I have no real opinion because I don't own and haven't played an OB-X8 🤷♂️ But they are very different instruments in totality. The OB-X8 provides the SEM filter option which I have personally always attributed to being the "Oberheim" sound. I have that same sound in my OB6 already which is why I have been content to not buy an OB-X8. Obvs I'd love to own one but money doesn't grow on trees! The UB-Xa doesn't have the SEM option, but it does have double the polyphony plus poly after-touch. Both are desirable things. I think this whole A vs B debate is going to get even more crazy when Behringer launch their UB-X (or whatever they will call it). We're at risk of tying ourselves up in knots arguing which is better (whatever "better" means!)
@@TimShoebridge Oberheim indicated they spent over $3 million reverse engineering the OBXa to achieve a very similar sound. they also used 20 OBXa owner beta-testers. So whether it sounds like an SEM filter synth is one thing, but they stand over this sounding like - an OBXa!
@@reecedeyoung6595 The Oberheim OB-Xa (personally my favorite synth) and OB-8 did not have SEM filters, they have Curtis VCOs/VCFs so you would expect a clone/remake/whatever of an OB-Xa to have Curtis based VCOs/VCFs, which the UB does. No surprise there. The UB-X will be SEM based, supposedly. The OB-X8 has "SEM/OB-X-lineage" VCOs/VCFs and they added the Curtis filter to cover some Xa, 8 territory.
Thanks very much for this Tim. I was becoming a little frustrated with trying to save and then find a layer (double). Look forward to more from you on the UBX-A 😀
I really wish they had put a second set of outputs on this for the second layer; particularly as there are no onboard effects and it would have been ideal to send each layer to different effects chains IMHO.
I watch your contributions with great interest, even though hardware synths haven't been my thing for a long time. I have plenty of virtual synths and samplers, such as Omnisphere or those from Native Instruments. Especially this contribution about layering shows me how limited hardware synths can be. I'm also not a performer, but rather a 'recorder' and sound designer. With virtual synths in a DAW, I have much more creative possibilities, especially when it comes to layering. I can control it more differentiatedly across the various tracks of the DAW. Your contributions, ideas, and experiments inspire me to implement these ideas with my virtual synths."
Clicked for cool UB-Xa content, left sad that I got reminded that I will probably never be able to own a Voyager XL :D. That thing towering above the Behringer just looks stunning.
Hey Tim, love your videos. When I first received my UVXA I wasn’t that impressed with the presets. Then I discovered the modulation matrix and the drift/vintage/atrophy parameters. I felt they were kind of hidden in the menu. I’d love to see an exploration of these so-called hidden parameters. Thanks for the many hours of education and entertainment!!!
Another great video. I’ve been mostly working with Pad type sounds with my UB-Xa so far. This video makes me want one make some pluckier sounds. ( as does Vykaar Tone’s video “Behringer UB-Xa does Tangerine Dream riffs”) This synth has a lot of possibilities.
This is high on my want list. And as an added bonus I can go straight from my late 80s Roland rack gear to this without having to wrap my way around a horrible complicated hi res display confusing me with too much useful information.
I'm enjoying the UBXA alot. Hidden in the simple settings are some unusual ones, and it has numerous quirks, such as the voice panning which is global....per atrophy. Spreading the voices makes a giant difference. The balance of layers can be mapped to MIDI, and could be saved in that way. It gives me GAS for an A6....and what would be so nice...an A6 remake with CV access to as much as possible, and as long as I'm dreaming, the Osmose keybed. Even just Osmose bed over a fully analog synth without digital roadblocks...not to say the Osmose we have now is anything but incredible. Eurorack suggests the complexity which keyboard synths lack...but my acoustic piano delivers. Thanks for the tips on saving layers!
That was a useful and clear explanation, thanks. The manual is not that clear about how to store doubles. Also, for balancing between layers, I've found that using pressure after touch driving the vcas, and have them working in opposite sense for each voice, has the balancing effect. It would have been simpler if "balance" was the destination for after touch,,,, but it works. And then the ub-xa pretty much becomes a CS80.
Hmmm, I was under the impression that the Mod section never gets saved. Good to know it does at least get saved in split and layer patches. I did use the layering for creating the Polymoog Vox Humana sound. The video can be found on my channel
Thanks Tim. It is a lovely synth and one I am considering investing in as my first "proper" polysynth. I have a eurorack system and a sampler, and probably don't need a poly, but would like one. I was considering the osmose instead, and using the synths on the laptop or MPC One.
Hey Tim, great video, I love Behringers philosophy, it gives skint people the chance to own some funky and sometimes clunky gear! Anyway, off topic but I’ve managed to work my nuts off and just purchased the UDO Super Gemini, such a complete synth. It would be amazing if you could get hold of one, I would to hear your thought on it, one day maybe!
It's cool that UB allows you to have one of two sound on each separate audio channel although in mono that way you can apply FX independently to each layer! It's tricky to set up with mod matrix
wow thanks for this video its great to know that you can combine any 2 sounds like this (like you can on the prophet 10). having a bi-timbral synth that do not have this ability is pretty useless. for example my prophet 08... its literally the biggest flaw of the 08! you have to program the two sounds from the beginning every single time! another topic - I thought of buying an Oberheim matrix 1000 for the sound but its actually more expensive than the ubxa 😂for the ubxa-d I'll get 16 voices, the ability to program sounds on the spot, bi-timbrality, also its new and works for sure and pretty much with the same sound. It's so weird that it is even something to decide about... happens only with synths. still debating tho
It seems that you came too late to make your move on to the Matrix-1000... 3-4 years ago, I could get two of them for 800 €/each and then, 800 € more for the Stereoping Programmer... That should show you how much I love this wonderful synth... It's as deep and advanced as the best analog modern polysynths, but sounds creamy vintage (although mono out... just add some stereo fx and shines...) A modern take on the Matrix synths are all the DSI/Sequential Prophets (08, Rev2, Mopho, Tetr4...), all them based on a Curtis chip, similar to the one on the Matrix 6/6r/1000... So, probably, if you can't decide between the UB-Xa and the Matrix, the best option could be a desktop Rev2 (if you don't need the keyboard)
Nice video Tim. One thought (may be wrong) if you programme the levels of each of the patches and then save them - wont that be similar to setting the balance (obvious a bit more pfaff) and the ability to save the balance would be simpler?
So another one to add to the update. Balance control saved with Double/Split preset. Work around for now, save the level/volume at the individual preset level. If you're going to use those particular presets only in a Double then I guess you're good, otherwise you'll just have to adjust the balance every time you call up that Double preset.
Hi ! Does the UB-Xa uses more than one MIDI channel for the layers? The SUMMIT has 3 midi channels (global, part A and part B), Hydrasynth Deluxe also has 3 midi channel (Global, Lo and Up). UB-Xa only has one stereo output, SUMMIT and Hydrasyth Del has 2 pairs of stereo output... Thanks for your answer! I love your videos!
I was dealing this afternoon with the Jupiter 50 layers menu😮.... Not fully Analogic, but began complicated. I discovered that the sound was affected by previous modified settings, this becomes Engineering things, not music.
I have a question concerning editing each layer (i.e cutoff resonance, etc.) while in double mode: Is it either pressing the upper or lower button and then tweaking the knobs?
One of the reasons is that it adds a lot of more hardware making it a lot more expensive and we only have 10 fingers to play.. So for most is 8 enough. I would rather have a UBXA 8 voice for 999 instead of 1300 for a 16 voice but maybe that's just me. Most aren't going to layer sounds ever... In their life.
You can't hard-pan patches? That seems like an egregious oversight. Layering a hard panned patch with a nearly identical patch the other side was one of the main things I was looking forward to doing with this.
What’s your opinion on the OB-X8 versus the UB-Xa?
I have no real opinion because I don't own and haven't played an OB-X8 🤷♂️ But they are very different instruments in totality. The OB-X8 provides the SEM filter option which I have personally always attributed to being the "Oberheim" sound. I have that same sound in my OB6 already which is why I have been content to not buy an OB-X8. Obvs I'd love to own one but money doesn't grow on trees!
The UB-Xa doesn't have the SEM option, but it does have double the polyphony plus poly after-touch. Both are desirable things. I think this whole A vs B debate is going to get even more crazy when Behringer launch their UB-X (or whatever they will call it). We're at risk of tying ourselves up in knots arguing which is better (whatever "better" means!)
@@TimShoebridgeno SEM filter is a deal breaker 😔 although I probably couldn't justify buying a 16 voice poly
@@TimShoebridgedespite the heritage, the filter in the OB6 is actually pretty different than the OBX8s
@@TimShoebridge Oberheim indicated they spent over $3 million reverse engineering the OBXa to achieve a very similar sound. they also used 20 OBXa owner beta-testers. So whether it sounds like an SEM filter synth is one thing, but they stand over this sounding like - an OBXa!
@@reecedeyoung6595 The Oberheim OB-Xa (personally my favorite synth) and OB-8 did not have SEM filters, they have Curtis VCOs/VCFs so you would expect a clone/remake/whatever of an OB-Xa to have Curtis based VCOs/VCFs, which the UB does. No surprise there. The UB-X will be SEM based, supposedly.
The OB-X8 has "SEM/OB-X-lineage" VCOs/VCFs and they added the Curtis filter to cover some Xa, 8 territory.
i really liked the sounds you made in this video - and that's what matters; the end result!
Thanks very much for this Tim. I was becoming a little frustrated with trying to save and then find a layer (double). Look forward to more from you on the UBX-A 😀
I really wish they had put a second set of outputs on this for the second layer; particularly as there are no onboard effects and it would have been ideal to send each layer to different effects chains IMHO.
I wish one of the inputs was bigger, soft, and wet but wishes are $$$$$$ aren’t they?
I watch your contributions with great interest, even though hardware synths haven't been my thing for a long time. I have plenty of virtual synths and samplers, such as Omnisphere or those from Native Instruments. Especially this contribution about layering shows me how limited hardware synths can be. I'm also not a performer, but rather a 'recorder' and sound designer. With virtual synths in a DAW, I have much more creative possibilities, especially when it comes to layering. I can control it more differentiatedly across the various tracks of the DAW. Your contributions, ideas, and experiments inspire me to implement these ideas with my virtual synths."
Thanks again Tim for this illuminating video on Layers (Doubles). This is going to add even more fun playing this gem.
Clicked for cool UB-Xa content, left sad that I got reminded that I will probably never be able to own a Voyager XL :D. That thing towering above the Behringer just looks stunning.
Great video Tim ,much to my surprise this synth sounds exceptionally good,never expected this well presented .as ever thank you .
Why surprised? Behringer normally do a pretty decent job.
Stellar as usual Tim.
Hey Tim, love your videos. When I first received my UVXA I wasn’t that impressed with the presets. Then I discovered the modulation matrix and the drift/vintage/atrophy parameters. I felt they were kind of hidden in the menu. I’d love to see an exploration of these so-called hidden parameters. Thanks for the many hours of education and entertainment!!!
Lovely pad, and of course as always a great and informative video.
Another great video. I’ve been mostly working with Pad type sounds with my UB-Xa so far. This video makes me want one make some pluckier sounds. ( as does Vykaar Tone’s video “Behringer UB-Xa does Tangerine Dream riffs”) This synth has a lot of possibilities.
That is a rather nice sounding synth.
This is high on my want list. And as an added bonus I can go straight from my late 80s Roland rack gear to this without having to wrap my way around a horrible complicated hi res display confusing me with too much useful information.
I'm enjoying the UBXA alot. Hidden in the simple settings are some unusual ones, and it has numerous quirks, such as the voice panning which is global....per atrophy. Spreading the voices makes a giant difference. The balance of layers can be mapped to MIDI, and could be saved in that way. It gives me GAS for an A6....and what would be so nice...an A6 remake with CV access to as much as possible, and as long as I'm dreaming, the Osmose keybed. Even just Osmose bed over a fully analog synth without digital roadblocks...not to say the Osmose we have now is anything but incredible. Eurorack suggests the complexity which keyboard synths lack...but my acoustic piano delivers. Thanks for the tips on saving layers!
Very nice video, as usual... Many thanks ! 👍
That was a useful and clear explanation, thanks. The manual is not that clear about how to store doubles. Also, for balancing between layers, I've found that using pressure after touch driving the vcas, and have them working in opposite sense for each voice, has the balancing effect. It would have been simpler if "balance" was the destination for after touch,,,, but it works. And then the ub-xa pretty much becomes a CS80.
Hmmm, I was under the impression that the Mod section never gets saved. Good to know it does at least get saved in split and layer patches. I did use the layering for creating the Polymoog Vox Humana sound. The video can be found on my channel
Thanks Tim. It is a lovely synth and one I am considering investing in as my first "proper" polysynth. I have a eurorack system and a sampler, and probably don't need a poly, but would like one. I was considering the osmose instead, and using the synths on the laptop or MPC One.
Hey Tim, great video, I love Behringers philosophy, it gives skint people the chance to own some funky and sometimes clunky gear! Anyway, off topic but I’ve managed to work my nuts off and just purchased the UDO Super Gemini, such a complete synth. It would be amazing if you could get hold of one, I would to hear your thought on it, one day maybe!
It's cool that UB allows you to have one of two sound on each separate audio channel although in mono that way you can apply FX independently to each layer! It's tricky to set up with mod matrix
Great real-world usage content Tim 👍
Good video Tim 🎉🎉
Congrats Tim, sounds mega, a keeper!! Hopefully even more reliable than the vintage model with being based on newer technology.
It's good to point out how difficult it is to manufacture a 16 voice vco synth 👍
very usefull yours videos .... thanks
Thanks Tim🙏🏻🎶
interesting video
wow thanks for this video its great to know that you can combine any 2 sounds like this (like you can on the prophet 10). having a bi-timbral synth that do not have this ability is pretty useless. for example my prophet 08... its literally the biggest flaw of the 08! you have to program the two sounds from the beginning every single time!
another topic -
I thought of buying an Oberheim matrix 1000 for the sound but its actually more expensive than the ubxa 😂for the ubxa-d I'll get 16 voices, the ability to program sounds on the spot, bi-timbrality, also its new and works for sure and pretty much with the same sound. It's so weird that it is even something to decide about... happens only with synths. still debating tho
It seems that you came too late to make your move on to the Matrix-1000...
3-4 years ago, I could get two of them for 800 €/each and then, 800 € more for the Stereoping Programmer...
That should show you how much I love this wonderful synth...
It's as deep and advanced as the best analog modern polysynths, but sounds creamy vintage (although mono out... just add some stereo fx and shines...)
A modern take on the Matrix synths are all the DSI/Sequential Prophets (08, Rev2, Mopho, Tetr4...), all them based on a Curtis chip, similar to the one on the Matrix 6/6r/1000...
So, probably, if you can't decide between the UB-Xa and the Matrix, the best option could be a desktop Rev2 (if you don't need the keyboard)
Dang... for some years my only "analog" poly has been my beloved Nord Lead 2X... It's about to change...
Thanks Tim 👍
That thing is a beast. Behringer is changing the game right now and I like that hehe
Nice video Tim. One thought (may be wrong) if you programme the levels of each of the patches and then save them - wont that be similar to setting the balance (obvious a bit more pfaff) and the ability to save the balance would be simpler?
Tim. I know you are a big Prologue fan also. If you had to choose Prologue or UBXA....which would you go for? Thanks for the video.
So another one to add to the update. Balance control saved with Double/Split preset. Work around for now, save the level/volume at the individual preset level. If you're going to use those particular presets only in a Double then I guess you're good, otherwise you'll just have to adjust the balance every time you call up that Double preset.
and balanve as mod destination
Thanks, Tim!
Is the sound/heft a bit lightweight, for a 16-voice VCO synth? How does it compare to the Moog One in that respect?
Cheers!
Awesome video! What reverb are you using?
Hi ! Does the UB-Xa uses more than one MIDI channel for the layers? The SUMMIT has 3 midi channels (global, part A and part B), Hydrasynth Deluxe also has 3 midi channel (Global, Lo and Up). UB-Xa only has one stereo output, SUMMIT and Hydrasyth Del has 2 pairs of stereo output... Thanks for your answer! I love your videos!
I was dealing this afternoon with the Jupiter 50 layers menu😮.... Not fully Analogic, but began complicated. I discovered that the sound was affected by previous modified settings, this becomes Engineering things, not music.
I have a question concerning editing each layer (i.e cutoff resonance, etc.) while in double mode:
Is it either pressing the upper or lower button and then tweaking the knobs?
yes
Yes, but you have to remember to save the individual preset you tweaked.
One of the reasons is that it adds a lot of more hardware making it a lot more expensive and we only have 10 fingers to play.. So for most is 8 enough. I would rather have a UBXA 8 voice for 999 instead of 1300 for a 16 voice but maybe that's just me. Most aren't going to layer sounds ever... In their life.
Agree. The digital age of massive polyphony has spoiled us. When the Jupiter 4 was originally released there were not too many complaints 😂
UBXa, Prologue 16, REV2 16, Moog One 16?
Moog is coming out with a new flagship synth soon…
Evidently Arturia is making a 16 voice polybrute....
Don´t forget the Summit 😉... (ok, it´s a hybrid)
@@ingolf7411summit is digital only has analogue filters
@@TheTerracide I know ... but despite the DCOs ... it´s a wonderful synth 😉
You can't hard-pan patches? That seems like an egregious oversight. Layering a hard panned patch with a nearly identical patch the other side was one of the main things I was looking forward to doing with this.
You can hard-pan voices. Set 1-8 voice left and 9-16 right in the voice menu. Save it in the Atrophy menu. Sounds lush!
Tim... if I read well on many pages this device has no effect. What were you using during the test?
That's correct. No effects built in. I'm just using a Lexicon multi effects unit to add some reverb. Not a fancy expensive Lexicon, just an MX unit.
@@TimShoebridge Good to know... thanks
Nice one Tim🫡
It’s work a bit the same with the Matrix 6
shame only 35 locations
No, it’s not multitimbral. It’s bitimbral and that’s a shame with 16 note polyphony. Not very helpful for live sequenced work.
Multi = more than one
Smile more Tim!