did implement digital filters (LP12/BP12/HP12 with resonance, but not self oscillated) in the last FW, which was released yesterday. But this is not a direct copy of the Microwave 2 filters (based on *but not the same implementation*), as they operate in the classic OSC modes too. The implementation of true Microwave 2 filters (and *for modern mode only*), was planned after some UI updates and some minor yet-unfixed bugs. Now I did analyze the code of MW 2 filters, but perhaps I need to clear some points with the developer of Microwave 2, Stefan Stenzel. @Starsky Carr, fantastic incredible amazing shining crazy very cool intro! Now I am your big fan!
Hey Vladimir - I want to congratulate you for the awesome design of the M! I got one of the last ones in stock and sounds like a super PPG without the clicking in wave transitions 🌟 - you forgot support for the hold pedal though and a pan spread function would be nice ;)
@@nabooka316 Hi Nabooka, please update both firmware (system and DSP) to the recent (1.06 System + 1.05 DSP). The Sustain pedal bug was fixed and also Inverse modulator was added to allow simulate PPG Wave 2x-like Stereo Basis. I will put also the very fresh DSP 1.06 soon at gearspace forum, there is experimental support of MW2 VCF added (first 3 types - LP12, BP12, HP12). It will be available too on the Waldorf website tomorrow as I don't want to disturb colleagues at weekends :) The design of M it's not only my own input. Please don't forget all the Waldorf team, especially Oliver Rockstedt, and also ingenious Mr. Palm on his breakthrough it is all based on. Also Andreas Busse and Stefan Stenzel as original MW software developers. Tomas Kirschner and Frank Schneider as hardware developers of the original Microwave. Also all sounddesigners. The creation of M was only possible via the synergy of all the clever minds behind it. I am glad that you like the sound. Vladimir upd : gearspace.com/board/showpost.php?p=15710955&postcount=1915 Here is the post at gearspace, one can find a link to the DSP FW 1.06 there.
@UCsg4ybQREcGxMkLUUGKmAlw That sounds great - I'll update the firmware asap :) I'm very much into the works of Hr. Palm and I've already spammed the PPG user group on FB with your latest creation, lol - Have nice weekend 🎈
@@vladimirsalnikov5806 Should I wait for Waldorf to have 1.06 posted? Or just use your link to check it out? I liked the DVCF for newer flexibility and I'm sure the newer MW2 will sound great hopefully all versions of the MWII filters will be added too, you are doing amazing work on a beautiful synth. I have other synths, but this one is very unique compared to everything else I have used.
I was intending to get myself the M for Xmas this year - and this video hasn't changed my mind one little bit. The more I hear it the more I want it, thanks for the very informative video.
The greatest feature of the Iridium's wavetable potential is found in kernel synthesis mode. You can stack up to 6 wavetables within a single oscillator, and use a custom defined algorithm to modulate each kernel using phase FM, true FM, ring mod, AM, and wavetable position. Each kernel with individual envelopes, panning, feedback, and 3 algorithmic modulation sources. That alone offers essentially infinite sonic capability to be explored for the rest of your life, and it's only 1 of 6 possible oscillators in use. You can use up to 36 different wavetables moving simultaneously if your heart desired, which is a nearly incomprehensible amount of synthesis power. Another hidden feature in kernel synthesis, is the ability to import DX7 mk1 sysex programs. All of the DX sounds we know and love over the past 40 years, now with the possibility of wavetables and new wave shapes, instead of only sine waves. To me, the Iridium is one of the greatest and most powerful synths ever created, with sonic possibilities that put it in a league of it's own. As an Iridium owner, I appreciate this comparison with the M. I could see myself getting an M one day for it's unique strengths. It's nice to see and hear where the two overlap with one another. Though, the Iridium is quite undersold here in my opinion, with more focus on the M's strengths. That's understandable though, in order to make it a fair comparison between these two beautiful pieces of equipment. If you included all of the Iridium's strengths, this video would be way too long and miss the point of fairly comparing the two. Thank you for the very informative video Starsky! One more side note on the Iridium. If anyone is into creating microtonal/xenharmonic music, the Iridium supports 32-bit pitch precision. Meaning, the smallest harmonic tuning ratio you can enter is 2147483647/2147483646, which is 0.000000806168675731715 cents. That's over 7500 times more precise than MTS (0.006103515625 cents), and over 1.24 million times more precise than standard 1 cent pitch adjustments. This is some of the best pitch precision on the hardware market today, until more developers start implementing ODDSOUND's 64-bit MTS-ESP (please Waldorf!). Does anyone know what the M's tuning capabilities are? The M being an analog hybrid, so high precision is sort of redundant, but I'm curious what Waldorf decided.
The depth of the Iridium and its versatility are mind-boggling. Makes one really wonder why 90% of all the videos show it making ambient space orbits for 1.5 hours of sequencer noodling :)
Thank you for this video. I got both and the M has this unique gritty, dirty sound. The Iridium is an absolute killer and together you can do hours of jams. Sold a lot of my analog gear and just keep my favorite synths. These two maschines are so inspiring and refreshing to my ears. I think that the return of digital Synths is a logical step because they are getting better and better. For me the Iridium is one of the most powerful and fantastic sounding Synths on the market. The M has its own character and if you start to tweak it you get lost for hours. Great work how ever. Keep on doing such great videos. Thanx
I recently sold my Iridium, and later fell for the M. The Iridium can do everything, but it’s complicated and convoluted to play with. But the M sounds absolutely fantastic, buzzes in each ear, recaptures the LoFi spirit of the Xt. I’m super happy with the M in a way I wasn’t with the Iridium. Biggest cons are the lack of effects, no touchscreen, nicest pluses are those large double knobs for playing wavetables, and THAT sound!
Thanks for the video!! I do have the Iridium and the Kyra and about 100 other synths. I was thinking about adding this unit and didn't know much about it, now I do thanks to your generous comparison! Cheers!!
Great video, thank you!! I was surprised the Iridium didn't have a filter mode that emulated the low frequency drop off, but perhaps such things will be added in a firmware update.
Dejavu. I literally went and demo'd iridium today. Was super fun. My final thoughts were great, but that price tag...not for me, i thiink its great what their doing. But would much rather an analog synth over one
Or you can buy a Blofeld instead. I've tried the M.. I'm Really struggling to justify £££. Over the Blofeld which has served me good for years. The iridium I would definitely buy. On the basis of the oscillator choice and conditions.
Great video Starsky - this is helping settle in my mind whether I want to get an m to go with my own quantum (and the pre-production iridiums I have here too). Something I noticed, at 9:30 you said you couldn't find the iridium saw going through any kind of filter - but that waveform looks exactly like what I see if "master>bass boost" is set to on, which is a global/perpetual eq/filter which softens everything. With that off, I see a much sharper defined saw. Something else to mention, when trying to emulate old gear, in addition to legacy mode, the wavetable keytrack (as distinct from pitch keytrack) is a useful parameter for getting closer to the behaviour of old hardware.
In a galaxy far far away ppl can afford Iridium and M and Kyra, that's how sound of universe is made :) I had Iridium, but at last moment flipped to wait on Polybrute. No regrets, but missed Iridium and M is cool! I can understand/hear the difference now. TNX!
loads of people who watch this have likely never had a waldorf, having owned most of them over the last 30 years i would always say to people that you just have to try them - they are always proper synths in the true meaning of the word - any waldorf can easily keep you entertained for the rest of your life, gas aside of course but that's not the synths fault.
love Walforf synths at least they update their synths with new features and tech UNLIKE the lazy folks at ACCESS who have not updated Virus in 15 years!
@@GuitarsAndSynths You're kidding, right? The Access Virus has to be the MOST updated synth in history. In fact, I would say Access is the whole reason why we get free updates for many synths. Before the Virus came along, most synth updates were paid, few and far between...
Thanks a lot for this comparison. Yes, it's unfair to reduce the Iridium to wavetables, but for me it is exactly the question: What can give me the M that Iridium cannot. I think that you made a very good comparison. And once more I am sold on the M.
It looks like a digital 12db DVCF was added yesterday to the M. More improvements to it are also planned. I am downloading this today and checking it out. I love the M, and this video really sold me on the smoothness of the Iridium. Different flavors of the same types of sounds for sure.
M! I had wanted a MW I for years, this fulfilled an unlikely wish. Aside from all the "dirty digital," with the analog VCF and VCA the M can be quite smooth and wam. Played the Iridium (and Quantum), but they didn't grab me; the M did so instantly. Without effects no less...
I have both. You're not wrong! There is *one* problem, though, in that the blofeld has a more flexible filter routing setup than the iridium does, simply because Waldorf insists on complete compatibility with the Quantum. It's quite unfortunate.
Las Year it was Sequential P10 that was my Xmas gift, this year it will be Iridium. I have been ignoring it for too long and choosing different synths in the process. All love to the M, I get the pros there, but I prefer Iridium atm.
Thanks for this, I was indeed in doubt between what to buy first, probably gonna have both someday but prioritizing is already a win... P.S. Afaik, the developer of M will try to implement XT filters in a firmware update but nothing is sure.
@@falangistavaleroso9689 Mostly buy, sell, borrow and beg !! - but never steal :) I have to get stuff for my Clubbing TV show. So I do in-depth here and more light touch on that. I get most from eBay have a play then sell on, some people loan me, others I'll buy new - and decide if it's for me - like the Take 5. I've kept that one. ... So I'm constantly on the look out for interesting things to get hold of. It'd be nice to get them pre-release like others do... so M is on loan... which is why I'm getting a few out while I have it.
@@StarskyCarr nice, also you might get some cash from Utube as well. btw due to you (r fault lol) , I might get a Micowave xt soon... Jeff Mills uses a lot of Waldorf things but he only sounded good on DX7 25 years ago. What about a XT vs Q video?
I like the dirty grittier filter on the M but prefer the user interface of the Iridium. Hard to say. But then there is Kyra to consider. Waldorf M sounds way better to me and costs a little less but the Iridium has nicer more advanced interface but tone not as good.
I owned a PPG 2.3 many years ago and was looking at which Waldorf synth could replace it. I think I'll shoot for an Iridium keyboard and an M. Both are still far less money than lowest priced PPG wave 2.3 on the market. The Iridium doesn't replace the PPG, it's a monster synth on its own merit. I currently have a Microwave II XTk and it still never ceases to amaze me.
Hi, maybe you can help me out. I'm starting with synthesis. I've tried vsts and I need has on; I'm a piano player and I guess that makes me prefer more of a tactile workflow. I like composing anything from ambient, trance, to just warmth synth melodies. I want a synth that I can grow with over the years. I'm debating between something like the iridium, or buying a system 8 now and save the extra cash for later to buy another synth if I need one. What do you recommend?
Enjoyed the video and love both synths. I’m a bit uncertain about the point of a ‘vs’ approach. Seemed like it should be called “Why the M is better at sounding like the M than the Iridium is.” Or something :) Could just as easily flipped the script and the Iridium would be better at sounding like an Iridium than the M. Subscriber who loves your content, but this fight was fixed from the start :)
Haha… yeah the titles are ‘vs’ to help with the algorithm .. Having said that I thought it was pretty well balanced tbh. The Iridium doesn’t sound exactly like the M, it can get close BUT it does a whole lot more. I’ve an Iridium video planned so this would just repeat stuff. Also if I started down the rabbit hole of what it can do and the M can’t it’d be an hour longer!
you could have sampled the M into the Iridium, or used white noise on both since white noise should be the same on both. Don't know if the M has inputs you can run through the filter, but the Iridium does for sure. A proper test would use a pink noise generator with the same level sent into both..but apparently I'm nerdier than most.
@@StarskyCarr Would love to see a comparison to a MW I. As mentioned above, Waldorf (VladiS) is planning on adding more XT functionality in the near future.
The Iridium is great. Funny that some folks seem to think I gave it a raw deal here... I think it shows how close it can get.. plus its got tonnes of other stuff on board.
I don’t care what Iridium can do when it doesn’t sound nearly as good as the M. The M oozes class and elegance and sounds special. The iridium sounds like just another dsp synth to me.
Great comparison thanks. For a small company Waldorf do some really impressive synths, unfortunately many out of my price range 😕. I do hope you get your hands on a Kyra one day, it seems a bit of shame but Waldorf seem to have lost interest in that synth but it’s more the sort of synth I’m personally interested in so I’d love to see what you can do with one...
I think the M sounds great and would be very desirable ... if it wasn't almost exactly the same price as the Iridium! That pricing makes no sense to me. The Iridium does so much more for the money. Its sample/granular and FM capabilities on top of wavetable just make it so much more bang for the buck. I've never been so keen on wavetable that I'd want to drop that much money on a dedicated wavetable synth. Would rather get the Iridium and then maybe a Hydrasynth Deluxe as a controller/companion.
I think the analog filters add a lot of complexity to the electronics. Its not just a matter of fitting 8 chips, but they all need to be controlled ... and work together (i.e. not like a mono synth where a single filter calibration doesn't have to match 7 other voices). I wonder if things like this are part of the reason we've not seen all the Behringer polys arrive? I wonder if this adds a lot to the cost? I've no idea btw .. just pondering :)
@@StarskyCarr No doubt that does play into it. It's hard to get a good feel for what really plays into the price point. The Polybrute right now is about the same price point as the Iridium and it's got analog filters plus a full-sized keybed ... but only 6 voices so ... ?
The PPG model does indeed go higher than the standard Iridium filter, which models the analog filters of the Quantum. I had to switch to that model on the Quantum for some patches to get the behavior I was looking for.
Yeah there are some minor differences but it’s much harder to use in a test like this 😂 it doesn’t drop volume when adding resonance etc.. and doesn’t follow these very well. So yeah maybe a bit closer but ultimately the conclusion is the same. I’m waiting for someone to find the ASIC bug or equivalent in the Iridium 😀. The XT has one but it’s not as slick as this in some cases and it wasn’t until I compared them I realised that’s what it was doing. … sometimes there are little hidden features you can miss!
@@StarskyCarr Or Waldorf could program it in on a firmware update, they have added a lot of stuff over the years like that into the Quantum and that's the same engine apart from having analogue filters.
Thanks for making sense of the relationship, Starsky! How would you compare the M to the MicrowaveXT? Does the M subsume what the XT could do and sound like! The XT was a synth I grew to feel I should like to have, but by then it was out of production and out of reach
being digital, isn't it possible to offer one hardware box where those 2 babies fuse - nowadays using the new FPGA technology and simply providing more audio I/Os along with multitimbrality?
Well the M filters are analog... so there's the Quantum... which is basically the Iridium with analog filters. But I'm not sure what those filters are like. Someone has commented that they're like the PPG on the Iridium, but I suspect they're not exactly the same.
12:15 Self-oscillating means that it starts oscillating all by itself. If it needs an "exciter" (beyond its own noise) and stops oscillating when that excitation is gone, the filter is not self-oscillating by any definition. What you hear there is just a high Q without any kind of positive feedback happening yet. [/Mr. Wiseguy aka Cpt. Obvious]
It’s odd that Jupiter 6 owners all told me their filters self-oscillated and I thought the one I had was knackered because it didn’t. Turns out none of them do! BUT even in old reviews and adverts it says it self oscillates when it obviously doesn’t. Not without some input from the oscillators and even then it’s a bit lacklustre.
@@StarskyCarr Quite sure the filters on the Jupiter 6/8 are at least not supposed to self-oscillate. Maybe some calibration/aging parts can cause the filters to "ring" a bit beyond the input signal and people confuse this with "self-oscillation", or they generally think a high Q that produces a single tone is self-oscillation? Whatever it is, people seem to be a bit obsessed with that self-oscillation, even on completely hardwired synths with oscillators that can produce sine tones. :)
@@gerdpfeil haha I know… the number of times I’ve had to stop myself saying ..’well if you want a deep bass sine tone you can just use your sine!’ When demoing filters. I just sound like a nutter 😂
They are both awesome, and make a great couple. Yet to make a "bad" sound on my M. Iridium is a powerhouse. All you ever need..in the digital domain, of course.
@@StarskyCarr - correct, can't escape the digital ending these days :)) I love them both, M is really special...I wish I went Quantum instead of Iridium for the analog piece, but the price difference and the footprint convinced me to go Iridium in the end.
Question: if I have a Virus TI2 synth would the Waldorf still be worth getting as an addition in the future or should I get a different synth to complement the Virus?
It really depends on what you use the TI for. It’s such a flexible instrument it can cover loads of ground. The one thing it’s not so good at is emulating ‘warm’ analog circuits - ie sloppy’ or ‘out of tune’. To complement the TI I would be more inclined to go with something like the Take5/Rev2 or other analog Poly (there’s a great selection around they’re just the first that spring to mind).
I bought the M… but I don’t make hard neuro dirty gritty basslines… although I’d like too every now and then. So can’t advise on that tbh. I would say that both can import wavetables etc and with the overflow error on the M I’d be more inclined to go with that. Plus the extra mental envelope can be very useful for that. But I think either would be a winner tbh - I’d choose depending on what else you might like to do. … but I did get the M 😂
I'm more taken with the M than Iridium, because it does that soundworld better. How M compares to a Korg Modwave would be interesting, (just the sound engine, not all the polyphonic sequencing). Probably wavetabling on an Iridium and a Modwave are more similar, and the M more of a sonic chainsaw (in a good way).
@@StarskyCarr ...yes. There is that „small factor“ of cost...😄 And space aswell. I wonder when you load/import an original PPG wavetable (like with the microfreak), if the Iridium sounds grittier with more high freq like the M...🤔 Theoretically you could even sample the M and convert that to a wavetable inside the Iridium? There is this new small hybrid wavetable synth Espen Kroft reviewed some time ago. That could be a nice comparison too. Anyways, fantastic video, as always!
@@saftpackerl Thanks... I think using the M or XT wavetables on the Iridium would be difficult. I don't think they're available anywhere as they're Waldorf copyright so it's not something Ive seen downloadable (but maybe it is). By the time Id sampled everything I'd rather just by the thing :)) Haha.. can you remember what the Hybrid Synth Espen Kraft demo'd was called?
Different People, different opinions but : I want a 4piece live techno setup. I have the Perkons hd-01, octatrack, Analog Four Mk1. The 4th device will be the M or Iridium ( and will replace my virus ti2 ). I cannot make the descision...
Iridium is possibly more like the virus in its flexibility and the range of tones. A bit like a grown up virus. I was more tempted by the M though and bought that. There’s just something about it that I felt a deeper connection. It wasn’t an easy decision, but having the XT I’m a huge fan of the microwaves so the M was almost like an old friend back from the grave 💀
the pricing on the M seems wrong, im curious as to how many people can justify that. It seems like a lot for an 8 voice digital synth with a very basic display.
iridium is a dead digital characterless machine, while M has built in at least a bit of analogue and therefore sounds a lot more expressive than iridium. pls, however, with the iridium, all its functions are granular, etc., that's amazing. i think nowadays people prefer this clean digital - too bad. it doesn't matter which record you listen to back then, be it 90s rap, 70s psychedelic sound all floyd, dooors, it just sounds expressive and interesting. if you turn on the radio today, everything sounds the same and lifeless and mostly without any feeling or massage behind it, just procedurally. sry, maybe it's just me, but I don't think so. I think the best is the way from both worlds and the M has that, so I advocate the M.
I've something in my mind that i like to share: I think that these 2 synths and also the hydrasynth sound often realy cold/harsh. Like if the cut off for the low pass filter is on max/+. I'm not sure if i explaned it well because lack in knowledge. But what i do know is that my prophet rev 2 and novation summit sound smoother, in general. What do you think about this?
@M Edward Borasky "Harshness", so called, can be eliminated by the filter; but here's a thing. A chainsaw-like sound can bring out interesting harmonics from the filter. Diferent manufacturer's digital filters vary. I think Roland's current digital filters might as well be analogue, they are that good. I look forward to auditioning an M in a shop very soon.
reason why the 8bit mode appears brighter than 16bit is, the latter emulates mwii/xt oscillator bandlimiting to avoid aliasing. in 8bit mode there is no band limiting and you get aliasing and mirroring artifacts from the phase accumulator engine, which not only reinforce, but better said add harmonics that weren't there in the source wave. as a result the 8bit i.e. MW mode is always inherently buzzier with more lively harmonics. i have the old MW revA and XT here, and with the same wavetable, you get similar behaviour respectively. in dream dream scenario i would love if they made new Iridium with analog filters from M, meaning 2144 and placed at the end of the audio path (like on ppg, mw, m) on a related note: im looking at Iridium btwn the two, as more complementary to my setup,but got little scared off with recent numerous complaints on quality control, displays falling out, buttons etc. dunno if Waldorf has upped the quality on the current batch. is your Iridium problem free @ Starsky Carr ?
Hi, I just wanted to chime in. I have an Waldorf M for 4 weeks now, and absolutely no problems with the hardware. It’s built like a tank and looks and feels just gorgeous. My XT definitely makes more trouble with its sticky plastic knobs, and the display glass of my RevA started to become loose a bit. The M is seems very solid in comparison.
love it but I cannot find a single sound that is actually nice to listen to in this entire vid. I get it, but why must everyone make everything so unromantic and ugly. I am also an audio person and very skilled synth programmer and engineer but I would never make a vid that didn't have any good sounds. I just that's wrong. hate me if you will. but I appreciate your vid and I want you to do well.
I do have you covered. Waldorf M // Sounds Only Demo th-cam.com/video/DT4BmG8r9TE/w-d-xo.html Putting everything in a single video isn’t practical (even just every run through to check for errors and edits takes over an hour in an hour long video - and more like 2 or 3 - introducing possibly other errors that then require another viewing etc).
@@krinzologicstudio haha I know but one song one synth has more alliteration than one track one synth… synth per tune… ?? Open to suggestions actually 😀👍
@@StarskyCarr I love the M and it definitely sounds close to my old Microwave 1 that I unfortunately sold for a Korg Wavestation in 1994. Just bought a Prophet 10 so I can't afford the M anytime soon🥺
did implement digital filters (LP12/BP12/HP12 with resonance, but not self oscillated) in the last FW, which was released yesterday. But this is not a direct copy of the Microwave 2 filters (based on *but not the same implementation*), as they operate in the classic OSC modes too.
The implementation of true Microwave 2 filters (and *for modern mode only*), was planned after some UI updates and some minor yet-unfixed bugs. Now I did analyze the code of MW 2 filters, but perhaps I need to clear some points with the developer of Microwave 2, Stefan Stenzel.
@Starsky Carr, fantastic incredible amazing shining crazy very cool intro! Now I am your big fan!
Awesome.
Hey Vladimir - I want to congratulate you for the awesome design of the M!
I got one of the last ones in stock and sounds like a super PPG without the clicking in wave transitions 🌟 - you forgot support for the hold pedal though and a pan spread function would be nice ;)
@@nabooka316 Hi Nabooka,
please update both firmware (system and DSP) to the recent (1.06 System + 1.05 DSP). The Sustain pedal bug was fixed and also Inverse modulator was added to allow simulate PPG Wave 2x-like Stereo Basis.
I will put also the very fresh DSP 1.06 soon at gearspace forum, there is experimental support of MW2 VCF added (first 3 types - LP12, BP12, HP12). It will be available too on the Waldorf website tomorrow as I don't want to disturb colleagues at weekends :)
The design of M it's not only my own input. Please don't forget all the Waldorf team, especially Oliver Rockstedt, and also ingenious Mr. Palm on his breakthrough it is all based on. Also Andreas Busse and Stefan Stenzel as original MW software developers. Tomas Kirschner and Frank Schneider as hardware developers of the original Microwave. Also all sounddesigners. The creation of M was only possible via the synergy of all the clever minds behind it.
I am glad that you like the sound.
Vladimir
upd : gearspace.com/board/showpost.php?p=15710955&postcount=1915 Here is the post at gearspace, one can find a link to the DSP FW 1.06 there.
@UCsg4ybQREcGxMkLUUGKmAlw That sounds great - I'll update the firmware asap :)
I'm very much into the works of Hr. Palm and I've already spammed the PPG user group on FB with your latest creation, lol - Have nice weekend 🎈
@@vladimirsalnikov5806 Should I wait for Waldorf to have 1.06 posted? Or just use your link to check it out? I liked the DVCF for newer flexibility and I'm sure the newer MW2 will sound great hopefully all versions of the MWII filters will be added too, you are doing amazing work on a beautiful synth. I have other synths, but this one is very unique compared to everything else I have used.
I was intending to get myself the M for Xmas this year - and this video hasn't changed my mind one little bit.
The more I hear it the more I want it, thanks for the very informative video.
It's called Christmas
@@jim6186 Amen
The greatest feature of the Iridium's wavetable potential is found in kernel synthesis mode. You can stack up to 6 wavetables within a single oscillator, and use a custom defined algorithm to modulate each kernel using phase FM, true FM, ring mod, AM, and wavetable position. Each kernel with individual envelopes, panning, feedback, and 3 algorithmic modulation sources. That alone offers essentially infinite sonic capability to be explored for the rest of your life, and it's only 1 of 6 possible oscillators in use. You can use up to 36 different wavetables moving simultaneously if your heart desired, which is a nearly incomprehensible amount of synthesis power. Another hidden feature in kernel synthesis, is the ability to import DX7 mk1 sysex programs. All of the DX sounds we know and love over the past 40 years, now with the possibility of wavetables and new wave shapes, instead of only sine waves. To me, the Iridium is one of the greatest and most powerful synths ever created, with sonic possibilities that put it in a league of it's own.
As an Iridium owner, I appreciate this comparison with the M. I could see myself getting an M one day for it's unique strengths. It's nice to see and hear where the two overlap with one another. Though, the Iridium is quite undersold here in my opinion, with more focus on the M's strengths. That's understandable though, in order to make it a fair comparison between these two beautiful pieces of equipment. If you included all of the Iridium's strengths, this video would be way too long and miss the point of fairly comparing the two. Thank you for the very informative video Starsky!
One more side note on the Iridium. If anyone is into creating microtonal/xenharmonic music, the Iridium supports 32-bit pitch precision. Meaning, the smallest harmonic tuning ratio you can enter is 2147483647/2147483646, which is 0.000000806168675731715 cents. That's over 7500 times more precise than MTS (0.006103515625 cents), and over 1.24 million times more precise than standard 1 cent pitch adjustments. This is some of the best pitch precision on the hardware market today, until more developers start implementing ODDSOUND's 64-bit MTS-ESP (please Waldorf!). Does anyone know what the M's tuning capabilities are? The M being an analog hybrid, so high precision is sort of redundant, but I'm curious what Waldorf decided.
Great comment
The depth of the Iridium and its versatility are mind-boggling. Makes one really wonder why 90% of all the videos show it making ambient space orbits for 1.5 hours of sequencer noodling :)
Thank you for this video. I got both and the M has this unique gritty, dirty sound. The Iridium is an absolute killer and together you can do hours of jams. Sold a lot of my analog gear and just keep my favorite synths. These two maschines are so inspiring and refreshing to my ears. I think that the return of digital Synths is a logical step because they are getting better and better. For me the Iridium is one of the most powerful and fantastic sounding Synths on the market. The M has its own character and if you start to tweak it you get lost for hours. Great work how ever. Keep on doing such great videos. Thanx
I recently sold my Iridium, and later fell for the M. The Iridium can do everything, but it’s complicated and convoluted to play with. But the M sounds absolutely fantastic, buzzes in each ear, recaptures the LoFi spirit of the Xt. I’m super happy with the M in a way I wasn’t with the Iridium. Biggest cons are the lack of effects, no touchscreen, nicest pluses are those large double knobs for playing wavetables, and THAT sound!
I have the M, but don't have the Iridium ;)
I don't own any hardware, use Ableton with VSTs, but found this fascinating to watch! Nice one.
The M has this brutal sound quality to it that I remember from the 90s -
And that I cannot get out of a plug-in.
Thanks for the video!! I do have the Iridium and the Kyra and about 100 other synths. I was thinking about adding this unit and didn't know much about it, now I do thanks to your generous comparison! Cheers!!
Great video, thank you!!
I was surprised the Iridium didn't have a filter mode that emulated the low frequency drop off, but perhaps such things will be added in a firmware update.
Hope so, i do use analog pres and eq to make it more alive that it does really sound (more like a vst instrument)
Dejavu. I literally went and demo'd iridium today. Was super fun. My final thoughts were great, but that price tag...not for me, i thiink its great what their doing. But would much rather an analog synth over one
When I hear the Iridium, I think, “Vital sounds as good and is free.” When I hear the M, I think, “what can I sell to make that mine?”
Or you can buy a Blofeld instead. I've tried the M.. I'm Really struggling to justify £££. Over the Blofeld which has served me good for years.
The iridium I would definitely buy. On the basis of the oscillator choice and conditions.
@@dnlphlptt The Blofeld always sounds like a slightly crappier version of Largo to me. Which doesn’t mean bad, but not worth the space it takes up.
The Iridium sounds like a VST and the M sounds like a proper instrument with lots of rich harmonics to work with.
@@videosuperhighway7655 The idea that a plugin isn’t a proper instrument is your imagination.
Great video Starsky - this is helping settle in my mind whether I want to get an m to go with my own quantum (and the pre-production iridiums I have here too). Something I noticed, at 9:30 you said you couldn't find the iridium saw going through any kind of filter - but that waveform looks exactly like what I see if "master>bass boost" is set to on, which is a global/perpetual eq/filter which softens everything. With that off, I see a much sharper defined saw. Something else to mention, when trying to emulate old gear, in addition to legacy mode, the wavetable keytrack (as distinct from pitch keytrack) is a useful parameter for getting closer to the behaviour of old hardware.
Nice one thanks for the tips.
@9.25 8 bit is brighter because of the extra harmonics generated from the squareness of the lower bit rate
In a galaxy far far away ppl can afford Iridium and M and Kyra, that's how sound of universe is made :) I had Iridium, but at last moment flipped to wait on Polybrute. No regrets, but missed Iridium and M is cool! I can understand/hear the difference now. TNX!
loads of people who watch this have likely never had a waldorf, having owned most of them over the last 30 years i would always say to people that you just have to try them - they are always proper synths in the true meaning of the word - any waldorf can easily keep you entertained for the rest of your life, gas aside of course but that's not the synths fault.
love Walforf synths at least they update their synths with new features and tech UNLIKE the lazy folks at ACCESS who have not updated Virus in 15 years!
@@GuitarsAndSynths You're kidding, right? The Access Virus has to be the MOST updated synth in history. In fact, I would say Access is the whole reason why we get free updates for many synths. Before the Virus came along, most synth updates were paid, few and far between...
M sounds alive. M's sound is in beetween PPG wave 2.2 and Microwave I.
Love your videos Starsky thanks for all the effort and insights!
Thanks… they do take a while to put together (can’t miss a trick on either synth or I’ll get demolished!) haha.
Thanks a lot for this comparison. Yes, it's unfair to reduce the Iridium to wavetables, but for me it is exactly the question: What can give me the M that Iridium cannot. I think that you made a very good comparison. And once more I am sold on the M.
It looks like a digital 12db DVCF was added yesterday to the M. More improvements to it are also planned. I am downloading this today and checking it out. I love the M, and this video really sold me on the smoothness of the Iridium. Different flavors of the same types of sounds for sure.
I got a used Iridium and I can't believe how amazing Waldorf Synths are. I'm selling other things just to justify keeping these two amazing Synths.
M! I had wanted a MW I for years, this fulfilled an unlikely wish. Aside from all the "dirty digital," with the analog VCF and VCA the M can be quite smooth and wam. Played the Iridium (and Quantum), but they didn't grab me; the M did so instantly. Without effects no less...
I own a microwave 1 and an iridium, so I seen no need for the M
IRIDIUM is like a posh version of my Blofeld! 😜
A posh Blofeld. haha .. nice :)
I have both. You're not wrong! There is *one* problem, though, in that the blofeld has a more flexible filter routing setup than the iridium does, simply because Waldorf insists on complete compatibility with the Quantum. It's quite unfortunate.
Las Year it was Sequential P10 that was my Xmas gift, this year it will be Iridium. I have been ignoring it for too long and choosing different synths in the process. All love to the M, I get the pros there, but I prefer Iridium atm.
Thanks for this, I was indeed in doubt between what to buy first, probably gonna have both someday but prioritizing is already a win...
P.S. Afaik, the developer of M will try to implement XT filters in a firmware update but nothing is sure.
That would be great. XT vs M coming next week :)
@@StarskyCarr Mate do you buy all this or get it from a shop or brand to test? best
@@falangistavaleroso9689 Mostly buy, sell, borrow and beg !! - but never steal :) I have to get stuff for my Clubbing TV show. So I do in-depth here and more light touch on that. I get most from eBay have a play then sell on, some people loan me, others I'll buy new - and decide if it's for me - like the Take 5. I've kept that one. ... So I'm constantly on the look out for interesting things to get hold of. It'd be nice to get them pre-release like others do... so M is on loan... which is why I'm getting a few out while I have it.
@@StarskyCarr nice, also you might get some cash from Utube as well. btw due to you (r fault lol) , I might get a Micowave xt soon... Jeff Mills uses a lot of Waldorf things but he only sounded good on DX7 25 years ago. What about a XT vs Q video?
@@falangistavaleroso9689 peanuts from TH-cam tbh… but it pays for postage and packing 😂 I’d love to do the Q…. If someone can lend me one.
Brilliant videos btw. Love watching them!
Thanks that's always nice to hear
I like the dirty grittier filter on the M but prefer the user interface of the Iridium. Hard to say. But then there is Kyra to consider. Waldorf M sounds way better to me and costs a little less but the Iridium has nicer more advanced interface but tone not as good.
I owned a PPG 2.3 many years ago and was looking at which Waldorf synth could replace it. I think I'll shoot for an Iridium keyboard and an M. Both are still far less money than lowest priced PPG wave 2.3 on the market. The Iridium doesn't replace the PPG, it's a monster synth on its own merit. I currently have a Microwave II XTk and it still never ceases to amaze me.
Sweet, nicely done 😻
SC has to be the most pleasant and comprehensive synthuber of them all
Thanks… lovely to hear 😀
I'm over here wanting an updated Blofeld
I've had the M for three weeks and I'm in PPG heaven 🎈
Hi, maybe you can help me out. I'm starting with synthesis. I've tried vsts and I need has on; I'm a piano player and I guess that makes me prefer more of a tactile workflow. I like composing anything from ambient, trance, to just warmth synth melodies. I want a synth that I can grow with over the years. I'm debating between something like the iridium, or buying a system 8 now and save the extra cash for later to buy another synth if I need one. What do you recommend?
Enjoyed the video and love both synths. I’m a bit uncertain about the point of a ‘vs’ approach. Seemed like it should be called “Why the M is better at sounding like the M than the Iridium is.” Or something :)
Could just as easily flipped the script and the Iridium would be better at sounding like an Iridium than the M. Subscriber who loves your content, but this fight was fixed from the start :)
Haha… yeah the titles are ‘vs’ to help with the algorithm .. Having said that I thought it was pretty well balanced tbh. The Iridium doesn’t sound exactly like the M, it can get close BUT it does a whole lot more. I’ve an Iridium video planned so this would just repeat stuff. Also if I started down the rabbit hole of what it can do and the M can’t it’d be an hour longer!
you could have sampled the M into the Iridium, or used white noise on both since white noise should be the same on both. Don't know if the M has inputs you can run through the filter, but the Iridium does for sure. A proper test would use a pink noise generator with the same level sent into both..but apparently I'm nerdier than most.
There’s no input in the M
@@StarskyCarr I was not aware of that. Glad I bought the Iridium :-)
The M is specifically meant to be more or less a Microwave I with a Microwave XT inspired interface.
vs XT coming next week ;)
@@StarskyCarr Would love to see a comparison to a MW I. As mentioned above, Waldorf (VladiS) is planning on adding more XT functionality in the near future.
I ll stick to my microwave1 and slap a Lexicon on it for the fx. I already have the iridium
I was not impressed with the Kyra and Iridium or Quantum but the M is really nice, definitely a great sounding instrument.
Thanks vor the Video. I was torn, then i have an iridium and think about for a M. But now i know, with the iridium
i have all need.
The Iridium is great. Funny that some folks seem to think I gave it a raw deal here... I think it shows how close it can get.. plus its got tonnes of other stuff on board.
I still use a Microwave from 1990. Never saw a reason to buy any other Waldorf instrument.
I don’t care what Iridium can do when it doesn’t sound nearly as good as the M. The M oozes class and elegance and sounds special. The iridium sounds like just another dsp synth to me.
You can add import wavetables from sounds. So it would be completely possible to just add the wavetables into the Iridium instead.
That’s the thing with the Iridium… there’s always more you can do 😀
Great comparison thanks. For a small company Waldorf do some really impressive synths, unfortunately many out of my price range 😕. I do hope you get your hands on a Kyra one day, it seems a bit of shame but Waldorf seem to have lost interest in that synth but it’s more the sort of synth I’m personally interested in so I’d love to see what you can do with one...
I’ve been wondering what people would like to see… any suggestions. I’ve got access to one.
Would love to see a kyra video focused on the layering aspects, dual mode, and just seeing how far you can get it to sound
I think the M sounds great and would be very desirable ... if it wasn't almost exactly the same price as the Iridium! That pricing makes no sense to me. The Iridium does so much more for the money. Its sample/granular and FM capabilities on top of wavetable just make it so much more bang for the buck. I've never been so keen on wavetable that I'd want to drop that much money on a dedicated wavetable synth. Would rather get the Iridium and then maybe a Hydrasynth Deluxe as a controller/companion.
I think the analog filters add a lot of complexity to the electronics. Its not just a matter of fitting 8 chips, but they all need to be controlled ... and work together (i.e. not like a mono synth where a single filter calibration doesn't have to match 7 other voices). I wonder if things like this are part of the reason we've not seen all the Behringer polys arrive? I wonder if this adds a lot to the cost? I've no idea btw .. just pondering :)
@@StarskyCarr No doubt that does play into it. It's hard to get a good feel for what really plays into the price point. The Polybrute right now is about the same price point as the Iridium and it's got analog filters plus a full-sized keybed ... but only 6 voices so ... ?
The PPG model does indeed go higher than the standard Iridium filter, which models the analog filters of the Quantum. I had to switch to that model on the Quantum for some patches to get the behavior I was looking for.
Yeah there are some minor differences but it’s much harder to use in a test like this 😂 it doesn’t drop volume when adding resonance etc.. and doesn’t follow these very well. So yeah maybe a bit closer but ultimately the conclusion is the same. I’m waiting for someone to find the ASIC bug or equivalent in the Iridium 😀. The XT has one but it’s not as slick as this in some cases and it wasn’t until I compared them I realised that’s what it was doing. … sometimes there are little hidden features you can miss!
@@StarskyCarr Or Waldorf could program it in on a firmware update, they have added a lot of stuff over the years like that into the Quantum and that's the same engine apart from having analogue filters.
I choose the Iridium because it just has more. If you want dirt, just run it into a distortion pedal.
Thanks for making sense of the relationship, Starsky! How would you compare the M to the MicrowaveXT? Does the M subsume what the XT could do and sound like! The XT was a synth I grew to feel I should like to have, but by then it was out of production and out of reach
XT is coming next week
being digital, isn't it possible to offer one hardware box where those 2 babies fuse - nowadays using the new FPGA technology and simply providing more audio I/Os along with multitimbrality?
Well the M filters are analog... so there's the Quantum... which is basically the Iridium with analog filters. But I'm not sure what those filters are like. Someone has commented that they're like the PPG on the Iridium, but I suspect they're not exactly the same.
12:15 Self-oscillating means that it starts oscillating all by itself. If it needs an "exciter" (beyond its own noise) and stops oscillating when that excitation is gone, the filter is not self-oscillating by any definition. What you hear there is just a high Q without any kind of positive feedback happening yet. [/Mr. Wiseguy aka Cpt. Obvious]
It’s odd that Jupiter 6 owners all told me their filters self-oscillated and I thought the one I had was knackered because it didn’t. Turns out none of them do! BUT even in old reviews and adverts it says it self oscillates when it obviously doesn’t. Not without some input from the oscillators and even then it’s a bit lacklustre.
@@StarskyCarr Quite sure the filters on the Jupiter 6/8 are at least not supposed to self-oscillate. Maybe some calibration/aging parts can cause the filters to "ring" a bit beyond the input signal and people confuse this with "self-oscillation", or they generally think a high Q that produces a single tone is self-oscillation? Whatever it is, people seem to be a bit obsessed with that self-oscillation, even on completely hardwired synths with oscillators that can produce sine tones. :)
@@gerdpfeil haha I know… the number of times I’ve had to stop myself saying ..’well if you want a deep bass sine tone you can just use your sine!’ When demoing filters. I just sound like a nutter 😂
They are both awesome, and make a great couple. Yet to make a "bad" sound on my M. Iridium is a powerhouse. All you ever need..in the digital domain, of course.
They’re both amazing… don’t forget the M’s analog filters. So digital until then. Then digital again once you’ve recorded it 😂
@@StarskyCarr - correct, can't escape the digital ending these days :)) I love them both, M is really special...I wish I went Quantum instead of Iridium for the analog piece, but the price difference and the footprint convinced me to go Iridium in the end.
I bought the iridium new 2 months ago for 2000€, now with the new batch the price has gone up almost 25%
Question: if I have a Virus TI2 synth would the Waldorf still be worth getting as an addition in the future or should I get a different synth to complement the Virus?
It really depends on what you use the TI for. It’s such a flexible instrument it can cover loads of ground. The one thing it’s not so good at is emulating ‘warm’ analog circuits - ie sloppy’ or ‘out of tune’. To complement the TI I would be more inclined to go with something like the Take5/Rev2 or other analog Poly (there’s a great selection around they’re just the first that spring to mind).
That low end! :)
Waldorf synth designers: let’s design a synth that belongs in the control panel of a spaceship
Starsky Carr: yes
Did you just… Make a Star Wars themed video for a brand associated with the James Bond universe? :)
Haha well I couldn’t do Bond again after the last one! The tux has gone back 😂
Starsky Carrnobi, you’re my only hope.
These are not the synths your looking for
Would you recommend the Iridium or M for hard neuro dirty gritty basslines? thx!
I bought the M… but I don’t make hard neuro dirty gritty basslines… although I’d like too every now and then. So can’t advise on that tbh. I would say that both can import wavetables etc and with the overflow error on the M I’d be more inclined to go with that. Plus the extra mental envelope can be very useful for that. But I think either would be a winner tbh - I’d choose depending on what else you might like to do. … but I did get the M 😂
My guess, Answer: M is 1/5th the cost ?
The only rational answer is to get both. A Waldorf salad, if you like.
Have you ever done an overview/tutorial on the Iridium Starsky?
Not yet…. But there are a fair few out there so trying to figure out what extra I could bring… ideas welcome 👍
I'm more taken with the M than Iridium, because it does that soundworld better. How M compares to a Korg Modwave would be interesting, (just the sound engine, not all the polyphonic sequencing). Probably wavetabling on an Iridium and a Modwave are more similar, and the M more of a sonic chainsaw (in a good way).
That's not a moon - that's a Waldorf desktop synth!
maybe the Quantum would be the "fairer" comparison? For the Filter. But the Oscillators do sound surprisingly different.
Maybe… except for the cost. But I don’t have one so that scuppers that 😂
@@StarskyCarr ...yes. There is that „small factor“ of cost...😄
And space aswell.
I wonder when you load/import an original PPG wavetable (like with the microfreak), if the Iridium sounds grittier with more high freq like the M...🤔
Theoretically you could even sample the M and convert that to a wavetable inside the Iridium?
There is this new small hybrid wavetable synth Espen Kroft reviewed some time ago. That could be a nice comparison too.
Anyways, fantastic video, as always!
@@saftpackerl Thanks... I think using the M or XT wavetables on the Iridium would be difficult. I don't think they're available anywhere as they're Waldorf copyright so it's not something Ive seen downloadable (but maybe it is). By the time Id sampled everything I'd rather just by the thing :)) Haha.. can you remember what the Hybrid Synth Espen Kraft demo'd was called?
@@StarskyCarr true 😄
Yes its called Töörö Digilog.
Different People, different opinions but : I want a 4piece live techno setup. I have the Perkons hd-01, octatrack, Analog Four Mk1. The 4th device will be the M or Iridium ( and will replace my virus ti2 ). I cannot make the descision...
Iridium is possibly more like the virus in its flexibility and the range of tones. A bit like a grown up virus. I was more tempted by the M though and bought that. There’s just something about it that I felt a deeper connection. It wasn’t an easy decision, but having the XT I’m a huge fan of the microwaves so the M was almost like an old friend back from the grave 💀
the pricing on the M seems wrong, im curious as to how many people can justify that. It seems like a lot for an 8 voice digital synth with a very basic display.
Prophet 6 desktop. Six voices, no display. 2.3K €....
Walfdorf
iridium is a dead digital characterless machine, while M has built in at least a bit of analogue and therefore sounds a lot more expressive than iridium. pls, however, with the iridium, all its functions are granular, etc., that's amazing. i think nowadays people prefer this clean digital - too bad. it doesn't matter which record you listen to back then, be it 90s rap, 70s psychedelic sound all floyd, dooors, it just sounds expressive and interesting. if you turn on the radio today, everything sounds the same and lifeless and mostly without any feeling or massage behind it, just procedurally. sry, maybe it's just me, but I don't think so. I think the best is the way from both worlds and the M has that, so I advocate the M.
Deeehhhhhrrrty..... so deeeehhhhrrrty.
Looks like they just added a digital filter to the M in the latest update
Oooh I’ll check it out.!
I've something in my mind that i like to share: I think that these 2 synths and also the hydrasynth sound often realy cold/harsh. Like if the cut off for the low pass filter is on max/+.
I'm not sure if i explaned it well because lack in knowledge. But what i do know is that my prophet rev 2 and novation summit sound smoother, in general.
What do you think about this?
@M Edward Borasky "Harshness", so called, can be eliminated by the filter; but here's a thing. A chainsaw-like sound can bring out interesting harmonics from the filter. Diferent manufacturer's digital filters vary. I think Roland's current digital filters might as well be analogue, they are that good. I look forward to auditioning an M in a shop very soon.
@M Edward Borasky Okay, i gues the filter on my summit than is more sophisticated...because it's a digital synth...
reason why the 8bit mode appears brighter than 16bit is, the latter emulates mwii/xt
oscillator bandlimiting to avoid aliasing. in 8bit mode there is no band limiting
and you get aliasing and mirroring artifacts from the phase accumulator engine,
which not only reinforce, but better said add harmonics that weren't there in the
source wave. as a result the 8bit i.e. MW mode is always inherently buzzier with
more lively harmonics.
i have the old MW revA and XT here, and with the same wavetable, you get similar
behaviour respectively.
in dream dream scenario i would love if they made new Iridium with analog filters
from M, meaning 2144 and placed at the end of the audio path (like on ppg, mw, m)
on a related note: im looking at Iridium btwn the two, as more complementary to my
setup,but got little scared off with recent numerous complaints on quality control,
displays falling out, buttons etc. dunno if Waldorf has upped the quality on the
current batch. is your Iridium problem free @ Starsky Carr ?
Hi, I just wanted to chime in. I have an Waldorf M for 4 weeks now, and absolutely no problems with the hardware. It’s built like a tank and looks and feels just gorgeous. My XT definitely makes more trouble with its sticky plastic knobs, and the display glass of my RevA started to become loose a bit. The M is seems very solid in comparison.
Is this instance M comes way way way after I.
That’s begs the question… In what instance could it come first - as this is the limits of the M’s abilities whereas the Iridium has so much more?
I will take less features for superior sonics anytime.
That’s kinda my philosophy - but for anyone with limited funds or needing something more portable the features are a godsend.
love it but I cannot find a single sound that is actually nice to listen to in this entire vid. I get it, but why must everyone make everything so unromantic and ugly. I am also an audio person and very skilled synth programmer and engineer but I would never make a vid that didn't have any good sounds. I just that's wrong. hate me if you will. but I appreciate your vid and I want you to do well.
I do have you covered. Waldorf M // Sounds Only Demo
th-cam.com/video/DT4BmG8r9TE/w-d-xo.html
Putting everything in a single video isn’t practical (even just every run through to check for errors and edits takes over an hour in an hour long video - and more like 2 or 3 - introducing possibly other errors that then require another viewing etc).
What the hell is a Walfdorf?! 😜
We’re all out of Waldorfs sorry!
I'd rather see an M vs an XT
It’s on its way.
@@StarskyCarr amazing…i own the iridium and the xt and what i miss is this conjunction test. I follow you ( and is not a song) :)
@@krinzologicstudio haha I know but one song one synth has more alliteration than one track one synth… synth per tune… ?? Open to suggestions actually 😀👍
I have both. Completely different beasts.
Digital vs Digital, and the winner is....
Hybrid.
The M is hybrid…you forget the analog filter on it.
I like ASM Hydrasynth better and it’s much cheaper.
Different beasts… there’s loads of love for the Hydrasynth but I’ve yet to have a play with it tbh. Looks great.
@@StarskyCarr I love the M and it definitely sounds close to my old Microwave 1 that I unfortunately sold for a Korg Wavestation in 1994. Just bought a Prophet 10 so I can't afford the M anytime soon🥺
@@StarskyCarr I sold the Hydrasynth and got an M damn I love it. love the channel man keep it up and good work take care.
M is buzzy as hell, couldn’t do anything with this, like korg, never spoke to me.
I love the buzz… but it really depends on what you’re producing. I get that it’s a nightmare for some 😀