Thanks for the very thorough and fair review. It took me a couple weeks of back&forth emails to convince Roland the sawtooth markings on the Model D were backwards. A different team wrote the manual, I didn't get to proofread that. But you could see on the scope the SE-02 and Mini both ramp down. The sharktooth is made by mixing the saw and tri with a pair of resistors. I deliberately added more saw to it - I like it that way. Same on the 2 narrow pulses - I did them to taste. The narrower one is narrower than the Mini, again because I like that. That's why it sounds different. The waveforms look different because I inadvertently went the opposite way from square as the Mini, so they are 180 degrees out of phase. That's controlled by a couple of numbers in the code, I'll fix it on the next update. The filters are as close to identical as they can be using the available surface mount parts instead of the thru hole ones in the Mini. What makes it seem different is the taper of the resonance pot. Also, there is an internal trim that sets where oscillation begins. We set ours that way so that there is more range of the pot before oscillation starts. The mini could easily be set that way too, or the SE-02 set more like the Mini. The Cutoff pot is a tough one. The pots are converted with 8 bit resolution, or 256 steps. To get the 10 octave range needed, that's only 25 steps/octave. Sorry. Sweep it with an envelope - those are 16 bit, over 65,000 steps. I know many modern VCF designs have gain compensation when Emphasis (resonance) is turned up. The first one I know of is the Roland TB303's variation of the ladder filter. The Model D didn't have it, so we didn't add it. We also chose to hit the filter much harder than the Mini does. Back the Mix levels off to 2 o:clock to get closer. We love the Mini (I'm keeping my vintage one). It's a landmark instrument and a pleasure to play. We wanted to bring a similar sound to a compact package with many more features, at a fraction of the price. Roland did an amazing job of cramming all that stuff into such a small and inexpensive package. Thank you all for your interest.
Hi Tee Cee! Thanks for taking the time to add some feedback! The Sawtooth markings are backwards on the Model D, I noticed that while looking at the wave forms later in the video but I was confused at first, as you mentioned the SE-02 is correct as is the manual. Thanks for the additional clarification on some of the other points as well, it's very interesting to me from a technical standpoint! Thank you again, SE and Roland really did a great job on this synth! I will be using it a ton myself!
Much respect for divulging this information. It speaks volumes of SE and your hard work - I'm glad to see your name again on such an iconic piece of history :) I understand the need for digital control using midi on any synthesizer. after all it is 2017. Complaints would be heard had it not been so. I do appreciate a work around mentioned using envelopes. Again, much respect and I look forward to see what's in store from you next :) cheers!
Hello :) Just ouf of curiosity - why not using 14bit midi / NRPN, like post-Voyager Moog (or Behringer on the cheap BCR2000) ? Or even a-bit-higher-than-standard resolution pots like for the recent Korg synths (1000 steps)? Is it a cost issue ? I really dont understand why it's not that much of a thing for most of synth designers :s Thank you, and congratulations for this great collaboration !
That's a good question. It was never discussed, the Boutique series uses 8 bit pots, I was just told that was what to expect. It isn't really a problem except with the filter, and by the time we got that far with the project, it was too late to do anything about it. Will certainly be aware of this on my next project!
Something maybe : lots of software synths use only 8bit control, but have a parameter smoothing algorithm, which makes it less steppy / more "natural" at high resonance. Isnt it something that could be implemented through a firmware update? Very glad that the next Studio Electronic synths will have 14bit midi !! Looking forward to it :) Cheers !
I think that a "cheap" solution to avoid the filter stepping is controlling it with CV. For example: connecting the MOD CV OUTPUT from the Arturia Keystep to the VCF CV INPUT from the SE-02... but, of course, by using a Mod touch strip and not a knob.
Yep. Studio Electronics actually makes an add-on for this called the SE-02 Ext Box with a large cutoff knob (which controls the filter via CV), and also adds drive, a highpass filter, and a few other odds and ends. I'm a lot happier with my SE-02 after adding that box. The drive sounds really good, and can be used to compensate for the loss of low end when turning up the filter resonance.
Generally, it is smarter to get an instrument with the best possible oscillator & filter tone over added features like sequencer and delay. I mean, you either want to feel it in your plums or you don't. Garage band is free and can do the sequencing and fx. If you want buttons & knobs for your sequencer then you have to pay more for an external unit, but you'll also have to pay more to add CV control to the Roland SE-02 filter. In both cases the footprint of the setup will increase and the number of parts will increase. Something about a 256 step digital knob controlling the filter reveals something about Roland's priorities, which is to reach a larger audience with multiple features as opposed to maintaining fidelity to a legendary oscillator/filter pairing.
Model D Sawtooths actually ramp down even though the graphics show it ramping up - but your ears can’t differentiate between it ramping up or down. Nice review :) The voyager ramps up as does the S37. The Behringer Model D ramps down.
Starsky Carr thanks for checking it out! Love your vids man, been a sub of yours for quite a while 😀 Yeah, ramp up/ramp down deal had me all confused at the beginning of the comparison. Hadn't had either of these on the osiliscope before this vid so I was thrown off initially, but once I had them up I noticed they were the same and corrected myself from the intro. Glad you stopped by man!
Stepping isn't caused by digital aliasing. Aliasing is the mirrored wrapping of the harmonics back down below Nyquist (i.e. 22050hz @ a 44.1kHz sampling rate) Which adds inharmonic distortion. But stepping is caused by a finite number of digital points in the control. Like 127 or 256 controller values. The controls on the SE-02 are digital, that's how it has the ability to store presets. Steeping can be made less noticeable by adding a smooth timed fade or delay between the steps, or by using SysEx messages to give it 1024 or more values, instead of 127 like a standard midi controller message. But then it is harder to automate as well.
The roland MKS-50, 70 and 80 all have filter stepping but I was sort of playing along with the video with my Minimax digital minimoog and that has no stepping - perversely
The soundcard gets 8 bit pot values from the main cpu. The extremely wide range of the filter makes the 256 steps seem coarse. If I add enough glide to the cutoff frequency pot to smooth the steps, it causes VERY slow response to the panel control. Trying to arrive at an acceptable compromise. But again, there is no stepping with the 16 bit envelopes, just the panel control.
The Minimoog's filter is THE best selling point of it. For the price of the SE-02 I can live with the stepping. However, the "character" of the SE-02's filter being different (or not as sensitive to the resonance freq.) could be a deal breaker for me. The resonance gives the Mini its aggressive bite.
Just FYI, the comment from Tee Cee on the comparison vid, he mentions that there is a trim for the Emphases that can be adjusted to make it more like what we heard from the MiniMoog.. so I wouldn't count it out :)
Nice video. I'd love to see an update, especially comparing the SE-02 to the Behringer Model D and perhaps the Novation Bass Station 2. I really think those 3 are the best in class for this type of less expensive moog-sound synth.
Thanks for doing this. Very useful demo, which helped me decide that the Behringer device will more likely be the thing for me. Not that the SE-02 sounds bad, not by a long shot.. It's just that the idea of having a fully analog device with nothing between me and the knobs sounds kindof exciting to me.
It's something pretty sweet to have a fully analog unit I agree. The Behringer D from what I saw in a recent teardown is just like the MiniMoog in that regard.. other than the reference tone generator (which is a digital tone) and the MIDI DA stuff. Still the SE-02 has some great additional features that to me make it a must have also, but then again I have been told I buy way too many synths so I might have a problem :)
I wonder how the SE-02 treats CV to the VCF? Could be a workaround there. On the other hand, selling off a Minimoog Model D Full Size, and having the SE-02 + Behringer D, would result in some spare to use on other synths, that would add more in terms of sound pallette, than what would be missing from those 2 Minimoog based units.
Sound differences aside, glad to hear you give it a good review. Too often I hear reviewers be hyper critical if the sound isn't "close enough" for their tastes, or comments about how nothing can sound like a real, true Minimoog. I have a friend in a prog-rock era cover band with 2 Mini's from the 70's. I don't know the age differences between them, but one he uses for bass lines and the other for leads. And he cannot switch them because their bass response is different enough that it's too weak for him if their uses were switched. Not all Minis sound the same so 1 to 1 comparisons should always be taken as subjective, and not definitive. As long as the SE-02 sounds good, then that's the main thing. It's Moog-ish and for the price I'm sure glad it exists. Thanks Studio Electronics and Roland. :-)
I feel a bit sorry for all the people that got the Mini "re-issue", that don't have piles of cash... the same would be true for anyone that bought a vintage one for lots of money recently, but don't have piles of cash. Moog should not have "re-issued" it really... What they should have done is boosted the Sub 37 with a 3rd OSC, FM and a high-pass filter. And given it a pricetag of 1999 dollars at most. (It actually wasn't a re-issue, since Moog Music of today is not the same company, so it was actually a clone... Bob Moog bought the rights to the name of the company back, but he didn't buy the company back, as it was no longer, and all the patents of the Minimoog was already in public domain since long)
This is a really great comparison video, they actually sound closer than I expected. I've been pondering picking up an SE-02, but I'm still waiting to get my hands on a Behringer Model D to see how it sounds in person.
I love my Roland SE-02. How can you beat an analog synth that emulates the Moog mini Model D - with 512 patches? 128 of those patches are User writable, the other 384 are presets. I had the Behringer Model D, and while is sounded good and the knobs were a little more easily accessible than the Roland SE-02, the Behringer has no patch memory storage like the SE-02 does. Yes, I sold the Behringer Model D. The Roland SE-02 is actually designed by Studio Electronics and squeezes their SE-01 into the Roland Boutique synth case, while also being Roland’s only true analog synth in their Boutique range is synths. The rest of Roland’s Boutique synths all use their ACB (Analog Circuit Behavior) synth engine. I have several of the Roland Boutiques synths, because they are not huge, sound great and emulate several classic Roland analog synths like the Jupiter-8 (JP-08), Juno-106 (JU-06), JX-3P (JX-03) and the SH-101 (SH-01a). All fun to have and play with. Great little retro synth toys if you will. But the SE-02 is awesome for being a real analog synths copy of the Moog Mini Model D, and having patch memory storage! Studio Electronics have been repairing and modifying original Moog minis for over 30 years. And over the years created their own SE-01. A great clone of the Moog mini. For the price, sound, patches memory storage and the sequencer/arpeggiator - the SE-02 is a wonderful little synth! And... I forgot to mention that the Roland SE-02 comes with standard MIDI In and Out jacks built-in. Such a great deal in one little package!
One tip for doing comparisons with a daw... mute one of the channels, then put it in Solo mode. Now you have two states that you can switch with just one key press on your computer keyboards. I use the "S" key in Digital Performer. Press "S" and you hear one channel, press "S" again and you hear the other, and so on. So much faster than the mouse.
It seems that the Roland sounds a bit "open" than the Moog. But we're splitting hairs here. I like the quality of the noise the Roland's steps introduce.
Still sounds sweet to me, but some will have an issue with stepping in the filter, but is a personal preference for sure. I would prefer no stepping, but don't think it handicaps this synth regardless. Thanks for checking out the vid!
I checked out theSE-02 at Guitar Center.....the small knobs,,,,,,what a drag.....especially those to change oscillator range etc......the Berhinger D sounds better to me....but the Roland has presets and a seq (great for live playing).....Roland please fix the filter
Behringer do like in 80', withojt menus and presets saving) theh lost somewhere in time) so no compromise - Roland win. +it sounds more clear, than dirty behringer.
I agree…very disappointing…but it's not the filter that steps; it's the knob (all the knobs except the master Tune are digitally scanned; I believe they are 8-bit, i.e. 0-255). You can get true analog, 100% smooth control of the filter via the VCF CV jack. Studio Electronics makes an addon called the Ext Box that connects to the SE-02 and gives you a large, very nice filter knob with no stepping. It also adds drive and a high pass filter, among other things.
A couple of things to note, the narrow pulse width is the same waveform but just inverted, the sound difference is due to pulse width. A slight difference in pulse width is very noticable. Resonance (emphasis) on the MM is controlled by a reverse audio taper pot and on the roland it sounds more linear.
I did fix the inversion of the pulse wave on the latest firmware. But I'm sticking with the narrower widths. I could have gone to more trouble to match the curve of the Mini's resonance pot, but the setting of the Reso trim in the Mini can put it on a different part of the curve, so it didn't seem worthwhile. If you've played a lot of original Minis you'll know they vary quite a bit due to component tolerance and internal calibration settings. The SE-02 has much better component and calibration tolerances than the original.
The SE-02 also has more features. But those looking for the "purest" Model D experience, will probably be better served by the Behringer D. I would gladly have them both.
The Behringer D has a killer patch bay that allows all kinds of crazy interfacing with other gear, but this has patch banks which is a big plus for live playing.
It's a lot closer than I thought it would be. Really think the SE-02 is a fantastic 3-osc monosynth for the money despite the odd quirk (especially the filter stepping at max emphasis, and the emphasis not really sounding like it kicks in until 12 o clock or so). It's capable of great sounds and you add in the patch memory, sequencer, USB audio, etc, I think it's kind of a bargain.
Thanks for the demo. Two things, 1. I have heard the SE-02 in full resonance and I'm thinking that you can get a more 'Minimoogish' sound by backing the oscillators off to let it get a bit chaotic. I haven't got an SE-02 yet but will try this out when I get mine.. 2. I'm wondering if say the LFO sweeping the filter will be stepped. I suspect it doesn't step so the only issue with this is either real time control of the filter cutoff or VERY fine tuning of the filter cutoff setting in general. Again, I don't yet have one to test this out. Thanks again for the comparison though..
Correct, the LFO will not cause VCF stepping. Also correct, backing off the Osc levels will get more like the Mini. I did mention that we like to drive the filter harder than the Mini, but you can simply back off the Osc levels to match the Mini. We are very concerned with the level of the resonance vs the level of the Oscillators. That can really change the sound. So we just provide a bit more range to the Osc levels.
The filter stepping is something I've heard mentioned elsewhere (though not bothered by it if this weren't my only monosynth). There is the EXT BOX accessory for the SE-02 that provides a large high-resolution filter frequency knob plus extras.
Thanks so much for taking the time to put this video together. The se 02 definitlt sounds a touch brighter compared to the model d . I think (thou i may be wrong ), the shark tooths is derived from a sawtooth not being fully waveshaped to a triangle wave. The se 02 has more of the sawtooth harmonics left in its sharktooth . There isnt alot of diffrence in the raw oscillators to be honest.
Yo Adamski! Thanks for checking it out, it my pleasure to share these videos! I agree about the Sharktooth, the SE-02 does appear to have more Saw harmonics.. still between the Model D and the SE-02 they sound very close!
the model d has the sawtooth thing backwards, not the se 02. my guess is back in the day it was different but i've always known normal sawtooth goes from up to down
why does the filter step on the SE 02? Is that a digital aspect of it? Never heard an analog filter step, but I thought the only thing digital on this synth was the delay. Thanks for the vid!
Yeah I checked my other synths also and apparently I was mistaken.. standard Saw wave ramps down.. so I had it backwards in my mind.. but my MiniMoog does have the wrong direction showing on it's front panel.. threw me off when I was setting up this test :)
+Microwerx - My Minitaur and Little Phatty both show the saw wave ramping down, but they both ramp up when I put them on a scope. On the SE-02, I've compared the downward saw on the first osc to the upward saw on the 3rd osc and there was no sonic difference (and I did put them both on the scope to make sure the wave shapes matched what on the face plate).
redirishmanxlt thanks for commenting. Is odd that Moogs saw diagrams are backwards from what is actually seen on scopes..had me confused lol. Thanks again!
Big Moog fan and analog nerd.....Studio Electronics have done an amazing job! I was sold in the shop after after hearing preset 3.......back home in my studio it sounds even better! It's a great little unit. I know your doing this for a comparison shoot out....don't really see the point. EVERY synth has its place. Love my MiniMoog too pieces. But my favourite synth at this moment in time is my Matrixbrute. In a few weeks it will change to my OB8 or my Jupiter......analog will ALWAYS rule! (But I do own some great digital gear too) nice to mix them together and create the sounds in your head to make music happen!! 🕶🎶✌🏻
Hey Dukeofpearl! I agree SE and Roland did a great job here, the SE-02 sounds amazing! The idea here in comparing these was just pure curiosity on my part. The SE-02 is obviously inspired by the MiniMoog, so I wondered how much alike they would sound :) Thanks for checking out the video!
With the SE-02 and the Behringer D, most synth players that want minimoog sounds will not have to pay for a used Minimoog (vintage or "-re-issue") any more. I think that is great. We just need more polys as well.
I'm going to post a prediction before I watch: Model D sounds better, but SE-02 is decent and has the benefit of a sequencer. So I'd probably end up buying both...
I believe that the SE-02 oscillators at full volume, are driving the filter harder than the mininoog does. It think keeping the volume on individual oscillators lower is the key to matching they classic Model d tonality
Thanks for this comparison. I am missing real music being played, like chords and stuff. The Roland is pretty close when listening to individual waves though. This illustrates once more how insanely overpriced Moog gear is.
Lawrence O Overpriced? It costs more to develop an original than to copy a success. Plus, doesn’t the moog use higher quality components? And moog is a much smaller company-sourcing and production cost more. Aren’t moog products made in the USA? Just like guitars, American guitars cost more than those produced in Asian countries with cheaper labor. And with Roland, if they want this product to compete in a given price point, it can be subsidized by the rest of their vast catalog. Pricing isn’t just a matter of component cost.
@@CentaurusRelax314 We did use high quality parts in the SE-02, and Roland didn't change that. The other comments are spot-on tho. Our own made-in-the USA products are comparably expensive to Moog's. It just costs a lot more to make full sized stuff with quality parts here. It would cost us far more than the retail price of the SE-02 to make that here. I am amazed at how little things can be made for in Asia. Our aim with the SE-02 was to make that kind of sound more affordable, not to put Moog (or ourselves) out of business.
@@teecee1370 Thanks @Tee Cee. I don’t even remember writing that three years ago…. I only (finally) bought an SE-02 a few months ago, and still need to spend some time with it to get better acquainted.
If I was 2' tall and had infant hands, I might be comfortable playing the SE-02. There is no comparing it to the real thing, in terms of sound and playability. For the money, the SE-02 is cool.
Great comparison vid. Some chapter or section breaks would be really neat additions. (See reviews by Andertons and Starsky Carr for examples of this if you don't know what I mean.)
Indeed, but when this was made ther was no chapter feature. More recent demo vids I have leveraged it though, I think it's very helpful. I know what you mean though, I've seen plenty of Starskys vids, I think he's got a lock on the VS thing for sure 😁.
Unless Roland/SE can fix the stepping on the filter (firmware) I am giving it a no go. (some are ok with filter stepping if it's "musical"). Might be midi CC resolution? Not sure.. Also was the glide on the re-issue up a little? Going through the octaves I thought I could hear some. Anyhow, great comparison, and properly thought out! Personally, I am thinking the Behringer D is the one I'll wait on, or just be good and happy with my slim phatty :D
Yo CowFood! Yeah, I was not expecting to hear filter stepping on this, pretty disappointing :( I hope they can fix that because it's pretty sweet sounding otherwise. And yeah, the glide apparently was up a bit on the Model D... must have been from a patch I was working on a while back, I forgot to ck it and didn't hear it until I started recording. It could really only be heard when the difference between notes was over a few octaves. I'm looking forward to getting a Behringer D in here and do that comparison, should be interesting! BTW, the Slim Phatty is one of my all time favorite synths!
It is the knob ADC that is stepping, not the filter itself. That is your price for having full patch storage at that $ price level. It could be done a different way, but it would increase the price. And there is nothing that can be changed in firmware to fix that problem.
I would not say no-go. The SE-02 can to things that the Minimoog and Behringer D can't. A Behringer D + a SE-02 is still a lot less than an original or "re-issue". One could probably get a Sub 37 for that price diffference, if one is really in to Moog sound.... Too bad Moog hasn't made a Slim Subby... The Sub phatty is really let down by it's keyboard, and it's limited patch storage, but it does offer more bite than the Slim Phatty.
I'll have to check Dos Gos, but from what the developers at SE said the encoders are only 8bit...I doubt they can fix the stepping problem via software with low rea encoders. They recommended using the envelopes to get around it last I recall. But, I'll update my SE02 to the latest rev and let ya know.
It is a free Max for Live oscilloscope, link is here: www.maxforlive.com/library/device/1124/oscilloscope - The next time I use it though I will change the Ableton colors as you can see the wave forms are a light blue, and though it can be seen in the video next time I'll chose a different color pallet. Thanks for checking out the Video :)
Cool. Thanks, Marshal Arnold. I was hoping it was a generic VST that might work in Cantabile Lite, but I guess I could try Ableton too... One day... :) The software / PC based stuff kind of wears me out. It seems like a good idea, but I tend to spend a lot of time shouting at the monitor about how there's no ^$&£^&ing sound coming out again. It was a very informative video, and using the scope plug-in really helped, I thought. I was watching in a darkened room, with the brightness turned down a lot on my monitor (and a night mode style turned on, for TH-cam). In those conditions, the scope was quite readable.
Agreed, SE-02 is pretty sweet for a low cost and compact format with some Moogish qualities, but the MiniMoog is a classic and something special. Still, this was a fun comparison sonically at a basic level. Will be interesting to see how the Behringer D stacks up.. if it ever gets here :)
Thanks for the review. My wife gave me a hard time watching it near the kids because of your language from time to time. The Roland is not an exact Moog knock-off, but is a great little affordable analog synth with presets. I can forgive the digital stepping, but it is annoying!
Hi like your video I think roland boutique se02 got more things to work with the moog I had one and it's a pice of gear that will never die but thanks very much for the video very good 👍
ya but wouldn't it make more sense to use a really expensive studio electronics synth to make comparison rather than something made for everybody? It's like your insinuating studio electronics can't make a better synth than the model d by moog.
So the point of this video is pretty obvious, however it appears that you may not be aware that the SE-02 was designed to be a small MiniMoog with some update features. Roland and SE never said this outright in their promotion of the SE-02 but since it was obvious this was the intention that is why I did the comparison. I am in no way insulting Studio Electronics, I think they are a fantastic company and think the SE-02 is a great value. The Model D has legendary status in the synth world so any synth and wants to clone or emulate it I personally want to hear how close they are to the real deal and being I'm in a position to do so I think there is nothing wrong with sharing this.
You're comparing the Model D to the SE-02. You should reverse the order and show what the sound should sound like first then show how the SE-02 compares.
I think it's pretty silly that many people will watch a review like this that isn't musical in any way, shape or form, and decide if a synth sucks or not. Damn is this video what your tracks/beats sound like? 🤣 Good Lord.
Is more of a technical comparison than a review. Both are great synths, but at the time there were several companies who were releasing mini Model D clones. Though the SE-02 was not stated to be such a thing, the intent was obvious. I still own both and use both. A musical demo doesn't really demonstrate the differences with synths that are pretty close in overall timber, plus IMO it's nice to see and hear differences in oscillators and filters. Again, nothing wrong with either synth, I personally would say to get as many synths as possible :)
@@MarshalArnold Yes I understand your points, and I also own the SE02 and a Moog (Sub 37. )My gripe wasn't intended for you at all. I get the intended purpose and I've loved Moogs and SE-1's since the 90's. However, what I don't get is when people watch this type of technical video and start bashing one of the synths as if just because it's different, it somehow is a toy or incapable of making a phat bass groove. Personally, I don't even care about the stepping. I'm never going to do what it takes to cause that while I'm making a bassline. Mike Pensini has that Se02 sounding like Parliment. It's no toy even though it's true that it isn't as gritty as my 37. But the people who make comments like that wouldn't be able to pick out the SE02 from the Model D in the context of a mixed record. I'm in love with both of my Synths, and yes, I want another. A poly.
@@richiefamus8778 ah, I hear ya. Yeah no need to synth bash. Each has it's place! Did you see that SE released an EXT box for the SE-02 that resolves the stepping? I have one though haven't tested it out yet. I only could really hear it when the resonance was cranked and I almost never use filters in that way personally. But I see what you ment anout people getting riled up with videos like this.
@@MarshalArnold Funny you mention that, I was on the phone last night with a friend of mine and we were both on their website looking at that, and those outrageous Omegas lol. Didn't know that it resolves stepping but that's great! Let me know how you like it.
Hey Harry! Is all good, but this was more a comparison vide rather than a full on review, so unless you are a hardcore synth nerd this can be a bit dry. I do however hope to be more entertaining in the future :) Thanks for watching!
Don't waste your time with this whining fool, he's talking out of his ass! It was a good video! He needs to get back to cat videos and let the adult talk.
just a bit of advice for OP of you want it: we need just a sprinkling of quick snappy to the point. one thing is that the everyone is going to know they are different... i would humbly suggest, start off with some sounds. and then whip up some proper patches. i kinda wanna hear the capabilities of your synths. the basic waveforms aren't that interesting... and the subtle nuances Don't really translate over youtube. we gotta go just a little less subtle i think. and maybe plan your steps, like: init patch sound, detune a bit and dial in the oscillators, hear that, check out the filters, do something gnarly, hear that, turn up the LFO rate and dial in a bit of audio rate modulation and see how similar they can be while doing something gnarly.
Marshal I really appreciated your review - but to be honest, much of your explaining or commenting was unnecessary for a vid like this. So I think you should do some cutting before releasing it. Oh - and my opinion on the SE-02 is simple. I like the sound but I hate that hardware. Too tiny knobs and switches, no real display ...
Thanks for the very thorough and fair review. It took me a couple weeks of back&forth emails to convince Roland the sawtooth markings on the Model D were backwards. A different team wrote the manual, I didn't get to proofread that. But you could see on the scope the SE-02 and Mini both ramp down. The sharktooth is made by mixing the saw and tri with a pair of resistors. I deliberately added more saw to it - I like it that way. Same on the 2 narrow pulses - I did them to taste. The narrower one is narrower than the Mini, again because I like that. That's why it sounds different. The waveforms look different because I inadvertently went the opposite way from square as the Mini, so they are 180 degrees out of phase. That's controlled by a couple of numbers in the code, I'll fix it on the next update. The filters are as close to identical as they can be using the available surface mount parts instead of the thru hole ones in the Mini. What makes it seem different is the taper of the resonance pot. Also, there is an internal trim that sets where oscillation begins. We set ours that way so that there is more range of the pot before oscillation starts. The mini could easily be set that way too, or the SE-02 set more like the Mini. The Cutoff pot is a tough one. The pots are converted with 8 bit resolution, or 256 steps. To get the 10 octave range needed, that's only 25 steps/octave. Sorry. Sweep it with an envelope - those are 16 bit, over 65,000 steps. I know many modern VCF designs have gain compensation when Emphasis (resonance) is turned up. The first one I know of is the Roland TB303's variation of the ladder filter. The Model D didn't have it, so we didn't add it. We also chose to hit the filter much harder than the Mini does. Back the Mix levels off to 2 o:clock to get closer. We love the Mini (I'm keeping my vintage one). It's a landmark instrument and a pleasure to play. We wanted to bring a similar sound to a compact package with many more features, at a fraction of the price. Roland did an amazing job of cramming all that stuff into such a small and inexpensive package. Thank you all for your interest.
Hi Tee Cee! Thanks for taking the time to add some feedback! The Sawtooth markings are backwards on the Model D, I noticed that while looking at the wave forms later in the video but I was confused at first, as you mentioned the SE-02 is correct as is the manual. Thanks for the additional clarification on some of the other points as well, it's very interesting to me from a technical standpoint!
Thank you again, SE and Roland really did a great job on this synth! I will be using it a ton myself!
Much respect for divulging this information. It speaks volumes of SE and your hard work - I'm glad to see your name again on such an iconic piece of history :) I understand the need for digital control using midi on any synthesizer. after all it is 2017. Complaints would be heard had it not been so. I do appreciate a work around mentioned using envelopes. Again, much respect and I look forward to see what's in store from you next :) cheers!
Hello :) Just ouf of curiosity - why not using 14bit midi / NRPN, like post-Voyager Moog (or Behringer on the cheap BCR2000) ? Or even a-bit-higher-than-standard resolution pots like for the recent Korg synths (1000 steps)? Is it a cost issue ? I really dont understand why it's not that much of a thing for most of synth designers :s Thank you, and congratulations for this great collaboration !
That's a good question. It was never discussed, the Boutique series uses 8 bit pots, I was just told that was what to expect. It isn't really a problem except with the filter, and by the time we got that far with the project, it was too late to do anything about it. Will certainly be aware of this on my next project!
Something maybe : lots of software synths use only 8bit control, but have a parameter smoothing algorithm, which makes it less steppy / more "natural" at high resonance. Isnt it something that could be implemented through a firmware update?
Very glad that the next Studio Electronic synths will have 14bit midi !! Looking forward to it :) Cheers !
I think that a "cheap" solution to avoid the filter stepping is controlling it with CV.
For example: connecting the MOD CV OUTPUT from the Arturia Keystep to the VCF CV INPUT from the SE-02... but, of course, by using a Mod touch strip and not a knob.
Yep. Studio Electronics actually makes an add-on for this called the SE-02 Ext Box with a large cutoff knob (which controls the filter via CV), and also adds drive, a highpass filter, and a few other odds and ends. I'm a lot happier with my SE-02 after adding that box. The drive sounds really good, and can be used to compensate for the loss of low end when turning up the filter resonance.
Sound starts at 6:15
Generally, it is smarter to get an instrument with the best possible oscillator & filter tone over added features like sequencer and delay. I mean, you either want to feel it in your plums or you don't. Garage band is free and can do the sequencing and fx. If you want buttons & knobs for your sequencer then you have to pay more for an external unit, but you'll also have to pay more to add CV control to the Roland SE-02 filter. In both cases the footprint of the setup will increase and the number of parts will increase. Something about a 256 step digital knob controlling the filter reveals something about Roland's priorities, which is to reach a larger audience with multiple features as opposed to maintaining fidelity to a legendary oscillator/filter pairing.
Model D Sawtooths actually ramp down even though the graphics show it ramping up - but your ears can’t differentiate between it ramping up or down.
Nice review :)
The voyager ramps up as does the S37. The Behringer Model D ramps down.
Starsky Carr thanks for checking it out! Love your vids man, been a sub of yours for quite a while 😀
Yeah, ramp up/ramp down deal had me all confused at the beginning of the comparison. Hadn't had either of these on the osiliscope before this vid so I was thrown off initially, but once I had them up I noticed they were the same and corrected myself from the intro.
Glad you stopped by man!
Cheers man, just found you in the suggestions.... got some similar things going on... nice!
Stepping isn't caused by digital aliasing. Aliasing is the mirrored wrapping of the harmonics back down below Nyquist (i.e. 22050hz @ a 44.1kHz sampling rate) Which adds inharmonic distortion. But stepping is caused by a finite number of digital points in the control. Like 127 or 256 controller values. The controls on the SE-02 are digital, that's how it has the ability to store presets. Steeping can be made less noticeable by adding a smooth timed fade or delay between the steps, or by using SysEx messages to give it 1024 or more values, instead of 127 like a standard midi controller message. But then it is harder to automate as well.
Hi Audesi! Yup, that's my mistake. Not sure why I said aliasing x). Thanks for the feedback! Very interesting to discuss!
I only pointed it out because I've seen multiple videos of other people describing parameter stepping as digital aliasing. Thanks for the video.
The roland MKS-50, 70 and 80 all have filter stepping but I was sort of playing along with the video with my Minimax digital minimoog and that has no stepping - perversely
Sysex messages... go on? Is this the kinda thing that can brick your synth?
The soundcard gets 8 bit pot values from the main cpu. The extremely wide range of the filter makes the 256 steps seem coarse. If I add enough glide to the cutoff frequency pot to smooth the steps, it causes VERY slow response to the panel control. Trying to arrive at an acceptable compromise. But again, there is no stepping with the 16 bit envelopes, just the panel control.
The Minimoog's filter is THE best selling point of it. For the price of the SE-02 I can live with the stepping. However, the "character" of the SE-02's filter being different (or not as sensitive to the resonance freq.) could be a deal breaker for me. The resonance gives the Mini its aggressive bite.
Just FYI, the comment from Tee Cee on the comparison vid, he mentions that there is a trim for the Emphases that can be adjusted to make it more like what we heard from the MiniMoog.. so I wouldn't count it out :)
The SE-02 can be more aggressive than the minimoog.
Nice job! I'm sticking with the SE-02. :)
Nice video. I'd love to see an update, especially comparing the SE-02 to the Behringer Model D and perhaps the Novation Bass Station 2. I really think those 3 are the best in class for this type of less expensive moog-sound synth.
Thanks for doing this. Very useful demo, which helped me decide that the Behringer device will more likely be the thing for me. Not that the SE-02 sounds bad, not by a long shot.. It's just that the idea of having a fully analog device with nothing between me and the knobs sounds kindof exciting to me.
It's something pretty sweet to have a fully analog unit I agree. The Behringer D from what I saw in a recent teardown is just like the MiniMoog in that regard.. other than the reference tone generator (which is a digital tone) and the MIDI DA stuff. Still the SE-02 has some great additional features that to me make it a must have also, but then again I have been told I buy way too many synths so I might have a problem :)
I wonder how the SE-02 treats CV to the VCF?
Could be a workaround there.
On the other hand, selling off a Minimoog Model D Full Size, and having the SE-02 + Behringer D, would result in some spare to use on other synths, that would add more in terms of sound pallette, than what would be missing from those 2 Minimoog based units.
If you change your Live settings, you can solo and mute with one click.
Good tip! I didn't think about that at the time, but would have been simpler for sure :)
That's what is cool about the SE02 it isn't just a rip off of the moog it's defo it's on thing and I think the thing rocks..
Ian Philp I agree 100% 😁👍👍
Sound differences aside, glad to hear you give it a good review. Too often I hear reviewers be hyper critical if the sound isn't "close enough" for their tastes, or comments about how nothing can sound like a real, true Minimoog. I have a friend in a prog-rock era cover band with 2 Mini's from the 70's. I don't know the age differences between them, but one he uses for bass lines and the other for leads. And he cannot switch them because their bass response is different enough that it's too weak for him if their uses were switched.
Not all Minis sound the same so 1 to 1 comparisons should always be taken as subjective, and not definitive. As long as the SE-02 sounds good, then that's the main thing. It's Moog-ish and for the price I'm sure glad it exists. Thanks Studio Electronics and Roland. :-)
Totally agree, I dig the SE-02 but was curious how close it would be to my Mini. Personally the more modern.features plus the low price tag are huge!
I feel a bit sorry for all the people that got the Mini "re-issue", that don't have piles of cash... the same would be true for anyone that bought a vintage one for lots of money recently, but don't have piles of cash.
Moog should not have "re-issued" it really... What they should have done is boosted the Sub 37 with a 3rd OSC, FM and a high-pass filter.
And given it a pricetag of 1999 dollars at most.
(It actually wasn't a re-issue, since Moog Music of today is not the same company, so it was actually a clone... Bob Moog bought the rights to the name of the company back, but he didn't buy the company back, as it was no longer, and all the patents of the Minimoog was already in public domain since long)
Thanks again Arnold - enjoying the comparison. These are a bit different and the comparison gives a unique view on SE-02 sounds. Sounds great!
dos gos you bet Dos! I enjoyed this and yup, gives some perspective to the differences between these 2 awesome synths!
This is a really great comparison video, they actually sound closer than I expected. I've been pondering picking up an SE-02, but I'm still waiting to get my hands on a Behringer Model D to see how it sounds in person.
Thanks! Yeah, me too I cannot wait to match the Behringer D with the Model D! BTW, subbed to your channel, am a big trek fan, so I dig your vids!
I love my Roland SE-02. How can you beat an analog synth that emulates the Moog mini Model D - with 512 patches? 128 of those patches are User writable, the other 384 are presets. I had the Behringer Model D, and while is sounded good and the knobs were a little more easily accessible than the Roland SE-02, the Behringer has no patch memory storage like the SE-02 does. Yes, I sold the Behringer Model D. The Roland SE-02 is actually designed by Studio Electronics and squeezes their SE-01 into the Roland Boutique synth case, while also being Roland’s only true analog synth in their Boutique range is synths. The rest of Roland’s Boutique synths all use their ACB (Analog Circuit Behavior) synth engine. I have several of the Roland Boutiques synths, because they are not huge, sound great and emulate several classic Roland analog synths like the Jupiter-8 (JP-08), Juno-106 (JU-06), JX-3P (JX-03) and the SH-101 (SH-01a). All fun to have and play with. Great little retro synth toys if you will. But the SE-02 is awesome for being a real analog synths copy of the Moog Mini Model D, and having patch memory storage! Studio Electronics have been repairing and modifying original Moog minis for over 30 years. And over the years created their own SE-01. A great clone of the Moog mini. For the price, sound, patches memory storage and the sequencer/arpeggiator - the SE-02 is a wonderful little synth! And... I forgot to mention that the Roland SE-02 comes with standard MIDI In and Out jacks built-in. Such a great deal in one little package!
@@garyturner5204 and a delay!!
I think the behringer d is much closer. But beyond sound, the build quality of the minimoog kills most every mass produced synth.
One tip for doing comparisons with a daw... mute one of the channels, then put it in Solo mode. Now you have two states that you can switch with just one key press on your computer keyboards. I use the "S" key in Digital Performer. Press "S" and you hear one channel, press "S" again and you hear the other, and so on. So much faster than the mouse.
It seems that the Roland sounds a bit "open" than the Moog. But we're splitting hairs here. I like the quality of the noise the Roland's steps introduce.
Still sounds sweet to me, but some will have an issue with stepping in the filter, but is a personal preference for sure. I would prefer no stepping, but don't think it handicaps this synth regardless. Thanks for checking out the vid!
Marshal Arnold x
I checked out theSE-02 at Guitar Center.....the small knobs,,,,,,what a drag.....especially those to change oscillator range etc......the Berhinger D sounds better to me....but the Roland has presets and a seq (great for live playing).....Roland please fix the filter
Behringer do like in 80', withojt menus and presets saving) theh lost somewhere in time) so no compromise - Roland win. +it sounds more clear, than dirty behringer.
With an ext-box you have a more powerful cutoff but both are great I think. I have se-02 and love it also. Just depends what you do with it and how.
Stepping of the filter is unforgivable in a modern synth. Roland dropped the ball on that.
I agree…very disappointing…but it's not the filter that steps; it's the knob (all the knobs except the master Tune are digitally scanned; I believe they are 8-bit, i.e. 0-255). You can get true analog, 100% smooth control of the filter via the VCF CV jack. Studio Electronics makes an addon called the Ext Box that connects to the SE-02 and gives you a large, very nice filter knob with no stepping. It also adds drive and a high pass filter, among other things.
A couple of things to note, the narrow pulse width is the same waveform but just inverted, the sound difference is due to pulse width. A slight difference in pulse width is very noticable.
Resonance (emphasis) on the MM is controlled by a reverse audio taper pot and on the roland it sounds more linear.
Thanks a ton pinchin!
I did fix the inversion of the pulse wave on the latest firmware. But I'm sticking with the narrower widths. I could have gone to more trouble to match the curve of the Mini's resonance pot, but the setting of the Reso trim in the Mini can put it on a different part of the curve, so it didn't seem worthwhile. If you've played a lot of original Minis you'll know they vary quite a bit due to component tolerance and internal calibration settings. The SE-02 has much better component and calibration tolerances than the original.
Having presets is a big plus for the SE over the Behringer D, I think.
The SE-02 also has more features.
But those looking for the "purest" Model D experience, will probably be better served by the Behringer D.
I would gladly have them both.
The Behringer D has a killer patch bay that allows all kinds of crazy interfacing with other gear, but this has patch banks which is a big plus for live playing.
It's a lot closer than I thought it would be. Really think the SE-02 is a fantastic 3-osc monosynth for the money despite the odd quirk (especially the filter stepping at max emphasis, and the emphasis not really sounding like it kicks in until 12 o clock or so). It's capable of great sounds and you add in the patch memory, sequencer, USB audio, etc, I think it's kind of a bargain.
FinalForm I agree, the SE-02 is fantastic and a great value!
I wonder if SE had released the Ext box when you guys said this :)
@@LordoftheBadgers I bought the ext-box, and still love the synth.
Thanks for the demo. Two things,
1. I have heard the SE-02 in full resonance and I'm thinking that you can get a more 'Minimoogish' sound by backing the oscillators off to let it get a bit chaotic. I haven't got an SE-02 yet but will try this out when I get mine..
2. I'm wondering if say the LFO sweeping the filter will be stepped. I suspect it doesn't step so the only issue with this is either real time control of the filter cutoff or VERY fine tuning of the filter cutoff setting in general. Again, I don't yet have one to test this out. Thanks again for the comparison though..
Correct, the LFO will not cause VCF stepping. Also correct, backing off the Osc levels will get more like the Mini. I did mention that we like to drive the filter harder than the Mini, but you can simply back off the Osc levels to match the Mini. We are very concerned with the level of the resonance vs the level of the Oscillators. That can really change the sound. So we just provide a bit more range to the Osc levels.
The filter stepping is something I've heard mentioned elsewhere (though not bothered by it if this weren't my only monosynth). There is the EXT BOX accessory for the SE-02 that provides a large high-resolution filter frequency knob plus extras.
Thanks so much for taking the time to put this video together. The se 02 definitlt sounds a touch brighter compared to the model d . I think (thou i may be wrong ), the shark tooths is derived from a sawtooth not being fully waveshaped to a triangle wave. The se 02 has more of the sawtooth harmonics left in its sharktooth . There isnt alot of diffrence in the raw oscillators to be honest.
Yo Adamski! Thanks for checking it out, it my pleasure to share these videos! I agree about the Sharktooth, the SE-02 does appear to have more Saw harmonics.. still between the Model D and the SE-02 they sound very close!
the model d has the sawtooth thing backwards, not the se 02. my guess is back in the day it was different but i've always known normal sawtooth goes from up to down
The sawtooth graphics on my Moog Slim Phatty ramp down, so it appears that the error is with the Mini Moog.
Anyone knows what's the link or online reference to the Oscilloscope plugin used here?
Thanks for sharing. Can i ask what cable is best for the SE? It just has a mini 1/8th inch output. Is there a special cable for that?
Se02 is more powerful in synthesis and modulations... but
The minimoog is the king
why does the filter step on the SE 02? Is that a digital aspect of it? Never heard an analog filter step, but I thought the only thing digital on this synth was the delay. Thanks for the vid!
Is due to the resolution of the encoders used. If I remember right, due to the smaller sized pots.
For what it's worth, on my Moog Sub 37, the icon for the sawtooth wave ramps down...I don't know if the actual wave does or not...
Yeah I checked my other synths also and apparently I was mistaken.. standard Saw wave ramps down.. so I had it backwards in my mind.. but my MiniMoog does have the wrong direction showing on it's front panel.. threw me off when I was setting up this test :)
You just f'd up about 100 noobs, who just watched this, for the next decade ... Lol
+Microwerx - My Minitaur and Little Phatty both show the saw wave ramping down, but they both ramp up when I put them on a scope. On the SE-02, I've compared the downward saw on the first osc to the upward saw on the 3rd osc and there was no sonic difference (and I did put them both on the scope to make sure the wave shapes matched what on the face plate).
redirishmanxlt thanks for commenting. Is odd that Moogs saw diagrams are backwards from what is actually seen on scopes..had me confused lol. Thanks again!
+Marshal Arnold - Glad I could be helpful.
Big Moog fan and analog nerd.....Studio Electronics have done an amazing job! I was sold in the shop after after hearing preset 3.......back home in my studio it sounds even better! It's a great little unit. I know your doing this for a comparison shoot out....don't really see the point. EVERY synth has its place. Love my MiniMoog too pieces. But my favourite synth at this moment in time is my Matrixbrute. In a few weeks it will change to my OB8 or my Jupiter......analog will ALWAYS rule! (But I do own some great digital gear too) nice to mix them together and create the sounds in your head to make music happen!! 🕶🎶✌🏻
Hey Dukeofpearl! I agree SE and Roland did a great job here, the SE-02 sounds amazing! The idea here in comparing these was just pure curiosity on my part. The SE-02 is obviously inspired by the MiniMoog, so I wondered how much alike they would sound :) Thanks for checking out the video!
With the SE-02 and the Behringer D, most synth players that want minimoog sounds will not have to pay for a used Minimoog (vintage or "-re-issue") any more.
I think that is great.
We just need more polys as well.
I'm going to post a prediction before I watch: Model D sounds better, but SE-02 is decent and has the benefit of a sequencer. So I'd probably end up buying both...
Very informative, thank you
Sounds like the waves on the Moog peak and trough at a slower rate, making them feel more varied and alive
Interesting comparison. In my opinion the SE-02 sounds more nasal and buzzy compared to the Mini which sounds warmer and rounder.
I believe that the SE-02 oscillators at full volume, are driving the filter harder than the mininoog does. It think keeping the volume on individual oscillators lower is the key to matching they classic Model d tonality
The Minimoog hands down but then I am biased towards Moog.😀
light blue osciloscope on grey background
Pure genius
Thanks for this comparison. I am missing real music being played, like chords and stuff. The Roland is pretty close when listening to individual waves though. This illustrates once more how insanely overpriced Moog gear is.
Lawrence O Overpriced? It costs more to develop an original than to copy a success. Plus, doesn’t the moog use higher quality components? And moog is a much smaller company-sourcing and production cost more. Aren’t moog products made in the USA? Just like guitars, American guitars cost more than those produced in Asian countries with cheaper labor. And with Roland, if they want this product to compete in a given price point, it can be subsidized by the rest of their vast catalog. Pricing isn’t just a matter of component cost.
@@CentaurusRelax314 We did use high quality parts in the SE-02, and Roland didn't change that. The other comments are spot-on tho. Our own made-in-the USA products are comparably expensive to Moog's. It just costs a lot more to make full sized stuff with quality parts here. It would cost us far more than the retail price of the SE-02 to make that here. I am amazed at how little things can be made for in Asia. Our aim with the SE-02 was to make that kind of sound more affordable, not to put Moog (or ourselves) out of business.
@@teecee1370 Thanks @Tee Cee.
I don’t even remember writing that three years ago…. I only (finally) bought an SE-02 a few months ago, and still need to spend some time with it to get better acquainted.
If I was 2' tall and had infant hands, I might be comfortable playing the SE-02. There is no comparing it to the real thing, in terms of sound and playability. For the money, the SE-02 is cool.
Link to the 'scope? Thanks :)
I made a similar experience, the filter just can´t catch up with the Moog ladder.
Great comparison vid. Some chapter or section breaks would be really neat additions. (See reviews by Andertons and Starsky Carr for examples of this if you don't know what I mean.)
Indeed, but when this was made ther was no chapter feature. More recent demo vids I have leveraged it though, I think it's very helpful. I know what you mean though, I've seen plenty of Starskys vids, I think he's got a lock on the VS thing for sure 😁.
Unless Roland/SE can fix the stepping on the filter (firmware) I am giving it a no go. (some are ok with filter stepping if it's "musical"). Might be midi CC resolution? Not sure.. Also was the glide on the re-issue up a little? Going through the octaves I thought I could hear some. Anyhow, great comparison, and properly thought out! Personally, I am thinking the Behringer D is the one I'll wait on, or just be good and happy with my slim phatty :D
Yo CowFood! Yeah, I was not expecting to hear filter stepping on this, pretty disappointing :( I hope they can fix that because it's pretty sweet sounding otherwise. And yeah, the glide apparently was up a bit on the Model D... must have been from a patch I was working on a while back, I forgot to ck it and didn't hear it until I started recording. It could really only be heard when the difference between notes was over a few octaves. I'm looking forward to getting a Behringer D in here and do that comparison, should be interesting! BTW, the Slim Phatty is one of my all time favorite synths!
It is the knob ADC that is stepping, not the filter itself.
That is your price for having full patch storage at that $ price level.
It could be done a different way, but it would increase the price.
And there is nothing that can be changed in firmware to fix that problem.
I would not say no-go.
The SE-02 can to things that the Minimoog and Behringer D can't.
A Behringer D + a SE-02 is still a lot less than an original or "re-issue". One could probably get a Sub 37 for that price diffference, if one is really in to Moog sound.... Too bad Moog hasn't made a Slim Subby... The Sub phatty is really let down by it's keyboard, and it's limited patch storage, but it does offer more bite than the Slim Phatty.
Did Roland fix the stepping on the filter?
I'll have to check Dos Gos, but from what the developers at SE said the encoders are only 8bit...I doubt they can fix the stepping problem via software with low rea encoders. They recommended using the envelopes to get around it last I recall. But, I'll update my SE02 to the latest rev and let ya know.
What's the oscilloscope plug-in called?
It is a free Max for Live oscilloscope, link is here: www.maxforlive.com/library/device/1124/oscilloscope - The next time I use it though I will change the Ableton colors as you can see the wave forms are a light blue, and though it can be seen in the video next time I'll chose a different color pallet. Thanks for checking out the Video :)
Cool. Thanks, Marshal Arnold. I was hoping it was a generic VST that might work in Cantabile Lite, but I guess I could try Ableton too... One day... :)
The software / PC based stuff kind of wears me out. It seems like a good idea, but I tend to spend a lot of time shouting at the monitor about how there's no ^$&£^&ing sound coming out again.
It was a very informative video, and using the scope plug-in really helped, I thought.
I was watching in a darkened room, with the brightness turned down a lot on my monitor (and a night mode style turned on, for TH-cam). In those conditions, the scope was quite readable.
TooSlowTube oh sure no problem! I'm glad it was informative for ya, really appriciate you checking it out 😎
I can hear the difference on my laptop speakers, but for the price, maybe ill grab one
A great deal on a great little synth! I have one.
Honestly, i really like the se02, but you just can't compare it to the minimoog
Agreed, SE-02 is pretty sweet for a low cost and compact format with some Moogish qualities, but the MiniMoog is a classic and something special. Still, this was a fun comparison sonically at a basic level. Will be interesting to see how the Behringer D stacks up.. if it ever gets here :)
Sure you can. You can compare anything with anything.
minimoogs often differs in sound between the years ass components get aged
Which era was your Minimoog from?
Like he said in the video - it's a re-issue purchased this year.
yup, as mentioned in the video this is a re-issue MiniMoog, purchased new in April this year.
Thanks for the review. My wife gave me a hard time watching it near the kids because of your language from time to time.
The Roland is not an exact Moog knock-off, but is a great little affordable analog synth with presets. I can forgive the digital stepping, but it is annoying!
Hi like your video I think roland boutique se02 got more things to work with the moog I had one and it's a pice of gear that will never die but thanks very much for the video very good 👍
ya but wouldn't it make more sense to use a really expensive studio electronics synth to make comparison rather than something made for everybody? It's like your insinuating studio electronics can't make a better synth than the model d by moog.
So the point of this video is pretty obvious, however it appears that you may not be aware that the SE-02 was designed to be a small MiniMoog with some update features. Roland and SE never said this outright in their promotion of the SE-02 but since it was obvious this was the intention that is why I did the comparison. I am in no way insulting Studio Electronics, I think they are a fantastic company and think the SE-02 is a great value. The Model D has legendary status in the synth world so any synth and wants to clone or emulate it I personally want to hear how close they are to the real deal and being I'm in a position to do so I think there is nothing wrong with sharing this.
You're comparing the Model D to the SE-02. You should reverse the order and show what the sound should sound like first then show how the SE-02 compares.
I think it's pretty silly that many people will watch a review like this that isn't musical in any way, shape or form, and decide if a synth sucks or not. Damn is this video what your tracks/beats sound like? 🤣 Good Lord.
Is more of a technical comparison than a review. Both are great synths, but at the time there were several companies who were releasing mini Model D clones. Though the SE-02 was not stated to be such a thing, the intent was obvious. I still own both and use both. A musical demo doesn't really demonstrate the differences with synths that are pretty close in overall timber, plus IMO it's nice to see and hear differences in oscillators and filters. Again, nothing wrong with either synth, I personally would say to get as many synths as possible :)
@@MarshalArnold Yes I understand your points, and I also own the SE02 and a Moog (Sub 37. )My gripe wasn't intended for you at all. I get the intended purpose and I've loved Moogs and SE-1's since the 90's. However, what I don't get is when people watch this type of technical video and start bashing one of the synths as if just because it's different, it somehow is a toy or incapable of making a phat bass groove. Personally, I don't even care about the stepping. I'm never going to do what it takes to cause that while I'm making a bassline. Mike Pensini has that Se02 sounding like Parliment. It's no toy even though it's true that it isn't as gritty as my 37. But the people who make comments like that wouldn't be able to pick out the SE02 from the Model D in the context of a mixed record. I'm in love with both of my Synths, and yes, I want another. A poly.
@@richiefamus8778 ah, I hear ya. Yeah no need to synth bash. Each has it's place! Did you see that SE released an EXT box for the SE-02 that resolves the stepping? I have one though haven't tested it out yet. I only could really hear it when the resonance was cranked and I almost never use filters in that way personally. But I see what you ment anout people getting riled up with videos like this.
@@MarshalArnold Funny you mention that, I was on the phone last night with a friend of mine and we were both on their website looking at that, and those outrageous Omegas lol. Didn't know that it resolves stepping but that's great! Let me know how you like it.
Will do!
Good
I prefer the D here.
Teh mini moke hez no stepping. Cool :D
Less talk more action dude 😩
Thanks Fj, I'll be mindful of that in future comparison vids. I appreciate your feedback :)
@@MarshalArnold thanks for your videos Dude!
My pleasure 😁
Look at a wood saw...
There’s no real value in comparing synths this way.
waste of time on u tube compression
😴😴😴
Most boring review in the universe.
Hey Harry! Is all good, but this was more a comparison vide rather than a full on review, so unless you are a hardcore synth nerd this can be a bit dry. I do however hope to be more entertaining in the future :) Thanks for watching!
Don't waste your time with this whining fool, he's talking out of his ass! It was a good video! He needs to get back to cat videos and let the adult talk.
just a bit of advice for OP of you want it: we need just a sprinkling of quick snappy to the point. one thing is that the everyone is going to know they are different... i would humbly suggest, start off with some sounds. and then whip up some proper patches. i kinda wanna hear the capabilities of your synths. the basic waveforms aren't that interesting... and the subtle nuances Don't really translate over youtube. we gotta go just a little less subtle i think. and maybe plan your steps, like: init patch sound, detune a bit and dial in the oscillators, hear that, check out the filters, do something gnarly, hear that, turn up the LFO rate and dial in a bit of audio rate modulation and see how similar they can be while doing something gnarly.
I'm in the market, this was extremely helpful.
Marshal
I really appreciated your review - but to be honest, much of your explaining or commenting was unnecessary for a vid like this. So I think you should do some cutting before releasing it.
Oh - and my opinion on the SE-02 is simple. I like the sound but I hate that hardware. Too tiny knobs and switches, no real display ...
Boring 😢
SE-02 just sounds like toy. It can’t replace moog😜
Nonsense