I Have an Uncomfortable Admission to Make

[Big Mouth Strikes Again]

I'm pretty sure my Uno Pro sounds better than any equivalent softsynth in my arsenal. The important qualifier here is "equivalent", which means a monosynth without any unison capability. But it includes two of my favourite VSTi, GForce's SEM and FBM's MonoFury, so it's no faint praise.

It's taken you two years to figure out that a 3-oscillator VCO monosynth sounds better than your GForce and FBM synth plugins? i guess better late than never. But I could have told you this in the first two minutes of playing the Uno Pro.

Then there's the fact that the Uno Pro is not a massive leap forward in hardware designs. I can name at least 10 better sounding / more functional analog monosynths:
...

Sorry, not even close. I had a Pulse 2 but I got rid of it. It was way too anodyne for my liking. I like Rocket's sound (and immediacy) more. And there is no way in hell I'd swap my Uno Pro for my bandmate's Subsequent 37. f**king ladder filters, spare me days! I wouldn't even have swapped my original Uno for the S37. And that's ignoring the fact the S37 cost him four times more than Uno Pro cost me (and more like 8 times what you can get them for now). He's woken up to it, too, I can't remember the last time he used his S37 at all. We'll probably take it on stage next time we play, just because it looks so cool, but it will be all for show.

These were just a few of the monosynths that feature a display and patch storage. It we eliminate these constraints we have:
...
This is far from an exhaustive list. But many, if not most, of these synths sound better than the Uno Synth Pro. They are also often easier to use due to their more faithful and expansive knob/slider layout.

The more knobs/sliders, the more shit that's never in the right spot when you go to adjust it. Absolutely useless on stage. It's got to be endless rotary encoders or nothing.

So it's not a "battle" between the Uno Synth Pro and the entire plugin world. There are other VCO monos that can crush the best VST monosynths.

No, there aren't. None of them are worth what they cost, even Uno Synth Pro, and we'd never even contemplate using any of them in production. They simply don't stack up to even cheap VSTi. e.g. Uno Synth Pro can sound ever so slightly bigger than GForce's SEM but, like every synth in each of your lists, it is absolutely crushed by bx_oberhausen with it's 32 voice unison capability. Then there are stupidly cheap VSTi that can also outperform anything in your lists. At the moment you can pick up Soundspot's Union for $20 and it is just about the hugest sounding synth in all of creation. I'd' take that over anything in your list, every day of the week.

Yes, I know you specifically said "VST monosynths" but that's kind of my point - you have to have very, very narrow criteria in order for hardware to make any kind of sense at all and thos ekinds of distinction in the VST world are pointless and meaningless. If someone makes a VSTi monosynth, they are doing it for stupid reasons, because it doesn't cost a penny more to make a polysynth. That's why bx_oberhausen will always beat SEM and OB-E and it's why software synths will always be better than hardware in every way.

You've made one embarrassingly uninformed statement after another. You really should learn when to stop.

Why isn't it enough that the Uno Pro is a surprisingly good sounding three oscillator VCO mono synth?



Of course, the Uno Pro doesn't outshine any of the synths I listed. But that's okay. At $300, the Uno Pro is a great sounding monosynth.

[Big Mouth Strikes Again]

Sorry, not even close. I had a Pulse 2 but I got rid of it. It was way too anodyne for my liking. I like Rocket's sound (and immediacy) more. And there is no way in hell I'd swap my Uno Pro for my bandmate's Subsequent 37. f**king ladder filters, spare me days! I wouldn't even have swapped my original Uno for the S37. And that's ignoring the fact the S37 cost him four times more than Uno Pro cost me (and more like 8 times what you can get them for now). He's woken up to it, too, I can't remember the last time he used his S37 at all. We'll probably take it on stage next time we play, just because it looks so cool, but it will be all for show.

Are you really unfavorably comparing a Moog Subsequent 37 to an IK Uno Synth Pro? Those two synths are not even in the same sonic universe. What did I say about making embarrassingly uninformed statements? Well, you just made a few more. Time to stop.

The more knobs/sliders, the more shit that's never in the right spot when you go to adjust it. Absolutely useless on stage. It's got to be endless rotary encoders or nothing.

Seriously? That's how you want to play it? If so, you might be a hopeless case.

None of them are worth what they cost, even Uno Synth Pro, and we'd never even contemplate using any of them in production. They simply don't stack up to even cheap VSTi. e.g. Uno Synth Pro can sound ever so slightly bigger than GForce's SEM but, like every synth in each of your lists, it is absolutely crushed by bx_oberhausen with it's 32 voice unison capability. Then there are stupidly cheap VSTi that can also outperform anything in your lists. At the moment you can pick up Soundspot's Union for $20 and it is just about the hugest sounding synth in all of creation. I'd' take that over anything in your list, every day of the week.

Take a listen to Studio Electronics Midimini V30 and tell me with a straight face that it doesn't utterly crush every mono softsynth on the market.

[BONES]

Of course, the Uno Pro doesn't outshine any of the synths I listed. But that's okay.

Yes it does. It's $300. You can't take price out of the equation, it's just about most people's biggest concern when deciding what to buy. And Uno Pro is definitely better than Pulse 2. No question. I've owned both, there's no contest. Pulse 2 sounds OK but it's not great. Mostly I used it in 8 n voice unison mode to try and make it sound as big as my softsynths and, when you do that, you lose a lot of functionality. Ditto with Subsequent 37, which only has two oscillators and an LP filter, and the worst possible one at that. It's not half as versatile and you're stuck with that shitful filter. Multidrive is a nice feature but it doesn't come close to making up for all the things it does comparatively poorly. I haven't tried but I'd be interested to see how Sub37 goes against Uno Pro in duophonic/paraphonic mode. Uno Pro sound surprisingly good in paraphonic mode but S37 has the sub-oscillator, which might give it an edge.

If you go through your lists, you might find all the features Uno Synth Pro has but you won't find any one synth with all of them. Of course, that wouldn't mean much if it didn't sound good but, like the original, it sounds really good over a wide range of timbres.

Are you really unfavorably comparing a Moog Subsequent 37 to an IK Uno Synth Pro? Those two synths are not even in the same sonic universe.

You're right, the Subsequent 37 is far less capable and only sounds good over a comparatively narrow range of timbres, thanks to its shitful filter. And you know the filter is shitful because Moog have put so much effort into trying to hide the fact by giving you lots of slopes to choose from and adding Multidrive as a (pretty decent) distraction from its inescapable limitations.

Seriously? That's how you want to play it? If so, you might be a hopeless case.

Are you telling me it's not an issue? It's the main reason I got rid of my Korg Minilogue. I thought it would be great having knob-per-function but it turned out to be a right royal PITA. But so many hardware synths I've owned used a matrix style editor like the Uno Pro that to me it's every bit as quick and easy. In fact the way it's implemented in both the Unos makes it even quicker than I am used to. e.g. It's a lot more fluid to work with than my Analog Keys.

Take a listen to Studio Electronics Midimini V30 and tell me with a straight face that it doesn't utterly crush every mono softsynth on the market.

I doubt I'd be able to find one and I have learned not to put much faith into what I hear in YT videos. But, again, it's only got one filter and it's only LP. I'm also assuming it has no on-board effects so you'd be paying 10 times as much for a less well featured instrument. It might sound 1.1 x better than Uno Pro but there is no way it is going to sound 10 times better, so how stupid would you have to be to pay that much for it?

[zerocrossing]

Isn’t it clear that this post is from the poster to the poster as a way of convincing himself that he’s made the right choice when he’s unsure? He wants you to counter him so he’s got a chance to dig in even deeper. You’d have better luck converting the Mormons at your door to atheism.

[ghettosynth]

The more knobs/sliders, the more shit that's never in the right spot when you go to adjust it. Absolutely useless on stage. It's got to be endless rotary encoders or nothing.

Seriously? That's how you want to play it? If so, you might be a hopeless case.

Oh, cmon now. If you're relying on presets live then how the knobs pick up is important. I'm not going to agree with everything that Bones says here, but, I've been there. I have a recording of me using an MKS-50 with a PG-300 and I grabbed the filter cutoff which was not in the right place after loading a new preset and out came a hopeless blatt of sound instead of the nice introductory filter sweep that I was expecting. Yes this was back when MKS-50s were $100, I learned my lesson. Fortunately, the audience thought it was intentional and cheered. It was exciting I suppose, if not smooth.

Later when I played in a couple of pop/rock bands, I felt the same way as Bones, that any knob adjustment on synths where presets are going to be loaded during a song, needed to have rotary encoders to avoid the problem. If a synth doesn't have presets then it's not a problem.

Later, I switched do a DJ style cueing approach so that this was less of a problem, but that requires more gear and doesn't always work well in a band setting, especially if you are playing a synth live and switching presets mid song.

[machinesworking]

Posts stating a synth is great to somebody don’t need arguing or debate. It’s a personal opinion, it’s a lot different than something like “This soft synth sounds just like the original SEM!”

I don’t mind when super opinionated people tell me what synths they love, personally I had never paid much attention to the Uno Pro and now I’m going to.

[BONES]

Take a listen to Studio Electronics Midimini V30 and tell me with a straight face that it doesn't utterly crush every mono softsynth on the market.

There are a couple of nice sounds in there and it's got tonnes of aggro in the sound but there's no way I can hear Au$6,000 worth in it. That price is a f**king joke! On Thomann it is Au5,899 plus delivery, for a f**king mono synth that doesn't even have ADSR envelopes. Who woudl be stupid enough to pay that much money for so little synth?

[Big Mouth Strikes Again]

Oh, cmon now. If you're relying on presets live then how the knobs pick up is important. I'm not going to agree with everything that Bones says here, but, I've been there. I have a recording of me using an MKS-50 with a PG-300 and I grabbed the filter cutoff which was not in the right place after loading a new preset and out came a hopeless blatt of sound instead of the nice introductory filter sweep that I was expecting. Yes this was back when MKS-50s were $100, I learned my lesson. Fortunately, the audience thought it was intentional and cheered. It was exciting I suppose, if not smooth.

Later when I played in a couple of pop/rock bands, I felt the same way as Bones, that any knob adjustment on synths where presets are going to be loaded during a song, needed to have rotary encoders to avoid the problem. If a synth doesn't have presets then it's not a problem.

You're preaching to the choir here. I think almost every synth would benefit from encoders rather than pots. And I don't mean a "Matrix" interface like that on the Pulse 2 or the Blofeld with just 4 or 5 encoders. I mean a full compliment of encoder knobs for all the primary functions of the synth. Something like the Waldorf II XT or, even better, the Nord Lead 3 with its lighted encoder rings springs to mind.

FYI, the original versions of the Dave Smith Mono Evolver Keyboard and Prophet '08 used encoders rather than pots. But so many people complained that Dave quickly released pots editions.

So there are obviously many, many people who prefer pots to encoders. It's not a mystery why the vast majority of synths use pots. Synth manufacturers are simply giving people what they want.

[Big Mouth Strikes Again]

Take a listen to Studio Electronics Midimini V30 and tell me with a straight face that it doesn't utterly crush every mono softsynth on the market.

There are a couple of nice sounds in there and it's got tonnes of aggro in the sound but there's no way I can hear Au$6,000 worth in it. That price is a f**king joke! On Thomann it is Au5,899 plus delivery, for a f**king mono synth that doesn't even have ADSR envelopes. Who woudl be stupid enough to pay that much money for so little synth?

I don't mind the absence of ADSR envelopes so much. That's how the envelopes work on the Minimoog. The MIDImini V30 is simply a modern recreation of the Minimoog including its 3-stage envelopes.

My problem with the MIIDImini V30 is the lack of a display for naming patches and adjusting global settings. My other "dealbreaker issue" with the MIDImini V30 is it's inability to store patches.

If the MIDImini V30 had these features, I think it would be worth every penny of its $3,000 asking price. Also, the Moog Minimoog Model D reissue costs $5,000. Moog can hardly keep them on the shelves because they are selling so fast. You may not want to accept this, but some people are willing to pay a premium for a premium synth. We're not the target market for the Model D. But at least I can appreciate the the premium build quality and superior sound.

Anyway, given that the MIDImini V30 doesn't have a display and can't store patches, the Studio Electronics SE-3X is a better choice for me. It still sounds fantastic. It's a little more affordable. And I love the fact that it's rack mountable.

[BONES]

Isn’t it clear that this post is from the poster to the poster as a way of convincing himself that he’s made the right choice when he’s unsure? He wants you to counter him so he’s got a chance to dig in even deeper. You’d have better luck converting the Mormons at your door to atheism.

Why would he care? If he's happy with his choice, that would be all that would matter to him, surely? That said, he's trotted out a couple of lists of synths to try and make his point, synths he's probably never owned, so maybe he is as sad as you're suggesting. I'm sure you can sympathise with him.

Oh, cmon now. If you're relying on presets live then how the knobs pick up is important.

Unless you want to interact with the knobs, like manually sweep the cutoff, which is why you'd actually want knob per function in the first place, surely?

I have a recording of me using an MKS-50 with a PG-300 and I grabbed the filter cutoff which was not in the right place after loading a new preset and out came a hopeless blatt of sound instead of the nice introductory filter sweep that I was expecting.

See, perfect illustration.

If a synth doesn't have presets then it's not a problem.

More accurately, that's a much bigger problem. I manage with Rocket, because it only has a dozen or so parameters and all the magic happens with just two or three of the controls, but on anything more complex it's basically untenable on stage.

So there are obviously many, many people who prefer pots to encoders. It's not a mystery why the vast majority of synths use pots.

No, it's because there are way too many fucktards who can't abide anything that's different from what they expect. Rotary encoders are far too digital, don't you know!?! They completely ruin the sound. Plus, of course, pots are probably a lot cheaper, which keep prices down. Uno Pro only has one, the others are all pots.

I don't mind the absence of ADSR envelops so much. That's how the envelops work on the Minimoog. The MIDImini V30 is simply a modern recreation of the Minimoog including its 3-stage envelops.

See, that's exactly the attitude that keeps us all in the Dark Ages. So f**king what if the MiniMoog didn't have ADSR? Why recreate it and not make it better?

[Big Mouth Strikes Again]

Isn’t it clear that this post is from the poster to the poster as a way of convincing himself that he’s made the right choice when he’s unsure? He wants you to counter him so he’s got a chance to dig in even deeper. You’d have better luck converting the Mormons at your door to atheism.

Is this directed at me? Because your post is completely nonsensical. If you have something to say to me, then just say it.

Your psycho babble bullshit says more about your need to sound "intelligent" (although you fail miserably). Instead of boring us to death, go join a Mensa club whose members might actually give a shit. Because you sound like a clown in these forms.

[Big Mouth Strikes Again]

See, that's exactly the attitude that keeps us all in the Dark Ages. So f**king what if the MiniMoog didn't have ADSR? Why recreate it and not make it better?

If you actually thought about this, you would be advocating for ADSTR envelopes that include an additional "Fall/Rise" time after the Sustain segment. Such envelopes, as found on the Access Virus and a number of u-he soft synths, offer much more flexibility and sound design possibilities.

But regarding the 3 stage envelopes on the Minimoog, the most popular Nord Lead by far is the A1 which, you guessed it, features Minimoog style envelopes. For reasons I can't fathom, users seem to love them.

[Big Mouth Strikes Again]

Isn’t it clear that this post is from the poster to the poster as a way of convincing himself that he’s made the right choice when he’s unsure? He wants you to counter him so he’s got a chance to dig in even deeper. You’d have better luck converting the Mormons at your door to atheism.

Why would he care? If he's happy with his choice, that would be all that would matter to him, surely? That said, he's trotted out a couple of lists of synths to try and make his point, synths he's probably never owned, so maybe he is as sad as you're suggesting. I'm sure you can sympathise with him.

Sad? That actually made me laugh.

Your jealously is there for all to see. I worked very hard for years to buy all the synths I own. That concept must be lost on you if you think I don''t own the synths I listed. If I was trying to impress KVR members, I would list synths like the 16-voice Moog One, the Sequential OB-X8, the Waldorf Quantum mk2, and the Groove Synthesis 3rd Wave. While I would love to own every one of these synths, I don't have enough room for that many keyboards.

[Big Mouth Strikes Again]

So there are obviously many, many people who prefer pots to encoders. It's not a mystery why the vast majority of synths use pots.

No, it's because there are way too many fucktards who can't abide anything that's different from what they expect. Rotary encoders are far too digital, don't you know!?! They completely ruin the sound. Plus, of course, pots are probably a lot cheaper, which keep prices down. Uno Pro only has one, the others are all pots.

Hahaha. I'm completely sympathetic to your point of view. Pots ARE stupid for the most part. It's a mystery to me why so few keyboard players recognize the advantages of encoders.

I think synth manufacturers are just too cheap to use encoders. The encoders need to be of sufficient quality that they don't fail or start to wobble and skip values. And synth manufacturers need to implement a finely tuned accelerometer so you don't have to spin the encoder forever to reach distant values. This software just adds to the cost. And finally, encoders are simply more expensive than pots.

[zerocrossing]

Posts stating a synth is great to somebody don’t need arguing or debate. It’s a personal opinion, it’s a lot different than something like “This soft synth sounds just like the original SEM!”

So true. It’s super tedious when threads get filled with that kind of b.s, but the usual perps are easily put on ignore. I don’t care that people like or hate something, but when people start cutting down other people’s choices as “crap,” it’s just stupid posturing, and mostly people talking to themselves.

I don’t mind when super opinionated people tell me what synths they love, personally I had never paid much attention to the Uno Pro and now I’m going to.

The first Uno had a bunch of bad demos made for it by IK. I have no idea how they managed to get posted the way they did, but they legitimately sucked. I can’t quite remember, but there was some odd noise, like digital artifacts or something. Terrible. I’m good with the analog monos that I have, so I just sort of forgot about the Uno and didn’t even look at the Uno Pro, but since then, I’ve heard some great sounding demo tracks made with it.

The truth is, most stuff these days is good to great. In the past, low end stuff really meant low end quality, sonic and otherwise. I tend to lean towards higher end gear, but that’s more because I’m looking for specific features that are often missing from less expensive gear. That can go in the other direction too, as sometimes hardware can’t easily do what’s required. I just replaced my Dominion 1 in a track with Model 72 because I needed a degree of automation that is just way easier to do with a plugin. Makes me wish the Dominion 1 had a plugin editor. I’d probably use it a lot more if it did.