Excellent review! Thank you for taking the time do demonstrate these two synths, side-by-side! That clicking / thumping sound at note onset, is most likely due to VCA / VCF balance or bias being offset from the "balanced" setting. When unbalanced, control voltage will bleed through to the audio path, so you'd hear the envelope CV in the audio path. Regarding the Tom Sawyer sound, I believe that is due tp the Oberheim spreading VCF tuning across the unison voices, whereas the Behringer seems to keep VCF relatively constant between voices, which has a less complex sound. Both of those issues could be addressed with firmware update, so well see! The VCF cut-off limit on the Behringer is disappointing; it's possibly firmware fixable, but may be a limitation of the filter circuit or component selection. The Behringer envelope generator attack phase is not typical of vintage synths, in that the exponential "goal" is set equal to the sustain value, rather than a higher value (usually 3 x sustain, or so). This results in the attack phase seeming to linger a bit before the decay phase kicks in. I'm surprised the Behringer team missed that, but it is, perhaps, another firmware addressable issue. Cheers!
I seriously don't care if it sounds mono to mono vs the original. Behringer added so many features and 16 voices analog sounds really Good. @ 1199$ that's totally insane. Thanks for the comparison!!
Thank you very much for the comparison. Well done. The price for 16 voices and poly aftertouch paired with that sound and the other extras in the UB-XA makes me want it. Lets see when they are finally available in numbers here in Germany.
Wow! You've done a proper job of comparing those two. An excellent job in fact. I also love the overhead viewpoint, making us appreciate how "compact" the UB-Xa is. Soundwise I think the Behringer is as close as two OB-Xa synths to the OB-X8. Thanks for a great comparison, you've obviously worked hard at matching them. BTW, had the UB-Xa for a couple of weeks now, and loving it, despite its minor flaws. @19:57 if you want to recreate that patch more faithfully, I suggest watching Tom Noise's excellent video tutorial on YT on how to program that on the UB-Xa. It's called Tom Sawyer By Rush.
Oberheim staff member Marcus Ryle compared the OBX8 side by side with any important OB series-instr. also with an OBXa. There weren't any significant differences at all but the UB-Xa requires external adjustments if (even) helpful. To me the differences are much bigger than just component tolerances. I'm disappointed. Their pro800 is closer to it's original. Because behringer cloned well in the past I'd expected more authenticity, especially from an ambitious project like UB-Xa.
@@PaulC-Drums Minor flaws (for me) are: red LCD display is poorly located, the performance section is not saved with a patch (might be corrected in a future firmware upgrade maybe?), notchless digital encoder feels a bit flimsy.
Thanks for these deep comparison videos Starsky! Best in the Business! I feel like Behringer will be able to get these even closer with a few firmware updates.
@@StarskyCarrdo you still own your UBXa? Seems like the new 2.0 firmware should fix the DC thump in the envelopes. Very curious to hear your findings! :)
You would be much better off and even save some money buying a UDO super gemini. Or you could pick up a used UDO super 6 for about 2k. OBX8 is cool but it ain't worth that sort of money
Understandable, doesn't really scratch the Oberheim itch in my ears. Also, I found out the hard way that buying the first batch of massive polysynths is not risk free. Let others beta test them and badger the manufacturer.
Yeah, the highs are a bit more vibrant on the Oberheim as well. Whether it’s $3500 worth of difference is up to us. If you’re wealthy or a professional, it’s potentially worth the extra cash. But for anybody who is working class or a hobbyist, the Beh simply makes it possible to own a version of the Oberheim sound. I generally find Behringer’s clones to sound very close, but slightly less beefy, and more "precise" than the originals. That’s the only word i can think of to describe it. Used to work with an original 2600 for years, and know the sound super well. Picked up a Beh 2600, and it sounds great but it is lacking the more ‘goopy’ heavy sound of the original; it’s more akin to something like a software synth in its tone. I still love my B2600, it’s just not the same thing.
I second this…love to see your take on it. I have the Moog Subsequent 37 and the Pro 3. I go back and forth on them as to favorites, but I will say that the Moog is much easier to get a “usable” sound with. I’d welcome any comments where someone might also own both.
Moog and Sequential filters are totally different animals. Apples and oranges imo. Moog filter is more fuzzy, like a big warm fuzzy scarf. Sequential is more streamlined and clean. I have a Matriarch and a Pro 2, and i adore both of em. I usually reach for Matriarch for basslines, and Pro 2 for strange sound design, percussive stuff and leads. But sometimes the Moog is a bit heavy in a mix, Sequential tends to stay out of the way more.
Thank you very much for the insightful comparison, which I'm sure many people were longing for. Good idea, with EQ one could eventually bring the UB-Xa closer to the originals. It didn't work in my case with Andromeda's SEM-VCF. On that polarizing instrument 2- and four-pole VCFs have exactly the same hi cut. There its totally impossible to attain the OB-series' gliss because non existent frequencies unfortunately can't get emphasized. With the UB-Xa it's perhaps somehow possible.
We're at the stage here in 2024 where an oscilloscope is required to tell the diff. Awesome comparison TY. When you mentioned the pop at the start my JP-8000 and 8080 had the same click but on the release. Very annoying and I often wondered why it was not picked up when reviewed back in the day by all the magazines like Sound on Sound and Future Music. Drove me mad. Otherwise a superb synth but its quit a big thing considering it affects everything.
I wasn't about to comment, but this video deserves another one, if only for the TH-cam algorithm. Great comparison. And you are one of the few people who actually pronounce Behringer very well.
Well done! I know which Faust would have bought.....mine showed up a couple days ago. Just learning it, but not disappointed. I love how easy it is to use. The screen is totally fine as is, to my surprise. Vintage modes are sweet. It's stereo! Really nice once I spread the voices. Arp and sequencer super easy. Perf LFO works good for poly AT. Keyboard light, not my favorite, but good enough. Just getting into the bi-timbral oomf. It's roughly the size and weight of VirusTI. Equally quirky. Keeper.
~95% of the sound for less than 25% of the money, that's hard to process! Great comparison, highlights the similarities (many) and differences (significant) very well. Hard to imagine buyers of either being disappointed though.
Version 000.003.117 (V2.0 Update) (02 Sep 2024) Bug Fixes: Fixed ‘Thumping Issue’, this was due to the background calibration routine changing the pitch and pulse width CVs the moment that it detected that a particular voice was silent, even if this voice wasn’t currently being calibrated. The result was a click each time the envelope was triggered which was particularly showing in unison and envelopes with a fast attack phase.
The main thing I care about with the Behringer is that it has that filter that doesn’t lose low end with resonance. And to my ear, it’s doing a great job! Thanks for the great video!
This is quit telling. It seems like the resonance behavior really brings out the differences in them. Though, I wonder, with so much control over the atrophy settings on the UB-Xa, if it could sound a bit closer.
@@jibberish00 This guy pretty much nails the Tom Sawyer Growl. th-cam.com/video/5DQJzZ4byxk/w-d-xo.html Tom Sawyer by Rush - Recreating the bass sweep on the Behringer UB-Xa
agreed - though the very first chords played at 0.02 then 0.07 tell me the same thing. I know some peoples opinion of "close enough" is different to others, but Id never be happy with the Behringer after hearing those differences - there night and day to me (as much as they can be between similar designs). Maybe its because Im primarily a guitarist, and I can tell the difference between an ash and alder bodied strat, or a 22 v 24 fret neck. Cant fault the UB for the price - and 16 voice with poly AT is nice as well - but...... nothing but the sound really matters, and the OB definitely pips the UB there. Ive held off so far until some comparisons came out - and I do need a desktop version (I already have a Poly AT Keybed) (the UB will be available in that form factor too), but Ill be getting the big wallet out for the OB.
This thing doesn't even need a comparison. It sounds beautiful in every way. I bought one without even thinking about it. And it lives up to my expectation perfectly. And for a quarter of the cost. Oberheim, I know you can do this too! And start offering synths that are cost friendly to a lot of people.
@StarskyCarr I noticed on the dive bomb patch you were trying to replicate, that you didn’t have the filter tracking on the UB, which spreads the filter resonance out, even on the lowest notes. It’s a different sound especially in unison. Great video. Cheers👍
I'm not a Behringer hater by any stretch, but that 'bump' sound on the UB's note-on is super distracting. I hope they can sort it out with a firmware update like they did for the Pro-800's envelopes.
The "bump" that seems so distracting is ridiculous! In the context of a song, you'd never be able to tell which is which! Remember, these synths are made to play music! These so-called distractions will never be heard in a song!
Hi guys, just want to inform that the UBXA has been updated to 2.0 firmware free of charge. Can you make a comparison video with the now updated filter for the UBXA and your thoughts?
Very very close, but the Oberheim sounds that tiny bit brighter/fizzier. The Behringer sounds like the filter is a touch darker. Maybe editing can get them closer, but I suspect that's just the character it has. The difference doesn't justify splashing out thousands more in my books.
@@SPAZZOID100 you keep spewing the same nonsense over and over, build quality build quality, for something that costs 4.5 times more, you would expect an increase of build quality, that doesn't make it worth 4.5 times more though.
@@SPAZZOID100 the build quality of Behringer gear has been fine for ages. It also has its own type of vintage knob, which sounded pretty great to me. It's also 16 voice and poly after touch. Amazing value for money.
haha I know - I think they first mentioned it about 6 years ago. It does, however, show that even for a huge company like Behringer recreating classic with modern tech isn't as simple as we might think.
In the Oberheim sits no more electronics than the Behringer. Time for an open gear youtube movie :-) You pay for the Name and everyone goes with the hype. Nice video and have fun!
I don t want either but i think the ob sounds too open. It reminds me of the ob6, i did not like it either. Sold it. And too open is strange since i would pick a prodigy over a grandmother, and that oldy was more open then the new moog. Thanks for the video! Saves me thousands 😎
About to watch this, with equal abundances of apprehension, excitement and dread - all at the same time: as I just bought an OB-X8, after auctioning off my kidneys. Please justify it for me, Starsky. 🤣
I think I'm going to get a lot of happy UBXa owners and a lot of happy OBX-8 owners ... For the money the B is amazing, and the OB shows why it's more expensive.
@@StarskyCarr As long as the last sentence stands, I’ll use that to help me sleep at night! Thank you so much for making these incredible videos for us! Big fan of your channel! 👏🏼🙏🏼
@@AdamLeeGuitaristworth auctioning off your kidney, I think I gotta do same 😅 a day before starskys ubxa video came out I placed a deposit on a used P5 as was not fealing it with the existing ubxa demos. It's a review I'm not gonna watch as don't want regrets 😅
I would definitely choose the UB-Xa. And have a lot of money left for other gear! In fact, I did. And not regretting it one bit. The 16 voices and Mod Matrix on it are a huge advantage.
@@t2m1412 Honestly, when listening carefully, you're right. But in a mix, you'd be hard-pressed to tell the difference. Let's play and enjoy each other's synths!
I definitely personally hear a difference...but not enough to justify the price difference. The fact Behringer's desktop model of it is $800 means that's the one I'm going for
The low end is most likely caused by the VCAs opening. Most all synths have that. The first thing I do when mixing, is high pass them a bit. I imagine the more notes you play, the more that lowend sums, so in chord mode you'd definitely get a hefty thump.
The click is a common thing in behringer synths that i thiiink comes from the vco resetting everytime? You can always disable it in the behringer software editor.
@@MrSunnyBra yeah exactly, it's not a bad thing at all. In fact I think I prefer the Behringer sound. But having this said you can EQ a brighter sound and remove of that top end or use a LP filter. But it's MUCH harder to create brightness if needed hehe Anyways Behringer are killing it right now.
No one is going to be able to tell what is what in a mix, anyone that says otherwise is telling porky pies. Who cares in the end, it's what you do with them, not what they cost. 4.5 times the cost, but not 4.5 times the sound quality. PAT keybed and 16 voices with MPE support goes a long way today. OBX8 should still find its audience no doubt, just that the days of having to be wealthy to get that sound is now a thing of the past. Great vid, thx.
If you apply that logic to each instrument in your song (use cheaper synth, ampsims, only plug in processing) and compare that to a song with better synth, real Amp, hardware fx. You will notice that in the mix! Can u get away with going cheap on 1 aspect? Perhaps sure, but not all
@@LordBiffMusic what are you even talking about? You need to compare apples and apples when you are working with mixes, you just changed the play field with plugins vs hardware. If you use hardware fx and these synths, you will get the same results. I don't think you really thought this one out.
idk man LordBiff made perfect sense to me. They mentioned plugins as just an example of somewhere people often use cheap gear in their signal chain. If you cheap out all over your track, be it cheap hardware synths or cheap amps or cheap mics (or cheap-sounding VSTs) you will notice a difference in the final track. To quote LordBiff: "Can u get away with going cheap on 1 aspect? Perhaps sure, but not all" @@dankeplace
As somebody who can't afford either unit, I simply cannot unhear that "click" or "thump", or whatever you want to call it, when you trigger notes no the UB-Xa, and to me, the filter on the OB-X8 just sounds a bit smoother and cleaner. That being said, both synths sound great, and in an actual song, I doubt you'd be able to identify whether you've used one or the other.
I'm just watching to amuse myself as I ended up returning the X8 (why?, well just look at the used prices. That how I felt about it) back when it first came out and I'm considering the UB because of it's features and price. In a blind test that included the X8, UB, and OB6, simply picking out which tones I like better, I picked the UB and X8 pretty evenly, and the OB6 dead last all 16 (I think) times as it turns out. It kinda crazy how much my eyes influence my hearing, so to speak.
I still prefer the OB-6. I was excited about the X8 coming out only to realize I didn't want it. Definitely don't want the Behringer, since the Xa is my least favorite Oberheim.
@@cfs That's fair. My favorite synth ever is the Xa. Too bad I can't keep an original. No point in getting one if I can't afford to keep it. Maybe one day when I have money to burn and my new best friend is a tech. 😜
i definitely hear the distinction in tone and prefer the X8's "openness" and depth much more than the muffily, less lifely character on the UB. The latter of those which to me is my gripe with the OB6, which being only 2 pole, sounds a bit soft
Excellent work as always and as always when you do one of these I can't tell a difference. I think the only one that I ever did was the 2 poly-6s. I was hoping we'd get a song where you use both together though.
Think I heard Jamie from Geosynths mention that there is a little bit more clarity with the different voices when you play chords on the OBX-8 and I think I'm hearing that here. Still can't grumble with 16 voices and at that price! They're really close... I'd always go with the OBX-8 as I always want to give props to the originators and I think we need to keep those companies alive... Have to say I love your overlay... seems like Sequential missed a trick there!
Cheers. I’ve a few videos in the Minifreak. If you search on my channel you’ll find them. This is the main one (I think). MiniFreak Quickstart // How to Program and Edit Tones th-cam.com/video/7WB0p90JDFo/w-d-xo.html
Thanks for this Starsky, and taking the time to showcase the great OBX8 and the Behringer. I own a Roland D50 and would love to she how the tabletop version would interface with that? But in the end, I think this would be a nice option to serious look at for use with a classic rock cover band. Cheers Mate. RJ
Interesting comparison. There seems to be constant lowpass engaged on Behringer version, which tames the topends and it is definitely noticable. Curious if it is sortable through the menu or is it part of calibration.. or even a hard set design choice. Wondering. Both sounds pretty fantastic. OB8X sounds for me bit better and more matured, but PolyAT is easy the winner in favour for Behringer.
Great presentation. Behringer obviously is a great brand I respect but my ears make me more inlove with ob-x8. Right off the bat SUPERIOR. I would however easily buy the ub_xa coz its price frendly and sounds good too. Asante sana🙏🏼😊👍🏼
I'm reading comments here and the general sentiment is "Close enough for me!" waited so long for the Xa to actually arrive... I waited IMPATIENTLY... BUT, I can hear a large difference between the two. 90% of the time I can hear a difference, (100% with actual patches, and not just chorded raw oscillators), and the difference is major for me. The Xa is ragged and shabby, which generally is my sound (and ethos), but for the sounds that this synth is supposed to be able to do, and for what I want it for... no, the shabbiness defeats the purpose. And I'm dismayed by this. I'd hoped that I could afford the Xa when it arrived... and I was awaiting before (kho video and) the dollar collapse (or inflation added from 50-100% to the price of everything). But arriving when it did, with a higher price than expected, and now the price has increased again... even the Xa is out of my price range. I mean, I don't have any money to spend (or any money at all), I'd have to sell gear to afford it. Was planning on selling my AX-60 and Alpha Juno to afford the Xa, that was going to be a good deal for me. Those are my only two analog poly's, and the Xa would cover that ground, so all good. But with the price increase, I'd have to sell a couple more smaller, but significant pieces to my workflow. And the Xa wouldn't be covering the lost abilities of those pieces, like it would cover the AX and the Alpha. BUT... here is what I'm trying to say... the Xa is not making the sound I'm looking for, and with the price increase, it's just slipped beyond my reach, anyway. But, if I were going to sell my cherished gear (I love my AX-60, love the sound, am frustrated to hell by the interface) for a analog poly, it'd have to be the X8 to actually scratch my itch. Man, I've lost the plot of this comment. Sorry. I'm just really disappointed by the Xa here. Maybe all of this is fixable with the slop settins, sorry, am losing my mind, can't remember words right now. Just saying maybe the system settings on the Xa can be tweaked to achieve a more mature, put together sound that is powerful and ordered, but still scintillating alive analog, like the X8 is. I find with all of the new analog poly's, they're either too stiff, so almost digital sounding, no life, or they're made with slop settings that all are too disordered, like the slop is too sloppy, and you don't get that living analog sound, you get the last teleportation from the movie The Fly, just an unviable mess that can't stand up, let alone live. But the X8 has THAT sound, that analog poly sound, where it is clean and tight, but still shimmering and modulating and not with lfo's grossly detuning just the osc's, but with living, breathing analog life. It's just right. But, lol, $3,500, that might as well be 30 million doll hairs, it's an imaginary number. Anyway, great time to be a consumer, if you're capable of consumption, otherwise, not so great. Let us all carry on, anyway, as we must.
Cool video! I've been really happy exploring the UB-Xa so far. I haven't tested yet, but I wonder if the high end roll off is present on all outputs. I wonder if the balancing transformers are causing some loss...
It is lovely to see how many guys are trying to find defects in a device costing one fourth of the original. Nice. Buy the OB if you can. It's a wonderful machine. My opinion: there would be less guys reporting that if tests would have been made "double blind". I think I will consider Hydrasynth Deluxe. Less hype, more waves, more fun. Maybe. I need to test it seriously.
Good, useful vid, thx. But you're not a Rush fan, and it shows! "Dive Bomb"?? You/they spelled Tom Sawyer wrong! The UB-Xa patch had wayyy too much slow vibrato, pulsing/beating...which may have been a function of too much deture, but it was too warbly. Yes, I'm picky...but you started it, lol. Liked and subbed.
sound similar to me. I think it depends what your goals are. If you play for yourself and wear headphones, you 'might' be able to tell them apart. In a mix, based on what I'm hearing here, there is NO WAY you could tell them apart.
Considering that this is 1200 USD, and assuming UB-X will also be 1200 USD, you can get both Oberheim ‘sounds’ for 2400 with Keybeds, and extra voices, being able to use each independently, which is cheaper than a sans-keybed OB-X8 by 1100. Even if its slightly off, for most sounds, its sounds great, and is truly a bargain. Hope to see UB-X soon.
Are you spending $2400 USD to get a Bargain? or cause you really need 32 oberhiem voices & in 2 giant keyboards at once.... because if I'm spending that kind of money im spending it to get the best sound quality possible & saving space in my studio to fit another very different instrument equal quality next to it by having it in one OBX-8 which i can use Bi-timbrally to paly 2 separate parts of 2 different model oberhiem's in their perfected form ....NOT to get a kind of thier... but miss the last 8% of fine qualities.... It's always the last 8-10% that matters in separating the very good from the exceptional in all things.
Well yes, the OB X8 sounds more brilliant and a little bit bigger. But it this is not worth the Price for me. The UB-Xa hits the 80s Oberheim Sound for me, so i would always go with the Behringer. But both are great Synths and this Video was great to show the Differences.
To all of the commenters here. This is a comparison with another copy of the OBxa. Sure they sound different but which one is closer to the original? And anyway , what does that matter if you have only oneself them? Human ear can’t remember sounds, you can just compare
Somebody posted on the forums if you put the resonance around 3 o'clock and use 2 pole filter and engage tracking you will get some of the top end back. Obviously not an ideal solution but I think it sounds better to my ears with more presence. Many patches sound a bit dull to my liking. Also, if we had a way to quickly toggle the LCD contrast (Shit combo button) between when we sit down vs standing up could be useful workaround to some to solve problem with lcd viewing angle. Just my observation
Hopefully a firmware update can bring them closer. That click needs to go and the Oberheim sizzle is a hallmark of that OB sound. What always stumps me is how these issues end up in a production unit. 6 years developing this synth and in one 27 min video we can hear where the UBXA falls short. Did no one over those 6 years notice the click? Or say hey guys we are missing that sizzle? Why are we rolling off the top end? I don’t get it.
It does amaze me, I did hold great hopes for this Synth but between delays and what not I got peed off in the final moments and ditched the idea of purchasing this.
In case you haven't been paying attention for the last 30 years, making unreliable ripoff trash is kind of Behringer's thing. He could be making his own unique synths but instead he knows there's a market for people that want the real thing and think a similar paint job and name makes his crap related.
In a song, which is what these synths are made for, you'd never be able to tell the difference! Quit being a cork sniffers and play music! Sometimes, these little differences are just plain ridiculous!
Beautiful Lesson! :) I watched the entire video with my headphones on and the first patchs you showd I couldn't feel any difference. But on other sounds the OBX8 seems to have a bit of more brilhance. Is that hi freq limit on the UBXa set in stone by hardware or can it be tweaked by adjustments? :)
Excellent comparison - pretty damn close if you ask me and plenty close enough to get those sounds at the Behringer price. The original is subtly richer, sometimes obvious, sometimes not, but It's the only way I could get these sounds in hardware form as the original is a really big spend for what it is. Shame about the initial transient pop, but maybe they can fix that with a firmware update.
That rolloff that you discuss at 5:00ish may just be something to do with drive/gain that's pushing the whole curve down a bit. Hard to tell looking at the graph, but seems likely. It might be something that can be worked around. Just a guess. Haven't played with the UB yet. It could also be that the filter control signal doesn't open it 100% (relative to how open it is on the OB-X8). Also might be able to be patched/calibrated or worked around. Edit: Ha! I should have just kept watching. You mentioned the filter right after I typed that.
I agree that "emulation" is the best term for this type of a synth - I hate "clone", because they are not! Anyway, great comparison. The UBXa comes pretty close most of the time. I do have to say that I like the "presence" of the OBX8 and when the sounds are different, that's the sound I gravitate towards. But for four times the price? I am not sure... And given that the UBXa is 16 voices, there is the mod matrix, poly aftertouch, etc., it starts looking like a great deal. But then, the OBX8 has those other filters and such and... lol. Anyway, again, great video.
Oberheim will be glad to know that I'm not getting the Behringer ... because I got fed up waiting and bought a different "master keyboard that has good sounds" instead - a DX7 IID 😎
@@ironinquisitor3656I’m old school and need tactile gear. Software is immensely unsatisfying to me. Not to mention being ball and chained from then on to paid updates on the VST AND the OS of your system, both of which will eventually become unsupported by the companies involved, making it very possible to become obsolete and impossible to use.
@@entropybentwhistle Actually, upgrading the OS, DAW, and plugins on a computer is always a choice. People act like you HAVE to do updates, but you don't. I have several older computers that are frozen in time, and they work fine. You don't have to do updates. People usually want to do them to gain new features, but that sometimes comes with baggage.
Caveat - if you want to surf the web on the same computer as your audio software, then security updates may be important... but you don't have to surf the web on your DAW machine.
People want that analog harmonic distortion though plugins haven't got that and it is difficult to recreate with VST distortion effects, You switch a piece of good analog gear on and it has that sound straight off the bat, there is a huge difference between the 2 concerning that.
There is no comparison, the oberheim is open and as you play up and down you hear the richness and all that makes this unit what we known it to be for over 40 years! Someone please make a proper affordable sampler workstation and let’s move on! Sound matters !
Bingo. Best comment top to bottom. Affordable sampling keyboard with an analog filter would be lovely. I’m using a Prophet X, and sent it a whole mess of my own wav. But, it’s a pain because you have to use an editor to prepare the sounds first. That said, it sounds absolutely insane due to the great stereo filters. (Same filter as UDO and 3rd Wave iirc)
Behringer and their utterly shamless copies always make me smile. 😀 At least the kids on low budget can join the dawless community. At least that... Nice one Brosky, your comparison vids are the best on TH-cam!
Interesting thanks for doing this comparison. The behringer got closer than I thought it might. I do prefer the filter in the Oberheim and overall everything sounds just slightly richer. But its tiny margins. Is the Oberheim worth the price difference, probably not considering the mod matrix, aftertouch and voice count on the Behringer. The atrophy settings are really nice too.
Nobody in the audience while they’re jamming having a good time listening to music are going to notice or even care if it’s oberheim or behringer, it’s all about the feel, being musical and the song. They both sound basically identical, and I’d be fine using either one on a gig, but I do like saving money, so…..
Im thinking that both the thud and the frequency limit in the ubxa could have a link to the filter resonance. I think the thud stems from DC being present at the VCA input. That may be reduced by having just a slight bit of resonance in the filter. That could also increase the high frequency content. Plus, it is evident that the filter frequency doesnt go quite as high, would ne nice with a comparison of of the frequency response when the filters are 'matched' rather than on 'max open'
![SAFEPLANET - ดาวเคราะห์ [ THE PLANET ]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/4X1XL3I_k3c/mqdefault.jpg)
Let's face it, this is the video the Internet has been waiting for when it comes to people interested in the UBXA 😂😀
😂. Yep!
Should have just programmed it properly @@tenalock
@@Dudderlyful I want to hear! I havn't heard the ob resonant sweep matched on this yet! Still it is amazing value.
Close enough for me! My UB-Xa arrives in a couple days - very excited for it!
Exactly how I feel. It's close enough. I love mine.
My take-away: They both sound great, and either would be welcome in my little studio!
Excellent review! Thank you for taking the time do demonstrate these two synths, side-by-side! That clicking / thumping sound at note onset, is most likely due to VCA / VCF balance or bias being offset from the "balanced" setting. When unbalanced, control voltage will bleed through to the audio path, so you'd hear the envelope CV in the audio path. Regarding the Tom Sawyer sound, I believe that is due tp the Oberheim spreading VCF tuning across the unison voices, whereas the Behringer seems to keep VCF relatively constant between voices, which has a less complex sound. Both of those issues could be addressed with firmware update, so well see! The VCF cut-off limit on the Behringer is disappointing; it's possibly firmware fixable, but may be a limitation of the filter circuit or component selection. The Behringer envelope generator attack phase is not typical of vintage synths, in that the exponential "goal" is set equal to the sustain value, rather than a higher value (usually 3 x sustain, or so). This results in the attack phase seeming to linger a bit before the decay phase kicks in. I'm surprised the Behringer team missed that, but it is, perhaps, another firmware addressable issue. Cheers!
And he didn’t have KBD Tracking turned on- essential for this patch
thanks! The ulinger needs some serious updates but at the end of the day is a 16 voice dual vco analog synth for$1200
I seriously don't care if it sounds mono to mono vs the original. Behringer added so many features and 16 voices analog sounds really Good. @ 1199$ that's totally insane. Thanks for the comparison!!
Yep. Features vs quality, with a price difference.
@@cfs Oberheim owner ? ;)
I have to wait for a Behringer desktop as my studio in the kitchen.
It has existed since 2019, just not mass produced yet.
What about the poly aftertouch though would you need
a poly aftertouch enabled midi keyboard to get the
aftertouch to work.
@err4071 I'm getting UBXA Desktop to use with Hydrasynth Keyboard for poly AT.
Thank you very much for the comparison. Well done. The price for 16 voices and poly aftertouch paired with that sound and the other extras in the UB-XA makes me want it. Lets see when they are finally available in numbers here in Germany.
Wow! You've done a proper job of comparing those two. An excellent job in fact. I also love the overhead viewpoint, making us appreciate how "compact" the UB-Xa is. Soundwise I think the Behringer is as close as two OB-Xa synths to the OB-X8. Thanks for a great comparison, you've obviously worked hard at matching them.
BTW, had the UB-Xa for a couple of weeks now, and loving it, despite its minor flaws.
@19:57 if you want to recreate that patch more faithfully, I suggest watching Tom Noise's excellent video tutorial on YT on how to program that on the UB-Xa. It's called Tom Sawyer By Rush.
What, in your opinion, are its minor flaws? Very likely to purchase one for myself, but I'm just curious.
Oberheim staff member Marcus Ryle compared the OBX8 side by side with any important OB series-instr. also with an OBXa. There weren't any significant differences at all but the UB-Xa requires external adjustments if (even) helpful. To me the differences are much bigger than just component tolerances. I'm disappointed. Their pro800 is closer to it's original. Because behringer cloned well in the past I'd expected more authenticity, especially from an ambitious project like UB-Xa.
@@PaulC-Drums
Minor flaws (for me) are: red LCD display is poorly located, the performance section is not saved with a patch (might be corrected in a future firmware upgrade maybe?), notchless digital encoder feels a bit flimsy.
haha , no, if you compare to OB-Xas, they're gonna be a lot closer than comparing the behringer "we tried to get as close as we could" knock off.
@@djpopcorns
BTW, I have since sold the UB-Xa and got an OB-X8.
Thanks for these deep comparison videos Starsky! Best in the Business! I feel like Behringer will be able to get these even closer with a few firmware updates.
Cheers, and yeah the updates normally iron out little issues or enhance stuff pretty quickly.
@@StarskyCarrdo you still own your UBXa? Seems like the new 2.0 firmware should fix the DC thump in the envelopes. Very curious to hear your findings! :)
Your videos are always top notch, a real gift for us all! Thank you!
Thanks.
Yes!! Been waiting for this! Edit: as much as I appreciate Behringer’s attempt (and it is close), I will continue saving for the OB-X8.
Sort of close. The build is more solid on the OBX8.
You would be much better off and even save some money buying a UDO super gemini. Or you could pick up a used UDO super 6 for about 2k. OBX8 is cool but it ain't worth that sort of money
@@uv77mc85. Gemini has some nice features, but not worth its current asking price!
Understandable, doesn't really scratch the Oberheim itch in my ears. Also, I found out the hard way that buying the first batch of massive polysynths is not risk free. Let others beta test them and badger the manufacturer.
One is an OB-X, one is an OB-Xa. There will be differences.
Thanks Starsky, you put a lot of work into this & enjoyed the comparison....also enjoyed watching the chilled cat 😀
that's about as chilled as I've ever seen him. He's the house guard cat and patrols around checking everyone coming, going or just walking past 😂🐈⬛😸
My main takeaway is I need that overlay for my Oberheim!
Nah.
O yes, looks so much better indeed.
@@SPAZZOID100yes
@@SPAZZOID100Yup…it has the Page 2 functions printed on it.
Where do they sell it?
It’s even better that they are not totally identical. It is so good that UbXa has its own timbre flavor!
yeah but it's a resort of not hitting the mark. 😂
Great Video , thanks for taking the time . for me the OBX8 sounded more rich open and with depth especially in the low end
Yeah, the highs are a bit more vibrant on the Oberheim as well. Whether it’s $3500 worth of difference is up to us. If you’re wealthy or a professional, it’s potentially worth the extra cash. But for anybody who is working class or a hobbyist, the Beh simply makes it possible to own a version of the Oberheim sound.
I generally find Behringer’s clones to sound very close, but slightly less beefy, and more "precise" than the originals. That’s the only word i can think of to describe it. Used to work with an original 2600 for years, and know the sound super well. Picked up a Beh 2600, and it sounds great but it is lacking the more ‘goopy’ heavy sound of the original; it’s more akin to something like a software synth in its tone. I still love my B2600, it’s just not the same thing.
Got to say, you are one of the best on TH-cam for sound-matching two different synths. Good job.
We still need a Pro 3 video from you, Starsky … ! 🙏🏼
I second this…love to see your take on it. I have the Moog Subsequent 37 and the Pro 3. I go back and forth on them as to favorites, but I will say that the Moog is much easier to get a “usable” sound with. I’d welcome any comments where someone might also own both.
I'll have to see if I can borrow one from somewhere.
Moog and Sequential filters are totally different animals. Apples and oranges imo. Moog filter is more fuzzy, like a big warm fuzzy scarf. Sequential is more streamlined and clean. I have a Matriarch and a Pro 2, and i adore both of em. I usually reach for Matriarch for basslines, and Pro 2 for strange sound design, percussive stuff and leads. But sometimes the Moog is a bit heavy in a mix, Sequential tends to stay out of the way more.
Thank you very much for the insightful comparison, which I'm sure many people were longing for. Good idea, with EQ one could eventually bring the UB-Xa closer to the originals. It didn't work in my case with Andromeda's SEM-VCF. On that polarizing instrument 2- and four-pole VCFs have exactly the same hi cut. There its totally impossible to attain the OB-series' gliss because non existent frequencies unfortunately can't get emphasized. With the UB-Xa it's perhaps somehow possible.
We're at the stage here in 2024 where an oscilloscope is required to tell the diff.
Awesome comparison TY. When you mentioned the pop at the start my JP-8000 and 8080 had the same click but on the release. Very annoying and I often wondered why it was not picked up when reviewed back in the day by all the magazines like Sound on Sound and Future Music. Drove me mad. Otherwise a superb synth but its quit a big thing considering it affects everything.
I wasn't about to comment, but this video deserves another one, if only for the TH-cam algorithm. Great comparison.
And you are one of the few people who actually pronounce Behringer very well.
Thanks 🙏
Well done! I know which Faust would have bought.....mine showed up a couple days ago. Just learning it, but not disappointed. I love how easy it is to use. The screen is totally fine as is, to my surprise. Vintage modes are sweet. It's stereo! Really nice once I spread the voices. Arp and sequencer super easy. Perf LFO works good for poly AT. Keyboard light, not my favorite, but good enough. Just getting into the bi-timbral oomf. It's roughly the size and weight of VirusTI. Equally quirky. Keeper.
~95% of the sound for less than 25% of the money, that's hard to process! Great comparison, highlights the similarities (many) and differences (significant) very well. Hard to imagine buyers of either being disappointed though.
and layer 2 patches in Dual mode for a HUGE 8-voice OB poly
Been waiting for this one! Now add the OB-X8 and that'll be gg.
Version 000.003.117 (V2.0 Update) (02 Sep 2024)
Bug Fixes:
Fixed ‘Thumping Issue’, this was due to the background calibration routine changing the pitch and
pulse width CVs the moment that it detected that a particular voice was silent, even if this voice wasn’t
currently being calibrated. The result was a click each time the envelope was triggered which was
particularly showing in unison and envelopes with a fast attack phase.
Ta dah!! I knew I wasn’t hearing things 👍 excellent. They are very good at addressing these things.
The main thing I care about with the Behringer is that it has that filter that doesn’t lose low end with resonance. And to my ear, it’s doing a great job! Thanks for the great video!
This part was all I needed to know about their differences:
19:05 OB-X8
19:50 UB-XA
Btw... Thanks for doing this video!
This is quit telling. It seems like the resonance behavior really brings out the differences in them. Though, I wonder, with so much control over the atrophy settings on the UB-Xa, if it could sound a bit closer.
There are others who have come much closer than this... th-cam.com/video/Kn3JJuZsHKU/w-d-xo.htmlsi=c4xIWgEo4v_cvWvQ
There's also this one and Tom brings up some really good info .... th-cam.com/video/5DQJzZ4byxk/w-d-xo.htmlsi=Pnl116yps7VfQN1O
@@jibberish00 This guy pretty much nails the Tom Sawyer Growl. th-cam.com/video/5DQJzZ4byxk/w-d-xo.html Tom Sawyer by Rush - Recreating the bass sweep on the Behringer UB-Xa
agreed - though the very first chords played at 0.02 then 0.07 tell me the same thing. I know some peoples opinion of "close enough" is different to others, but Id never be happy with the Behringer after hearing those differences - there night and day to me (as much as they can be between similar designs). Maybe its because Im primarily a guitarist, and I can tell the difference between an ash and alder bodied strat, or a 22 v 24 fret neck. Cant fault the UB for the price - and 16 voice with poly AT is nice as well - but...... nothing but the sound really matters, and the OB definitely pips the UB there. Ive held off so far until some comparisons came out - and I do need a desktop version (I already have a Poly AT Keybed) (the UB will be available in that form factor too), but Ill be getting the big wallet out for the OB.
This thing doesn't even need a comparison. It sounds beautiful in every way. I bought one without even thinking about it. And it lives up to my expectation perfectly. And for a quarter of the cost. Oberheim, I know you can do this too! And start offering synths that are cost friendly to a lot of people.
@StarskyCarr I noticed on the dive bomb patch you were trying to replicate, that you didn’t have the filter tracking on the UB, which spreads the filter resonance out, even on the lowest notes. It’s a different sound especially in unison. Great video. Cheers👍
I'm not a Behringer hater by any stretch, but that 'bump' sound on the UB's note-on is super distracting. I hope they can sort it out with a firmware update like they did for the Pro-800's envelopes.
I agree... almost wish he hadn't pointed it out; ha! Ruins the UB a little, aside from the X8 also sounding more clear and pure in the top end.
The "bump" that seems so distracting is ridiculous! In the context of a song, you'd never be able to tell which is which! Remember, these synths are made to play music! These so-called distractions will never be heard in a song!
@@dez1989 ok
Hi guys, just want to inform that the UBXA has been updated to 2.0 firmware free of charge. Can you make a comparison video with the now updated filter for the UBXA and your thoughts?
Very very close, but the Oberheim sounds that tiny bit brighter/fizzier.
The Behringer sounds like the filter is a touch darker. Maybe editing can get them closer, but I suspect that's just the character it has.
The difference doesn't justify splashing out thousands more in my books.
Build quality plus vintage knob.
@@SPAZZOID100 you keep spewing the same nonsense over and over, build quality build quality, for something that costs 4.5 times more, you would expect an increase of build quality, that doesn't make it worth 4.5 times more though.
@@SPAZZOID100 the build quality of Behringer gear has been fine for ages.
It also has its own type of vintage knob, which sounded pretty great to me.
It's also 16 voice and poly after touch. Amazing value for money.
Been waiting years for this.
haha I know - I think they first mentioned it about 6 years ago. It does, however, show that even for a huge company like Behringer recreating classic with modern tech isn't as simple as we might think.
In the Oberheim sits no more electronics than the Behringer. Time for an open gear youtube movie :-) You pay for the Name and everyone goes with the hype. Nice video and have fun!
I don t want either but i think the ob sounds too open. It reminds me of the ob6, i did not like it either. Sold it. And too open is strange since i would pick a prodigy over a grandmother, and that oldy was more open then the new moog. Thanks for the video! Saves me thousands 😎
Sometimes I can't tell which is which and other times the OBX8 wins. The UB is a steal for 1200.
the oberheim has different envelope models based on the 3 differ ob's
Fantastic video by a fantastic musician !
Nice, thanks.
About to watch this, with equal abundances of apprehension, excitement and dread - all at the same time: as I just bought an OB-X8, after auctioning off my kidneys. Please justify it for me, Starsky. 🤣
I think I'm going to get a lot of happy UBXa owners and a lot of happy OBX-8 owners ... For the money the B is amazing, and the OB shows why it's more expensive.
@@StarskyCarr As long as the last sentence stands, I’ll use that to help me sleep at night! Thank you so much for making these incredible videos for us! Big fan of your channel! 👏🏼🙏🏼
@@AdamLeeGuitaristworth auctioning off your kidney, I think I gotta do same 😅 a day before starskys ubxa video came out I placed a deposit on a used P5 as was not fealing it with the existing ubxa demos. It's a review I'm not gonna watch as don't want regrets 😅
You did the right thing.
@@xntricity6446you’ll never regret the P5! It’s gorgeous
They've done such a great job with it eh! Its a no brainer buying one of these!
I would definitely choose the OBX8
I would definitely choose the UB-Xa. And have a lot of money left for other gear! In fact, I did. And not regretting it one bit. The 16 voices and Mod Matrix on it are a huge advantage.
@@AlainHubert But the sound is definitely better with Obx8. A matter of taste, as they say🤭
@@t2m1412
Honestly, when listening carefully, you're right. But in a mix, you'd be hard-pressed to tell the difference. Let's play and enjoy each other's synths!
OBX8 definitely sounds better but not sure if the extra cost justifies this.
@@AlainHubertbuild quality.
I definitely personally hear a difference...but not enough to justify the price difference. The fact Behringer's desktop model of it is $800 means that's the one I'm going for
The low end is most likely caused by the VCAs opening. Most all synths have that. The first thing I do when mixing, is high pass them a bit. I imagine the more notes you play, the more that lowend sums, so in chord mode you'd definitely get a hefty thump.
The click is a common thing in behringer synths that i thiiink comes from the vco resetting everytime? You can always disable it in the behringer software editor.
The 8s pinstripe overlay confused the heck out of me 😂
Impressive! They sound pretty identical to me. The Oberheim is a BIT brighter.
A LOT brighter I reckon. But that’s not necessarily a good or a bad thing. It just is
@@MrSunnyBra yeah exactly, it's not a bad thing at all. In fact I think I prefer the Behringer sound. But having this said you can EQ a brighter sound and remove of that top end or use a LP filter. But it's MUCH harder to create brightness if needed hehe Anyways Behringer are killing it right now.
No one is going to be able to tell what is what in a mix, anyone that says otherwise is telling porky pies.
Who cares in the end, it's what you do with them, not what they cost.
4.5 times the cost, but not 4.5 times the sound quality.
PAT keybed and 16 voices with MPE support goes a long way today.
OBX8 should still find its audience no doubt, just that the days of having to be wealthy to get that sound is now a thing of the past.
Great vid, thx.
If you apply that logic to each instrument in your song (use cheaper synth, ampsims, only plug in processing) and compare that to a song with better synth, real Amp, hardware fx. You will notice that in the mix!
Can u get away with going cheap on 1 aspect? Perhaps sure, but not all
@@LordBiffMusic what are you even talking about?
You need to compare apples and apples when you are working with mixes, you just changed the play field with plugins vs hardware.
If you use hardware fx and these synths, you will get the same results.
I don't think you really thought this one out.
@@dankeplace I dno what you are talking about ether so at least we have that in common
idk man LordBiff made perfect sense to me. They mentioned plugins as just an example of somewhere people often use cheap gear in their signal chain. If you cheap out all over your track, be it cheap hardware synths or cheap amps or cheap mics (or cheap-sounding VSTs) you will notice a difference in the final track. To quote LordBiff: "Can u get away with going cheap on 1 aspect? Perhaps sure, but not all"
@@dankeplace
You get what you pay for. The Uli Oberheim I think would sound fine in the mix
Everytime I watch starsky my ears get run through.
Oops ⚔️
As somebody who can't afford either unit, I simply cannot unhear that "click" or "thump", or whatever you want to call it, when you trigger notes no the UB-Xa, and to me, the filter on the OB-X8 just sounds a bit smoother and cleaner.
That being said, both synths sound great, and in an actual song, I doubt you'd be able to identify whether you've used one or the other.
I'm just watching to amuse myself as I ended up returning the X8 (why?, well just look at the used prices. That how I felt about it) back when it first came out and I'm considering the UB because of it's features and price. In a blind test that included the X8, UB, and OB6, simply picking out which tones I like better, I picked the UB and X8 pretty evenly, and the OB6 dead last all 16 (I think) times as it turns out. It kinda crazy how much my eyes influence my hearing, so to speak.
I still prefer the OB-6. I was excited about the X8 coming out only to realize I didn't want it. Definitely don't want the Behringer, since the Xa is my least favorite Oberheim.
@@cfs That's fair. My favorite synth ever is the Xa. Too bad I can't keep an original. No point in getting one if I can't afford to keep it. Maybe one day when I have money to burn and my new best friend is a tech. 😜
The X8 has SEM.
@@bengsynthmusic Yep
i definitely hear the distinction in tone and prefer the X8's "openness" and depth much more than the muffily, less lifely character on the UB. The latter of those which to me is my gripe with the OB6, which being only 2 pole, sounds a bit soft
Excellent work as always and as always when you do one of these I can't tell a difference. I think the only one that I ever did was the 2 poly-6s. I was hoping we'd get a song where you use both together though.
Haha.. the song may yet come. but only when inspiration strikes!
They sounds absolutely identical.
Think I heard Jamie from Geosynths mention that there is a little bit more clarity with the different voices when you play chords on the OBX-8 and I think I'm hearing that here. Still can't grumble with 16 voices and at that price! They're really close... I'd always go with the OBX-8 as I always want to give props to the originators and I think we need to keep those companies alive...
Have to say I love your overlay... seems like Sequential missed a trick there!
I think the overlay adds Page 2 functions too, something else the OG company missed the mark on.
Great video. Can’t wait for your review of the Arturia Minifreak
Cheers. I’ve a few videos in the Minifreak. If you search on my channel you’ll find them. This is the main one (I think).
MiniFreak Quickstart // How to Program and Edit Tones
th-cam.com/video/7WB0p90JDFo/w-d-xo.html
I'm just here for that overlay lol.
Why?
I dunno. Looks pretty cool and I was hoping someone would bring back the blue and black. Classic look. @@SPAZZOID100
Thanks for this Starsky, and taking the time to showcase the great OBX8 and the Behringer. I own a Roland D50 and would love to she how the tabletop version would interface with that? But in the end, I think this would be a nice option to serious look at for use with a classic rock cover band. Cheers Mate. RJ
Overall, they're very similar. I listened with and without picture. You know what, I prefer the Behringer!
Interesting comparison. There seems to be constant lowpass engaged on Behringer version, which tames the topends and it is definitely noticable. Curious if it is sortable through the menu or is it part of calibration.. or even a hard set design choice. Wondering.
Both sounds pretty fantastic. OB8X sounds for me bit better and more matured, but PolyAT is easy the winner in favour for Behringer.
idem for me
The part was all I needed to know about their differences:
19:05 OB-X8
19:50 UB-XA
Great presentation. Behringer obviously is a great brand I respect but my ears make me more inlove with ob-x8. Right off the bat SUPERIOR. I would however easily buy the ub_xa coz its price frendly and sounds good too. Asante sana🙏🏼😊👍🏼
I'm reading comments here and the general sentiment is "Close enough for me!"
waited so long for the Xa to actually arrive... I waited IMPATIENTLY... BUT, I can hear a large difference between the two. 90% of the time I can hear a difference, (100% with actual patches, and not just chorded raw oscillators), and the difference is major for me. The Xa is ragged and shabby, which generally is my sound (and ethos), but for the sounds that this synth is supposed to be able to do, and for what I want it for... no, the shabbiness defeats the purpose.
And I'm dismayed by this. I'd hoped that I could afford the Xa when it arrived... and I was awaiting before (kho video and) the dollar collapse (or inflation added from 50-100% to the price of everything). But arriving when it did, with a higher price than expected, and now the price has increased again... even the Xa is out of my price range.
I mean, I don't have any money to spend (or any money at all), I'd have to sell gear to afford it. Was planning on selling my AX-60 and Alpha Juno to afford the Xa, that was going to be a good deal for me. Those are my only two analog poly's, and the Xa would cover that ground, so all good.
But with the price increase, I'd have to sell a couple more smaller, but significant pieces to my workflow. And the Xa wouldn't be covering the lost abilities of those pieces, like it would cover the AX and the Alpha.
BUT... here is what I'm trying to say... the Xa is not making the sound I'm looking for, and with the price increase, it's just slipped beyond my reach, anyway. But, if I were going to sell my cherished gear (I love my AX-60, love the sound, am frustrated to hell by the interface) for a analog poly, it'd have to be the X8 to actually scratch my itch.
Man, I've lost the plot of this comment. Sorry. I'm just really disappointed by the Xa here. Maybe all of this is fixable with the slop settins, sorry, am losing my mind, can't remember words right now. Just saying maybe the system settings on the Xa can be tweaked to achieve a more mature, put together sound that is powerful and ordered, but still scintillating alive analog, like the X8 is. I find with all of the new analog poly's, they're either too stiff, so almost digital sounding, no life, or they're made with slop settings that all are too disordered, like the slop is too sloppy, and you don't get that living analog sound, you get the last teleportation from the movie The Fly, just an unviable mess that can't stand up, let alone live. But the X8 has THAT sound, that analog poly sound, where it is clean and tight, but still shimmering and modulating and not with lfo's grossly detuning just the osc's, but with living, breathing analog life. It's just right. But, lol, $3,500, that might as well be 30 million doll hairs, it's an imaginary number.
Anyway, great time to be a consumer, if you're capable of consumption, otherwise, not so great. Let us all carry on, anyway, as we must.
Cool video! I've been really happy exploring the UB-Xa so far. I haven't tested yet, but I wonder if the high end roll off is present on all outputs. I wonder if the balancing transformers are causing some loss...
The cat is sure comfy in the background
They sound exactly the same to me l, still waiting for that Jupiter 8 and CS80 clone though.
much more presence on the X8, but I wonder if you switch those modes on Behringer to "modern" or whatever they have if the presence comes back.
OB-X8 sounds a little brighter or there is a hint of chorus or something on it.
It is lovely to see how many guys are trying to find defects in a device costing one fourth of the original. Nice. Buy the OB if you can. It's a wonderful machine.
My opinion: there would be less guys reporting that if tests would have been made "double blind".
I think I will consider Hydrasynth Deluxe. Less hype, more waves, more fun. Maybe. I need to test it seriously.
Good, useful vid, thx.
But you're not a Rush fan, and it shows!
"Dive Bomb"??
You/they spelled Tom Sawyer wrong!
The UB-Xa patch had wayyy too much slow vibrato, pulsing/beating...which may have been a function of too much deture, but it was
too warbly.
Yes, I'm picky...but you started it, lol.
Liked and subbed.
sound similar to me. I think it depends what your goals are. If you play for yourself and wear headphones, you 'might' be able to tell them apart. In a mix, based on what I'm hearing here, there is NO WAY you could tell them apart.
Considering that this is 1200 USD, and assuming UB-X will also be 1200 USD, you can get both Oberheim ‘sounds’ for 2400 with Keybeds, and extra voices, being able to use each independently, which is cheaper than a sans-keybed OB-X8 by 1100. Even if its slightly off, for most sounds, its sounds great, and is truly a bargain. Hope to see UB-X soon.
Are you spending $2400 USD to get a Bargain? or cause you really need 32 oberhiem voices & in 2 giant keyboards at once.... because if I'm spending that kind of money im spending it to get the best sound quality possible & saving space in my studio to fit another very different instrument equal quality next to it by having it in one OBX-8 which i can use Bi-timbrally to paly 2 separate parts of 2 different model oberhiem's in their perfected form ....NOT to get a kind of thier... but miss the last 8% of fine qualities.... It's always the last 8-10% that matters in separating the very good from the exceptional in all things.
Well yes, the OB X8 sounds more brilliant and a little bit bigger. But it this is not worth the Price for me. The UB-Xa hits the 80s Oberheim Sound for me, so i would always go with the Behringer. But both are great Synths and this Video was great to show the Differences.
19:08 Divebomb = Instant Tom Sayer by Rush
That low-end thing is a big deal, unfortunately. Unison mode with a fast attack sounds basically unusable with those pops.
To all of the commenters here. This is a comparison with another copy of the OBxa. Sure they sound different but which one is closer to the original? And anyway , what does that matter if you have only oneself them? Human ear can’t remember sounds, you can just compare
Somebody posted on the forums if you put the resonance around 3 o'clock and use 2 pole filter and engage tracking you will get some of the top end back. Obviously not an ideal solution but I think it sounds better to my ears with more presence. Many patches sound a bit dull to my liking.
Also, if we had a way to quickly toggle the LCD contrast (Shit combo button) between when we sit down vs standing up could be useful workaround to some to solve problem with lcd viewing angle. Just my observation
Thanks. It’s a bit of a workaround, but not really … if that makes sense. You’d be just as well using an EQ and wouldn’t lose the low end/volume.
Hi! Great presentation. Do you sell patches for the UB-Xa?
Good job man. Thanks
thank you
Hopefully a firmware update can bring them closer. That click needs to go and the Oberheim sizzle is a hallmark of that OB sound. What always stumps me is how these issues end up in a production unit. 6 years developing this synth and in one 27 min video we can hear where the UBXA falls short. Did no one over those 6 years notice the click? Or say hey guys we are missing that sizzle? Why are we rolling off the top end? I don’t get it.
It does amaze me, I did hold great hopes for this Synth but between delays and what not I got peed off in the final moments and ditched the idea of purchasing this.
In case you haven't been paying attention for the last 30 years, making unreliable ripoff trash is kind of Behringer's thing. He could be making his own unique synths but instead he knows there's a market for people that want the real thing and think a similar paint job and name makes his crap related.
In a song, which is what these synths are made for, you'd never be able to tell the difference! Quit being a cork sniffers and play music! Sometimes, these little differences are just plain ridiculous!
@@syntheticmoment9994🤣 cork sniffer!
Beautiful Lesson! :) I watched the entire video with my headphones on and the first patchs you showd I couldn't feel any difference. But on other sounds the OBX8 seems to have a bit of more brilhance. Is that hi freq limit on the UBXa set in stone by hardware or can it be tweaked by adjustments? :)
Thanks a lot for this comparison 👍
Excellent comparison - pretty damn close if you ask me and plenty close enough to get those sounds at the Behringer price. The original is subtly richer, sometimes obvious, sometimes not, but It's the only way I could get these sounds in hardware form as the original is a really big spend for what it is. Shame about the initial transient pop, but maybe they can fix that with a firmware update.
How is the keybed of UB-XA pls? I have Deepmind 12 but :(
That rolloff that you discuss at 5:00ish may just be something to do with drive/gain that's pushing the whole curve down a bit. Hard to tell looking at the graph, but seems likely. It might be something that can be worked around. Just a guess. Haven't played with the UB yet. It could also be that the filter control signal doesn't open it 100% (relative to how open it is on the OB-X8). Also might be able to be patched/calibrated or worked around.
Edit: Ha! I should have just kept watching. You mentioned the filter right after I typed that.
I agree that "emulation" is the best term for this type of a synth - I hate "clone", because they are not! Anyway, great comparison. The UBXa comes pretty close most of the time. I do have to say that I like the "presence" of the OBX8 and when the sounds are different, that's the sound I gravitate towards. But for four times the price? I am not sure... And given that the UBXa is 16 voices, there is the mod matrix, poly aftertouch, etc., it starts looking like a great deal. But then, the OBX8 has those other filters and such and... lol. Anyway, again, great video.
When you need an oscilloscope to tell the difference, I'd say you're good to buy the clone. Screw those Oberheim prices, THANK YOU BEHRINGER
haha, yeah I use the scope to reduce the number of endless arguments about perceived qualities, and keep stuff fact based as much as possible.
Oberheim will be glad to know that I'm not getting the Behringer ... because I got fed up waiting and bought a different "master keyboard that has good sounds" instead - a DX7 IID 😎
Damn so damn close to each other
For people who say the Behringer is better because it's cheaper, check out Arturia OP-Xa V and save over $1000 vs. the Behringer
I like hardware over software so nah.
@@ironinquisitor3656I’m old school and need tactile gear. Software is immensely unsatisfying to me. Not to mention being ball and chained from then on to paid updates on the VST AND the OS of your system, both of which will eventually become unsupported by the companies involved, making it very possible to become obsolete and impossible to use.
@@entropybentwhistle Actually, upgrading the OS, DAW, and plugins on a computer is always a choice. People act like you HAVE to do updates, but you don't. I have several older computers that are frozen in time, and they work fine. You don't have to do updates. People usually want to do them to gain new features, but that sometimes comes with baggage.
Caveat - if you want to surf the web on the same computer as your audio software, then security updates may be important... but you don't have to surf the web on your DAW machine.
People want that analog harmonic distortion though
plugins haven't got that and it is difficult to recreate
with VST distortion effects,
You switch a piece of good analog gear on and
it has that sound straight off the bat, there is a
huge difference between the 2 concerning that.
There is no comparison, the oberheim is open and as you play up and down you hear the richness and all that makes this unit what we known it to be for over 40 years!
Someone please make a proper affordable sampler workstation and let’s move on! Sound matters !
Bingo. Best comment top to bottom. Affordable sampling keyboard with an analog filter would be lovely. I’m using a Prophet X, and sent it a whole mess of my own wav. But, it’s a pain because you have to use an editor to prepare the sounds first. That said, it sounds absolutely insane due to the great stereo filters. (Same filter as UDO and 3rd Wave iirc)
I also got a Prophet X as well and my Emu samples sound amazing !
You tricked me before with the prophet 5/6 comparison 😂
Let's see if you can do it again
Uli the psychopath for prison 2024.
Behringer and their utterly shamless copies always make me smile. 😀 At least the kids on low budget can join the dawless community. At least that... Nice one Brosky, your comparison vids are the best on TH-cam!
Interesting thanks for doing this comparison. The behringer got closer than I thought it might. I do prefer the filter in the Oberheim and overall everything sounds just slightly richer. But its tiny margins. Is the Oberheim worth the price difference, probably not considering the mod matrix, aftertouch and voice count on the Behringer. The atrophy settings are really nice too.
Lovely job as usual. They sound pretty close, but I must admit the Tom Sawyer patch sounds dramatically better on the real Oberheim.
Yeah I maybe could’ve got them closer. There are some suggestions in the comments. But … fact is it was easier to produce on the Oberheim as is
Close, but I can definitely hear a difference.
Nobody in the audience while they’re jamming having a good time listening to music are going to notice or even care if it’s oberheim or behringer, it’s all about the feel, being musical and the song.
They both sound basically identical, and I’d be fine using either one on a gig, but I do like saving money, so…..
Im thinking that both the thud and the frequency limit in the ubxa could have a link to the filter resonance. I think the thud stems from DC being present at the VCA input. That may be reduced by having just a slight bit of resonance in the filter. That could also increase the high frequency content. Plus, it is evident that the filter frequency doesnt go quite as high, would ne nice with a comparison of of the frequency response when the filters are 'matched' rather than on 'max open'
Nvm with the filter comparison, saw you did a great one with the 4pole filter :) definitively a big difference in harmonic content