Upcoming Synapse OB-Xa: Obsession

[zvenx]

................

To me Legend is up there with RePro (I love Repro too, especially 1) as far as quality. I don't think you can't improve any further on any of them as far as an emulation goes. And Obsession is up there too.

Looking forward to it, as indeed the OB series were my favourite ever Analog Synths.
rsp

[Yorrrrrr]

................

To me Legend is up there with RePro (I love Repro too, especially 1) as far as quality. I don't think you can't improve any further on any of them as far as an emulation goes. And Obsession is up there too.

Looking forward to it, as indeed the OB series were my favourite every Analog Synths.
rsp

So, I would be very surprised if you don't absolutely love this thing then. Such a nice synth. A very good tribute to the Oberheim.

[wagtunes]

What exactly does analog sound like? And how can a soft synth sound analog when it's made up of zeros and ones?

This whole conversation is amusing to say the least.

[chk071]

Hey, it's not like we have anything better to do...

[Funkybot's Evil Twin]

DIVA could not really replace OBsession for me for what that one is able to do. Same is true about Repro-5 while this is based on the same CEM chips as in the OB-Xa but besides other differences in the sound it does not include the state variable 2-pole Lowpass filter (and also misses some features found in OBsession).

Not to mention Obsession cpu usage is way lower than Repro-5!

Yes that is true. Much lower CPU usage especially with multiple instances.

I don't know what magic Richard applies to achieve such good CPU usage. Same quality as RePro, but RePro is a hog.

I think Richard is very aggressive with the AVX instuctions, whereas I *believe* U-he hadn't been as aggressive with AVX in the past. But note: Multi-Core performance on Diva and ACE improved quite a bit recently so maybe RePro is next.

[Funkybot's Evil Twin]

What exactly does analog sound like? And how can a soft synth sound analog when it's made up of zeros and ones?

Well, sound is not made of zeroes and ones. You don't hear ones and zeroes. You hear the waves being transmitted from the source (speakers, headphones, acoustic instruments, a glass breaking) that move through air (assuming your not underwater) and into your ears. How the sound is made is moot.

This synth really needs to get released soon. Even I'm annoyed at this post.

[Echoes in the Attic]

What exactly does analog sound like? And how can a soft synth sound analog when it's made up of zeros and ones?

That's like asking how a digital picture can look realistic when it's made of pixels.

[Yorrrrrr]

So all this time I've been listening to never ending streams of 1s and 0s. No analog waves going through my ears, just 1s and 0s.

[Echoes in the Attic]

There WAS a difference. That's why they chose Diva.

And did they not chose Diva as their guess as to which was the analog hardware synth?

Exactly. Yes they did.

Ok pretend I am talking very slowly. If people guess by sound that one thing is an analog hardware synthesizer and the other isn't, that means that they think that the first one sounds more like an analog synth than the second. Otherwise they would not have guessed that way. People generally don't listen to two things and then chose the one that sounds less like an analog synth as their guess as to which one is the Analog synth.

What is wrong with your brain? It's like if people did a blind taste test between vegan beef and real beef and more people thought the vegan beef is the real beef, would you say they didn't necessarily say that the vegan beef tasted more like beef? I can't believe I need to use an analogy for something so obvious.

[wagtunes]

What exactly does analog sound like? And how can a soft synth sound analog when it's made up of zeros and ones?

That's like asking how a digital picture can look realistic when it's made of pixels.

It may look realistic (and digital has improved over time) but it still doesn't look like my photos taken with a Kodak camera with film. They're almost too perfect. It's hard to explain but if you've taken photos for a long time (I started in 1974) you can tell the difference.

[BONES]

Of course you can tell the difference - film looks terrible compared to the pristine beauty of digital imagery.

With all of the filters in Dune 3, I would think it would be pretty easy to get that sound...however not a function-to-function match. I guess it would be great if you are a huge fan of that synth.

Interestingly, I had no opinion about the OB-Xa until I started beta-testing OBSession and now I am a huge fan and I might end up buying the Behringer clone when it comes out. There is a certain charm to it's simplicity that doesn't limit it as much as many other synths from that time. It's surprisingly deep for a synth with only 20 or so knobs and a few buttons and it sounds great.

Sound is always personally indeed though, but Repro-1 is the best sounding synth I have ever owned or played.

I don't know that I'd go that far but I certainly use RePro 1 a lot more than RePro 5. Nothing sounds as good as DUNE to my ears, it just has something really special going on that I don't get from anything else. That's not to say I use DUNE much, I don't actually like the workflow at all and there are plenty of other synths out there that sound more than good enough and are better to work with.

[Echoes in the Attic]

What exactly does analog sound like? And how can a soft synth sound analog when it's made up of zeros and ones?

That's like asking how a digital picture can look realistic when it's made of pixels.

It may look realistic (and digital has improved over time) but it still doesn't look like my photos taken with a Kodak camera with film. They're almost too perfect. It's hard to explain but if you've taken photos for a long time (I started in 1974) you can tell the difference.

There is a certain point where the human eye can no longer distinguish pixels, therefor can not tell if something is analog or digital. The same is true of digital audio. The same recording on high enough sample rate vs a high quality tape would be indistinguishable to human ears, even though the former is 1's and 0's. As for what analog sounds like, that's mostly to do with the different characteristics of imperfect signals that give nice harmonics in oscillators for example, or the effects of amplification and the overdrive introduced in analog circuits from things like resonance and overload. I'm sure there's plenty of resources out there to learn about how exactly they capture analog behavior in the digital realm through modeling.

[chk071]

nvmd

[electro]

How many years away do you think we are from augmented reality over wireless 8G?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Feed_ ... TV_series)

There is a certain point where the human eye can no longer distinguish pixels, therefor can not tell if something is analog or digital. The same is true of digital audio. The same recording on high enough sample rate vs a high quality tape would be indistinguishable to human ears, even though the former is 1's and 0's. As for what analog sounds like, that's mostly to do with the different characteristics of imperfect signals that give nice harmonics in oscillators for example, or the effects of amplification and the overdrive introduced in analog circuits from things like resonance and overload. I'm sure there's plenty of resources out there to learn about how exactly they capture analog behavior in the digital realm through modeling.

[Hanz Meyzer]

So, where is it?