Oberheim OB-X vs. OP-X PRO-II

[hakey]

The real OB in each case: 2,2,2,1,1,1,1,2,2

They all sound very close indeed.

There's a give away, but it's not exactly a deficiency in the emulation...

[olikana]

why these comparisons are always with slow modulated sweeps and pads and never with snappy or punchy sounds. that's how vst developers have been getting away with comparisons since 12 year to not unearth filter feedback lag.
compare a ressy bass, a filter zap, a self osc kick drum and 1/32 modulation...
then it may be a worthy comparison.

[braj]

Actually what I think would be the best demo would be to have the same basic song, including a bass, chord and melody track to be rendered with the hardware and software and then see what we think it the real vs the vst.

[Peter999]

why these comparisons are always with slow modulated sweeps and pads and never with snappy or punchy sounds. that's how vst developers have been getting away with comparisons since 12 year to not unearth filter feedback lag.
compare a ressy bass, a filter zap, a self osc kick drum and 1/32 modulation...
then it may be a worthy comparison.

OP-X PRO-II would win for these types of sounds since the old 1979 OB-X isn't the snappiest synth around - it's definitely a sweep and pad machine. But maybe I can post some of this stuff, let me see...

Actually what I think would be the best demo would be to have the same basic song, including a bass, chord and melody track to be rendered with the hardware and software and then see what we think it the real vs the vst.

Good idea, I keep it in mind for the next time

[opus_diaboli]

My guess:

The original Oberheim is:

Brass: #2
Sweep1: #2
Sweep2: #2
PmPad1: #2
PmPad2: #1
Strings: #1
BrightStrings1: #1
Brightstrings2: #1
SyncSolo: #2

[Viktor [TUC]]

I'd say it gets progressively difficult to hear the details, the more sounds play at the same time, so I'd vote against a whole demo song to tell the difference. Could be interesting to hear, of course, but as a comparison of the qualities, can't imagine it to be much use really. For me as a keyboard player, the sound of a single note counts the most.

[Examigan]

Thanks for your votes

Let's say, the best one gets a free OP-X PRO-II (also can be used stand alone on intel Macs), if you own it already a Stringer license.

What if I already have both?

[Peter999]

Hmm... maybe a future product?

Any more votes? There are 7 so far.

[Examigan]

For the real OB, I say

2
2
2
1
1
1
1
2
2

[braj]

I'd say it gets progressively difficult to hear the details, the more sounds play at the same time, so I'd vote against a whole demo song to tell the difference. Could be interesting to hear, of course, but as a comparison of the qualities, can't imagine it to be much use really. For me as a keyboard player, the sound of a single note counts the most.

I disagree. An isolated note may sound perfect, but how do the notes sound in real life? A sampled piano key strong can sound exactly like a recorded piano because it is, but it doesn't sound the same as a real piano when played. So the differences would become more apparent the more the sounds interact with eachother and you may hear the nuances of the synthesis more when you actually hear more.

[hakey]

A sampled piano key strong can sound exactly like a recorded piano because it is, but it doesn't sound the same as a real piano when played.

That's down to the sympathetic resonance between hammered notes and any undamped strings. There's no equivalent effect with synths.

[braj]

A sampled piano key strong can sound exactly like a recorded piano because it is, but it doesn't sound the same as a real piano when played.

That's down to the sympathetic resonance between hammered notes and any undamped strings. There's no equivalent effect with synths.

But the overall character may be heard more when more is played. The two example sounds each sound nearly identical, but how close would a sequenced song sound? That's what I'm getting at.

[Viktor [TUC]]

An isolated note may sound perfect, but how do the notes sound in real life?

Yes, I actually meant not just a single note, but also a single sound being played. One riff, one melody line, etc. Some subtleties get lost with fast playing too, so you gotta have it all in there, all the varieties of playing. But if it's buried under 10 other sounds, I wouldn't be able to tell anymore. Software "breaks" easier when you reach the boundaries. What part of the sound, would you say, gets more obvious if you pile on many different tracks of sounds? Believe me, it's all fine if you can really tell better in a whole song, I just wouldn't be, and I also can't think of a reason it would get easier in a whole arrangement.

[Viktor [TUC]]

I have to stop going off topic so much.

[braj]

Yeah that's why I say three tracks only, no drums, and no other tweaks to the midi. Not to bury anything, and this doesn't mea don't have individual tones like what is in this thread. I'd just be personally interested to hear some simple sequence with both, seems a more real world test of the emulation to me. I think any differences would be more apparent in that scenario.