Thoughts on Cherry Audio's analog emulations

[edwina]

I’m curious where Cherry Audio stands in terms of CPU efficiency, analog modeling accuracy, and mix integration.

Any plugins you’d recommend (or avoid) from their lineup?

Appreciate any thoughts or tips

[planetearth]

Some of their emulations of synths with complicated routing and/or voice architecture (such as the Rhodes Chroma, the Sequential Circuits Prophet 10, the Korg PS-3300, and others) can be CPU-intensive, especially with the early versions, and with oversampling set above 2X. But Cherry Audio is usually able to tame the CPU usage a bit in the first few revisions.

I can't speak to how accurate they are — and frankly, very few people can (despite what they may claim on KVR ). There simply weren't many that many Rhodes Chromas, Prophet-10s, PS-3300s and the like made, and there are even fewer around now to compare to the plug-ins. And the ones that are available now may or may not have sounded exactly like the one(s) Cherry Audio used, since no two analog synths sound exactly the same, especially not after 40 to 45 years.

For me, the Chroma, Prophet-10, and Elka Synthex emulations have been interesting to play and to learn how they worked. The CA emulations aren't necessarily 100% accurate in the features in some cases (Whose are?), so you don't always get the "real" experience of trying to get the sound you want. But to me, they've been more fun and interesting to use than the Dreamsynth (CA's own, original, "Ensoniq-inspired" creation, which is actually still pretty cool), or some of the older Roland or Oberheim emulations. But that's more a reflection of the relative "simplicity" of the original Jupiter-4 and Jupiter-6 or SEM designs, than of CA's emulations. As always, YMMV, of course.

And while the emulations may not always match the hardware options, CA's Rhodes Chroma can load SysEx data from the original Rhodes Chroma synths, which is pretty cool.

If you're looking to grab one or two CA synths, keep in mind that you can demo them all for 30 days. They have the white noise interruptions, but you can get an idea of which ones you might like. With their current system, if you demo a synth but decide you don't want it, you can't demo it again after 30 days, without contacting support for a "reset".

"Mix integration" really depends upon what you're using these synths for. I think they work well as leads, pads, basses, etc., but if you're referring to simply dropping the synth into a mix and not having to EQ or compress it much, that hasn't really been my experience. To me, the on-board effects they've included are sometimes a bit much, and I have to dial them back or replace them with something else. They sound good (or great) when auditioning presets, but they may be a bit overboard in a mix. But that's just a matter of personal taste, and may not be something you experience. Fortunately, most of their synths have a way to quickly disable or edit the effects, so this may not even be an issue for you.

Hope that helps!

Steve

[Dirk Diggler]

Big thumbs up for 8 voice and Lowdown. Only played on a real physical Oberheim 4 voice many times, and owned the original Taurus bass pedals.
So there are actually folks that have played the real hardware versions.
Both are spot on, absolutely rub that classic synth itch big time.
Oh and the free single Synthesizer Expander module is as legit.
As planetearth says, just try the demos.

[machinesworking]

Mixed bag, Cherry hires people at times so some emulations are fantastic like the Polivoks (Atomika) but others are awful like the Memorymoog one. I still own a working Memorymoog and nothing about the emulation is right, but Atomika is great.

[trusampler]

Whoever did Atomika and their P10 + Yellow Jacket should redo all of their earlier versions. Especially the Memorymoog. I’m sure Cherry Audio are aware of the differences in sound quality.
These 3 sound completely different and so much more satisfying than the others. I own the entire bundle. Their GS , and Sines are also pretty decent, but the 3 I mentioned are to date the best sounding imo, monitoring on great RME ADI PRO SE 2/4 converters and Dynaudio monitors.These are really close to the real deal. It’d be awesome if they revisited their Roland’s & ,Memorymoog ,etc.

[thedddkkk]

I like their GX-80 and Quadra. The Quadra because it was used on the Escape from New York soundtrack and I just love recreating them. Carpenter did a great job on that one. And I get this Cherry one the same vibe kind of sounds out of it without trying that hard, thats what I like about as i will never own the original haha.

And the GX-80 because nothing else out there that come close to the real deal. Maybe the Memorymoon, never tried it. But I have the Arturia, my girlfriend gave it for christmas few years ago. Im happy with them. But their effects on every of their synths I dont like. One preset is using it, the next doesnt but doesnt sound nice. Something is wrong with Arturia's one in my opinion. I think they use the same engine or whatever it's called on every synth of them and they use the effect sections to compensate for the failures. But with the GX-80 maybe its not 100% accurate as I have never been closed to a real cs-80, but when i just play around with the knobs i get instantly nice and different sounds. It really feels like an instrument. But with the Arturia it all sounds the same. I have this same issue with some full bucket instruments, many sound the same.

But im sure if I tried all Cherry's synths I maybe found out the same issue. So I used only a few from every different company.

I do love Arturia's Matrix-12. Its awesome. But maybe also there is no other emulation of it out there and the original is expensive.

But I will try their Atomika

[trusampler]

Actually the information that someone said here is wrong , and here is what Cherry audio says about why there’s a difference between their synths.

The same developers have made all of our synths. There have been various preset sound designers over the products, but somewhere in the middle of our timeline, a seasoned industry sound designer joined the team to manage presets for all of our products.
As far as DSP goes, the sound engine itself, for lack of better terms, remains the same. What is different isn't an issue per se, rather the outcome of almost 5 years of iteratively developing the available features — new effects algorithms, multi-layered instruments, motion sequencing, expanded modulation offerings. Also, our GUIs have become a whole new thing around the middle of our timeline as well, and believe it or not, that greatly affects people's sonic experience.

Will V2 releases be available for our older products, incorporating more of the offerings you see in recent releases? It's possible, but I can't say for certain. It is certainly something we have heard interest in and something we will consider