Introducing UB-Xa

[TomKittel]

3 hours ago, The Real MC said:

I don't need any "bias" lectures about a company that is a known chronic plagiarist who sues their critics and floods discussion groups with "I got mine" "sounds just like vintage" and teaser announcement posts. When you see the similar patterns of posts across different groups it is very obvious they are ads disguised as "user reports" and "news" propagated by marketing trolls. Anyone who dares to object is demonized as "haters".  I will not submit to Alinsky manipulation tactics.

 

Bots and trolls seem to be Behringers best friends… 😜

[Joe Muscara]

Jim, 

 

I don’t mean to call you out or anything because I agree with just about everything you’ve been writing, but you keep saying “double blind” and what you’ve described is “single blind”. The difference is that in double blind, neither the tester nor the testee know which is which. In single blind, the tester knows but the testee does not. 
 

Double blind is better because then the tester neither influences the testee (raising an eyebrow, asking pointed questions like, “are you sure A isn’t better?”, etc.) nor does any interpretation of what the testee chooses that influences the report. The tester has no idea which choice or result is which.

 

When you tested your friend about his preferred conversion to 96k of the THEO album, if you didn’t know when it was the Cubase version or the $14k version, just A or B, that would have been double blind.

 

Also, in your long post, I think you accidentally wrote “we all try to be subjective” when you meant “objective”.

[Jim Alfredson]

Thanks, Joe, I edited the post but kept my use of double-blind. In my Cubase vs Prism example, while I did know which was which, my friend had his eyes closed and I didn't say anything except when I switched audio.  But I'll read more about double-blind vs single-blind. 

I think ABX is better as well because you don't have just A or B but X which can be either A or B.

[Radagast]

Seven pages of rants and arguments over one Behringer synth release.  I can’t wait until Behringer releases the CS-80 clone, the PPG 2 clone, and the 16 note Prophet clone.  It’ll be time to pop some popcorn and sit down for some real entertainment.

 

I am glad that no one held a grudge against Dave Smith when he publicly went after Casio and their FZ-1 sampler.

[DroptopBroham]

9 hours ago, RABid said:

The worst is someone who has a history of producing a sponsored video from companies like Mutable Instruments or Moog, then a year later taking money from copy companies to praise their product over the originals. The worst was a video where he kept saying "They sound exactly the same" over and over throughout the video. There was no mention of build quality, tuning stability, etc... Just how the copied product sounds exactly like the Mother 32 it ripped off. I no longer watch his videos.

Like I'm sure Nick Batt really gives 2 Fs if you watch or not.

[Threadslayer]

On 12/8/2023 at 3:32 PM, ChazKeys said:

The difference between SMT and discrete components

?

[JoJoB3]

This entire thread boils down to If you're in the market for an OB there's one for every budget.
You can order at $1k or wait, hunt at well above.  Or dabblers can consider the even more affordable (yet somehow rarely ever challenged) VST versions.
Yay. Same goes with ODYs, Minis, etc etc.

Absolutely NOBODY cares what you buy.  They (somewhat) care what you're doing with it/them.

Not every synth they've cranked out piques my interest but with some of these flagships Behringer did great (again).  I only buy synths used but I may snag one of these down the line.

Best to make use of them though, especially beyond comparisons.

What I find more laughably gross is seeing vintage sellers attempting to push near $14k for an ARP Quadra, one of the most overrated synths out there. Now that's offensive.
I think even Mr. Pearlman would sneak away silently laughing at this.

[uhoh7]

On 12/10/2023 at 9:59 AM, The Real MC said:

I don't need any "bias" lectures about a company that is a known chronic plagiarist who sues their critics and floods discussion groups with "I got mine" "sounds just like vintage" and teaser announcement posts. When you see the similar patterns of posts across different groups it is very obvious they are ads disguised as "user reports" and "news" propagated by marketing trolls. Anyone who dares to object is demonized as "haters".  I will not submit to Alinsky manipulation tactics.

Humans have very limited bandwidth. The more you know about one thing, the less you know about everything else, though the pie can grow a bit. Hence many "geniuses" in all sorts of fields make fools of themselves with opinions and actions...concerning anything else. What are your feelings about Henry Ford? Have you ever owned a Ford? 

 

Consider the first line in the list of books by Henry Ford:

https://www.thriftbooks.com/a/henry-ford/243704/

 

Uli is a public idiot, but his cases were thrown out, he has not put anybody out of business, and products like the XR18 have many working musicians glad there is a Behringer.  Uli's "oppression" in real life is mainstream, like Amazon, Apple, Yamaha, or Costco. His most offensive speech has hurt his reputation, not anyone else, since it's so blatant.

 

As to his stealing intellectual property....Uli has nothing on Laurens Hammond, or Bob Dylan, in their early days, or so one could very easily argue. But Uli does provide a means to "take a moral stance" in the industry....yet another service, no?

[Jim Alfredson]

3 hours ago, JoJoB3 said:

What I find more laughably gross is seeing vintage sellers attempting to push near $14k for an ARP Quadra, one of the most overrated synths out there. Now that's offensive.
I think even Mr. Pearlman would sneak away silently laughing at this.

 

Yes, the prices for vintage analog synths has gone through the roof. They have become mostly collector's items at this point. Although the prices have been slightly dropping in recent months from their peak earlier in the year.

 

The good thing about the high prices, though, is that it has pushed manufacturers to bring back certain models and return to analog synthesis again. Honestly, for what it does and the lineage behind it, I think the OB-X8 is positioned at a fair price. Sure, it is unaffordable for many, but there are many other options that do similar things for far less money. And yes, B**ringer is part of that affordability. 

As I've said many times, my personal beef with the company isn't really about their versions of old classics. It's about them stealing stuff that's currently in production and of course their horrible litigious behavior. The UB-Xa offers a lot of bang for the buck. I would never replace my OB8 with it or an OB-Xa... or even the OB-X8... but obviously there's a demand for it.

 

The tonewheel vs clonewheel argument that was brought up recently (either in this thread or another) is an interesting comparison because it really is a false equivalency in terms of 'stealing designs'. But when it comes to actually playing the instrument, I always tell my students to get a real console as soon as they can. You just cannot understand how to play the Hammond properly by playing a clonewheel. Will all these recreations be similar? Will playing the UB-Xa be like playing a vintage OB-Xa? Probably not if only because it has velocity, aftertouch, more polyphony (which isn't necessarily a good thing... voice stealing is very useful especially for sounds that have long release times), etc. Will it lead people to desire the 'real experience'? Maybe. Will it lead to the originals being worth even more? I would not be surprised. 

 

Then again, everything is cyclical. I'm still holding on to my late 80s / early 90s digital synths because the old-school digital synth renaissance is coming.

[jerrythek]

16 hours ago, Radagast said:

I am glad that no one held a grudge against Dave Smith when he publicly went after Casio and their FZ-1 sampler.

Wow, you have a good memory. As the US product manager at the time I was flabbergasted and upset at the company’s actions at that NAMM Show. For those that don’t know, the company reprinted a German magazine spec test from a prototype FZ that show audio performance below 16-bit capability, casting doubt on the product’s claim of being true 16-bit. But there was no Internet for that action from the company to become very well known. 
 

One has to put it in perspective: Sequential was teetering on the brink of failure by then, and chose an unfortunate way to fight for survival. On a personal level I was crushed that a hero of mine was attacking my company. But our product came out, was obviously better than those tests showed, and we chose to just move on. I became good friends with Dave later on, and we never spoke of it.

 

No doubt there are plenty of other such stories from the pre-Internet era. But with all the benefits that todays social media and easily accessible information offers, we also have the easy-to-post suspect information, downright misinformation, and just differing opinions. I’ll still vote for the benefits we have… but I do get frustrated at the sometimes rancor that ensues. 

[Jim Alfredson]

3 minutes ago, jerrythek said:

No doubt there are plenty of other such stories from the pre-Internet era. But with all the benefits that todays social media and easily accessible information offers, we also have the easy-to-post suspect information, downright misinformation, and just differing opinions. I’ll still vote for the benefits we have… but I do get frustrated at the sometimes rancor that ensues. 

 

The other negative side of the internet is that our heroes have ample opportunities to make public asses of themselves.

[RABid]

14 hours ago, DroptopBroham said:

Like I'm sure Nick Batt really gives 2 Fs if you watch or not.

Wow, you really guessed wrong on that one. I've watched a bunch of his videos and have never heard him say "they sound exactly the same" over and over. Have you?

[RABid]

7 minutes ago, Jim Alfredson said:

The other negative side of the internet is that our heroes have ample opportunities to make public asses of themselves.

Not just heroes. I have a very large extended family. There have been so many times that I wanted to pick up the phone and tell a cousin to delete a facebook post.

[The Real MC]

10 hours ago, uhoh7 said:

What are your feelings about Henry Ford? Have you ever owned a Ford? 

 

Yawn, another b****** troll using typical Alinsky deflection tactics to draw focus away from Uli's well established history of plagiarism and lawsuits against critics.  Trolls have been using that tired manipulation for over twenty years on other discussion forums.  That does not belong here, keep that garbage on Gearspace.

[ElmerJFudd]

 

 

[Mighty Motif Max]

Something I would be curious about is whether people doing these comparisons are picking the correct instrument "profile" on the UB-Xa (there's an OB-8 profile, for example), or if they're just going with the default settings fresh out of the box. That could be a factor we aren't considering.

 

I do think this would be getting wider interest had Behringer put a decent effects section in there - seems to me that a lot of the synth sounds that I associate with the Oberheims in general were processed through numerous effects back in the day as well - chorus and delay in particular. That sound's not going to come from anything raw. I do appreciate the comparisons being dry, to take that out of the loop. But I often find I don't care for either sound dry...

[Baggypants]

4 hours ago, The Real MC said:

 

Yawn, another b****** troll using typical Alinsky deflection tactics to draw focus away from Uli's well established history of plagiarism and lawsuits against critics.  Trolls have been using that tired manipulation for over twenty years on other discussion forums.  That does not belong here, keep that garbage on Gearspace.

Give it a rest, you've made your

point and for some reason I can't put you on my ignore list. So I'm having to ask you to stop.

[TomKittel]

4 hours ago, ElmerJFudd said:

 

 

 

That doesn't sound identical. Not at all. I can even hear the anemia through my iPhone's speakers.

[ElmerJFudd]

5 hours ago, TomKittel said:

 

That doesn't sound identical. Not at all. I can even hear the anemia through my iPhone's speakers.

I felt the same off of the phone speakers - which of course hide so many frequencies.  On proper monitoring I’m actually less critical.   There are patches with obvious differences (OB being the preferred timbre - but not always by much).  And there are patch types  that are difficult to differentiate in a blind test - especially if you didn’t know which was which. 
 

My conclusion from this and the previous A/B video are that this is a very nice analogue poly synth for the price when compared to any new analogue poly available.  As an OB-Xa clone it’s hit and miss, however… 

 

A 43 year old OB-Xa can be between $8-10k or more.  An OB-X8 is $5k.  And a UB-Xa is $1.2k.  
 

There would be less to criticize had they not called it a clone and gave it its own name and look.  

[CrossRhodes]

For anyone who might be interested this was posted by Fabian Potter, a member of the development team:

 

The Behringer UB-Xa development and some of my favourite features.

While some are excitingly waiting for their UB-Xa to arrive, I thought I share bit of background story to the design and some of my favourite features that might be interesting to you.

 

The UB-Xa project started about 6 years ago and about 3 years in we received the first few engineering prototypes for testing and firmware development. There have been a few more hardware revisions until the final release, that we have thoroughly tested while fine tuning the firmware. Mike did a great job here together with the many testers and the rest of the Behringer Team.

 

We used both the original OB-Xa and OB-8 as reference. The UB-Xa is based on the OB-Xa but has many advancements, including page two based on the OB8, hence also including OB-8 for the project. With the many measurements taken from several of our OBXa(s) and OB8(s) we noticed a much tighter tolerance with the OB8 vs the OBXa which you can hear in the Atrophy Profiles selected in the UBXa. Imagine the Atrophy as a level of calibration and degradation of your vintage instrument over decades. While all OB8(s) measurements were very similar from one to the next, the results from the OBXa(s) on hand were more spread apart. So for those owning the original instrument and like to compare to the UBXa, the measurements of the OB8 Atrophy will give you spot on waveforms on the Oscilloscope as you can see on the images below (as long you have it regularly serviced and calibrated), where the OB-Xa might vary slightly as one would to an other. The liveliness of the OB-Xa is what makes this such a nice lush and yet powerful synth many have been desiring for.

 

Now to some of my favourite features; the new designed Poly-Aftertouch Keybed is definitely on top of my list, to be able to play those expressive compositions. Which then also controls the 8x programmable Modulation Matrices per patch for even more expressiveness and endless possibilities for patch creation. Next, up the 16 voices vs the 8 of the original synth, for an impressive 32 analog oscillator monster. Now hit that Unison button and you will be greeted with an earth shattering drone on a single key press! You are also able to change how many voices you want to assign to Unison mode, 1-8 or all 16. And as mentioned earlier, the Atrophy Profiles where your UB-Xa can sound and respond like the original OB-Xa, an OB-8 or any other OB-Xa variant and over decades of degraded circuitry. And then there's the sound! You'll just have to wait and see for yourself. Now there are so many other great features you will be able to explore once you receive your UB-Xa, so I highly recommend reading up on the informative UB-Xa manual to familiarise yourself with this great beast of a synth!

[RABid]

12 hours ago, Mighty Motif Max said:

But I often find I don't care for either sound dry...

You know, I think this was my problem with the early DSI poly synths. I was playing and buying synths when the Prophet 5 came out. It sounded big and beautiful. I chose between the Prophet 5, Jupiter 8, MemoryMoog and Rhodes Chroma and ended up with the MemoryMoog and Chroma. Always wanted a Prophet 5 and Jupiter 8. Bought a couple DSI Prophets and was disappointed. Looking back, I don't think the problem was the DSI creations, it was my change over the years as I grew accustom to synths with built in effects. That makes it tough for me to really appreciate recreations that don't offer improvements and modernization. 

[Jim Alfredson]

4 hours ago, ElmerJFudd said:

There would be less to criticize had they not called it a clone and gave it its own name and look.  

Pretty much sums it all up, imo. It's an intriguing synth and the poly aftertouch is great. But I think they should've branded it as it's own thing. Something like "a new analog poly inspired by the great American polysynths of yore!" and went the Andromeda route with it. It's great it has 16 note polyphony, like the Andromeda. But can you do Multis like with the Andromeda, where you can have individual oscillators playing different drum sounds, all sequenced, still have a bass sound (on it's own separate sequence if you want), a leadpatch, and a pad all mapped across the keyboard? Why not? That would be super cool!

 

Limited polyphony is actually part of the charm, playability, and beauty of the old designs. More polyphony sounds like a good thing but offering it just as raw polyphony, without the ability to utilize it like the Andromeda does is a missed opportunity.

[JoJoB3]

Can't agree with that however. I do think it's best to call it what it is.  Same goes for all like products and companies.
Why should it be renamed something else? (and why does the name even matter?). It's clear what it is. It IS a clone and of that but often with improvements and features for today's users.

[JoJoB3]

On 12/11/2023 at 10:27 AM, Jim Alfredson said:

Yes, the prices for vintage analog synths has gone through the roof. They have become mostly collector's items at this point. Although the prices have been slightly dropping in recent months from their peak earlier in the year.

 

The good thing about the high prices, though, is that it has pushed manufacturers to bring back certain models and return to analog synthesis again. Honestly, for what it does and the lineage behind it, I think the OB-X8 is positioned at a fair price. Sure, it is unaffordable for many, but there are many other options that do similar things for far less money. And yes, B**ringer is part of that affordability. 

As I've said many times, my personal beef with the company isn't really about their versions of old classics. It's about them stealing stuff that's currently in production and of course their horrible litigious behavior. The UB-Xa offers a lot of bang for the buck. I would never replace my OB8 with it or an OB-Xa... or even the OB-X8... but obviously there's a demand for it.

 

The tonewheel vs clonewheel argument that was brought up recently (either in this thread or another) is an interesting comparison because it really is a false equivalency in terms of 'stealing designs'. But when it comes to actually playing the instrument, I always tell my students to get a real console as soon as they can. You just cannot understand how to play the Hammond properly by playing a clonewheel. Will all these recreations be similar? Will playing the UB-Xa be like playing a vintage OB-Xa? Probably not if only because it has velocity, aftertouch, more polyphony (which isn't necessarily a good thing... voice stealing is very useful especially for sounds that have long release times), etc. Will it lead people to desire the 'real experience'? Maybe. Will it lead to the originals being worth even more? I would not be surprised. 

 

Then again, everything is cyclical. I'm still holding on to my late 80s / early 90s digital synths because the old-school digital synth renaissance is coming.

Agree on Hammond clone vs vintage. The vintage steers players into becoming 'organists' whereas the clones not so much.  Good seeing the vintage UI coming into play now though. Like to see it be the norm. 

Mmm, perhaps but it's 2023 and the (rather hopeful) vintage prices I see are getting beyond ridiculous and reaching ludacris speed.  I own select vintage I cherish but sheesh.  It is what it is with collectors items now of course but the current prices mainly just help ensure these remaining vintage sit idle and/or in hands of owners with more $ than talent.  Hopefully they're one day placed in appropriate studios to be used and maintained.

But no, although I don't buy all of the ever-changing 'horror stories' from the randos online (many who have been milking it for $ gains), those who dislike and avoid purchasing Behringer products are well free to do so.  Their quality of their products of the past were in fact turrible (overall).  Old Behringer doesn't get a pass from me either iow.

It just doesn't quite apply today with their investments in new teams and direction however (mixer line, new synth division, newer Amp/PA/Proaudio products, etc). Not interested in owning everything from them but can now agree that there's finally B products worthy of respect.

I have their Model D and Poly D, and a Deepmind 12 for example.  Was expecting utter shite that might suffice for the role/job but seeing these exceeded this was more than a pleasant surprise. No, Behringer's very much a player in the game now.  And in the end - these are music items. They're for the enjoyment of music and I feel it's great that this fun stuff should be made $attainable$ to as many as possible (because music is important to and for humanity).

Meanwhile later catch-up attempts from KORG, Roland, etc would prove that none of this is easy as users saw crappier build and parts, ridiculous boutique pricing that meets astonishingly stunted functionality, and non-existent support in regard (crap/lazy planning and R&D).

[Jim Alfredson]

1 hour ago, JoJoB3 said:

Can't agree with that however. I do think it's best to call it what it is.  Same goes for all like products and companies.
Why should it be renamed something else? (and why does the name even matter?). It's clear what it is. It IS a clone and of that but often with improvements and features for today's users.

Because it's isn't what it claims to be and it's misleading, imo. But that's kind of B**hinger's MO.

Frankly, I think the Arturia PolyBrute is the most exciting new design poly to be released since the Prophet 12, with the possible exception of the Trigon. The more I play with the PolyBrute, the more I'm amazed at what it can do and sound like. I think it's a good example of what a company like B**hringer could be doing with their resources rather than bandwagoning on the vintage train.

[JoJoB3]

8 minutes ago, Jim Alfredson said:

Because it's isn't what it claims to be and it's misleading, imo. But that's kind of B**hinger's MO.

Frankly, I think the Arturia PolyBrute is the most exciting new design poly to be released since the Prophet 12, with the possible exception of the Trigon. The more I play with the PolyBrute, the more I'm amazed at what it can do and sound like. I think it's a good example of what a company like B**hringer could be doing with their resources rather than bandwagoning on the vintage train.

I just don't see it as misleading. I feel slathering what's obviously a clone (again, it's very purpose) with inventive names and sales-speak is far more misleading (not to mention pointless).  Plus these classic names should be there for the new gen who will fall in their own kind of love with all this stuff (and who may now likely venture into the pricey vintage land after some time with these more accessibly priced clones).

And again, if the Moogs, Rolands, Korgs, etc of the world had realized the bleeping market here they would have done so instead of the mediocre so far in playing catchup (talk about misleading stuff btw. Users are VERY wise to read real-world reviews iow).  What little they've done so far isn't as impressive overall.

[RABid]

I think the market and other manufacturers are adjusting. Roland's $200 line of mini synths are very well designed. I wish the Boutiques had the MIDI, audio, battery and chaining capabilities that these little synths have. Sequential released the Take 5 and it competes very well in the budget analog keyboard line. Not sure why these are not more popular. It bridges the gap between the Korg Minilogue XD and the more expensive Sequential offerings.

[ABECK]

12 hours ago, TomKittel said:

 

That doesn't sound identical. Not at all. I can even hear the anemia through my iPhone's speakers.

Some patches sound very similar and others, like the sustained string type patches, sound very different.  Nothing on there screams "I gotta have it!"  But, if I needed a poly analog for live playing....It'd be hard to not choose this over something like the more expensive Juno-X (I realize the Juno has roland cloud, pcm sounds and all that.....so not the BEST comparison).  

 

[Jim Alfredson]

37 minutes ago, ABECK said:

Some patches sound very similar and others, like the sustained string type patches, sound very different.  Nothing on there screams "I gotta have it!"  But, if I needed a poly analog for live playing....It'd be hard to not choose this over something like the more expensive Juno-X (I realize the Juno has roland cloud, pcm sounds and all that.....so not the BEST comparison).  

 

I'd go for the Sequential Take 5 or the Korg Prologue.

[DroptopBroham]

This thing not having effects is a bad move. I thought for sure they'd have reverb delay and chorus. They put it on their ARP and DeepMind. It adds a lot to the sound and gives you more options. Having to bring external effects, power and cables when this is already going to be a 2nd or 3rd board makes it a pain to gig with. A poly synth needs effects and in this day and age it's ridiculous not to have them onboard. C'mon Uli, what were you thinking?