Ideal for brutal noise art, no? 
doesn’t apply, i always make my own patches
(also fun fact: i like my noise to be peasant)
1 Like
I am surprised the extra work put into the firmware to implement the Vintage sounds. They could have just presented the eight vintage options and left it at that. Someone in engineering decided that since they were going to implement this using 40 “Atrophy” digital control parameters, that instead of locking this down they’d open this up so users could make there own decision on vintage and change the parameters individually.
If you want a really broken sound you can definitely do that. But you will also be able to create some subtlely unique sounds too. Like i notice only one of the Vintage sets uses the OB-8 Quirks parameter and only in one form, so that is probably a place to experiment. This is described thusly :
OB-8 Quirks – allows the phase of the LFO square wave and the VCF modulation to be separately inverted.
I imagine Jeanne, you may be able to take advantage of some of this having heard your Hydrasynth quirks.
My guess on a desktop is that a lot of this work on the keyboard version will carry over. This will include internal sub-units – the completed boards many will be the same between the two. It helps to justify a development budget when you can spread the capital costs across several products.
4 Likes
The things that I’ve noticed in the demos to date, are that they sound like demos that come early in a synth’s life. Even though this is a synth based on a synth from decades ago, I have a feeling that patch design on it, will develop later on. Same with firmware etc.
I did notice some cases where it sounds just a bit brighter than vintage, (and even the other modern OBs) but then there are tons of reasons that that could be the case. Patch design. Aged components. Difference between models of past versions. Different recording chains. Different FX or no FX, the person patching, the amount of effort one wants to actually spend getting an exact 1:1 patch, etc.
That’s not to say that it won’t have some inherent differences in some ways, but I always find that these can be mitigated with a bit of care. Also, when not A/Bing, and actually using a synth musically, I find that these minutae matter less and less.
Then there’s the user complaint factor where I’m sure there will be updates to tweak things that people find they don’t like.
So far, I like the sound of the UB-Xa, but I would really like to play it myself, or hear some people I typically turn to for demos do some.
The problem is, the people that I typically like to hear demos from, gravitate more toward the big boys, and less toward the B clones. (Matt Johnson, J3PO, Luke Neptune, etc.) At least for keyboards. With other types of synths, I have a different set of people that I follow.
2 Likes
The poly-aftertouch, something completely foreign to the original, is something still very much an open question on the Behringer version. Obviously you turn that off when being historic, but it’s going to define this instrument, and if the hardware is not good you’re sunk.
Though i see they have three separate firmwares that are loaded separately – interesting. So there is a Main Firmware, a Voices Firmware and a Keys Firmware. One advantage to something like this is perhaps for other models, so like the Keys Firmware could get revved, but wouldn’t get loaded on the Desktop. And it also means if you decide to move back to an earlier version, you can decide what parts get kept. Lots of reasons are possible, like the hardware, maybe there are multiple processors. Don’t know.
ADDED : Yup, the P-AT keybed, has it’s own processor. The keyboard connects to the synth electronics with a simple com connection. We’re going to see this keybed in a slew of Behringer keyboard synths.
1 Like
I’m surprised Tom Oberheim has kept so quiet. He would be able to tell the differences immediately.
Definitely no Loopop review. Never ever it sounds.
They fell out so he won’t be interested. I’m expecting Starsky Carr though
Pft, screw Tom Sawyer and Jump!
This:
Here’s a good list of famous OB-X tracks. Worth exploring if reviewing.
I don’t think Tom would care about the actual sound, since he’s still making the synths.
The OB-X8 is his. The OB-6 is a collaboration between Tom and Dave Smith.
The UB-Xa is a competing product that kind of rips off his trade-dress and design wholesale. 
I’m not going to get into that latter discussion. In my opinion the OB-X8 and UB-Xa are aimed at two different markets, two different types of musicians, and I don’t really think Tom has to worry about the UB-Xa taking away anything from his intended market.
I’m guessing that nearly nobody that’s got their eye on the OB-X8 is even going to consider the UB.
Also, IMO the big boy designers of the 60s, 70s, and 80s, have had a good run, have their audiences, and while they deserve every bit of praise and reverence they get, there is now room in the world for some competition, some democratized gear, etc.
Patents on the old stuff are all up now.
Copyright on the panel art, PCB art, and other trade-dress items are still in most cases protected I believe, but the circuits are fair game now.
So, IMO things can just carry on as they are.
But, my main point is still that Tom probably isn’t thinking too hard about this. I could be wrong. I’m not a duly designated representative for him, but I would think he’d be more interested in his own products, how THEY sound, and how they both innovate and bring back what people love about the originals.
1 Like
This is true. The Poly-AT is an EXCELLENT feature to bring toward this style, and specifically OB-style synths. They have the perfect, expressive sound that I really think this will help bring out. I’m a huge fan of Poly-AT. Makes me miss my Hydra Deluxe.
1 Like
12 Likes
I’ve been hearing more good things about this guy.
Wine and Synths seems to like it (minus the knobs).
Also, this is more the type of context that I like to hear Oberheim’s in:
(which is why I wish Matt Johnson would demo it, but probably a long shot there. 
)
Though the tune in the background of the Wine and Synths video was pretty cool. A bit The Shining(y) / Dies Irae-esque / etc.
2 Likes
My kind of context too!
Shared it somewhere else, where one person said it was annoying - made me realize I don’t actually watch video demos like this - I tend to play it then switch to another tab while listening.
While replaying the video to see what annoyed said person, I noticed the Hydrasynth desktop off to the side.
2 Likes
An Oberheim trying to be a Moog Model D 
tom noise does a walk through of the features.
Stuff like the short cuts on the mod-matrix. Simple stuff mostly.
0:00 – Introduction
1:20 – Overview and structure
3:30 – Presets loading and writing
5:43 – Shift mode und secondary functions
10:10 – Víntage Atrophy Modes
13:00 – Oscillators
17:50 – Unison and poly voice count
20:38 – Portamento and Portamento Bend
22:05 – Filters
23:16 – Envelopes, LFO
27:20 Modulation Matrix
31:50 – Voice Panning
33:29 – Arpeggiator
34:50 – Chord Memory
35:30 – Sequencer
38:00 – Performance Section
40:00 – Split / Double Modes
44:53 – Outro Jam
2 Likes
Is that his real name?
He sounds German, so I’d say that his name is Tom but definitely not Noise. But maybe his original German name is something like Neus or Neuss, which would be pronounced the same 
1 Like
Amazona did a thorough Christmas day review.
Thumbs up. Though they wished Behringer had been less hyper-historic and included velocity in the factory patches. They also commented on the red display.
ADDED : Given that there is a separate “Voices” firmware, perhaps there could be other options on the factory patches. We’ll see.
Good news was they were very positive on the poly-aftertouch keybed, though they said it wasn’t like
Expressive E’s keybed. Not sure who it was that expected that ?
Behringer gives you a choice of three P-AT hardness settings. I have reason to think they will expand on this.
Good review, and worth the read. Includes some test sound examples.
Had a laugh, a commenter already had and returned their UB-Xa, because they didn’t bother to glance at the manual, and didn’t realize they had it set to a “vintage” mode, maybe it was “Broken”, or that it even had a vintage mode, and thought the synth sounded terrible ! Par for the course there with commenters.
3 Likes