People wanted to clone acoustic drums in the 80ies, now we clone the clones that defined the sound of the 90ies to reproduce it 30 years later. Circle of life in the music industry.
Wow, I've almost doubled my subscriber number the last few weeks! I'm over a 100 now, I did not expect that! Should I pretend to be a proper RUclipsr and make a 100 subscriber special? What should it be about in that case? The only idea I have is that I show my collection of drum machines. Or maybe a channel trailer? Maybe someone has another idea?
Very cool info here. Love the detail on the filters on the main and individual outputs. When it all boils down the minutiae of the details probably don’t actually make a difference overall from a musical perspective but it does help explain the minor differences we can hear. I’ve never owned a 909 but have so many records with it on I feels like I know it inside out. The overall feel is there for me - and it’s great to understand why there are specific differences. Respect for the detail 👍
Your review helped me shape a decision, I got myself a RD 9 , I have to admit, it sounds superbe , and the versatility of the instrument is very nice and capable.
I listened to a few sounds and quit the video, because it was clear to me that they sounded or could sound the same. The clone has the character of the original and so I decided to buy me one and I do not regret it. The clone is awesome.
30-40 year old electronics in the original are going to make a difference. Also I'm sure if you played someone a Roland 909 and told them it was a Behringer they would instantly say Not as good!
Agreed. The bias that's presented by the creator of this video (using "cheap" in a video's title, for example) makes it impossible for me to take this test seriously.
@@timbrechopper This is the reason why i initially did not want to click the video but did anyway. Just to see in the comment section that i was right and did not bother watching past the first 2 seconds.
@@derkernspalter So, I'm not sure why I'm explaining this, but here we are. The intro is making fun of Behringer haters. If you watched more than 2 seconds, you would have realized that.
Warmness/Fullness/Fatness == electrons hanging around == tubes/tapes/germanium/noise/old stuff Sharpness/crispness/cleanness/brightness == electrons going where they're meant to go == silicon/digital/filters
Then there are the TR-909s made on June 6th, 1984 where a new worker, who we will call "Mary" inserted the wrong capacitor in the filter circuit giving a unique sound and the group Dirt, Air and Flames a #1 hit.
Fascinating. They all sound wildly different - pitches are all over the place and yes, the filter is way higher on the RD-9. But I wouldn't have known which is supposed to be the 'correct' one as I've never owned a 909, only various samples, all of which are also quite different in terms of pitch and timbre. Great info on the different components on the main vs instruments outs as well. Thanks!
Would be good to hear the RD-9 sequence run through a 6db filter as you say, and compared again with the TR909. The way individual sounds behave and interact with each other when sequenced always seems to be where clones have difficulty.
I feel the real comparison test is putting the sounds in a sequence, there's something interesting I remember, that when the claps are close together on the real tr909, they start sounding.... hard to describe it in words.
Really the best comparison I've seen so far. Based on facts and not feelings. Grymt jobbat!😊 I think the most prominent difference is that I feel the sounds from the RD9 are less balanced/glued together. When you play the loops, the sounds from 909 feels like the play togehter like a unit. The RD9 sound more like individual sounds playing together. Are there any compression or other dynamics in the 909 glueing the sounds together?
Tack! No, there is no compression or dynamics there. It may be that the output filtering taking the edge of the sounds makes it sound a bit more cohesive.
Very interesting take. From what I can make out it's not just that most people can't tell an RD9 from a 909 they can't tell between the different iterations of 909 production, and to be fair why the hell should they?
I like this comparison with technical background, thanks for that! Also, I already found that adding a global lowpass to the TR-8S makes it sound much more 'calming' to the ear. The same 'mod' :)
It's ironic that so many people are hyper-concerned about emulating timbres from 30 or 40 years ago, when the pioneers who used those tones were looking to the future, trying to do something that had never been done before. We have limitless posibities as electronic artists. Why stay fixated on the past? They sound great, but art is for pushing past the status quo into unexplored territory-is it not?
You have a good point. But most people making music want to make what they like, and they like things they have already heard. In addition to that, since the digital revolution, all sounds are available, and cheaply, so making anything new is really hard. So music seems stuck in nostalgia at the moment.
Agreed with both of you. To add to the conversation, this is why I truly think SOPHIE was the artist who was forward-thinking _all_ the time. Her sound was and still is the future of music. Artists in the hyperpop realm are having to catch up to that and it'll take them a couple years to get on the level that she was. Her passing was not only devastating to friends, fans, and family, but music as a whole. This decade was hers to lead and who knows what she would've had in store for us.
I fully agree with you. Forward thinking should be in the DNA of electronic music. But if you want to the nostalgia effect in full effect, I invite you to look into the (electric) guitar industry. Decades of lusting about mythical guitars from the early '60-ies:)
Unless you've been salivating over sounds in unobtainable machines for the past several decades that finally became accessible for a fraction of the price.👉🙋♂️👈
very interesting video, i really appreciate how in-depth this was. most people comparing clones just check individual sounds and while they often times match up, the devil is in the details. it doesn't surprise me that most people could tell the clone from an original when an entire pattern was being played. what a lot of engineers miss when creating a clone is how everything sounds in a context. you can replicate every small part of a circuit, but still not get the overall sound right. i am very interested in the RE909, but haven't heard enough demos to convince me to spend 2k on one.
I really like your comparison between the two! I actually do enjoy the sound of the RD-9 but I do like the original's sound as well. Regardless I'd love to have either one haha! Great video! 🥁🎶
They picked C at 2:39 because that is a more "vintage" sounding kick, IDK how to explain it other than that. I did not take the test myself, so I have no stake in this, lol. When people hear the 909 or clone make a sound like what is used in a lot of the applicable music, they think the sound is from the original. If you make a sound that is a little "off" compared to what people expect, they will assume it is the RD-9.....just my 2 cents.
The real deal is basically a vintage collectors item at this point, and will simply never be worth the price difference. For people that has used the 909 a lot and knows the workflow inside and out, some of the other clones replicate that exactly, so that can make sense. Otherwise I'd just stick to the RD-9, to be honest.
Thorough stuff, appreciate your solid work on this video. Subscribed now, hoping to see more from you on instruments, sounds, electronics, derivatives or whatever loosely related. Thanks again.
The 909 has MIDI OUT for up to 16 additional Notes that can be played at the same time. Its still dwarfs the RD for live therefore. However I love Behringer. If you are just for the sound... go for it.
Yeah, the external instrument is fun thing of the 909. I like using it for bass, as programming a bass line that way is very difficult and generally leads to some happy accidents. I'm not sure how it would have been useful in 1984, but today you could also use a modern drum machine with more sounds and control that from the 909. But you must be able to map MIDI in notes to specific sounds, because you can't remap the notes coming out from the 909.
These comparisons are only for gear geeks like me. The gen pop listening has no clue nor care about any of it or what they hear on radio or in their cars. IMO, the analogy I use is comparing vintage stereo gear from the 60’s and 70’s and some 80’s to today’s stereo gear (sans very HQ and extremely expensive). I know a repair shop that makes their living off rebuilding and reviving vintage receivers, amps, speakers, LP players, cassette decks, reel to reels, etc. Just as there is discernible distinction to audiophiles who treasure the sound and essence of gear from that era, so it is with electronic music gear aficionados. (But not to anyone else 😃) And frankly Some of us just can’t afford it anymore😄
Not talk, but a CGI render of one. You can't properly 100% clone an oscar, as the quirks of the software oscillator makes it impossible. But you certainly can make something that sounds very similar. It would likely have a slightly cleaner sound, and it wouldn't glitch if you turn knobs quickly, but it could still sound absolutely great. Maybe even have an additive sound editor for PC/Mac?
Interesting to hear the differences, and thx for the explanation on the different revisions. You gotta know what you're comparing to....nice video! With regards to your comment on the tom revisions, I think it is audible in the attack of the toms, but nothing you'd hear when you wouldn't focus on it and easily lost in a mix. The low pass at 15K, I'd imagine can impact the hats, even if it's just 6 dB/oct, the 7K most definitely does, like you said. All in all the RD9 seems to hit it pretty well, I'll really have to try one in a store. If anyone is interested in how a fully modded RD9 sounds, Maffez has a sample pack on his website where he documented all the mods (Maffez Synth Mods). Cheers
Very cool video! That seems like a lot of work put in! The thing I have trouble with getting used to with my RD-9 is the clap and the snare. The clap doesn’t move like my 909 used to. What I mean is, the 909 has a more lively feel on each hit it seems. The RD-9 does have that but it seems less pronounced or something.
I would be interested in the general impression: if sound is almost identical (and will probably be altered in effects / pedal processing anyways), are you more limited on a RD-9 than on a TR-909 in matters of composition, improvisation and pattern writing ?
@@troybalgie2149 I know but many of the comparisons have a faulty approach. There was a video on RUclips a while ago that did a deep dive but I think it has been removed.
I missed the original video but this was really interesting. Fwiw, I only got one in this video, which was the kick. Edit new sub today. The algorithm works! I have been watching a lot of diy synth tutorials in the last week and you were top of the feed this morning.
I feel like an argument can almost be made that the RD9 is mimicking what the 909 was originally intended to sound like. I suspect that 7K filter was not originally intended to be there and only showed up after prototypes were exhibiting too much noise and a compromise had to be made. Regardless, it sounds like they really did their homework and the consumers are the real winners here.
In a full mix, I imagine it would be even more difficult (if not impossible) to tell the RD-9 and TR-909 apart. Especially if further processing is applied to the electronic drums, such as compression, distortion, equalization filters, or reverb.
Fantastic review, thank you 😊 and a new subscriber here. I have the RD9 and extremely happy with the results. I wonder could you make a video on post processing of the audio output from this,let's say in Ableton, such as recommended equalisation etc. I ask this as you know many people have these unit's now and may will be recording tracks with them. Many thanks
@@RegebroRepairs Totally agree that eq for example would be song specific. It was probably a silly question 😇 I guess since so many people are going to be making recordings of this machine in their tracks it would be interesting to see studio processing tips for it. Looking forward to watching your other videos.
I got the Behringer RD-9 (and RD-8 MKii too) and I am returning them both. Not because they don't sound like a TR-909 and TR-808, they do to 98%, but because of the shortcomings I didn't like about them. I'm a Behringer fan, and I'm 100% delighted by my VC340, and DeepMind 12. But the quality level is not what I expected with the RD-9 and RD-8 MKII. The user interface is unfriendly and the tactile experience unpleasant. The external PSU with a short lead is annoying, too.
This video goes into disturbingly deep, never considered before, levels of geekery that require the concentration of a brain surgeon to even slightly begin understanding the subject matter! Regardless, I want that machine soooooo badly!
Definitely get it if you want it. I got mine last Christmas and love it. If you are in the US, there is a Behringer sale going on at Sweetwater. You can get it at its cheapest price yet.
RD-9 sounds fantastic. The comparisons of the RD-9 and the TR-909 are IMO irrelevant, I have owned 2 real TR-909's and neither sounded exactly the same as each other. The RD-9 is a no brainer and comparisons are a waste of time but thanks for the video. :-)
Well we don’t know for sure they gave up on making an OSCar, last semi official comment was… if the demand is there we will move forward. Sadly when this was mentioned in a number of the synth groups on FB that Behringer monitors, the OSCar saw very little love as something people people wanted to see.
Thanks for that interesting video. It was a strange listening experience. From listening the single sounds, I thought that the REV2 sounded the best, followed by the Behringer. The single sounds of the REV4 just sounded horrible. But when I heard the loop, I really like the REV4.
To me it is also the timing of the pattern that differs ,it feels like the original timing is less rigid , and the snare and bassdrum are off , minor differences that i could not live with ,i rather have none than a flawed one
I’d like every sound comparison possible! Especially the 909? Sure 👍 Heck I’d listen to daily examples lol. Now I’m fascinated with what a 6db output noise filter sounds like…individual hits, rhythmic patterns with various busy-ness…is there an ‘attack’ sound to the filter? (& then I hear your examples at the end 🤣🤐👏👏) I’d love the wav files 🤷♂️ Very informative video, thank you 🙏
Listning in isolation is total differnt to how it sounds in the mix, this is were the real stuff shines IMO correct me if I'm wrong somehow, in the mix the sounds just fit better, the electronic components just like he shows have a sound, in the end its the results that count
I’m a drum machine collector and composer. I’m impressed by the RD-9 now that I have it. If it grooves that’s all that matters. I can mix it the way I want
Sorry I missed the poll, but it was so easy I don't understand how people got it wrong ? The RD9 was always the brightest/ hifi sounding and the rev 2 was mostly the dullest/ low passed. Very enjoyable video, thank you Also, I def subscribed, maybe do another poll on the individual outputs and maybe more people have seen this and will contribute to give you better testing results.
Yup, but 1, you need to know that, and 2, it's not obvious on all sounds as some of them just don't have the high end to get filtered away. But on the loop it was pretty obvious.
Un reportage sur un collectionneur de synthés et boites a rythmes vintages analogiques ruclips.net/video/528DtHGIbgw/видео.html&ab_channel=LeonardLORM ARP2600-ROLAND SH09-SH101-MC202-TB303-TR77-505-606-626-707-727-808-909-RE201-JUNO 106 OBERHEIM DX-PROMMER-MATRIX1000-SEQUENTIAL PRO ONE- PROPHET 600-DRUMTRAKS ET AUTRES
hmm that filter on the main out explains a lot why i hate samples of 909 hats as they always sound to harsh for me, im guessing most people used the individual outs to sample while a lot of records used the main outs
Finding them isn't that hard, they show up for sale a few times per year. PAYING for them, that's the tricky bit. They go for $6000 or so now, and they are amazing, but they are not $6000 amazing. Hey, that gives me an idea for a video. How to get the OSCar sound without an OSCar. I think I could do that, I know I can make decent replications with my Nord Modular, I wonder if I could make the Deepmind sound like an OSCar. I should try.
I might sound like a bit of a heathen here, but I feel like if you're recording from the summed output, you're not quite doing it right. Whatever processing you want on the kick- for example- probably wouldn't sound as good when applied to the full mix. Plus recording individual channels means you can tweak their levels later on.
@@RegebroRepairs I only have the RD8 right now, but I have the RD9 on the way. It is a bit entertaining how many people will complain about a lack of individual instrument outs but will then just use the total output anyway.
I respect the effort that has gone into this, but I wonder: what's the point of the comparison? Unfortunately, the naming of the two "competitors" as "The real thing" and "The cheap clone" already creates the feeling that the Behringer company is being trampled on here (once again). That being said, two original Roland TR-909s don't sound the same either.... I won't deny that there are audible differences when playing the snares alternately, for example. But I emphatically deny that anyone (apart from a few absolute audio engineering cracks) can hear in a finished song whether the drum machine used is a Roland TR-909 or a Behringer RD-9. Those who can and want to afford an original machine should do so, but those on a tight budget (like me) should thank Behringer for the RD-9. That being said, the RD-9 has a few features that make it more networkable...
I was thinking about doing something on timing, because I already know that will be interesting (foreshadowing), but it will also be a lot of effort. :-D Channel leakage is an interesting idea, that certainly would be easy to check for while doing individual out sounds.
I didn't like the 909 because I have an 808 and I think it was better. Today, I would like to have one but, I'm not going to spend that much money, I only paid $500 for the 808. So I might get an RD-9 because an 808 and 909 together are sick!
So the Behringer sounds have a bid more highs, no problem. But there is one instrument I was hoping, it is not the Behringer, and that is the snare. A bid deeper/more weight would be great. Maffez?
What i would be interested in would be to know about the power supply, in my experience, but things might have changed (in hate beringer and that way of doing things so...) beringer power supply are bad quality and dont last. do you think an rd9 will still be there and working if regularaly used in 40 years?
You have made a massive assumption that people who quit out could not tell the difference. That kind of analysis is called confirmation bias - where you take an incomplete set of data and push it into a particular unsupported premise. Some people just look videos and get bored, or are on their work computer and have to quit out, or are not as invested in the process as you are as the creator of the process. Some of your other interpretations are a lot stronger so good work on those.
I assume that the data has a bias in it yes, namely that the set of people who answered contains a higher percentage of people who could hear a difference than the set of people who did not answer. I don't think that's a controversial assumption, but of course I could be wrong. The conclusion is also entirely non-controversial: You can hear a difference if you know what to listen for.
You could revise that to be "You can hear a difference if you know what a TR909 (various revision) sounds like." But who *really* is especially post production etc and age of the devices. I am completely with you on that. It is interesting hearing the sounds in isolation. The clap was really the only one that sounded wrong (too loose at the front and the trail wasnt as airy). The snare maybe also but a little compression would fix that most likely. I liked your point about the 7k filter etc. "Punchier and Brighter" can be good but require post processing to move the high end frequencies out of the way of other instruments. I dont have an RD9 to test, but I can only imagine that in a modern DAW that would be quite trivial to accomplish. Maybe they left it out for cost reasons or maybe the team thought it was good for people to have the option to include the high end, or remove it post RD9. Anyway thanks for the well thought out presentation - that would have been a LOT of work.
@@xisotopex It's definitely a good analog drum machine. If you don't already have one, it's not a bad choice. I don't know if there is anything in the same price range except the Drumbrute impact, which I haven't used, but it also seems cool.
People wanted to clone acoustic drums in the 80ies, now we clone the clones that defined the sound of the 90ies to reproduce it 30 years later. Circle of life in the music industry.
20 years ago Reason Daw had a drum machine like this, I still use it today for every beat I make its call Redrum.
Not only do we clone the machines that tries to clone the sounds of real drums, we even emulate those machines virtually. It's meta on many levels :D
Beautiful
Clone Wars 😂
We’ve had 909 clones this entire time Jomox exists because of 909 clone kits.
Wow, I've almost doubled my subscriber number the last few weeks! I'm over a 100 now, I did not expect that!
Should I pretend to be a proper RUclipsr and make a 100 subscriber special? What should it be about in that case?
The only idea I have is that I show my collection of drum machines. Or maybe a channel trailer? Maybe someone has another idea?
Well, I did it!
ruclips.net/video/DwlJd6fX1W0/видео.html
Very cool info here. Love the detail on the filters on the main and individual outputs. When it all boils down the minutiae of the details probably don’t actually make a difference overall from a musical perspective but it does help explain the minor differences we can hear. I’ve never owned a 909 but have so many records with it on I feels like I know it inside out. The overall feel is there for me - and it’s great to understand why there are specific differences. Respect for the detail 👍
I couldn't help but read this in Starksy Carr's voice :)
King of the machines
Your review helped me shape a decision, I got myself a RD 9 , I have to admit, it sounds superbe , and the versatility of the instrument is very nice and capable.
I listened to a few sounds and quit the video, because it was clear to me that they sounded or could sound the same. The clone has the character of the original and so I decided to buy me one and I do not regret it. The clone is awesome.
I want that machine soooooo badly!
@@marcopaganotto9125 I use it in all my tracks. No more sample digging.
30-40 year old electronics in the original are going to make a difference.
Also I'm sure if you played someone a Roland 909 and told them it was a Behringer they would instantly say Not as good!
Agreed. The bias that's presented by the creator of this video (using "cheap" in a video's title, for example) makes it impossible for me to take this test seriously.
@@timbrechopper This is the reason why i initially did not want to click the video but did anyway. Just to see in the comment section that i was right and did not bother watching past the first 2 seconds.
@@timbrechopper I'm just being overly dramatic.
@@RegebroRepairs No disrespect but that is probably not the best idea if you want this kind of review content taken seriously.
@@derkernspalter So, I'm not sure why I'm explaining this, but here we are.
The intro is making fun of Behringer haters. If you watched more than 2 seconds, you would have realized that.
This was awesome. Thanks for taking the time to do the comparison.
Warmness/Fullness/Fatness == electrons hanging around == tubes/tapes/germanium/noise/old stuff
Sharpness/crispness/cleanness/brightness == electrons going where they're meant to go == silicon/digital/filters
Then there are the TR-909s made on June 6th, 1984 where a new worker, who we will call "Mary" inserted the wrong capacitor in the filter circuit giving a unique sound and the group Dirt, Air and Flames a #1 hit.
What does that even mean
@@martinkulik9466 Its a joke that obviously went right over your head lol
Surely A3Kr0n it wasn't in June, but in September?
@@KeirMurphyif I remember, it was an evening shift. Maybe like the 20th or the 22nd.
This is the most impressive compare between RD-9 and TR-909 that there is on the internet!!!
(so it must be true! 🙂) Massive Respect!
Fascinating, thanks for the video!
Fascinating. They all sound wildly different - pitches are all over the place and yes, the filter is way higher on the RD-9. But I wouldn't have known which is supposed to be the 'correct' one as I've never owned a 909, only various samples, all of which are also quite different in terms of pitch and timbre. Great info on the different components on the main vs instruments outs as well. Thanks!
excellent review, analyse , thank you
Awesome content. It’s interesting how detailed we get dissecting each sound. The reality is, the audience doesn’t care about gear as much as we do. 😅
Thank you for the very thorough comparison.
Excellent video. Thanks for the detailed breakdown
Would be good to hear the RD-9 sequence run through a 6db filter as you say, and compared again with the TR909. The way individual sounds behave and interact with each other when sequenced always seems to be where clones have difficulty.
This was awesome! :-) Thank you!
I feel the real comparison test is putting the sounds in a sequence,
there's something interesting I remember, that when the claps are close together on the real tr909, they start sounding.... hard to describe it in words.
Really the best comparison I've seen so far. Based on facts and not feelings. Grymt jobbat!😊 I think the most prominent difference is that I feel the sounds from the RD9 are less balanced/glued together. When you play the loops, the sounds from 909 feels like the play togehter like a unit. The RD9 sound more like individual sounds playing together. Are there any compression or other dynamics in the 909 glueing the sounds together?
Tack!
No, there is no compression or dynamics there. It may be that the output filtering taking the edge of the sounds makes it sound a bit more cohesive.
Great work!!!
Very interesting take. From what I can make out it's not just that most people can't tell an RD9 from a 909 they can't tell between the different iterations of 909 production, and to be fair why the hell should they?
I like this comparison with technical background, thanks for that! Also, I already found that adding a global lowpass to the TR-8S makes it sound much more 'calming' to the ear. The same 'mod' :)
I prefer the sound of Behringer, without noise and filter, that's the raw sound I want to have from the get-go.
Very informative video. Would really like to see a video with your overall conclusion about the RD9!
It's ironic that so many people are hyper-concerned about emulating timbres from 30 or 40 years ago, when the pioneers who used those tones were looking to the future, trying to do something that had never been done before. We have limitless posibities as electronic artists. Why stay fixated on the past? They sound great, but art is for pushing past the status quo into unexplored territory-is it not?
You have a good point. But most people making music want to make what they like, and they like things they have already heard.
In addition to that, since the digital revolution, all sounds are available, and cheaply, so making anything new is really hard. So music seems stuck in nostalgia at the moment.
Agreed with both of you. To add to the conversation, this is why I truly think SOPHIE was the artist who was forward-thinking _all_ the time. Her sound was and still is the future of music. Artists in the hyperpop realm are having to catch up to that and it'll take them a couple years to get on the level that she was.
Her passing was not only devastating to friends, fans, and family, but music as a whole. This decade was hers to lead and who knows what she would've had in store for us.
I fully agree with you. Forward thinking should be in the DNA of electronic music. But if you want to the nostalgia effect in full effect, I invite you to look into the (electric) guitar industry. Decades of lusting about mythical guitars from the early '60-ies:)
Unless you've been salivating over sounds in unobtainable machines for the past several decades that finally became accessible for a fraction of the price.👉🙋♂️👈
@@randilla yes, absolutely! Or could only use as digital format emulation. This is a great time for electronic music indeed.
Very interested to see how the flams and swing compare - Does the RD-9 groove like the 909??
This. the biggest difference ive noticed is in the sequencing. something about the metronome of the rd-9 doesnt seem as solidly in time to me
@@thestever my Tr-808 slays the Rd-8 in sequencing clock terms. But the same could be said of my Atari 1040 or Mac LC vs my 27” IMac or Core i7 Pc.
Woooow.... Estupendo análisis!!!! Deseo que el número de suscriptores en tu canal crezca mucho!!!
The RD-9 Is An Awesome Drum Machine In It's Own Right .
very interesting video, i really appreciate how in-depth this was. most people comparing clones just check individual sounds and while they often times match up, the devil is in the details. it doesn't surprise me that most people could tell the clone from an original when an entire pattern was being played. what a lot of engineers miss when creating a clone is how everything sounds in a context. you can replicate every small part of a circuit, but still not get the overall sound right. i am very interested in the RE909, but haven't heard enough demos to convince me to spend 2k on one.
I really like your comparison between the two! I actually do enjoy the sound of the RD-9 but I do like the original's sound as well. Regardless I'd love to have either one haha! Great video! 🥁🎶
They picked C at 2:39 because that is a more "vintage" sounding kick, IDK how to explain it other than that. I did not take the test myself, so I have no stake in this, lol. When people hear the 909 or clone make a sound like what is used in a lot of the applicable music, they think the sound is from the original. If you make a sound that is a little "off" compared to what people expect, they will assume it is the RD-9.....just my 2 cents.
Thanks for sharing, good info!
Well done! Great video!
What a nice analysis :)
Excellent video, thanks for the effort! Gives me confidence that an RD-9 will do just fine until I can get the real deal.
The real deal is basically a vintage collectors item at this point, and will simply never be worth the price difference. For people that has used the 909 a lot and knows the workflow inside and out, some of the other clones replicate that exactly, so that can make sense. Otherwise I'd just stick to the RD-9, to be honest.
damn that was so interesting ! Thanks !!
Thorough stuff, appreciate your solid work on this video. Subscribed now, hoping to see more from you on instruments, sounds, electronics, derivatives or whatever loosely related. Thanks again.
Great video mate!I am very interested in the Oscar Video and the reasons they failed to clone it!! Cheers!!
The 909 has MIDI OUT for up to 16 additional Notes that can be played at the same time. Its still dwarfs the RD for live therefore. However I love Behringer. If you are just for the sound... go for it.
Yeah, the external instrument is fun thing of the 909. I like using it for bass, as programming a bass line that way is very difficult and generally leads to some happy accidents.
I'm not sure how it would have been useful in 1984, but today you could also use a modern drum machine with more sounds and control that from the 909. But you must be able to map MIDI in notes to specific sounds, because you can't remap the notes coming out from the 909.
These comparisons are only for gear geeks like me. The gen pop listening has no clue nor care about any of it or what they hear on radio or in their cars. IMO, the analogy I use is comparing vintage stereo gear from the 60’s and 70’s and some 80’s to today’s stereo gear (sans very HQ and extremely expensive). I know a repair shop that makes their living off rebuilding and reviving vintage receivers, amps, speakers, LP players, cassette decks, reel to reels, etc. Just as there is discernible distinction to audiophiles who treasure the sound and essence of gear from that era, so it is with electronic music gear aficionados. (But not to anyone else 😃) And frankly Some of us just can’t afford it anymore😄
Brilliant comparison! I’m a happy rd9 owner
I like the well researched approach.
Awesome, very deep and technical and interesting facts well explained.
Isn’t their talk from Behringer of a PolyOscar, now? How is that, when they had to abandon making a copy if the original? Great vid! Cheers!
Not talk, but a CGI render of one.
You can't properly 100% clone an oscar, as the quirks of the software oscillator makes it impossible. But you certainly can make something that sounds very similar. It would likely have a slightly cleaner sound, and it wouldn't glitch if you turn knobs quickly, but it could still sound absolutely great. Maybe even have an additive sound editor for PC/Mac?
well done sir, big Behringer clone fan here
Solid analysis.
This is amazing thank you.
Great video.
Super video !
Interesting to hear the differences, and thx for the explanation on the different revisions. You gotta know what you're comparing to....nice video!
With regards to your comment on the tom revisions, I think it is audible in the attack of the toms, but nothing you'd hear when you wouldn't focus on it and easily lost in a mix.
The low pass at 15K, I'd imagine can impact the hats, even if it's just 6 dB/oct, the 7K most definitely does, like you said.
All in all the RD9 seems to hit it pretty well, I'll really have to try one in a store.
If anyone is interested in how a fully modded RD9 sounds, Maffez has a sample pack on his website where he documented all the mods (Maffez Synth Mods).
Cheers
Very cool video! That seems like a lot of work put in! The thing I have trouble with getting used to with my RD-9 is the clap and the snare. The clap doesn’t move like my 909 used to. What I mean is, the 909 has a more lively feel on each hit it seems. The RD-9 does have that but it seems less pronounced or something.
Yeah, they are a lot of work, which is why my video on the differences in syncing is taking time. :-)
I would be interested in the general impression: if sound is almost identical (and will probably be altered in effects / pedal processing anyways), are you more limited on a RD-9 than on a TR-909 in matters of composition, improvisation and pattern writing ?
Very well done video. I would love to see a comparison between the td-3 and the tb-303. Any chance you will do that in the future?
Sure, if you lend me a real TB-303. :-)
@@RegebroRepairs someone get this man a tb-303, stat
A ton of people have done it with the 303 and all its clones just look around
@@troybalgie2149 I know but many of the comparisons have a faulty approach. There was a video on RUclips a while ago that did a deep dive but I think it has been removed.
ruclips.net/video/osHqty-qfEk/видео.html
I missed the original video but this was really interesting. Fwiw, I only got one in this video, which was the kick.
Edit new sub today. The algorithm works! I have been watching a lot of diy synth tutorials in the last week and you were top of the feed this morning.
Glad you enjoyed it!
Good video.
What do you think about Prpellerheads ReBirth 338?
Is that close to the real things that are in there?
I love ReBirth and have used it a lot, but never actually compared the sounds to the real 909. In my head ReBirth is an instrument of its own. :-D
I feel like an argument can almost be made that the RD9 is mimicking what the 909 was originally intended to sound like. I suspect that 7K filter was not originally intended to be there and only showed up after prototypes were exhibiting too much noise and a compromise had to be made. Regardless, it sounds like they really did their homework and the consumers are the real winners here.
In a full mix, I imagine it would be even more difficult (if not impossible) to tell the RD-9 and TR-909 apart. Especially if further processing is applied to the electronic drums, such as compression, distortion, equalization filters, or reverb.
Fantastic review, thank you 😊 and a new subscriber here. I have the RD9 and extremely happy with the results. I wonder could you make a video on post processing of the audio output from this,let's say in Ableton, such as recommended equalisation etc. I ask this as you know many people have these unit's now and may will be recording tracks with them. Many thanks
I don't think there is anything like recommended EQ, it is entirely dependent on the music and the context and what you want and like.
@@RegebroRepairs Totally agree that eq for example would be song specific. It was probably a silly question 😇 I guess since so many people are going to be making recordings of this machine in their tracks it would be interesting to see studio processing tips for it.
Looking forward to watching your other videos.
I got the Behringer RD-9 (and RD-8 MKii too) and I am returning them both. Not because they don't sound like a TR-909 and TR-808, they do to 98%, but because of the shortcomings I didn't like about them. I'm a Behringer fan, and I'm 100% delighted by my VC340, and DeepMind 12. But the quality level is not what I expected with the RD-9 and RD-8 MKII. The user interface is unfriendly and the tactile experience unpleasant. The external PSU with a short lead is annoying, too.
You definitely need a manual, and the main buttons aren't nice. I like the knobs though.
amazing nerdy video
loved it :)
This video goes into disturbingly deep, never considered before, levels of geekery that require the concentration of a brain surgeon to even slightly begin understanding the subject matter!
Regardless, I want that machine soooooo badly!
Definitely get it if you want it. I got mine last Christmas and love it. If you are in the US, there is a Behringer sale going on at Sweetwater. You can get it at its cheapest price yet.
RD-9 sounds fantastic. The comparisons of the RD-9 and the TR-909 are IMO irrelevant, I have owned 2 real TR-909's and neither sounded exactly the same as each other. The RD-9 is a no brainer and comparisons are a waste of time but thanks for the video. :-)
Well we don’t know for sure they gave up on making an OSCar, last semi official comment was… if the demand is there we will move forward.
Sadly when this was mentioned in a number of the synth groups on FB that Behringer monitors, the OSCar saw very little love as something people people wanted to see.
Yeah, I really should make that video. Maybe I'll have time this fall.
impressive body of work here! Also i am loving the RD9 !
Thanks for that interesting video. It was a strange listening experience. From listening the single sounds, I thought that the REV2 sounded the best, followed by the Behringer. The single sounds of the REV4 just sounded horrible. But when I heard the loop, I really like the REV4.
You think like me. Your on point.
great test ! i got the loop guess correct, top end boost
more comparisons please
Professional review!
Its weird, the individual sounds are pretty similar, but the Loop at the end, the TR-909 Rev 4 sounds SO much better to me all at once.
Rd-9 sounds right off balance
exactly, suddenly the rd 9 sound more plastic.
To me it is also the timing of the pattern that differs ,it feels like the original timing is less rigid , and the snare and bassdrum are off , minor differences that i could not live with ,i rather have none than a flawed one
I’d like every sound comparison possible! Especially the 909? Sure 👍
Heck I’d listen to daily examples lol.
Now I’m fascinated with what a 6db output noise filter sounds like…individual hits, rhythmic patterns with various busy-ness…is there an ‘attack’ sound to the filter?
(& then I hear your examples at the end 🤣🤐👏👏)
I’d love the wav files 🤷♂️
Very informative video, thank you 🙏
Stfu and just by the rd9
Listning in isolation is total differnt to how it sounds in the mix, this is were the real stuff shines IMO correct me if I'm wrong somehow, in the mix the sounds just fit better, the electronic components just like he shows have a sound, in the end its the results that count
Interesting info about the filtering of the outputs, i wonder if this accounts for the RD-9 sounding slightly higher in pitch.
No, that's just differences per sound. But it does make it sound brighter.
I’m a drum machine collector and composer. I’m impressed by the RD-9 now that I have it. If it grooves that’s all that matters. I can mix it the way I want
Yeah, I agree. I don't love everything about it, but it definitely is a great machine.
Sorry I missed the poll, but it was so easy I don't understand how people got it wrong ? The RD9 was always the brightest/ hifi sounding and the rev 2 was mostly the dullest/ low passed.
Very enjoyable video, thank you
Also, I def subscribed, maybe do another poll on the individual outputs and maybe more people have seen this and will contribute to give you better testing results.
Yup, but 1, you need to know that, and 2, it's not obvious on all sounds as some of them just don't have the high end to get filtered away.
But on the loop it was pretty obvious.
@@RegebroRepairs 👌👍
Great vid! Can you make the same with a RD-8 MK2? 🙏🙏🙏
Sure, if you give me a TR-808 or two to compare with. 😀
@@RegebroRepairs I can help with a RD-8… 😅😅😅
Very interesting 😎👍🏼
Great Video
it seems that there is just as much variation between 909's as there was with the rd9
Yup. And there are rumors of early 909 versions that also don't have the output filter capacitors. One of those would sound much closer to the RD-9.
RD-9 sounds better to my ears.
I know I'm an ass but assuming an overlapping of 2 distributions by looking at data from such a low sample size is... optimistic.
nice vid. thanks
I bought an Erica lxr-02. these are both fun machines but I wanted something more flexible
Conclusion: Behringer did it again
Un reportage sur un collectionneur de synthés et boites a rythmes vintages analogiques
ruclips.net/video/528DtHGIbgw/видео.html&ab_channel=LeonardLORM
ARP2600-ROLAND SH09-SH101-MC202-TB303-TR77-505-606-626-707-727-808-909-RE201-JUNO 106
OBERHEIM DX-PROMMER-MATRIX1000-SEQUENTIAL PRO ONE- PROPHET 600-DRUMTRAKS ET AUTRES
hmm that filter on the main out explains a lot why i hate samples of 909 hats as they always sound to harsh for me, im guessing most people used the individual outs to sample while a lot of records used the main outs
Sounds likely.
Excellent tutorial.
So like the RD-8, I foresee a MKII of the RD-9 with the filtered outputs 😀
The OSCar clone was cancelled? Damn. That's pretty much the only vintage synth I would buy if I could find one.
Finding them isn't that hard, they show up for sale a few times per year. PAYING for them, that's the tricky bit. They go for $6000 or so now, and they are amazing, but they are not $6000 amazing.
Hey, that gives me an idea for a video. How to get the OSCar sound without an OSCar. I think I could do that, I know I can make decent replications with my Nord Modular, I wonder if I could make the Deepmind sound like an OSCar. I should try.
Great content! Thanks :) could you do the same for the mythical 808? Thanks
Sure, if you give me an 808. 😄
@@RegebroRepairs ahah nice try :P perhaps you could borrow from some RUclipsr or something like that? (Or do a collab) cheers 🙏
@@radiatingsun6056 No one is going to lend me their 808 for half a year. 😄
I might sound like a bit of a heathen here, but I feel like if you're recording from the summed output, you're not quite doing it right. Whatever processing you want on the kick- for example- probably wouldn't sound as good when applied to the full mix.
Plus recording individual channels means you can tweak their levels later on.
Having kick and snare separate is generally a good idea.
@@RegebroRepairs I only have the RD8 right now, but I have the RD9 on the way. It is a bit entertaining how many people will complain about a lack of individual instrument outs but will then just use the total output anyway.
I am guessing you have the RD9 set on standard mode, switch it to enhanced and you can tune/change/manipulate the tones.
That would invalidate the test. But for real usage, Enhanced mode is a given.
I respect the effort that has gone into this, but I wonder: what's the point of the comparison? Unfortunately, the naming of the two "competitors" as "The real thing" and "The cheap clone" already creates the feeling that the Behringer company is being trampled on here (once again). That being said, two original Roland TR-909s don't sound the same either.... I won't deny that there are audible differences when playing the snares alternately, for example. But I emphatically deny that anyone (apart from a few absolute audio engineering cracks) can hear in a finished song whether the drum machine used is a Roland TR-909 or a Behringer RD-9. Those who can and want to afford an original machine should do so, but those on a tight budget (like me) should thank Behringer for the RD-9. That being said, the RD-9 has a few features that make it more networkable...
That's the point.
I’m lost… revision one two three four 😂
What about channel leakage and timing?
I was thinking about doing something on timing, because I already know that will be interesting (foreshadowing), but it will also be a lot of effort. :-D
Channel leakage is an interesting idea, that certainly would be easy to check for while doing individual out sounds.
I didn't like the 909 because I have an 808 and I think it was better. Today, I would like to have one but, I'm not going to spend that much money, I only paid $500 for the 808. So I might get an RD-9 because an 808 and 909 together are sick!
sounds close enough for me!
So the Behringer sounds have a bid more highs, no problem. But there is one instrument I was hoping, it is not the Behringer, and that is the snare. A bid deeper/more weight would be great. Maffez?
Maffez have some mods on the snare, including one he calls "More snare body" which sounds like it could be worth a try.
I don’t like the snare sound of my 909 that much. Especially the portion where the noise doesn’t decay instantly but get hold for a couple of ms.
@@RegebroRepairs great, thank you! and thanks for your effort for the comparison, really well done!
@@PWMaarten I do tend to have the Tone control turned down.
What i would be interested in would be to know about the power supply, in my experience, but things might have changed (in hate beringer and that way of doing things so...) beringer power supply are bad quality and dont last. do you think an rd9 will still be there and working if regularaly used in 40 years?
The power supply is an external 18V center positive power supply. Finding replacements won't be a problem.
You have made a massive assumption that people who quit out could not tell the difference. That kind of analysis is called confirmation bias - where you take an incomplete set of data and push it into a particular unsupported premise. Some people just look videos and get bored, or are on their work computer and have to quit out, or are not as invested in the process as you are as the creator of the process. Some of your other interpretations are a lot stronger so good work on those.
Please dont take my comment the wrong way your analysis is excellent, the best I have seen.
I assume that the data has a bias in it yes, namely that the set of people who answered contains a higher percentage of people who could hear a difference than the set of people who did not answer.
I don't think that's a controversial assumption, but of course I could be wrong. The conclusion is also entirely non-controversial: You can hear a difference if you know what to listen for.
You could revise that to be "You can hear a difference if you know what a TR909 (various revision) sounds like." But who *really* is especially post production etc and age of the devices. I am completely with you on that. It is interesting hearing the sounds in isolation. The clap was really the only one that sounded wrong (too loose at the front and the trail wasnt as airy). The snare maybe also but a little compression would fix that most likely.
I liked your point about the 7k filter etc. "Punchier and Brighter" can be good but require post processing to move the high end frequencies out of the way of other instruments. I dont have an RD9 to test, but I can only imagine that in a modern DAW that would be quite trivial to accomplish. Maybe they left it out for cost reasons or maybe the team thought it was good for people to have the option to include the high end, or remove it post RD9.
Anyway thanks for the well thought out presentation - that would have been a LOT of work.
even more difficult than telling the two apart is guessing when the rd9 will be available again...
Hehe, they pop up at random stores and sell out quickly.
@@RegebroRepairs I see one now and I am tempted
@@xisotopex It's definitely a good analog drum machine. If you don't already have one, it's not a bad choice. I don't know if there is anything in the same price range except the Drumbrute impact, which I haven't used, but it also seems cool.
@@RegebroRepairs I already have the rd8 and I have the mfb tanzmaus as well, and on a shelf somewhere gathering dust I have the akai tomcat
@@xisotopex So unless you really feel that you need the 909 sound, it's probably not really that useful for you. Don't let the GAS get you. :-)