Tim, It would seem that your perfectionism is only matched by your amazing insights on this gear. Just know that all the time and patience you take in putting these videos together will always be rewarded by our appreciation on the other end. Thanks again for this and I look forward to your further insights!
Tim, as one of the guys (pulsn) who created a few of the audio demos on the Vermona site for the PerFourmer MK2...yes, i have to fully agree the filter is not the worlds best one, it actually is still very useable, still to the fact, that if you stack voices, the filter is not being in the way by adding too much fatness. Try that with a Moog... In my opinion this is the charming part about this synth. Always more than just the summary of the single parts. Just as you mentioned.....the oscillators, the envelopes, the mixer and modulation setup plus the filter in combination makes it a really good sounding synth that is indeed on par with a Moog or Sequential and other synths. I actually miss my Perfourmer mk2...
As much as I appreciate the effort here, not firing an Arpeggio at the Vermona with some delay and reverb and setting each Synth slightly differently is missing the point as a first exploration. Don‘t focus on your expectations and rather bask in the amazing vibe this synth delivers when used as aninstrument, not a review experiment. It will never ever leave my studio…
I've got a perfourmer mkII and a moogerfooger mf-101 for comparison. Here is the key reason they sound different. The oscillators on the perfourmer are overdriving the filters, it's not evidence they are different filter topologies. Patch the vco output of one channel into the external input of one of the others so you have the ability to turn down the oscillator before it hits the filter. Try it!
I’m listening and finding a lot of parallels with your process in my own research of this synth. Looking forward to the full review and very grateful for your self-reflection here. Keep up the great work :)
I'm pretty sure that the filter in the Mk 2 is a Moog ladder filter - it certainly was in the original Perfourmer. However, I think there are two issues to note when doing a direct comparison to Behringer 904C clone. The 904C clone clearly has been set so that the maximum amount of internal feedback is higher and thus produces a stronger self-oscillation than the Vermona when the resonance is turned up. The part where you demonstrate what the Pefourmer's filter sounds like with no audio input to it shows this - it simply does not self-oscillate at low frequencies. Personally, I'd have designed it so that it would have been stronger and self-oscillated at a lower frequency - much like the 904C clone. The resonance level may be trimmable inside in the Vermona. But the important bit is that the Vermona's VCO is seriously overdriving its filter. When you overdrive a Moog ladder the resonance gets damped - at high input levels you'll even stop a 904C ladder circuit from self-oscillating. Essentially the input signal swamps the feedback signal. I wonder whether you could use the Perfourmer's VCO out/VCF input socket to send the signal to a volume control to reduce the level of the signal and get a more traditional Moogy sound. I actually like the Perfourmer's filter but a drive control would have been a useful addition.
But I truly think that Tim's message is more about the glowing reviews, and basing purchase opinions based on those, as opposed to how the filter has been configured. In saying that, should the reviews have been based on A/B comparisons anyway, using the Vermona out-of-the box settings?
I bought one 6 months ago, these days I have quite a few synths and I appreciate the differences in filter sounds or other odd quirks. The filter adds to the sound of it one way or the other. Great to have someone being scientific about it.
Thanks Tim for the honest feedback on the synth, you are right, it's important to share your reservations & I can't be the only one who notices that's often missing from other YT reviews, so it's greatly appreciated. Also loved the fact that you dug up the original SOS review & picked holes in it, respect. It's quite interesting that such a big change to a fundamental part of any synth is not referenced anywhere else. Thanks for you perspective, please keep up the hard work on your awesome videos.
That was a good video. I bought one about a month ago. It sounds and behaves like pretty much like it does on the RU-vid videos I watched over the many months of deliberation. I based my decision on that along with any number of people declaring it a special synth, a keeper.
I tried the perfourmer a few times and i think thats what it is for, being "gorgeous". I have enough screaming synths but the vermona is beautiful... it is made for dreams
I have a Mono Lancet 15 and a Minitaur, Mono Lancet has the same filter as the Perfourmer. I like that the filter sounds different, to appreciate Vermona's synths you can notice how "precise" and clean yet charismatic they sound, I would define them elegant and versatile, classy and "alive" in their own way. It's not big and fat like a Moog, it's not like a Roland etc. It's Vermona's sound, take it or leave it, it's all good. At least it's not another clone
This is just the sort of in depth critical investigation of synths that we need. Subscribed! I agree with this: love the raw sound of the VCOs and don't tend to use much resonance.
This is a well known Vermona issue, the resonance kills off the filter. You can see Stimming struggling with it in his review as well. Edit - You mention Stimming further along in the video
Working in the academic world I’d say you would make a perfect colleague. Dialectical objections taken to the core, massive knowledge, keeping the fairness, valid and reliable… well done for specialists. My first thought was also 12db and being subjective the aesthetics of that gentle sweeps sound more subtle to me (also loving and owning moogs).. anyway keep the good work going- were listening
Before watching this video, I had no preconceptions of the Perfourmer, I hadn't even heard of it before your Matrix skit but I found the manner in which you set out your concerns very commendable. It's nice to know you take the process of reviewing very seriously, I just hope it doesn't cause you too much anguish or lost sleep 😉. Thanks again for taking the time to pass on your thoughts and unique perspective.
Tim, four year owner here of the MKll. I’m curious if my YT video pairing the MKll with my Dreadbox Abyss was one of the sound examples you watched? The filter is so much closer to my Jupiter-8. I’m planning on adding a Moog One to my studio at some point which would be my first Moog ever…… demo’d one at Superbooth and really liked it.
Thank you Tim. I really appreciate your honest opinion. I don't believe you wasted 20 minutes at all. Your expertise and opinions based on that expertise are of great value.
Interesting stuff, thanks for taking the time. I got a Perfourmer a couple of months ago too and love the overall sound and especially how changing the playmodes always brings nice surprises. With the filter, I was surprised that I couldn't raise the resonance and sweep the cutoff low to pick out and boost low sub-bass frequencies. It seems with high resonance it will only ever accentuate mid to high frequencies. Not sure if that's typical of this design, but it wasn't as I had expected.
I’m pretty sure that’s just what these filters do. I have a subharmonicon that sounds the same. If you want a bass boost you need different architecture (such as the classic FAT function). Correct me if I’m wrong someone :)
Hey Tim, long time subscriber, love your videos! I have some points i was thinking about while watching your video that you may find interesting. 1. On the original manual when they mention "Bob Moog" if i understand correctly i think they are referring to the 24dB/Oct slop (filter type). So they are not saying it's a "Moog filter" but it does seems like a problematic phrasing. They may have removed this statement because of this and to avoid confusion. I think most reviewer mentioned "Moog" when they review 24dB/Oct ladder low pass filter. It doesn't means they compare it to an actual Moog filter. So maybe it never meant to be what ever you hoped it will be based on the reviews. 2. The compensation usually don't change the way the resonance sound. Vermona said it effect the volume but not how the resonance behave. But i find it interesting they told you its because of signal to noise ration and on the manual it's because of distortion. Since all the original Moog don't have this compensation it's also fair to assume a filter with this compensation is maybe "less Moog" sounding? :) 3. It's very possible the review you read on SOS had the same filters like you have. Vermona said it was only on the first units. it's also possible that most the demos you heard (and loved) have the exact same filter. it's also very probable the resonance sounded about the same as yours but maybe with a bit higher volume. without knowing what SOS tested your last comment about "not getting the filter you read on the review" is somewhat negative correlation. They may had the same filters and we don't know how the first unit sounded. it may sounded "more like Moog" or maybe just louder or more distorted. 4. I think it's better to test a synth as a whole . the cliche "the whole is greater than the sum of the parts" is right with synth (Or any complex machines). If the filter is the perfect fit for the other parts it maybe not so exciting when tested alone but it doesn't means it's not the perfect filter for this synth. I think Nick from Sonic State said the filter of the Waldorf pulse2 don't have much character but it may be the reason the oscillators sound so strong and pronounce. So it's possible a stable and without much of harmonics filter can support a great sounding synth. He also said about the "Moog One" that the typical lack of low end at high resonance can be advantage with polyphonic synth. I'm looking forward to see your review about the MKII and I hope you find some of this thought interesting/helpful Cheers,
Tim we're fortunate to have yourself and likes of Stimming (whose reviews I adore) giving us the real dope on gear, and being creative with it. Even if it's just - in my case at least - living vicariously. Keep doing what you do.
I can clearly hear a lot more saturation on the vermona filter , which leads me to believe that the actual filter input gain is much higher (compared to the behringer ) , therefore reducing resonance peaks
Considering that this was intended as a live synth (it's in the name after all), could it be that constraining the resonance was deliberate? If I was using this live, I'd probably be happy knowing that I wouldn't accidentally tear people's heads off by having my pinky brush up against one of the four resonance knobs. Just a thought.
the best reviewer there is. Tim I do love the tone, the pace and the aproach you have with your presentations and reviews. pls do continue. ( SOS reader for the last 30 years ;-) my respect !
A while since I read SOS. Is Paul White still there? He was Mr Home Recording in the mid 80s - almost the only source of info we had back then. I've still got copies of Home & Studio Recording somewhere!
No problem this one doesn't do as native ladder filter, we can stick with Moog :) Cool to hear it from trustable source, and explaining in-depths, Tim!
Excellent video, as usual. I have a MkII and love it. I find the instrument (including the filters) to be very musical and pleasing. The weak resonance isn’t an issue for me, though I found your research interesting.
Interesting. I myself just purchased a new, but older German synth with very few reviews and am waiting for it to arrive this week... the Hypersynth Xenophone. Like you Tim, I didn't even know it existed until I happened to browse past one on sale. I'm pretty confident I'll fall in love immediately.
Bravo! This seems really "good form" - I wasn't in the market for a PERfourMER, but certainly find it an interesting instrument, and I think it is very good of you to share your expectations, explorations, and discoveries. Edifying. Particularly refreshing when my RU-vid feed seems mostly to be populated by synchronously released (semi-sponsored?) eulogies about some newly-released device with a token quasi-criticism at the end.
Hi Tim, funny I watched first your review and then this one a day later. Looking forward to my own version of the Performer. By the way did you ever tried the Schmidt Synth? That sounds really unbelievable.
I bought a used Vermona PerFourMer Mk1 in 2008 as a companion to my Moog Voyager. It is a long timekeeper for me, because it doesn't sound like a Moog. Back in the times, it was (and is) more or less the perfect affordable polyphonic addition for me in the analog domain.
I think your you're onto something here. I have a Lancet (wich has more or less the same circuits but a different architecture) since it came out and i find it sounds very "vintagy" almost like a cross between the Moogy warmth and a more "elegant and mild" Roland 4 Pole Filter (i think more SH or Juno than Jupiter). For me it never was intended to be a Clone. The VCOs for example are very perfect in terms of the waveform they sound softer and cleaner more like the VCOs on a SEM (not as raspy or fat than the classic Moog ones). It is always creamy and nothing really matches that exact Sound. Plus it has never been easyer or cheaper to by a Moog, if you want that Sound buy it.
Good video. Fair comments. It is very hard to stop butting one's head up against the limitations of a synth and turn instead to what it _is_ capable of; I continue to fail to do so with my E-mu Proteus/1 and Boutique JP-08. I do have a few good patches for the JP-08 but the Proteus is only kept to remind me _never again_ to compromise! 😀
I don't get that. if the filter was sounding so amazing - then why did they changed it? I own a perfourmer mk2 and I really love it. its one of the few synth that I never would resell. I love the simplicity and the charakter of it. I use every of its single outs going into an effektpedal and summing it again into a oto boum. but im curious now how the difference sounds like.
Hi Tim, great video as always, I have the Vermona 4 channel midi CV eurorack module. I have one Crave. I've done the Maths and I think 4 Craves and the Midi/CV module might be the way forward - could you imagine. Selling some gear as we speak lol
I find comparisons of the Vermona P4 to other synths analogous to guitar tone wood comparisons. It's such a warm, woody, mahogany-sounding, humbuckery synth. Those who want bright single-coil ash or spruce articulation need not apply.
You're right about the filters Tim, they're not as resonant as a Moog. The thing is though, I have never really considered them Moog filters, I've always thought of them as Vermona filters. I remember in the past I have butted up against the resonance disappearing at the lower frequencies when making percussive stuff but I just hopped over to the sine or triangle wave in the VCO and swept that instead. With the layering, FM and so on it there's plenty to dig into. If you made them all perfect Moog clone filters the synth would have a pretty different character.
@@johnmahoney5393 I use my ears. Specs and descriptions are always only a guide. And this is what the manual says: "Each of the PerFourMer MKII's synthesizer channels offers a voltage-controlled resonance-capable low-pass-filter with a slope of 24dB per octave. This proven effective filter-type has already been used in legendary synthesizer- models developed by Bob Moog. A low-pass-filter allows frequencies of an audio signal to pass below a certain frequency (cutoff frequency) and suppresses all frequencies above." It's not sold as a Moog clone. They are explaining it's a 4 pole ladder filter and they are giving Bob Moog the credit for inventing it. It's a Vermona and it sounds great. If someone wants a Moog, buy a Moog or a dedicated clone.
So, I am really amazed by p4 based on reviews and yt videos, it’s phat , it’s dreamy, it’s 4 in one, I have a chance to get one for £1k which is really tempting However, I have a moog 32, and I really love it ! The question is, should I sell my m32 and get the p4 or should I get another m32 ? Or maybe a harmonicon? Any suggestions? I use Digitakt as my main sequencer together with a vermona kick for my kicks and nord3p for percussion.
Matter fact, there is one thing I forgot to mention, let’s see if anyone crossed something like that, Right, so at some point the filter of my32 started to crack a lot at the low frequencies, and it was bit annoying even tho there are work arounds as it’s a semi modular, so I gave it to my friend to open it and clean the contacts as he is a pro engineer, and once he opened the m32 apart he noticed some weird stuff was going on there, The welding job (or something like that) (sorry I had no clue what he was explaining as I have no idea about electrical stuff so I wasn’t paying much attention)wasn’t done correctly, some parts wasn’t even welded at all, he was saying that it’s very weird for a company like moog do stuff like that, So I don’t have much details about it so I can’t explain it correctly, but I can find out what was exactly going on there Just curious if anyone knows anything about it
thanks for your research. I have a Perfourmer in order, so curious to hear the rest of your review. Don't care about the filter not being alike to a moog filter, as long as the sounds you can make with the synths are nice (hava a matriarch anyways!)
Thanks Tim, I had the same experience as you two and a half years ago when I bought my vermona - I thought something was wrong with it - I wasn’t able to get any kind of moogish bass out of it, nor did the filter bank add any character to revamped electronic drums - it was a big disappointment; no amount of tweaking of envelopes helped and adding resonance just made everything worse. One other “note”, like stimming, I’m always tuning the damned thing. For niche, one chord explorations and sound design, it’s cool, especially the fm example you show, but beyond that, it gets little use in my work - it’s mostly a support or additional layered synth that sits powered off much of the time.
I tried a recent Perfourmer and I think the filter sounds great, esp with the Freq turned down a bit (it’s quite bright otherwise) and hardly any or no Reso. That base tone is truly impressive. You can use lots of resonance for sure, it IS a useful sound, but I wouldn’t use it all the time. My gripe with it is that every knob related with pitch is way too sensitive. LFO to pitch, ENV to pitch, Pitch FM, etc. But definitely a great synth, just don’t buy it for poly work, it’s too much of a hassle.
Could the filter be modded to make it better? I bought mine years ago and the resonance is pretty bad. When was the revised filter implemented? It's really the oscillators that make this instrument great.
I thimk they didn't put a 24db filter on it to stay in the range of the warmth sound, the moog filter is absolulety one of the greatest, but for this synth i think it would be to much. Thank u for your video! I'm on the way to get a good synth for my setup and you introdiced it very well! I also saw the video from stimming one of my favourite producers and i think i will get it too! Thanks a lot!
I noticed when you were doing the sweeps that the filter does sound best with no resonance. It sounds better than the moog one with zero resonance. Just that beyond that it doesn't. When you did that first filter sweep with no resonance my immediate impression was I liked that better but then it was very disappointing to hear the other sweeps with resonance that just sound dead.
The only reason I can think of that this can happen is that the performer is over loaded (saturated) with input level gain from the VCO. You have to find a way to lower the input gain that is coming to the filter. Otherwise, the resonance will be chocked like that. Actually, any filter will behave like that. Try it for example with a eurorack filter you have. Just crank/amplify the input signal coming to the filter to a very high level until it saturates. You will hear the same thing.
I watched Stimming's video yesterday. I though he was trying to beat you to it after your teaser. He looks like you too. I wonder if the filter/mono lancet filter is same as perfourmer. Anyone know? Seems to be. Res never gets out of hand, always in the pleasant domain.
I have a Retroverb lancet and the resonance on that is wild. Definitely gets into self oscillation around the 75 percent resonance mark and it has a pre filter drive circuit too, which enhances the kind of harmonic singing that Moog filters are known for. I know that the Retroverb lancet has been updated in the last few years, and I know that my unit is an older one that was bought new in 2012, so I can’t speak for the new revision other than that the new units use DC power while mine uses AC. that could be the only difference, or there could be more.
I had the exact same experience as you two years ago. I was disappointed, but I quickly reasoned that I had powerful resonant filters on my other four synths, including the insanely screaming Behringer K2 (and by the way I don't give a f**k whether it sounds like the Korg MS-20 or not). I never had a Moog, and I don't even want one, except maybe the Subharmonicon, which I wouldn't buy for the filter... I came to appreciate this peculiarity of the Perfourmer as a positive when I discovered the multitudes of gorgeous and yes, creamy sounds one can create with it, especially with quality outboard effects or guitar pedals. The Perfourmer is this unique synth(s), with a distinct personality, which can be either used as the main instrument(s) , or to discreetly enrich any track with warmth and subtleness and magic. I love it now.
With regards to the filter comparison. I can defo hear the behringer module sounds far more juicier. I think surprising when you consider the costing Vermona possibly would charge for the filter as a standalone module . I can bet you that they have matched the ladder topology but not component specs. The Behringer just sounds far superior. The cutoff slope on the Performa sounds quite weak and nasal. Great reflective video Tim, honesty is always admired.
"I love his channel, I love his videos, he's got a little bit of humor .... that I don't have." - Tim, now that was funny! Seriously, I really appreciate your overall message and opinion about the Pefourmer. I was very close to purchasing one. I may still, but not without some additional research.
I never clicked with the Perfourmer but the guy I sold it to loves it. We all hear things differently and no musical opinion is right or wrong. It’s classy of you to continue to explore the Perfourmer to make sure you give it a proper review but it’s clear that it just isn’t what you expected. Plenty of other amazing synths out there!
....I thought it was just me! I bought one of these earlier in the year and returned it within a week. Even compared to my old Waldorf Pulse the filter just wasn't cutting it (in my opinion). Vermona is a great company, and I love my DRM1.
Thanks for that. I have been lusting after a Performer for a while. Now I'm not so sure. I recently embarked on building a Eurorack system - it is a less expensive way of making mistakes!
Stimming is a great musician and his record from 2013 it’s one of the most beatiful ones of last years. About this issue I’ve felt as well, there was this issue about polyphony and Moog filters, that they may have tried to amend but (imho) they couldn’t. It’s quite hard to make a chord without sounding ‘mushy’? Like in the 2 or 3 first octaves of a piano.. but for more octaves. My experience with the Per4 was: I almost bought in a trip of Europe (Thomann cancelled the purchase on my credit card), had it for less than a hour a year later, but I have this negative feeling, besides I could make really nice sounds, and desisted. Thanks so much for the review!
I watched your longer review first and enjoyed it because all the other youtube videos were demos of this synth in performance. I have always found your reviews to be very honest appraisal backed up by much more knowledge than I. I still like the Vermona for its sound and I like the controls and various modes. I still do not have one, but will keep your evaluation of the filter and its poor comparison made by the manufacturer and others to the Moog filter. Thanks again.
I had my first jam with your Perfourmer (😂- bought from the guy you sold it to, still looks brand new!) last night and loved it. It is simple but very effective. I find the advantages outweigh the disadvantages for my own interests and style . I owned one before and sold when I was hard up but had to go back. I get what your drawbacks are but they aren’t deal breakers for me. I have owned a Moog matriarch in the past and actually prefer the vermona. Interesting what you say about the filter. The Moog filter is not the same and nowhere near as strong as the matriarch but it does have a lovely personality
thank u so much for this video! it´s exactly what i felt in a same way jamming around with my MK2 and the Moog Subharmonicum ( both quite difficult synths if it´s about finding the right spots for good sounds ) . The Vermona feels like it hasnt resonance at all compared to the moog.
hahaaaa, and " strong self osc." is a joke . there is no self osc. at all. but as i am a big fan of super resonating sounds it´s still worth experimenting with the MK 2
Thanks' for the 'Superb' Review/Demo!The 'Vermona' has ,to my ears',an almost 'Oberheim' quality.The (Behringer- 904A) definitely follows' the structure of the original (Moog-904A);Less 'buzzy' and 'slightly-deeper' sounding. 'Vermona' is a 'good-sounding' synth,just not a 'Moog-Filter'!'Great-work'on your part!BTW,Tim,can you show us your newly configured 'Behringer,ARP-2500'?It's a little 'Blurry' back there! ; )
It's very interesting how reaction to something can be based on expectations, rather than just how it is. But when you spend a lot of money on a synth, you do need to research in advance to a degree to make sure it is what you are after. It sounds like the filter is 18db/Oct to me or just the resonance isn't as strong as the Moog circuit. It sounded more Moog-y without resonance. Some of that creamy smudge is there.
Am I the only one who preferred the sound of the Vermona compared to the 904? Also, just re-read Theo's review on Greatsynthesizers.com and he does mention that the resonance has it's own character which certainly holds true for his sound examples and what I've been hearing from you, though his unit definitely still had the compensation circuit as he points out the rise in background noise.
I kind of preferred the Vermona filter too, I've got no use for excessive resonance on this type of synth. The restrained resonance would give me, personally, the ideal range.
I gotta say. I've always felt the filter is weak. Though it is still one of the most beautiful synths I've ever owned/played. Especially running 4 sequences through it. Woah!!
Thanks for the research Tim.. sounds rather frustrating that they didn't just wait to revise this in a mk3.. and make the compensation circuit switchable on/off. Maybe you just need to buy 4 Vermona Filter Lancets to use as inserts on the output stages :)
Hey wagoo. I reckon Vermona just didn't quite do their homework properly on this one . I have seen and heard quite a few Moog ladder filter clones and most just don't hit the mark.
@@AdamTheAd-vanc3d there could be a factor of the age of this design at play.. wasn't really an analogue re-revolution yet back then so less other newer synths to compare it to.. maybe they thought it was good enough for the time and cleaning the noise was more important. Been poking about their retroverb and filter lancets vids though.. they sound nice from what I've found
@@Wagoo Yes very true good point Wagoo. Thou I doubt if was released say over the last 3/4 yrs they would have probably stepped their game up. Would be intresting to see the schem of exactly what Vermona engineers did on this take of the ladder filter.
@Snake Plissken It is available on the net . However just because the design is available doesn't mean it is always followed to a T shall we say. In some ways thats a good thing as people will try and find ways of improving the so called " flaws " and at the same time this occasionally leads to compromising the original sound characteristics.
In a way I kind of feel your disappointment. I think we're glad you took the time to state this and try and separate it from your "main" thoughts video. Unlike the other popular reviewers, your thoughts videos give us a better idea of what its like working with a piece of gear day-to-day and I think we all appreciate it.
While watching your video i tried to reproduce that resonance behaviour on my UDO Super 6 which has an analog 24dB resonating lowpass together with a 3 state DRIVE switch to let you choose if you want the "Moog" behaviour (DRIVE OFF), or a compensation of the "level lost" of deeper tones with increasing resonance (DRIVE 1) or if you want to overdrive the filter (DRIVE2). In fact this one sounds similar to your behringer filter with DRIVE OFF (no wonder) ... and similar to the Vermona filter if completely overdriven. So to me ... even the answer you got from Vermona sounds not really plausible. The current Perfourmer filter sound more like overcompensated level loss for higher resonance. But i agree with you, for most good sounding patches you don't need a self oszillating filter at all... or overdriving the filter oszillation is even a better choice.
Whenever I an considering buying a synth I listen to the online demo's. I don't take any notice of what anyone says about it. If I like the sound then I go ahead and buy it. I bought a Vermona Mk2 and I think it sounds great. If I wanted a moog sound I would have bought a moog (in fact I did) but the Vermona is its own thing. It has what some people might identify as a generally retro character but that's about as far as it goes.
I got me some nice strong self oscilation from my Behringer model D. xD With anything "moogish" it shouldn't be a surprise how the filter behaves. it is, for some. thx for making it clear(er)
Interesting we became Facebook friends the same day I find the first video I’ve seen by you. This is super interesting. I have this synth. I often do little research. I often blindly buy gear. I kinda did on this one. I’ve loved it everyday since getting it in 2018 except it’s a little noisy and worse the left and right outputs are uneven. About 4-6db difference. Actually in talks with Vermona about this issue now. I’ve always felt the synth sounds a little weak at high resonance. I’ve used it with little resonance so often I kind of never really thought about it a whole lot. It is super strange they never update their website. Its pretty weird across the board.
I prefer you put what you think out there even if it doesn't flow with everyone! Problems have a subjective element or a technical flaw...but that makes them not less valid while technical problems count for all subjective elements.maybe different for anyone but knowing it can help make a informed decision if you can life with these.
Interesting comments. I'd cast an admiring eye over this synth recently and read the same review. It seems the concern is with a synth design being tweaked unannounced, and I think your comment about being mk2.1 is very fair. A good reviewer would have noticed it had they reviewed it between 2012 and now (in fact, you have - well done!). To my ears your demo shows without resonance there is still that brassy-parp character which the ladder has, but I agree that once resonance is introduced its radically different, and at least the manufacturer has acknowledged this by changing the manual. Listening to it, i understand why the filter is at is. Subjectively, screaming self resonance on potentially four note polysynth is not a sound that's particularly tasteful to my ears. In fact, none of my polys (Korgs and Rolands) do self oscillation. That said, the option to have such power on a machine which can be configured with up to four independent mono voices would be desirable. But it is interesting how it seems to be overlooked by reviewers post 2012. Anyway, if you want to sell it... I'll give you fifty quid 😉
Reviewer usually avoid saying bad things about the products they’re reviewing. I bought a JU-06A to avoid using a computer for that Roland sound, and in the end, the thing doesn’t have enough juice to process its internal engine without aliasing with the chorus turned on. There’s no information about it in any review, not even the most respectable ones on RU-vid… decided not to trust any reviewer out there. Thank you for this video, informative and very interesting thoughts. Cheers!
Tim, first off, I love your videos and respect your expertise. This feels like a bit of a tempest in a teapot, perhaps not worthy of a 22 minute video. It’s fair & helpful you pointed out the change in the filter design for those that will read old reviews, but even having read the 2012 SOS review (and taken it with the appropriate grain of salt), I made my purchasing decision based on the video and audio examples I was able to find of the Perfourmer in action, rather than putting too much stock in fawning comparisons to Moog filters (which I’m not that partial to in any case). It’s a shame that it caused you such a block, and I understand the disappointment of expecting one thing and getting another, especially when you have done all the diligence, as you clearly do. I believe there is ample audio and video out there for people to make good decisions. Stimming’s review is timely, but also Ooramusic did a good walkthrough about 4 months back, and there are countless great jams and other examples to be had. I get that people need to understand some basic specs (polyphony, MIDI, etc.) in order to see if a piece of kit will meet their needs, but in the end surely hearing is believing? I’ll look forward to your review to see where you landed, having hopefully set this issue aside with this video. Cheers.
When a synth has a weakness such as an overblown filter that generates very little resonance, people are not going to post videos of them playing it that highlight that weakness, they are going to create patches that play to the instrument's strengths, that sound great, unless of course they want to show you the whole picture in a review. I have watched all Oora's videos on this synth, he's concentrating on his workflow and personal approach, he's not showing us all the nooks and crevices of this synth. Stimming is the only person I have found on YT who played with the filter on its own for us to hear (and appeared to not be impressed with what he heard). In the absence of a clinical YT review, where do you turn to before you take the plunge on buying a synth? Written reviews and opinions maybe? Well the only written reviews of this synth are indeed "old" as you point out because the synth was released 9 years ago. But "old" shouldn't mean a thing should it? After all a synth manufactured 9 years ago should sound exactly the same as the same model of synth manufactured today. BTW to say the SoS reviewer was "fawning" is to discredit his professionalism. But to return to your last point, yes hearing IS believing. But as I have written already, people wanting to showcase their precious synth on YT are not going to make it emit a weak, strangled squeal are they? I am under no illusion that my daring to point out a PERCEIVED weakness in the perfourmer is going to create a negative response. For a while now I have been closely paying attention to the unusually strong following that this particular instrument has in the synth community. For me to call the filter "weak" is like walking into a cage with a tiger. So what I am pointing out in this video is not worthy of 22 minutes? How about 15? Would you prefer that I talk a lot faster? Which parts of the video would you suggest I delete? Some while ago I did a series of videos on the Waldorf Quantum, which had not been released too long before. My videos were all positive, a few might even suggest "fawning". But then I decided to describe the touch screen, a source of constant frustration for many people, me included. I compared it to touchscreens on a variety of instruments older and newer. It was clear that the screen was not easy to use for many people, was a source of complaint on social media, and could have been so much better. What was the result of my video? A concentrated stream of denial and negativity focused at me by a subset of people who either owned the synth or else had some interest in its success. How dare I even suggest that something might not be perfect about this amazing synth?! I even had certain people with, how shall I put it, some kind of "affinity" with the product pressurising me to delete my video. But the main line of attack was to tell me that my video was not worth the air time, that it was a waste of precious viewing space. I completely understand why. EDIT: You are now the third person today to suggest that I have wasted 20 minutes or so of airtime.
@@TimShoebridge Hello again Tim. I appreciate your thoughts and understand your points. I hope I can offer a few constructive counterpoints, as we certainly don’t all have the same approach to gear hunting or evaluation. On a side note, I loved your videos on the Quantum, and your criticisms of the screen were both fair and fair warning. Partly on the strength of your Quantum/Iridium comparison video, I purchased an Iridium, and can happily say you didn’t steer me wrong (and have an extended warranty in case the screen craps out). I will make the unfashionable observation that perhaps not all of us need nor want screaming resonance on every one of our synths. I’m no Vermona cultist by any means (if indeed there is such a thing), but I have found the Perfourmer to suit my needs quite nicely; and it is, after all, just one tool in a toolbox of numerous synths, each filling a role that doesn’t always have to be filled in the same way by all others. I can understand that this might not meet other people’s expectations, for me it has not been an issue, and commensurately, I feel no disappointment with the Perfourmer’s non-Moogness, as I didn’t set out to buy a Moog in the first place. If a feature is missing on enough demos which might be important enough that it will impact someone’s personal user experience, I would hope that they would do additional diligence, ask in the forums, etc to get to a more comprehensive understanding if they can. For me, I do read the print reviews first, and I almost always start with SOS, of which I’ve been an avid reader for decades. I was being quite tongue in cheek about the “fawning” comment (if we can’t be a bit lighthearted in social media comments then where can we?), I apologize if that caused offence - the review is otherwise quite good, and SOS is always a reliable go-to. As to your question about whether “old” is relevant as reviews go, evidently it is since the design was changed, and so it’s certainly worth finding as much current content as one can. I typically head to YT and web/FB forums after that, and indeed there is plenty out there to digest, both laudatory and critical, but I tend to go from newest to oldest, as often things like firmware updates, changes in design/features, bugs, etc are often understandably missing in old reviews or are no longer relevant. Interestingly of course there is no real mention of the filter design change out there, so as I said, I’m glad you brought it to light for all those considering purchasing. In the end we’re all responsible for our own gear research and purchasing decisions, and we can all return/sell on synths without too much heartbreak if they aren’t what we need or thought we needed. Everyone gets to decide when they have done enough research to feel comfortable, and equally everyone should probably set a threshold on when they have struggled with a piece of kit enough that they know it isn’t working for them. No harm, no foul. All this aside, I hope you’ll take me at face value when I say my intent is not to critique your editing choices or attack your views, but to offer a different take. I couldn’t do what you do, and I appreciate that you take the time to do it for the benefit of the larger synth community. I understand that comes with its share of slings & arrows, and I don’t mean to add to it. Best, Christian
@@TimShoebridge your response here is not only brilliant, but brings up a great point. We, the YT viewer, can stop watching at any point we wish, so what air time (watch time) have you wasted? Personally, I felt the video perfectly demonstrated the confusion and disappointment we all have felt at times when a product did not meet our original perception based on our research. It should also be pointed out that we all have differences of opinion on any gear we might purchase, play, or review. Those differences of opinion add to the variety and depth of information as we determine what might be the right purchase for ourselves based on our needs. I will end by simply saying that in a Western style democracy (which one would hope YT aims to be) one should be encouraged and applauded for pointing out the emperor has no Moog style filter as advertised. We need more direct honesty with the equal forethought you always show in your videos. Thanks for the courage and honesty Tim!
@@TimShoebridge I have the synth and appreciate the video. You have to know what you like and what you don't, just because you don't like the filter doesn't mean I don't but for many people out there researching you are bringing up a well researched point that can only help. I'm waiting eagerly for your other video on it now!
Magazines are gas inducing promotional outlets. Using a moog filter is basicly a cheap marketing selling point. Now i have an idea, since it has 4 filters, maybe it would be interesting to modify 2 of them to make m sound different. Looking forward to the review. cheers
Another excellent video Mr. Shoebridge! I think I may have been one of the folks with an early unit. This video starts @ 1.04 where the vermona lead melody appears. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-qaUVzf60J0Y.html I thought it sounded buttery personally. I ended up selling the mkII and went with their eurorack modules. Now I have a handful of filters to utilize, and all is right in the world heh.
This is all interesting to hear, having not had one yet. Tim's points are pretty irrefutable, when reviews specifically say things like "strong self-oscillating filter;" I do understand his being disappointed and feeling misled. However, it seems many of the technical reviews and demos I've seen really do evoke rich, Moog-like sounds from this, notwithstanding filter sweeps with and without high resonance. I know filters are fundamental to any synth, and there's no denying the inaccuracy of some of these claims--but my God man this thing sounds great despite not having a Moog-like filter. This seems like it's all about false expectations based on mischaracterizations. If the reviews had just said "the filter is not like a Moog and does not produce strong self-resonance" I think Tim and others might have bought it anyway and been thrilled with what it does sound like. After all, we buy so many synths that don't have filters anything like Moogs, and this does not prevent many of them from being our favorites for what they do actually sound like, with their own distinct character. Thanks, Tim!
Considering the amount of those who are acclaimed in this field with much of the same viewpoint on the filter on the Perfourmer, I am thinking there are some components which, over time has changed value. Posted too soon. Ask the manufacture what are the components which were changed and if you can retrofit to accommodate the new released.
