The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 All  This Thread  Reviews  Gear Database  Synths for sale     Latest  Trending
The UB-Xa Synthesizer
Old 2 weeks ago
  #6301
Gear Nut
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reptil View Post
< Guys, I'm putting a stop to this discussion. It may veer off into political issues any moment now. Get back on topic please. Any next OT post will be deleted. >
Back to topic:

Old 2 weeks ago
  #6302
Lives for gear
 
daviddever's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by puta_locura View Post
not a problem for Korg,Roland,Behringer...

Novation,Elektron,Clavia,Arturia should be fine...

big problem for american synth makers.

Uncle D Smith and Moog can become victims as
they continue to assemble all their stuff in USA.
Not sure that makes any sense, but putdowns of American synth manufacturers on a Behringer thread are on fleek.

The reality is quite different; tariffs are one thing but there are enough holes that the situation is not really that much of an issue, at all.

Same goes for consumer electronics in general, if you're smart.
Old 2 weeks ago
  #6303
Here for the gear
 
Synth geek's Avatar
Hey Uli! Could you give us an update on the UB-Xa?
Old 2 weeks ago
  #6304
Gear Maniac
Quote:
Originally Posted by daviddever View Post
Not sure that makes any sense, but putdowns of American synth manufacturers on a Behringer thread are on fleek.

The reality is quite different; tariffs are one thing but there are enough holes that the situation is not really that much of an issue, at all.

Same goes for consumer electronics in general, if you're smart.
I don't know if Dave Smith has his synths made in America anymore. I have read some complaints about the OB6, but I don't know how many returns they get for synth failure.

Personally, I would look at a company's track record of Service after the sales as an indication of their warranty service and support.


Mike T.
Old 2 weeks ago
  #6305
Here for the gear
I have a nearly 40 year old oberheim obsx, best poly they made inmho, just a shame they made it a preset synth with limited editing, thanks to rolf meurer his midi convertor unleashes the beast. Anyway back to the point, even after 40 years its still only minor repairs needed, they really got their stuff right with these things years ago, that old bucket brigade technology is pretty sturdy.
Old 2 weeks ago
  #6306
Gear Nut
 
puta_locura's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by daviddever View Post
Not sure that makes any sense, but putdowns of American synth manufacturers on a Behringer thread are on fleek.
.
I ain't puttin' nobody down...I only say that tariffs can hit american manufacturers first of all, stating which is obvious as problematic laws are made in USA...and I have no idea if holes are there for them to get out of problems or if they know about those holes.
Old 2 weeks ago
  #6307
Lives for gear
 
daviddever's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by mikt156 View Post
I don't know if Dave Smith has his synths made in America anymore. I have read some complaints about the OB6, but I don't know how many returns they get for synth failure.

Personally, I would look at a company's track record of Service after the sales as an indication of their warranty service and support.


Mike T.
Pioneer TORAIZ AS-1 is made overseas, but that's not branded as Sequential f/k/a DSI.

Sequential f/k/a DSI is made here using contract manufacturing IIRC, with some overseas parts (keybeds), no big deal.

On point: out-of-box experience (OOBE) quality is still a big differentiator.
Old 2 weeks ago
  #6308
Deleted 063dc0d
Guest
OBXD is free and sounds fantastic
https://obxd.wordpress.com/

Why give this Behringer company any money at all
Old 2 weeks ago
  #6309
Gear Maniac
Quote:
Originally Posted by wintersunproject View Post
I have a nearly 40 year old oberheim obsx, best poly they made inmho, just a shame they made it a preset synth with limited editing, thanks to rolf meurer his midi convertor unleashes the beast. Anyway back to the point, even after 40 years its still only minor repairs needed, they really got their stuff right with these things years ago, that old bucket brigade technology is pretty sturdy.
I still have my Prophet 5 Rev 3.2 that I brought brand new in 1981. I only had it serviced once in all those years. I keep it on a keyboard stand in my music roo, and have primarily used it as a synth for A/B comparisons of synth sounds I create on other synths. It still works fine. It looks and sounds great, and has been solid as a rock.

Synth's made today have features and sound shaping capability that no one ever thought of 30 years ago. My experience with Asian made hardware has not always been good. Yamaha a fine exception, but lower priced synths from other manufacturers haven't matched Yamaha (Roland). I realize that in order to have lower prices, we may have to compromise hardware quality and longevity.


Cheers!


Mike T.
Old 2 weeks ago
  #6310
Gear Maniac
 
guictr's Avatar
I'd like to know something from Uli (I'm sorry if it's kind of dumb). When you're trying to recreate another synth, and in that case with a very characteristic sound, you probably play them side by side to know how close you are from the original. Sometimes you can get so close that you can't easily tell the difference, like the Model D. But when it's not that case, I'd like to know how do you make the decision of what's the point you can't get closer.
Old 2 weeks ago
  #6311
Gear Head
 
benanderson89's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by guictr View Post
I'd like to know something from Uli (I'm sorry if it's kind of dumb). When you're trying to recreate another synth, and in that case with a very characteristic sound, you probably play them side by side to know how close you are from the original. Sometimes you can get so close that you can't easily tell the difference, like the Model D. But when it's not that case, I'd like to know how do you make the decision of what's the point you can't get closer.
I'd wager part cost and extra time (which then adds more cost). If they got it close enough whilst being bang on or under a certain price ceiling then that would signal that it's done and ready for the next step.

Plus, as an aside, we don't know how they engineered the MS-101. Did they reverse engineer the original SH-101? Was it just the architecture pulled from the Deepmind 12 with some tweaks after an A/B comparison with an SH-101 by ear? Was an SH-101 involved at all? If it was, was the SH-101 they had dying after being kicked around at a rave in 1992, or restored to factory new condition?

I'd wager they used a like-new restored model. This A/B by loopop with a like-new SH clearly demonstrates that any differences are firmly in "neck beard" territory.



Even on his scope, the waves are 99% the same shape. The MS even has that weird step on the sub osc.
Old 2 weeks ago
  #6312
Lives for gear
 
Heinakroon's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by benanderson89 View Post
I'd wager they used a like-new restored model. This A/B by loopop with a like-new SH clearly demonstrates that any differences are firmly in "neck beard" territory.
Haha, '"neck beard" territory'!
Old 2 weeks ago
  #6313
vlz
Lives for gear
 
vlz's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by benanderson89 View Post
as an SH-101 involved at all? If it was, was the SH-101 they had dying after being kicked around at a rave in 1992, or restored to factory new condition?

I'd wager they used a like-new restored model. This A/B by loopop with a like-new SH clearly demonstrates that any differences are firmly in "neck beard" territory.

I think they might have based their circuits on the original, with what's available today.

I would have thought they got a few machines in the used gear market, then they used some sort of averaging to match the sound.
Old 2 weeks ago
  #6314
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by benanderson89 View Post
I'd wager they used a like-new restored model. This A/B by loopop with a like-new SH clearly demonstrates that any differences are firmly in "neck beard" territory..
Excellent video! As I said before, the missing “constant” portamento mode is probably the thing that’s really missing from the MS-101. Some have used the word “rubbery”, and you certainly can’t make rubbery sequences without it.

Hopefully Behringer will figure out a way to turn on unconditional glide in the next firmware.

Something Loopop didn’t discuss is portamento time. As I also mentioned before, the MS-101’s (digitally read) glide control seems to go from “instant” to “a lot slower than instant” with nothing in between. Presently the SH-101 can do very fast glide settings that the MS-101 cannot. I hope Behringer addresses this as well.
Old 2 weeks ago
  #6315
Lives for gear
 
Somebodyperson's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by benanderson89 View Post
I'd wager part cost and extra time (which then adds more cost). If they got it close enough whilst being bang on or under a certain price ceiling then that would signal that it's done and ready for the next step.

Plus, as an aside, we don't know how they engineered the MS-101. Did they reverse engineer the original SH-101? Was it just the architecture pulled from the Deepmind 12 with some tweaks after an A/B comparison with an SH-101 by ear? Was an SH-101 involved at all? If it was, was the SH-101 they had dying after being kicked around at a rave in 1992, or restored to factory new condition?

I'd wager they used a like-new restored model. This A/B by loopop with a like-new SH clearly demonstrates that any differences are firmly in "neck beard" territory.



Even on his scope, the waves are 99% the same shape. The MS even has that weird step on the sub osc.
It still would have been better with the original filter....but I guess it wasn't viable.

Well...at the very least hopefully that special portamento mode can be added in an update.

P.S. No neck beard here. :p
Old 2 weeks ago
  #6316
Gear Maniac
 
B_and_W's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by benanderson89 View Post
I'd wager part cost and extra time (which then adds more cost). If they got it close enough whilst being bang on or under a certain price ceiling then that would signal that it's done and ready for the next step.

Plus, as an aside, we don't know how they engineered the MS-101. Did they reverse engineer the original SH-101? Was it just the architecture pulled from the Deepmind 12 with some tweaks after an A/B comparison with an SH-101 by ear? Was an SH-101 involved at all? If it was, was the SH-101 they had dying after being kicked around at a rave in 1992, or restored to factory new condition?

I'd wager they used a like-new restored model. This A/B by loopop with a like-new SH clearly demonstrates that any differences are firmly in "neck beard" territory.



Even on his scope, the waves are 99% the same shape. The MS even has that weird step on the sub osc.
They reverse the synth and the schematics are widely available online. You can recreate the entire PCB if you have the schematic, anyone could recreate a synth, but the problem starts when you're dealing with obsolete components like those vintage IC's. With the proper tools it's possible to clone any IC. And for those EPROMS with data programmed on them you can easily copy the files to your computer. Once you figure everything out you can improve the synth, like including a better processor chip compared to the old Z80 processor. But if you recreate the oscillators from the service manual of a synth, it will sound exactly the same.

There is this guy who has cloned a Simmons SDS-V and it sounds exactly like the original and he added some more features to it, later he got a rare hi hat voice card he cloned it too.
Old 2 weeks ago
  #6317
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by infindebula View Post
Something Loopop didn’t discuss is portamento time. As I also mentioned before, the MS-101’s (digitally read) glide control seems to go from “instant” to “a lot slower than instant” with nothing in between. Presently the SH-101 can do very fast glide settings that the MS-101 cannot. I hope Behringer addresses this as well.
Yes, noticed this on mine too. It's not like the original. Makes me wonder if the glide is done digitally on the MS. Why they changed the switch from Auto/Off/On to Off/On is rather odd. For the most part it's pretty good (amazing really for the price) so it's a shame and slightly ungrateful to moan about a few things. They need input at the design stage from people who know the originals inside out.
Old 2 weeks ago
  #6318
Here for the gear
 
Synth geek's Avatar
Talking about the MS-101 in a thread about the UB-XA, when there is a separate thread for the Behringer MS-101 Look, I know I am still relatively new here, and I shouldn’t be complaining but come on guys, seriously! Can we get back on the topic at hand about the UB-XA? After all Uli himself did start this thread, and i feel disheartened too what it has become.

MS-101 discussions should be in the MS-101 thread, and UB-XA discussions here, and for goodness sakes, leave politics out of here. Sorry, for the rant, but , I have witnessed this sort of thing happen on other forums, and that’s why I left.

Now if no one objects, I am looking forward to the UB-XA’s release, because I can not afford an OB-6 or an original OB-XA.
Old 2 weeks ago
  #6319
Gear Maniac
We are all waiting for the Behringer rendition of the OBX or OBXA, whatever he makes. But, no wine before its time.


Mike T.
Old 2 weeks ago
  #6320
Gear Addict
 
JPogo's Avatar
I'm sure that, when there's definitely something to say, Uli will say it here -- because that's what he's done in the past. Until then, it would be counterproductive to say anything at all, given the track record here to analyse and criticize every last detail (or, more frequently, the *rumor* of any detail).

Honestly, I don't even read this thread anymore; without any new actual information, the rest is us just babbling with the ghosts in our heads. Or the ghosts in other people's heads. Which -- granted -- can be very diverting to those bored of waiting. But - boredom being such a great motivator to creation - I say, go create your backing tracks for the synths you dream (or expect) Uli to make, so then -- when he does -- you can just drop that sound in and it will be done. Voila!
Old 2 weeks ago
  #6321
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Synth geek View Post
Talking about the MS-101 in a thread about the UB-XA, when there is a separate thread for the Behringer MS-101 Look, I know I am still relatively new here, and I shouldn’t be complaining but come on guys, seriously! Can we get back on the topic at hand about the UB-XA? After all Uli himself did start this thread, and i feel disheartened too what it has become.

MS-101 discussions should be in the MS-101 thread, and UB-XA discussions here, and for goodness sakes, leave politics out of here. Sorry, for the rant, but , I have witnessed this sort of thing happen on other forums, and that’s why I left.
In my defence, I thought I was on that MS101 thread and I only realised I wasn't when my post went through! I don't think it's that bad compared to some of the other off-topic waffle these threads can cover.

My point about the MS101 also applies to the UB-XA as that's still in development. There are things that can be caught easily in the early stages but might be too late to fix once a product is done. No MIDI activity indicator LED on the Boog is one that springs to mind.
Old 2 weeks ago
  #6322
Quote:
Originally Posted by daviddever View Post
Pioneer TORAIZ AS-1 is made overseas, but that's not branded as Sequential f/k/a DSI.

Sequential f/k/a DSI is made here using contract manufacturing IIRC, with some overseas parts (keybeds), no big deal.

On point: out-of-box experience (OOBE) quality is still a big differentiator.
Pretty sure the DSI/Sequential PCBs are made and stuffed in China, like it is with almost every company. From what I've seen in the videos from DSI, they only do repairs in their office. (There are only 14 people working there)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s_XR7ruZEq8

There's an ancient video from Dave Smith kicking around from around the Evolver time frame. IIRC, it has a factory tour of his partner in China assembling his synths.

In any case, keep in mind that almost every single component on a PCB these days comes from China.

Sequential/DSI may be like Moog, where "assembled in USA" means QA, testing, and final assembly, but most everything is actually made overseas.

This is not making any sort of quality judgment -- plenty of stuff from China is quite good these days. And, of course, whatever Sequential/DSI is doing works well; their out of box quality tends to be quite good.

I'm hoping the UB-Xa hits the light of day at some point. A new version of this classic would be excellent to have. No way can I justify the prices being asked for the originals these days.

Pete
Old 2 weeks ago
  #6323
Lives for gear
 
kurzweil's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Psychlist1972 View Post
Pretty sure the DSI/Sequential PCBs are made and stuffed in China, like it is with almost every company. From what I've seen in the videos from DSI, they only do repairs in their office. (There are only 14 people working there)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s_XR7ruZEq8

There's an ancient video from Dave Smith kicking around from around the Evolver time frame. IIRC, it has a factory tour of his partner in China assembling his synths.

In any case, keep in mind that almost every single component on a PCB these days comes from China.

Sequential/DSI may be like Moog, where "assembled in USA" means QA, testing, and final assembly, but most everything is actually made overseas.

This is not making any sort of quality judgment -- plenty of stuff from China is quite good these days. And, of course, whatever Sequential/DSI is doing works well; their out of box quality tends to be quite good.

I'm hoping the UB-Xa hits the light of day at some point. A new version of this classic would be excellent to have. No way can I justify the prices being asked for the originals these days.

Pete
I remember Dave saying in an interview that they use a fabrication plant in/near San Francisco to print (some, probably not all) of their boards. That might have changed since the interview of course, particularly if products are being assembled overseas.
Old 2 weeks ago
  #6324
Lives for gear
 
Coorec's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by kurzweil View Post
I remember Dave saying in an interview that they use a fabrication plant in/near San Francisco to print (some, probably not all) of their boards. That might have changed since the interview of course, particularly if products are being assembled overseas.
Didnt they say its a company seated in SF? I found that odd because saying the production is in SF woulda been so much easier to say. Hence i made from it that they outsource to a chinese company, with a trade shop in SF. I might be wrong tho, and dont want to bring them any trouble. Anyhow, from a quality perspective it doesnt matter where things are produced. Different aspects determine that.
Old 2 weeks ago
  #6325
Lives for gear
 
kurzweil's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Coorec View Post
Didnt they say its a company seated in SF? I found that odd because saying the production is in SF woulda been so much easier to say. Hence i made from it that they outsource to a chinese company, with a trade shop in SF. I might be wrong tho, and dont want to bring them any trouble. Anyhow, from a quality perspective it doesnt matter where things are produced. Different aspects determine that.
I seem to remember seeing pictures of a fab plant in SF that DSI rented on a temporary basis to print boards.
Can't find the longer video that explained the details, but there's a shorter version on YT.

Found this from 2006: https://youtu.be/2xPaBpwxB2U
Old 2 weeks ago
  #6326
Lives for gear
 
kurzweil's Avatar
Hey, why not build a version of the UBX/a with both Xa and X (SEM) filters?
Just thought I'd put that helpful suggestion out there to delay production by another 6 months!

You know that otherwise you're just going to have to release an OBX/8-voice clone later anyway...
Old 2 weeks ago
  #6327
Lives for gear
 
Somebodyperson's Avatar
 

Speaking of the OB-12 in another thread made me think of the Matrix-12. Even if it would be a decade away, I would love to see Behringer come out with a modern, more affordable version of the Matrix-12.
Old 2 weeks ago
  #6328
Old 2 weeks ago
  #6329
Lives for gear
 
kurzweil's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Somebodyperson View Post
Speaking of the OB-12 in another thread made me think of the Matrix-12. Even if it would be a decade away, I would love to see Behringer come out with a modern, more affordable version of the Matrix-12.
All they have to do is smuggle some extra filter types, modulation sources into the UBXa, and a mod matrix in the back door via PAGE 2-3-4-5.
Should be easy-peasy!

Or maybe they should just re-boot the 8-voice as a modern, compact SMT instrument and combine it with all the functionality of the Matrix 12/Xpander as well?

Hopefully they won't just stop at a vanilla clone of the Xa..
Old 2 weeks ago
  #6330
Gear Nut
 

Damn straight! Give me the sound, give me the modulation, give me my damn after touch!
Topic:
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearslutz Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Forum Jump
Forum Jump