Gforce Oberheim OB-X

[andy-cytomic]

Might it be possible that things have advanced to where it's possible to have a smooth, lush sounding peaking filter.

Yes, if by smooth / lush you mean the opposite of the digital nasty early JV filters, then yes, definitely a lot smoother / lusher is possible as this is a really low bar to get over! But the JV 1080 has 64-voices and released in the 1994 and was affordable, so yeah, something has to give, and one of those things wast the sound quality of the filters - but it's still a classic device that defined an era that many people now have "Cultural PTSD" when listening to sounds from it:

[Frantz]

But the JV 1080 has 64-voices and released in the 1994 and was affordable, so yeah, something has to give, and one of those things wast the sound quality of the filters - but it's still a classic device that defined an era that many people now have "Cultural PTSD" when listening to sounds from it

Funny you should mention this. Just the other day I was thinking when I used my JV-2080 (which has 8 expansion slots compared to 4 in the JV-1080), I could quickly find a usable preset so I could focus on songwriting instead of flipping between VSTs searching for sounds. I realized I wanted the modern equivalent of a ROMpler specifically the JV's Vintage Synth Expansion Board. So I bought UVI's Synth Anthology 4 with 4,000 presets and my problems are solved. Tons of usable sounds for songwriting (some of which I will replace later in the production process).

And yes, the resonance on the JV series was terrible. I always left it at zero.

[Odd Fella]

It works with modulation - try modulating the cutoff with a short envelope, like you'd use on a bass patch, that's where you get (or don't get) the effect we're talking about. Think "funky".

You are not in a position to tell who is right and who isn't. Your opinion is just that, and no more valid any anyone else's.

Really? So a two year old child's opinion on ladder filters would be just as valid as yours or mine? My "opinion" is based on information that came straight from Dr Bob Moog's own mouth and you want to tell me it's not valid? You might also want to think about why GForce would put a second, non-ladder filter into MiniMonsta 2 if the ladder filter was as good as you seem to think it is? It's not something they thought Oddity or their Oberheims needed, so that's more evidence in favour of my argument.

Dune is all about the unison thingy.

You mean the factory patches you listened to tended to showcase that aspect of it. So what? You don't have to use it if you don't want to.

I think it is even in the name Dune.

Yes, it's short for Differential UNison Engine. The big point there is "Differential" because it allows each unison voice, at the patch level, to have different settings. When it was released, that was a fairly unique feature. But it has grown beyond that to be far more like layered patches in later versions.

And without it, it is just a normal, and in my opinion strikingly sterile, unappealing softsynth.

Here, again, we circle back to the value of your opinion. Because I never use the layers, they unnecessarily complicate things, yet I find DUNE capable of doing things no other synth in my arsenal can. It's quality from end to end.

Regarding the Minimoog filter, that is what the amp envelope is there for, to compensate for such changes.

So I have to set the amp envelope to the inverse of the filter envelope so it compensates properly? Seems like a big ol' waste of an envelope to me when there are hundreds of other synths I could use that don't have that problem, at least not to that degree.

And if you needed really low bass, why would you use a lot of resonance?!

For the same reason you'd use it anywhere. If you set the cutoff to 20Hz, then your resonance should enhance the signal at 20Hz, giving you more bass.

That's like deliberately removing the bottom so that you can complain about the lack of bottom.

No, it's trying to enhance the bottom end and finding out that all you are doing is getting rid of it. It's OK up to about 40% but, beyond that point, it starts to become troublesome.

And that whole "fat" talk with 32 stacked voices and what not. Really, if someone needs such exaggerated sounds to make music, their music is probably not worth much to begin with.

It's OK, most of us couldn't do that if we wanted to because bx_oberhausen would bring our computers to their knees in the attempt. But it's nice to know it's there if you really, really need it. I find 4 voices is usually the sweet spot for nice, fat strings patches with a bit of movement. Of course, you don't need it for basslines because you can use the filter resonance to push the bottom end up and get all those wonderful wet, squelchy bass sounds.

So, you ask why would I want something that sounds thin and weak and in the next sentence you confirm that the Minimoog had a big sound. Which is it?

It will depend entirely on your settings, won't it? I shouldn't have to explain that to you, surely? If you want that big oscillator sound, you need to be very careful with your resonance settings, which limits the sonic palette of the instrument quite a bit.

I have yet to hear high-resonance sounds that are actually musical.

I've yet to hear a patch made using only the Noise osc that sounds musical, so what? That's not what it's there for. People use synths for all manner of things you wouldn't classify as musical.

It is not difficult to make funky bass sounds with a ladder filter.

I have never heard a 2-year old talk about ladder filters. And anyone who uses synths and has an opinion on it, has their legitimate views...
Softsynth developers add stuff all the time that goes beyond the original they emulate. For instance 4-pole filters for Oberheims etc. Does that mean the 2-pole filter was inferior? No, it is just different and ads flexibility.

As I said, apart from the Unison and layer thingy, Dune didn't stand out in terms of sound in my view. It didn't wow me more than other synths!

Well, you have to use the amp envelope for something. Why not for achieving the sound you want?

What is the point of high resonance at 20Hz?! Most people don't even hear 20Hz and most speakers don't get near that, either. When you set your cutoff frequency to 20Hz, all you get is a very low, unpleasant rumble, that doesn't really have a character because the character of a bass sound (those "wonderful wet, squelchy bass sounds" you mentioned, which I hate) comes from mid frequencies, which you have cut away, though. So, you might as well use a sine and set resonance to zero. That is also less dangerous.

If a synth has a big sound and I were after a big sound, why would I care why it has a big sound? I.e. whether it is due to the oscillators or the filters or something else?

[onathanj]

Ok, only spent a few hours with the Ob-x but to me they nailed it. Its my all time favorite synth with the Ob6, and now my favorite soft synth with Diva and Repro. Just a sweet spot all over the place, but I don't really like most of the presets.

[Odd Fella]

My demo already expired...

[fisherKing]

My demo already expired...

then you're free! and you can buy the plugin... or delete it. congrats!

[Funkybot's Evil Twin]

I ended up coming into a few hundred bucks unexpectedly, so said screw it and bought this. I was impressed enough with the demo on my Mac (where I was careful not to leave the plugin open when not in use). It's a great sounding synth. They really need to sort out the low contrast white labels though. The labels are just as illegible on my Mac's display as they are on my PC so it's not like my monitor isn't just poorly calibrated.

There's no way for users to save Reverb presets right? No XML file I can add my own settings to or anything? That would definitely be a wishlist item for me. The reverb can sound good, but none of the few presets really do it for me.

[MrJubbly]

I ended up coming into a few hundred bucks unexpectedly, so said screw it and bought this. I was impressed enough with the demo on my Mac (where I was careful not to leave the plugin open when not in use). It's a great sounding synth.

So you're suggesting, that you might have come to the conclusion that the plugin was worth purchasing on your other device, if only the demo hadn't expired so quickly?

They really need to sort out the low contrast white labels though. I hear it was a somewhat last minute change anyway and prior betas looked better so hopefully they can just undo the change or find a better way to balance the colors better. The labels are just as illegible on my Mac's display as they are on my PC so it's not like my monitor isn't just poorly calibrated.

I have confidence that they will. If they were willing to relent on their decision to push the 'zoomed out' faux 3D skeuomorphism of SEM v1.6 in the subsequent v1.6.1 update, giving users the option for the previous 'zoomed in' (panel controls only) view. Then, I believe they will also find an acceptable solution to the label legibility issue for OB-X.

There's no way for users to save Reverb presets right? No XML file I can add my own settings to or anything? That would definitely be a wishlist item for me. The reverb can sound good, but none of the few presets really do it for me.

Not according to the manual ...

OB-X Reverb.png

...unless anyone knows otherwise?

[BONES]

It is not difficult to make funky bass sounds with a ladder filter.

It's a lot more difficult than it needs to be.

Softsynth developers add stuff all the time that goes beyond the original they emulate.

But only after they have filled it with all the shit from the original. OTOH, something like Tone 2's Saurus is freed from that restriction and is a much better synth for it. The need to slavishly emulate the original before you can improve on it holds many of these things back.

For instance 4-pole filters for Oberheims etc. Does that mean the 2-pole filter was inferior? No, it is just different and ads flexibility.

Actually, the OB-Xa and OB-8 had 2 or 4 pole options on their filters so that's why they put 'em into OB emulations.

Well, you have to use the amp envelope for something. Why not for achieving the sound you want?

Because I'd prefer to use it to create a bit of interplay with the filter, so I can choose to cut the sound off a bit earlier if that works better. Otherwise, you may as well only have one envelope.

What is the point of high resonance at 20Hz?!

Because if it's there are 20Hz, it's also there at 25Hz and 30Hz, all the way up to 20kHz. It's about creating a more holistic resonant sound for that "wet", squelchy effect, as opposed to the tendency of ladder filters to create a squeaky sound in the upper registers with a seemingly separate sound buried somewhere below it.

If a synth has a big sound and I were after a big sound, why would I care why it has a big sound? I.e. whether it is due to the oscillators or the filters or something else?

Imagine the possibilities with a synth that can create that big sound with either, or both at the same time! It's simply a better, more flexible set-up that broadens the sonic palette of the instrument and requires a lot less thought and effort to get the best from. Who wouldn't be interested in that? As onathanj said in the post after yours - you end up with "sweet spots all over the place".

[Bye Bye Love]

OTOH, something like Tone 2's Saurus is freed from that restriction and is a much better synth for it. The need to slavishly emulate the original before you can improve on it holds many of these things back.

I swear, if I see one more synth emulation with a lazy pop up or slide out "Advanced" panel for all the parameters that should have been better integrated into the main interface, my head is going to explode.

I just wish "analog" synth plugins could be their own thing and not simply mimic the archaic synth panels from the original 30 to 40 year old hardware synths in a cynical attempt to appeal to people's sense of nostalgia.

Tone2's Saurus, Steinberg's Retrologue 2, and Native Instruments' Super 8 are just a few synth plugins that take some of their design cues from classic hardware synths but don't try to mimic them 1:1. They're so much better for it, IMO.

[BONES]

I don't think it is a cynical attempt, it is because that's what users want. Invader 2 is another that sort of feels familiar but is entirely its own thing and, as you say, is better for it.

[Bye Bye Love]

I don't think it is a cynical attempt, it is because that's what users want.

Oh, I totally agree that's what users seem to want. I think I read somewhere that u-he's Repro has outsold all of their other synth plugins combined. (Or maybe Repro is "just" u-he's best selling synth plugin.)

And Repro isn't even a 1:1 emulation of a Prophet 5 synth panel and includes some really colorful effects unlike Softube's Model 80 which is bone dry. (How is this possible when Softube are known for their great sounding FX plugins?)

But don't you think users are often fooling themselves? Just because a synth plugins looks like a 30 to 40 year old classic hardware synth doesn't mean that it sounds like that synth. That's where I think the cynicism comes into play. Roland, for instance, keeps rehashing its revered synth brands and then fails to deliver on their most important quality, the sound. It all smacks of a cash grab to me, like a Fleetwood Mac revival tour.

At least GForce synth plugin emulations sound impressively close to the original hardware synths.

[Uncle E]

If only Roland would release an MKS-80 emulation...

[Igro]

Because Gforce is having a sale, what be more appropriate for nice silky pads, Oddity3 or OB-X?

[Uncle E]

OB-X is the better one for silky pads.