p7368805) and my own tests, load some patch on bx_oberhaunsen, eliminate the fx and trying to recreate the part that it's common to both synths in Arturia version.

[PAK]

I didn't have time to watch the whole vid, but - D'oh - around 2:40 he's repeating incorrect info.
Arturia not only has the equivalent of "TMT" features, it craps all over BX's so called TMT!

Namely, Arturia allows you to calibrate 24 different things in 6 slots across all 8 voices individually, then goes and does the same thing again except specific to keyboard follow, for a total of 12 calibration adjustments per voice, making a grand total of 96 possible adjustments from 24 sources!

IMO Arturia set the standard for how this calibration stuff should be done in emulations. The caveat, of course, being you now have to tune up to 96 options versus flipping a switch. Saving adjustments as their own profiles (which could be loaded, and locked as you flipped presets, to maintain the adjustments) would help usability, as would've allowing the calibration zone to use the whole UI window with more visible, rather than 1 set of 8 at a time.

I wish they'd done that and made a much bigger deal about these features (so people knew they were there!!). Of course, this also ignores the 8 slot mod matrix of 26 sources (if I counted right) in addition to the above.

Needless to say. voice pan is one of the sources which can be adjusted! Arturia is -vastly- superior. in this area, to BX, AFAICT (Won't be installing, not least because of the silly price games.. )

Arturia vs Bx

[chk071]

I didn't have time to watch the whole vid, but - D'oh - around 2:40 he's repeating incorrect info.
Arturia not only has the equivalent of "TMT" features, it craps all over BX's so called TMT!

His comparison videos are OK, but, he definitely misses, or mis-calibrates some stuff. Was already like that on his Minimoog emulation comparison.

[generaldiomedes]

I didn't have time to watch the whole vid, but - D'oh - around 2:40 he's repeating incorrect info.
Arturia not only has the equivalent of "TMT" features, it craps all over BX's so called TMT!

Namely, Arturia allows you to calibrate 24 different things in 6 slots across all 8 voices individually, then goes and does the same thing again except specific to keyboard follow, for a total of 12 calibration adjustments per voice, making a grand total of 96 possible adjustments from 24 sources!

What does that have to do with TMT? Those modulations are the equivalent of Zebra's mod mapper, or the arp mod. i.e. you can change parameters like filter cutoff, pan, frequency in a round robin fashion as you cycle through the voices or note sequence. Nothing to do with circuit emulation tweaking.

[Urs]

He said in the video he didn't model a particular synth.

In the handbook they use the term "unparalleled authenticity". I'd say that's a paradox, but maybe I misunderstand what is meant here and there. Can't be sure these days...

Does Carr say anything about maximum filter frequencies in the vid? Afaik the Arturia one is already a tad too bright with it's 18kHz max, and the handbook of the Brainworx one says 24+kHz?

[PAK]

What does that have to do with TMT? Those modulations are the equivalent of Zebra's mod mapper, or the arp mod. i.e. you can change parameters like filter cutoff, pan, frequency in a round robin fashion as you cycle through the voices or note sequence. Nothing to do with circuit emulation tweaking.

So what magical "circuit emulation" parameters do you think TMT is "tweaking" then? Do tell

The difference between analogue voices (and synths of the same type, for that matter) are down to the components and calibration (which is added to help solve the component differences in the first place).

The way TMT has been described, in their promotion videos, it seems it's simply adjusting values, such as envelope timings and cutoff points, on a per voice basis. In what way is that ANY different from adjusting them yourself using such a system? It's not. Indeed, the user has less control because it's been taken over by your oh-so-advanced magical "circuit emulation".

Of course, it could add in further elements - For example, they might use a varying (rather than static) values, which would need further modulation to "copy" on a system like Arturia's. Though the extra mod slots Arturia provide could also cover this to an extent. (This also assumes "TMT" even went that far.. )

Beyond that you're basically into areas like distortion, signal bleeds, and whatever. Areas in which BX doesn't seem to be doing anything over and above what anyone else does, and a road emulations still tend not to travel far down today.

Can it also do things like emulate the curves a real world SEM would follow for something like the filter? (Meaning you'd instantly notice differences on the low or high end notes versus a real SEM if there's no way to copy.. ) No. And yet, these differences can be amongst the most obvious sound differences. And no, Arturia weren't first with such features - but do get credit for understanding their importance in the context of an analogue emulation.

[waltercruz]

In the handbook they use the term "unparalleled authenticity". I'd say that's a paradox, but maybe I misunderstand what is meant here and there. Can't be sure these days...

I understood that they used the measurement of several units (kinda similar of what U-he did with Repro-1 don't?). So, it's not an emulation of a specific unit.

Does Carr say anything about maximum filter frequencies in the vid? Afaik the Arturia one is already a tad too bright with it's 18kHz max, and the handbook of the Brainworx one says 24+kHz?

Nothing specific, but bx_oberhausen filter seems to be brighther than Arturia.

[SoundPorn]

No his answers were vague and didn't get into detail of anything. Like says how they're known for M/S so he had to find a way to put M/S in and did it with the filter...okay what does that mean exactly.
I think the "authenticity" part is all about they're TMT tech which does sound good, and he says how it changes the channel response from left to right like how old synths would, again didn't say like the SEM would, but was vague, and was the SEM not mono anyway...nevermind lol.

He said in the video he didn't model a particular synth.

In the handbook they use the term "unparalleled authenticity". I'd say that's a paradox, but maybe I misunderstand what is meant here and there. Can't be sure these days...

Does Carr say anything about maximum filter frequencies in the vid? Afaik the Arturia one is already a tad too bright with it's 18kHz max, and the handbook of the Brainworx one says 24+kHz?

[SoundPorn]

Yes, BX is good at modeling analog circuits. They may have even modeled a SEM. But that's not what he said. The closest thing he said to mentioning a specific synth was "70's synths," which is plural. He kept saying they modeled synths in plural, not a specific synth even tho it's obvious what they were aiming for. And I'm still looking for the synth from the 70's with the mid side VCF. lol.

Look I'm just going off what the creator of the plug said. He said in the video he didn't model a particular synth. And the SEM didn't have unison. So if we're playing that game why are we playing it halfway?

did we watch the same video? from 50 seconds onwards, he says that them measure a lot of circuits to do. And when they tell that they didnot model a particular synth, it's because they measured probably some SEM units.

and about the unison, people used to join SEM units to create poly synths and to to unison, like the two voice pro (https://www.soundonsound.com/reviews/to ... -voice-pro) or the awesome eight voice.

watch the following video, around 8:20 there's a powerful example of unison.

Unison is one of the most requested features on the Arturia SEM.

[gentleclockdivider]

No his answers were vague and didn't get into detail of anything. Like says how they're known for M/S so he had to find a way to put M/S in and did it with the filter...okay what does that mean exactly.
I think the "authenticity" part is all about they're TMT tech which does sound good, and he says how it changes the channel response from left to right like how old synths would, again didn't say like the SEM would, but was vague, and was the SEM not mono anyway...nevermind lol.

He said in the video he didn't model a particular synth.

In the handbook they use the term "unparalleled authenticity". I'd say that's a paradox, but maybe I misunderstand what is meant here and there. Can't be sure these days...

Does Carr say anything about maximum filter frequencies in the vid? Afaik the Arturia one is already a tad too bright with it's 18kHz max, and the handbook of the Brainworx one says 24+kHz?

First you critize the developers that they are not EXACT emulating a known synth , while everybody knows it's an oberheim SEM
Then you critize them for adding an ads envelope , which againg proves you were not aware of that it's a SEM , because ----> sem has ads envelopes
ANd then you crawl back by saying you are only repeating what the developer said in the promo video .
And you don't know what M/S is ?
Why is so important to voice your opinion about shit you don't even know


Now , how old are you ?

[chk071]

Well, regardless of the technical details, it sounds darn good, i just played with it a bit more. Sounds rich, sounds fat, i love the filter resonance (much more than the Arturia, which i demo'd earlier as well... not nearly as high end sounding, and it also has a nast "thump" sound when modulating the cutoff, with full resonance),and it sounds nicely "analog" unstable as well. Really, if it was 99 €, i'm sure everybody would be all over the thing. Only thing that's wrong is the price tag, in my opinion. I'm sure i'll grab it when it goes on a good sale, though.

[kmonkey]

Whole TMT thing is just their marketing nonsense in their Synth portfolio that's all to it. TMT works fine in their channel strips but channel strip is not a synth.

Tested it. Synth itself is ok but merely a middle achievement. It's not exactly bad but not top level either. Late to the game and not pair with current standards produced by U-he, Synapse, NI and quite a few others.

It's laughable actually.

Ooooo we have TMT synth...Then you install it and you realize it's on pair with freebies from Reaktor free online library.

[gentleclockdivider]

Whole TMT thing is just their marketing nonsense in their Synth portfolio that's all to it. TMT works fine in their channel strips but channel strip is not a synth.

Tested it. Synth itself is ok but merely a middle achievement. It's not exactly bad but not top level either. Late to the game and not pair with current standards produced by U-he, Synapse, NI and quite a few others.

It's laughable actually.

Ooooo we have TMT synth...Then you install it and you realize it's on pair with freebies from Reaktor free online library.

Really , not on par with u-he , synapse ..hmmm...
Is that because you compared the brainworx with the moog , or maybe the pro-1 , afaik u-he , native , synapse etc.. have not yet developed a sem ...so you can't really compare can you
Or did you compare it with a real SEM , maybe you should

[chk071]

I'd say it's pretty much on one level with Diva or Monark, sound wise. Also CPU consumption wise.

As i mentioned, only thing i wasn't so sure about are the envelopes. But, maybe they're just as sluggish on the real thing, i don't know. I figure so, otherwise the envelope times wouldn't start at 4 or 5 ms on the emulation.