I purposefully kept the window minimised so I couldn't see the video and I figured out that I must have the worst ears in the world because I couldn't hear which was which. A lot of commenters here said they could hear the difference which means I need to get my ears checked I suppose.
Somthing interesting at 2:38. So the guy does a none for note comparison on most every patch, but on the big wide crossfade, he doesnt dare try to play the lower octave riff on the Bheringer. That's the mic drop moment for me.
Nobody noticed that the Polysix, although uses VCOs, doesn't has a TUNE routine and button, like all other analogs. That is because the standard way to tune them is to build an expo converter to each VCO, and tune the converters to match the total tuning. The Polysix has just one expo converter, that is switched between all 6 VCOs, therefore no discrepancies are noticed between them. The VCOs are very linear, therefore is a quite clever way to overcome to a common issue. I can't understand why that technique hasn't been replicated on other synths.
I'm not sure why anyone is trying to compare this to modern keyboards. That's like comparing a television from 1984 to the ones we have today. Of course it's not going to be as good but you can still marvel at how ahead of its time it was back then, especially if you are old enough to have actually lived through it.
I've never tried to use the gate output on my RS-09 to trigger another synth, but I'm definitely going to have to try it now that I've watched your video!
OB Xa tends to have more bite when it grows, the softer patches are pretty much identical. Despite this fact X8 leans on being despite this difference. The X8 (like at 4:58) tends to sound Wider, and I have no idea why. I tend to like the tails of the Xa a bit more (likely cuz of the digital envelopes), especially if you are cued into the very very end of notes, they just tend to sound dry. Most significant difference is at 6:40 (though I wish you would have let the sound decay completely before starting the other sounds) the Xa sounds far more nuanced but not by a crazy amount 7:51 9:57 I was surprised at how similar this patch sounded Filter sweeps teeend to sound better in Xa but not always I have not idea why 16:08 sounds better on the Xa but it does, deeper more 3D sound.
I'll take a 4 octave over a 3 octave everytime! Berhinger always gives a 3 octave keyboard which is a misrepresentation. I'll take the Roland everytime! Besides it's very easy to design these sounds to begin with!
Good morning . For the Demo, you indicate using a PA-Decoder cartridge as well as another Multi-Cartridge... At 29min26" this chorus pad sound is fabulous (it reminds me of the Prophet VS).. Could you tell me please the name of the patch as well as the origin of the sound bank from which it comes? Thank you in advance.
Absolutely beautiful sounding synth. Love your playing abilities and the programs you have made for the Super Gemini. I just pulled the trigger on one this past Friday and can hardly wait to get and do some sonic exploration.
Tom Sawyer”” patch sounds a lot different. Would like to know what amount of restoration went into the Xa are there mostly 40 year old components? And how much difference under the hood is the X8 from the (much cheaper ) UB-Xa.?
Tom sawyer was also not matched on the UB-Xa. The OB-Xa voice defining in unison gets wider the deeper the notes. In high notes the detuning is sharp. The filter resonance lacks on both recreations the growl.
This board was so far ahead of its time. There’s a reason musicians dreamed of owning a Kurzweil back in the mid 80’s to around the mid to late 90’s. They were king and they were expensive, but their reputation was well deserved.
I remember when the JV80/JV880 was launched. Everybody loved it for the emulation of strings and guitars. It was a solid "truth" that the filter was cold and that it could not do analog synth sounds very good. It was also more expensive than analogs at that time so I ignored JVs cause I preferred analog sounds of MKS series. No 30 years later I like the dreamy pads and string emulations in the JVs cause they have a special "glow" that real analogs does not have in the top end. Funny how things change. Would have been great if you had shown the actual preset names in the video or list them in the post.
@@vintagesynths Thank you. It was a suggestion about making the videopart in the video a bit more useful as well if the text in the display had matched the sounds. I was a overwhelmed by the amount of low end bass in some of the presets on my machine. It was really too much. Have you experienced the same?
Since the video is already a year old, I assume the problems have already been fixed. Since I don't know, I'll add my two cents anyway. If the lower one is the 2.2, the 2.3 sounds a bit broken, distorted. There further might be an issue with at least one voice, as well as the filter tracking, because for some sounds the bass range is always identic, but the 2.2 sounds louder with high tones. Overall a nice video! Listening to wavescanning never gets boring.
@@vintagesynths OS from Hermann seib, Austrian like myself what a small world... Have you sold any PPG gear, besides understandable frustrating tech. reasons, because you maybe might've already heard the upcoming hw clone or perhaps bought Groove Electronics' 3rd Wave?
Fun fact. The HW works without 8 saws to generate the supersaw. That would bring the DSP to the knees. It's a trick with modulated pulse waves. I like the JP Sound but you can recreate it nowadays.
Polysix is always more raw, organic and full. Filter is fantastic, Oscillators are VCOs, plus very useful ensemble fx. I sold juno, but will never sell polysix.
I want one of those Blue erasable Multi bank Carts. What an awesome thing to have with 16 banks. There is even a bigger one with switches and 48 banks WOW!!! So need one of these.
