Synth shoot-out real Jupiter 8 vs soft Jupiter 8V

[jonnypowell]

I just downloaded the demo of the JP8V and was quite impressed by it's sound.. I own the real deal and LUUURVE it!
I recorded the default patch on both instruments and copied the exact settings between the two.

Here is the link to the files marked A & B.
Let me know what you think's the soft and what's the real deal..


Edit: I screwed up with the recording. Logic was doing something weird... This one is 100% right and the levels and settings are matched EXACTLY!!!

Send big files the easy way. Files too large for email attachments? No problem!

[sctt_stone]

I think B is the real deal and A is the soft synth. The two sound really different in that B has a lot higher resonance dialed in.

[jonnypowell]

Originally Posted by sctt_stone

I think B is the real deal and A is the soft synth. The two sound really different in that B has a lot higher resonance dialed in.

Not gonna say yet, but I don't know what you are talking about re sounding really different. They sound VERY similar IMO.
There is 0 resonance on either, so you are wrong there. The filter is completely open as well.

[Jazzpunk]

'Test A' has more bass and it also sounds like the filter is closed off more than 'Test B'.

Anyway to get another version of 'Test A' with the filter opened to sonically match that of 'Test B'?

[Jazzpunk]

Originally Posted by jonnypowell

They sound VERY similar IMO.
There is 0 resonance on either, so you are wrong there. The filter is completely open as well.

Really?! 'Test A' is quite a bit darker while 'Test B' sounds alot brighter with less bass response.

As both examples have the filter wide open, it definitely shows that Arturia didn't nail the filter!

(Fun test by the way! )

[jonnypowell]

I do agree that A is a bit darker, but overall I don't think there is a huge difference between the 2. I'm sure that in a mix it would be even harder to pick..

[jonnypowell]

OK, I'm really sorry but this is FKD-up.
For some reason the bounced wav's sound completely different to how they did in Logic. Something screwed-up along the way..
These sound totally different!! I was wondering what you were al talking about!!

Let me bounce them again...

[Jazzpunk]

Originally Posted by jonnypowell

OK, I'm really sorry but this is FKD-up.
For some reason the bounced wav's sound completely different to how they did in Logic. Something screwed-up along the way..
These sound totally different!! I was wondering what you were al talking about!!

Let me bounce them again...

Man, that's a relief. I was thinking you had some serious hearing damage from your DJ gigs!

[jonnypowell]

OK, I've done it properly now.. Please download and let me know what y'all think!

Jonny

[jonnypowell]

Yeah the difference is pretty clear between these 2.. B is a LOT more open and much brighter. A is stronger in the mids and much darker.

Which one is the soft though???

[JDN]

Originally Posted by jonnypowell

Yeah the difference is pretty clear between these 2.. B is a LOT more open and much brighter. A is stronger in the mids and much darker.

Which one is the soft though???

It's hard too tell which is which, cause frankly they're a lot more different than I expected...I wouldn't say one is better or worse, just different....to my ears, definitely sounds like resonance on Test B....I'm thinking B might be real deal, as the voices sound a little more out of tune and interesting, as to be expected by analog, while b feals a little more consistant and sterile....but i'm totally willing to admit I could be totally wrong as to which is which, cause again, they sound pretty different

[Carey M]

Sample A (7.7MB) is double the size of the Sample B (3.84MB), yet both are 30 seconds in duration Sample A sounds more pleasing to me... less detune, darker filter... But what's with the file sizes?

- CM

[jonnypowell]

mono & stereo... there is nothing gone on in the stereo field though.
I think that just gave it away...

[Don Solaris]

Maybe a little bit offtopic but regarding this test....

IMHO with fully open filter, no detune and playing fast chords, i can think of at least 10 synths that sound just the same. What first comes in mind are Juno 60 and JX-3P. In fact, if you titled this thread "My JX-3P demo" no one would even notice this is actually a Jupiter. However, once the real JP-8 gets tweaked, detuned, add filter, PWM, it soon becomes evident that is no longer JX-3P what is being played.

Still thank you for taking your time and doing tests. When i get that Arturia plug i will try to do the same.

Just my 0.1 cents.

[jonnypowell]

Originally Posted by Don Solaris

Maybe a little bit offtopic but regarding this test....

IMHO with fully open filter, no detune and playing fast chords, i can think of at least 10 synths that sound just the same. What first comes in mind are Juno 60 and JX-3P. In fact, if you titled this thread "My JX-3P demo" no one would even notice this is actually a Jupiter. However, once the real JP-8 gets tweaked, detuned, add filter, PWM, it soon becomes evident that is no longer JX-3P what is being played.

Still thank you for taking your time and doing tests. When i get that Arturia plug i will try to do the same.

Just my 0.1 cents.

Sorry, but I have to disagree.. Although I think it is a god idea to test several patches (which I will) The Juno 60 doesn't sound like that.. I had one for several years, and it is nowhere near as thick IMO.

Anywayz, I'm gonna do a bass patch and a complex pad type sound. I have a feeling the bass will be the one that really sets them apart..None of the other arturia synths excel in that area.

[Don Solaris]

Originally Posted by jonnypowell

Sorry, but I have to disagree.. Although I think it is a god idea to test several patches (which I will) The Juno 60 doesn't sound like that.. I had one for several years, and it is nowhere near as thick IMO.

Yeah I agree. I dunno why i put Juno 60 there. I was thinking one thing and writing another. Still, if you give me a screenshot of settings you used in Arturia, i'm 99% sure i can get exactly the same sound on my AN1-x. With open filter and no modulations, i find things to be quite simple to be emulated.

[Dirty Halo]

I like "Test A" more and sounds like the real Juipter 8 to me.

Very curious to find out the results!

Thanks for the test


-andrews

[Dirty Halo]

So, is B the virual and that's why it sounds stereo? or what is it that I am hearing that sounds wider?

Humble enough to ask if I'm wrong on my previous post's guess.
("A" just sounds more organic to me and I like the sound of it)

You GOTTA tell us NOW!!!!

-andrews

[living sounds]

B obviously is the real deal. They sound very different. And i agree, it would be much better to actually hear the filter work.

[Dirty Halo]

Originally Posted by living sounds

B obviously is the real deal. They sound very different. And i agree, it would be much better to actually hear the filter work.

Curious why B is "obviously" the real deal. Maybe you're right, but you don't say why it is so obvious.

-a

[Strobian]

I can't listen to the files at work here, but I will say that I had a Jupiter 8 for some time and when I got the plug in demo I was laughing at how bad it sounded as a clone. It sounds cool and does some Jupiter like things, but especially the filter, it is not close to me. You may be able to program some average bass parts and things with a Rolandish sound, but I felt they were not close. Its a cool plug in on its own , but didn't remind me of a Jupiter 8. .02

[sctt_stone]

I also think it is obvious. There is a certain pissed off sound about B, sounds kinda iritic, frantic if you will. Also The soft synth "A" is more in your face as if it is compressed, all the dynamic is squashed out of the frequency range, its to perfect sounding to be real. Also the Real Jupiter 8 has a sort of metallic thing going on just like my P5, that was the first thing that gave it away for me. I would love to hear someone do this test again after running the soft synth through some external gear like analogue filters.wis

Originally Posted by Dirty Halo

Curious why B is "obviously" the real deal. Maybe you're right, but you don't say why it is so obvious.

-a

[Lessli]

I think A sounds quite 'vintage' (darker and rounder), though not necessarily analog. But personally I prefer the richness in B. Dunno why stereo/mono is a giveaway though. Does Jupiter 8 have only mono output?

And yeah, I'm now hoping B is the plug so I might grab one when I'm making my next purchase~!

I guess, Test A is the real thing... only based on my experience with the Prophet V, where there was something going in the stereo field. Test B is wider which leads me to think that it is the plug-in.

I have not yet laid my hands on the Jupiter 8V but have played with the real thing once.

[Rufuss Sewell]

B sounds more like a real analog simply because it's out of tune while A sounds perfectly in tune.

So that's what I'll guess.

[kingofswing]

Listening on my crappy TFT 1-watt speakers...

A = JP8 SW (has a more static sound)
B = JP8 HW (filter sound is more real)

Though B still sounds a little thinner / airy to me.

[SWAN808]

I agree with Don Solaris on this in that filters open doesnt really test the emulation too hard...

However I think I know which is which partially by one of the comments alluded to the truth above...if I hadnt know the truth I might well have picked the opposite...

[crufty]

I like B better. It sounds old, beat up, tired, worn out, but still going strong. A sounds like there is a sine whine going thru it about half way thru, which makes it a little brasher. B doesn't have that whine. The bass on A towards the last quarter is very pronounced, in B it is more subdued. I'm no JP8 expert, but I'm thinking B is the HW version. Listening on my headphones via duet there is a very obvious delta. Great test btw! Very nice, thanks for posting it.

[keybdwizrd]

I think this points to why so many composers and keyboardists are going with softsynths, especially when it comes to vintage emulations.

Certainly, many people prefer the tactile experience associated with playing hardware synths. Personally, a piece of software that looks like a Jupiter 8 is not the same as sitting in front of a real Jupiter 8 and playing it.

That being said, 99.9% of the listening public can't tell the difference between these emulations and the real deal.

I think people should buy vintage synths for the personal pleasure associated with owning one, and if they believe that perhaps they'll be inspired as a result.

Many pianists will say that a Steinway sounds "better" than a Yamaha. But does it sound three times better, as a Steinway can be triple the price of a comparable Yamaha?

Thanks for the demo.

[jonnypowell]

Originally Posted by sctt_stone

I also think it is obvious. There is a certain pissed off sound about B, sounds kinda iritic, frantic if you will. Also The soft synth "A" is more in your face as if it is compressed, all the dynamic is squashed out of the frequency range, its to perfect sounding to be real. Also the Real Jupiter 8 has a sort of metallic thing going on just like my P5, that was the first thing that gave it away for me. I would love to hear someone do this test again after running the soft synth through some external gear like analogue filters.wis

Bang on the money dude...

A is the soft-synth, B is the real deal!!

I think what you said here about the dynamic of the frequency range sounding compressed is spot on. I was saying that too my friend the other day. These emulations sound great but there is something lacking in the freq spectrum when you here them on their own.

Next up I'll do bass and a pad patch that really utilizes the JP-8's filter.
If anyone else has a Real and Soft version of a classic synth I'd love to hear some similar shootouts!
In particular the Arp 2600 and Prophet 5. I used to own one, but sold it awhile back. Wish I didn't now.. Never heard the Arturia Prophet V though.