Correction: on the U-he, the "Initial Amount" for modulation is the red triangle next to the mod wheel. That represents that bottom modulation amount. The white triangle is the upper modulation amount. So you absolutely can set an initial modulation and save it with presets.
@@StarskyCarr Another tip: if you want a quantized filter in RePro-5 use a mod slot, select a source (Ctrl A or B, Filter Env, LFO, etc.) then click the Q to quantize, select semi-tones. And there you go: quantized filter steps.
at 35:07 when you started with the chords, I couldn't believe how incredible and alive the hardware sounded at your initial low cutoff freq. I know you tended to move from that initial cutoff rather quickly with the softsynths, but I really didn't hear that same character from any of them.
It was also your demo of the p5 that made me pull the trigger, told sequential too dunno if that helps your channel but hope so. I like these synth channels that don't do the cringe clickbait influencer thing. Keep it up!
Great comparison! The most difference between these VSTs becomes obious when you start to abuse the voice mod with audio rate fm. The only VST that sounds like a proper PWM modulation at audio rates is Softube. While U-he and Arturia are great at simple patches they sound completely broken when you crank up that mod with multiple waves from OSC B. Love all of these synths though, each has its own strengths.
@@bonchbonch Well I guess the main differnce with Repro-5 is the EQ curves when it comes to PWM modulation, Model 80 has like a lot more mid range frequencies. I think I encountered the main difference thing is when I tried to replicate the patch from video "Prophet 5 Rev4 filter FM pad" . I couldn't get soft synths anywhere close to the sound from that video, they all sound broken to me.
I bought Softube’s model 80 after your first review. Zero regrets, absolutely awesome recreation of the synth. Btw this my 3rd synth from Softube, they are certainly hit the nails lately. I hope to see more stuff from them in the future.
Ooh, 45 minutes of synth good times on a Sunday - sure, I should be doing some work but listening to Starsky Carr A/Bing vintage synth VSTs is IMPORTANT, dammit!
I really love this channel and these videos!! The synth comparisons also between entirely different synths are really valuable for me and surely for many other curious synth enthousiasts as well :)
For any of these soft synths the Soundforce controller can be a great investment. A big part of the genius of this synth is the interface/workflow. As long as you get the sounds (and possibly other features) you want and VSTs are part of your workflow then it is a great companion IMHO.
Brilliant video, Starsky. I was definitely tempted by all of those VSTs as they sound so good, yet I still want the hardware version. I think what this video shows is that I'd be kidding myself if I thought the hardware sound was going to be streets ahead of the software VSTs. But watching you tweak the filter cutoff knob with the mouse reminds me that I'm really after the hands-on playing experience. Thanks for all the hard work on this - it's really appreciated!
i've got most of these, but for whatever reason i keep going back to the Pro-52 and Pro-53. it be interesting to see a shoot out with some of the first VSTs vs the newest ones to see how far everything has come.
i loved pro 53... and lost it a few years ago unfortunately... there was a preset on there called "butterfish" that i used a lot... would love to know the settings for that patch if anyone still has it
Ya, Native instruments have brought it back with the Poly Synth - asked on the Pro53. As someone who works with hardware, It sounds as good as any of my analog gear. NI did a great job with their Poly Synth aka prophet 5 emulation.
Crazy how side by side the differences are as big as they are, but in a user mix/song context, the slight variances (and even the larger volume differences) would simply be mixed out. I have a 40 year old (board marked as 1983) Rev 3.3 and I've dialed in with the Arturia V an almost identical patch. Definitely close enough to use live so I don't take my baby out of the home studio anymore. I added the Rev -1 filter mod (which is fantastic BTW) so I should try and compare the filter responses. Even after having Arturia for over a decade, it somehow escaped me that it was based on the Rev 2. The best thing about the mod, is that it not only has a very subtle difference in timbre (the tech who installed it told me there are very minor frequency bumps in the new filter) but it can change the filter to add a 2 pole option, and has a Q bass compensation that is great for high rez sounds without losing so much bass. It's almost like having an Oberheim within a P5 and having the Prophet's better Poly Mod options. I thought I read where the new prophet is using the same filter chips as the Rev-1 SSM design so maybe there will be a firmware update down the Sequential road to add 2 pole and Q compensation options into the new Rev 4 filters. I know it's not how the original P5 was designed, but the OB-X8 has all the OB versions, plus the sweepable SEM filter that none of the OB series had, so maybe.....
Thank you. I really enjoy these comparisons. They all sounded very good to me. I have the Repro and just imagined, when I would have the model 80 in my VST folder, too, I would just pick one of them by chance every time i need a prophet sound. So really no need to buy another one. Well, for me at least.
They do similar things differently but they all sound pretty good. I still want a hardware Prophet 5 though, tweaking things with a trackpad feels worlds apart from turning the knob and playing the keys on a hardware synth. They may not sound that different, but the way we interact with our instruments will change the way we write and play.
No it’s the same. I set levels and had a meter on another screen. Occasionally when adding the oscillators the arturia drops but I fixed in the mix… except where I was demonstrating the difference. I get lots of comments about levels and it’s mainly due to stuff having different harmonic content so sounding louder/quieter in different systems. I monitor loudness, but there are lots of other measures. Nothing will be perfect when comparing different sound sources. But I have to be careful to make the em the same and spend a lot of time doing this. Having said all that the Arturia was the one I had to keep on changing!
Sometimes I wonder where people get their energy. I would probably have had a couple mental and emotional breakdowns while trying to compare these just for myself. Yet you did that, did it again for the video, edited the video in a way that this absolutely insane sweeping and buzzing fiesta remains entertaining and did a voice over for it. And you have the audacity to still sound like you're having fun. Boggles my mind. PS: Website is not mildy annoying me anymore.
@@StarskyCarr I've had a thought. I know you advertised becoming a channel or patron member in order to get to tutorials for synths before. If I was you I'd sell your tutorials (downloadable) in organized bundles on your website as one-off-payments. I know setting up payment/shops can be a pain, but you seem to be a crafty man and it's getting easier by the day to do such things. Just a thought.
@@akagerhard thanks.. I’ve actually got a Udemy series… just haven’t had the time to make an advert!! But you’re right - I’ll put them in the site as well.
@@StarskyCarr I see you added the advert for the Udemy series. Personally I would've preferred cutting out the middle man. I'm a big fan of cutting out the middle man. Maybe you'll add it to your site when you have more time, for now I'll see if I can learn something. Btw.: I'm especially interested in learning how to create funky sounds with synths. Think George Clinton, Parliament - maybe even Funkadelic or being able to recreate Rick Jamesish sounds - but on a synth. That's where my head is at. So if you ever think about doing a masterclass on a genre, think of me, think of funk!
@@akagerhard thanks… something for me to think about. I put the series in Udemy as it’s hard to resell via a website. There’s 2.5 hours of video and I can only ‘sell’ one file at a time via the website. I guess that’s why things like Udemy have appeared - for a specific need.
More likely you're the problem. There are countless videos on YT demostrating how accurate Arturias emulations are to the original hardware. If you can't get absolutely amazing results from some of their plugins, then quite simply you're lacking either inspiration, focus, drive, or talent.
Thanks for the in depth review, personally I'd prefer a more accurate emulation instead of a lot of bells and whistles. Limitations can add to creativity. Currently I'm running a demo version of Model-80 in Bitwig, when I want to use the VCF module in Modular and turn the cutoff knob past the middle, there is a noticeable noise.The noise doesn't seem to appear when using the Model-80 as a synth. I just opened a chat with Softube and they said they will look into it. It would be nice to know if other people could replicate this issue or not? The VCF modules of Model 72, 82 and 84 are 'silent' although Korgasmatron also has a bit of noise (although much less then Model-80 there is something).
What were the Repro5 settings on the Tweak panel? I don't have hardware to compare to, but I found that a tweaked Repro5 >> Model 80 , but a default Model 80 > default Repro5. Plus Repro5 has a heck of a lot more features (can always be put in 5 voice mode for purists). Factor in the full price of all the synths and recognize that Repro gets you Repro1 (which is better than Repro5 to me), more customization, more modern features like useful keytracking, plus optional effects like per-voice distortion, and Repro is a much better synth to purchase when the price is comparable. Model 80 sounds really good, but is strangely limited and strangely overpriced given the tough competition. I have Model 72, 82, and 84. I don't think I'll bother with Model 80, given that I prefer Repro5. Thanks for the comparison.
I used the crispy filter setting, P5 oscillator and analog envelopes. I did try the P5 old as well on the oscillators and tbh not sure what was used in some of it. The differences in the filter were obvious although as I said when matching to something else they pretty much disappeared. The oscillator was more subtle and didn’t change the outcome of any of the tests tbh. Just another slightly different tone at times.
The square on repro sounds different to my rev 4, it actually sounds like i remember the 3340 square wave to sound like a nice hollow sound at 50%, the rev 4 is really muddy in the low mids makes it sound duller, thinking of selling it actually prefer repro
All Prophets, including the new from Sequential, don't sound like original from 80s... hands down... Softube, may be, are the most accurate emulation, warm and bold. Thanks.
I always wonder whether that's due to the 40 years between then and now. Originals all sound different to each other as well. I took a look at 2 vintage Polysixes and they defineity l had different characters - bit Polysix but I can spot which is which. 100s of components with dodgy tolerances degrading at different rates definitely does something to the individual tone. ruclips.net/video/REBHsr5vWPs/видео.html
Crazy how vst sounds always harsher and less pleasing… in guitar world it’s pretty impossible to make any difference between real tube amps and their deep learning models made with NAM or ToneX… the only one vst I found close to original was the Juno vst from Roland cloud.
Spent some time yesterday with the repro 5 and the model 80 demo VSTs. Ended up concluding my DeepMind 12 patches, probably from you, felt and sounded the best for Prophet-ish brass tones. It’s splitting hairs, but the model 80 felt better than the repro five.
14:34 PWM on the real thing sounds like a predator, especially at such low frequencies. Something is amiss in all 3 VSTs compared. Oh and yeah Arturia's resonance is the closest, surprisingly.
I thought the Arturias resonance was a little higher. But what’s odd is that every time you listen you can hear different aspects to the sounds. I’ve noticed while making these over the years that I can come back and hear something else that I wasn’t concentrating on. It happens a lot so these day I go back and forth a few times.
@@StarskyCarr Great! I swear some patches sound best on that little synth and it wont eat your cpu ;) great delay too plus it can be used as a separate fx plugin
Thank you Starsky Carr for another great comparison video. I already have Arturia V collection 9. I like Arturia a lot. I enjoy their Polybrute, Drumbrute Impact, Pigments and Effects as well. I always believed their software emulations of vintage hardware was quite good. However recently I've been watching many comparrison video's like your's and it turns out they're not as good as I thought. Once again I'm disappointed with Arturia's performance here, though not as much as with the Model D. I really appreciate how with V Collection 9 you get so many soft synths in one bundle. They're much cheaper than the Softube ones. I just wish they sounded a little more accurate. Fortunately this time around I actually own a Prophet 5 rev 4, so I won't be using any software emulations anyway. Why waste money on hardware if you're going to use software anyway right? I appreciatie how much you can tweak on the Arturia VST and how nice the UI looks. Still, why would you want to do that if you want to make it sound like a real Prophet 5? Especially when you have a real prophet 5? Anyway, I don't own a real Model D. I don't think it's worth what they're asking for it these days. I've been using the Arturia version for that one only to learn that the Softube and Synapse version sounded much closer. I don't want to spend more money on the Softube version, but I already owned the Synapse version long before I got the Arturia bundle. Now I know I'd be better off returning to Synapse Legend. In fact I've always been using Synapse Legend alongside the Arturia Mini V anyway. I like how they differ in character. It's like you have two different sounding Model D's. The Legend is good for basses, sequences and any type of authentic Model D sounds. The Mini V is a lot brighter and has an interesting sounding filter. I think it's quite suitable for leads. That actually illustrates my main opinion on software emulations in general. Maybe you just shouldn't compare them to the hardware too much, and just create sounds that happen to sound nice on the software. I think you get the most out of them that way and it really doesn't matter that much how they sound compared to the hardware. How many people who listen to your songs will even know it's "supposed to be" a Model D or Prophet 5 anyway?
Btw did you ever see this… my Minimoog bst comparison.. it agrees with your assessment :) Minimoog Softsynth Shootout: Diva MiniV3 Monark Legend Minimonsta vs Model D ruclips.net/video/S1h07ws--CM/видео.html
@@StarskyCarr Yes I have seen that comparison video and the comparison between the Synapse and Softube version as well. I think the Softube version sounds best, but I have the Synapse version already. I always liked the sound of it and I'm glad it comes out of the tests pretty well. Not just your test, but other people's tests too. I have NI Monark as well. It was included in NI Ultimate Collectors edition, which I got mainly for Kontakt. I have too many soft synths to explore. Sometimes I have to see other people's reviews to find out how good something is that I've owned for years, but never have done anything with. You're right it fun to play with these vintage synths with their limitations. It's nice to use these sounds for semi-authentic 70's or 80's style songs without needing to own any real equipment from that era. Some simply sound great as well. It's a good way to explore and learn about the legendary vintage synthesizers. Most I will never own in my life. It got me into buying a Prophet 5, OB-X8 and a MODX6 (it can do FM like the DX7 and a bunch of more modern wave table stuff).
What all those who swore by HW fail to realize is that software has exactly the same soul and character as good old HW analog synths. There are no two analog synths who sounds EXACTLY the same. Even the one same unit can sound a slightly different under different condition (temperature etc.). But what I really REALLY REALLY wish for are all those SW haters to sit on their asses and take some time to learn at least the very foundations of what the heck the Fourier transformation is, how synths (both analog, digital/software) work. There is a ton of videos even with tests with electronic oscillators and it's absolutely clear that at the current state of our digital equipment difference between discreet (software) and continuous (analog) is literally imperceptible unless you have some serious genetic oddity regarding ears. Start here: ruclips.net/video/UqiBJbREUgU/видео.html It's not about synths but if you still believe all that crap about how digitalization is soooooo hearable and it is definitely not psychology and bias at play well you are beyond saving I guess.
Not for most of it (it didn’t make a difference) and I had to watch the CPU - playing the synths live at times within Logic while recording the session on GarageBand and recording the screens takes it’s toll. But I did record some bits off-line separately. … the video folder contains 185 files!
@@StarskyCarr oh you do this all with the same computer at the same time? wild ha!!! I do a lot of consultation with software developers and from what i understand in Diva's case the HQ would make a difference for filter saturation and anything to do with FM and sync and whatever..so it does them a bit of a disservice not to have it on in a comparison for accuracy.
I love the Model 80... so close to my hardware. The Arturia V Collection is amazing though for the amount of synths you get. Sometimes its not about the perfect sound but the interface and limitations - and the fun and inspiration that comes with playing different and v expensive classic synths
Prophet 5 is great, but it's not the one I like the most, for me prophet 600 is a little better with the gli-gli modification. Realmete that far exceeds the prophet 5 rev2. The arturia plugins are not really good for me, but the u-he emulations I like better and I think they sound closer to this one. I also find the pro-1 emulation of u-he more convincing on filters with envelopes and amps.
I was most surprised by how good the Arturia Prophet 5 sounded. They have come a long way since their earlier Prophet V (or was it VS? The combo one with both Prophet 5 and VS in it). That old one sounded really "sterile" and cold compared to this one!
Yeah I did a comparison and the the now one really does sounds better (as a lot of their updated stuff). I get that by comparison softube sounds a bit better (and maybe u-he) but it's really not too shabby (and also I can't live without at least a second lfo).
The best prophet 5 sample ironically is in Sequentials own Prophet X. … don’t believe me, play it for yourself, you actually have to play it. It’s sampled from Dave Smiths own prophet 5
Now do it all over again with the Native Instruments Poly Synth 😂lol. No worries, I did it for you! After about 2 hours, I can conclude that the softube and the Poly Synth are nearly identical in sound if not always behavior (but with slightly different adjustments you can get the envelopes to behave identical as well). Maybe (big maybe) the softube sound a little richer on the low end and denser in the high end but that's a big maybe. It's so small that the ears begin to play tricks on our perception. The softube lacks the inverted envelope and 16 voices of the poly but the poly has no vintage knob (I use Isotope's vinyl effect for vintage anyway (highly recommended for adding additional pitch wobble and warm distortions.) Of course the poly interface is boring and bland but utilitarian in exchange.
Tried watching this in the hope of learning something regarding the Prophet V, but after 10 minutes, I decided to make an appointment with my dentist to have a few fillings and teeth extractions without any anesthetic. obviously a site for "purists" rather than newbies.
Haha.. yeah this is for those that are interested in the specifics of the sound engines .. not for the faint hearted! If you want to see some patch creation demos and what the Prophet 5 can do check this one out: ruclips.net/video/Txn5yGzwZFA/видео.html
@@StarskyCarr I'm just telling you I can't hear what you are saying, how it comes through on my system. Looking back my comment looks a little bossy. Sorry!
@@t.c.494 haha… FYI I’ve been testing a new bit of adobe software to reduce room ambience. I normally have to hang thick blankets around the area if I’m not in the studio as the room is so reverberant. This was the first attempt - it’s AI based and I think it’s getting better. It’s a massive hassle trying to get the right room, lighting, ‘look’ etc plus the sound of the synths and the voice spot on. The vox have always let me down when recording in that room.
Have the Arturia devs have ever even heard what an actual Prophet 5 sounds like before they modeled it? It's absolutely appalling how terrible it sounds; especially by 2023 standards.
Arturia don't care about getting anything accurate. They just charge lots of money and posers buy to look rich on RUclips screen capture Ableton live breakcore videos to theor 734 subscribers.
This seems like the old Arturia Prophet? Yeah this has the brighter wooden finish which is uglier as well. They did a much needed update of it like a year before this video
@@MrACangusyoungDC the video features the new one. IMO it sounds a lot better than the old one and saying it sounds bad is a bit much (maybe these people are talking about the old one?). I agree softube probably sounds better but the arturia is really not a bad emulation.
![Blox Fruits Dragon Rework Update [Full Stream]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/EqDAp8udhm0/mqdefault.jpg)
Correction: on the U-he, the "Initial Amount" for modulation is the red triangle next to the mod wheel. That represents that bottom modulation amount. The white triangle is the upper modulation amount. So you absolutely can set an initial modulation and save it with presets.
Thanks and pinned
@@StarskyCarr Another tip: if you want a quantized filter in RePro-5 use a mod slot, select a source (Ctrl A or B, Filter Env, LFO, etc.) then click the Q to quantize, select semi-tones. And there you go: quantized filter steps.
Thank you for taking all the time and effort to put this wonderful comparison together for your audience - wonderful! Liked and subscribed.
at 35:07 when you started with the chords, I couldn't believe how incredible and alive the hardware sounded at your initial low cutoff freq. I know you tended to move from that initial cutoff rather quickly with the softsynths, but I really didn't hear that same character from any of them.
It was also your demo of the p5 that made me pull the trigger, told sequential too dunno if that helps your channel but hope so. I like these synth channels that don't do the cringe clickbait influencer thing. Keep it up!
Thanks… if you bought it via one of my affiliate links I’d have got a tip. If not… send it back and buy another 😂
Great comparison! The most difference between these VSTs becomes obious when you start to abuse the voice mod with audio rate fm. The only VST that sounds like a proper PWM modulation at audio rates is Softube. While U-he and Arturia are great at simple patches they sound completely broken when you crank up that mod with multiple waves from OSC B. Love all of these synths though, each has its own strengths.
@@bonchbonch Well I guess the main differnce with Repro-5 is the EQ curves when it comes to PWM modulation, Model 80 has like a lot more mid range frequencies. I think I encountered the main difference thing is when I tried to replicate the patch from video "Prophet 5 Rev4 filter FM pad" . I couldn't get soft synths anywhere close to the sound from that video, they all sound broken to me.
I bought Softube’s model 80 after your first review. Zero regrets, absolutely awesome recreation of the synth. Btw this my 3rd synth from Softube, they are certainly hit the nails lately. I hope to see more stuff from them in the future.
But I must admit u-he recreation sounds really close as well
Model 84 is tops too imho
I guess you're a Softtube employee.
I also have that... agreed. @raymondo6665
@@mickwilliams910 and you're trolling in who's favor? U-he?
Ooh, 45 minutes of synth good times on a Sunday - sure, I should be doing some work but listening to Starsky Carr A/Bing vintage synth VSTs is IMPORTANT, dammit!
I really love this channel and these videos!! The synth comparisons also between entirely different synths are really valuable for me and surely for many other curious synth enthousiasts as well :)
For any of these soft synths the Soundforce controller can be a great investment. A big part of the genius of this synth is the interface/workflow. As long as you get the sounds (and possibly other features) you want and VSTs are part of your workflow then it is a great companion IMHO.
This is why i use my Sequential synth as a controller. Every knob sends midi.
Awesome video man! Really helpful for me to understand the basics and differences of these synths!
Brilliant video, Starsky. I was definitely tempted by all of those VSTs as they sound so good, yet I still want the hardware version. I think what this video shows is that I'd be kidding myself if I thought the hardware sound was going to be streets ahead of the software VSTs. But watching you tweak the filter cutoff knob with the mouse reminds me that I'm really after the hands-on playing experience. Thanks for all the hard work on this - it's really appreciated!
Some shootout! So well done! Great stuff!
i've got most of these, but for whatever reason i keep going back to the Pro-52 and Pro-53. it be interesting to see a shoot out with some of the first VSTs vs the newest ones to see how far everything has come.
The Pro52 was my first introduction to the prophet and I used it all over the place. Then bought a prophet!
@@StarskyCarr Plus the pro-52/53 used to talk to my Rev 3. Transferring my patches was surprisingly close in sound.
Once you get Softube synths no way you will go to other brands.
i loved pro 53... and lost it a few years ago unfortunately... there was a preset on there called "butterfish" that i used a lot... would love to know the settings for that patch if anyone still has it
Ya, Native instruments have brought it back with the Poly Synth - asked on the Pro53. As someone who works with hardware, It sounds as good as any of my analog gear. NI did a great job with their Poly Synth aka prophet 5 emulation.
Crazy how side by side the differences are as big as they are, but in a user mix/song context, the slight variances (and even the larger volume differences) would simply be mixed out. I have a 40 year old (board marked as 1983) Rev 3.3 and I've dialed in with the Arturia V an almost identical patch. Definitely close enough to use live so I don't take my baby out of the home studio anymore. I added the Rev -1 filter mod (which is fantastic BTW) so I should try and compare the filter responses. Even after having Arturia for over a decade, it somehow escaped me that it was based on the Rev 2. The best thing about the mod, is that it not only has a very subtle difference in timbre (the tech who installed it told me there are very minor frequency bumps in the new filter) but it can change the filter to add a 2 pole option, and has a Q bass compensation that is great for high rez sounds without losing so much bass. It's almost like having an Oberheim within a P5 and having the Prophet's better Poly Mod options. I thought I read where the new prophet is using the same filter chips as the Rev-1 SSM design so maybe there will be a firmware update down the Sequential road to add 2 pole and Q compensation options into the new Rev 4 filters. I know it's not how the original P5 was designed, but the OB-X8 has all the OB versions, plus the sweepable SEM filter that none of the OB series had, so maybe.....
Thank you. I really enjoy these comparisons. They all sounded very good to me. I have the Repro and just imagined, when I would have the model 80 in my VST folder, too, I would just pick one of them by chance every time i need a prophet sound. So really no need to buy another one. Well, for me at least.
Yesss I was waiting for this one ❤❤❤
They do similar things differently but they all sound pretty good. I still want a hardware Prophet 5 though, tweaking things with a trackpad feels worlds apart from turning the knob and playing the keys on a hardware synth. They may not sound that different, but the way we interact with our instruments will change the way we write and play.
100%
Always enjoy your in-depth, fun reviews! The level of the Arturia first example seems much lower. But as you say, they're all great!
No it’s the same. I set levels and had a meter on another screen. Occasionally when adding the oscillators the arturia drops but I fixed in the mix… except where I was demonstrating the difference. I get lots of comments about levels and it’s mainly due to stuff having different harmonic content so sounding louder/quieter in different systems. I monitor loudness, but there are lots of other measures. Nothing will be perfect when comparing different sound sources. But I have to be careful to make the em the same and spend a lot of time doing this. Having said all that the Arturia was the one I had to keep on changing!
Sometimes I wonder where people get their energy. I would probably have had a couple mental and emotional breakdowns while trying to compare these just for myself. Yet you did that, did it again for the video, edited the video in a way that this absolutely insane sweeping and buzzing fiesta remains entertaining and did a voice over for it. And you have the audacity to still sound like you're having fun. Boggles my mind.
PS: Website is not mildy annoying me anymore.
Thanks… I found the ‘animation’ settings :)
@@StarskyCarr I've had a thought. I know you advertised becoming a channel or patron member in order to get to tutorials for synths before. If I was you I'd sell your tutorials (downloadable) in organized bundles on your website as one-off-payments. I know setting up payment/shops can be a pain, but you seem to be a crafty man and it's getting easier by the day to do such things. Just a thought.
@@akagerhard thanks.. I’ve actually got a Udemy series… just haven’t had the time to make an advert!! But you’re right - I’ll put them in the site as well.
@@StarskyCarr I see you added the advert for the Udemy series. Personally I would've preferred cutting out the middle man. I'm a big fan of cutting out the middle man. Maybe you'll add it to your site when you have more time, for now I'll see if I can learn something. Btw.: I'm especially interested in learning how to create funky sounds with synths. Think George Clinton, Parliament - maybe even Funkadelic or being able to recreate Rick Jamesish sounds - but on a synth. That's where my head is at. So if you ever think about doing a masterclass on a genre, think of me, think of funk!
@@akagerhard thanks… something for me to think about. I put the series in Udemy as it’s hard to resell via a website. There’s 2.5 hours of video and I can only ‘sell’ one file at a time via the website. I guess that’s why things like Udemy have appeared - for a specific need.
Go man, great choice of video! Yet to watch...
Arturia never fails to disappoint me
They're finished in the VST world, all mine crash and burn these days.
More likely you're the problem. There are countless videos on YT demostrating how accurate Arturias emulations are to the original hardware. If you can't get absolutely amazing results from some of their plugins, then quite simply you're lacking either inspiration, focus, drive, or talent.
@@mickwilliams910never an issue in stability.
Thanks for the in depth review, personally I'd prefer a more accurate emulation instead of a lot of bells and whistles. Limitations can add to creativity. Currently I'm running a demo version of Model-80 in Bitwig, when I want to use the VCF module in Modular and turn the cutoff knob past the middle, there is a noticeable noise.The noise doesn't seem to appear when using the Model-80 as a synth. I just opened a chat with Softube and they said they will look into it. It would be nice to know if other people could replicate this issue or not? The VCF modules of Model 72, 82 and 84 are 'silent' although Korgasmatron also has a bit of noise (although much less then Model-80 there is something).
Great work! Loved it. I'll stick with my Rev. 4. Nothing quite sounds like it.
🙄
Ever heard MemoryMoon Messiah? Sounds good to me.
(+ ME80 for CS80)
+ Thanks for your great shootouts, I love 'em 🙂👍🏼
Thanks a lot for doing this. 🙂 I think they're all doing quite well. Surprised that the Arturia does too.
Ya maybe one day Arturia will actually sound like what it's supposed to 😅😅
This video is so necessary.
Thank you!!
Very interesting Starsky
As usual high quality content, thanks
Glad you enjoyed it thanks.
What were the Repro5 settings on the Tweak panel?
I don't have hardware to compare to, but I found that a tweaked Repro5 >> Model 80 , but a default Model 80 > default Repro5. Plus Repro5 has a heck of a lot more features (can always be put in 5 voice mode for purists). Factor in the full price of all the synths and recognize that Repro gets you Repro1 (which is better than Repro5 to me), more customization, more modern features like useful keytracking, plus optional effects like per-voice distortion, and Repro is a much better synth to purchase when the price is comparable.
Model 80 sounds really good, but is strangely limited and strangely overpriced given the tough competition. I have Model 72, 82, and 84. I don't think I'll bother with Model 80, given that I prefer Repro5.
Thanks for the comparison.
I used the crispy filter setting, P5 oscillator and analog envelopes. I did try the P5 old as well on the oscillators and tbh not sure what was used in some of it. The differences in the filter were obvious although as I said when matching to something else they pretty much disappeared. The oscillator was more subtle and didn’t change the outcome of any of the tests tbh. Just another slightly different tone at times.
nice vid, who remembers the granddaddy of prophet vsts, PRO-52....?
Me… loved that plug-in. So much I ended up buying 4 prophets in the end … 08 P6 P600 and P5!! And yes I’ve got a problem.
I still have my physical box & CD-ROM 😂
@@sonofdirt me too! and fm7! hated when they went to white with fm8.
@@StarskyCarr I'm halfway there.
there was a preset on the pro53 called "butterfish"... would love to know the settings for that patch if anyone still has it
Very good. Thanks Starsky.
Repro 5 and Model 80 sounded remarkably similar to me
Great comparison
Amazing work, thanks!!
The square on repro sounds different to my rev 4, it actually sounds like i remember the 3340 square wave to sound like a nice hollow sound at 50%, the rev 4 is really muddy in the low mids makes it sound duller, thinking of selling it actually prefer repro
All Prophets, including the new from Sequential, don't sound like original from 80s... hands down... Softube, may be, are the most accurate emulation, warm and bold. Thanks.
I always wonder whether that's due to the 40 years between then and now. Originals all sound different to each other as well. I took a look at 2 vintage Polysixes and they defineity l had different characters - bit Polysix but I can spot which is which. 100s of components with dodgy tolerances degrading at different rates definitely does something to the individual tone.
ruclips.net/video/REBHsr5vWPs/видео.html
Man, I need a whisky but I gotta work this weekend!
All sound like ZeroDelayFeedbackFilter. I own a P5 and the Filter is Universes away from those VST Plugs.
Sound good but.. sticking to the hardware. Never selling that baby!
Gotta justify your purchase. I get it.
This convinced me to sell my p10
Crazy how vst sounds always harsher and less pleasing… in guitar world it’s pretty impossible to make any difference between real tube amps and their deep learning models made with NAM or ToneX… the only one vst I found close to original was the Juno vst from Roland cloud.
Softube is by miles the best sounding.
Its my current favourite.
Spent some time yesterday with the repro 5 and the model 80 demo VSTs. Ended up concluding my DeepMind 12 patches, probably from you, felt and sounded the best for Prophet-ish brass tones. It’s splitting hairs, but the model 80 felt better than the repro five.
14:34 PWM on the real thing sounds like a predator, especially at such low frequencies. Something is amiss in all 3 VSTs compared.
Oh and yeah Arturia's resonance is the closest, surprisingly.
I thought the Arturias resonance was a little higher. But what’s odd is that every time you listen you can hear different aspects to the sounds. I’ve noticed while making these over the years that I can come back and hear something else that I wasn’t concentrating on. It happens a lot so these day I go back and forth a few times.
Great review! Maybe an old Pro-53 could be compared one day.. ;)
I loved that … it’s what turned me in to get the Prophet 08 then the Prophet 6 and now the Prophet 5… the gateway drug!
@@StarskyCarr Great! I swear some patches sound best on that little synth and it wont eat your cpu ;) great delay too plus it can be used as a separate fx plugin
Thank you Starsky Carr for another great comparison video. I already have Arturia V collection 9. I like Arturia a lot. I enjoy their Polybrute, Drumbrute Impact, Pigments and Effects as well. I always believed their software emulations of vintage hardware was quite good. However recently I've been watching many comparrison video's like your's and it turns out they're not as good as I thought. Once again I'm disappointed with Arturia's performance here, though not as much as with the Model D. I really appreciate how with V Collection 9 you get so many soft synths in one bundle. They're much cheaper than the Softube ones. I just wish they sounded a little more accurate. Fortunately this time around I actually own a Prophet 5 rev 4, so I won't be using any software emulations anyway. Why waste money on hardware if you're going to use software anyway right? I appreciatie how much you can tweak on the Arturia VST and how nice the UI looks. Still, why would you want to do that if you want to make it sound like a real Prophet 5? Especially when you have a real prophet 5? Anyway, I don't own a real Model D. I don't think it's worth what they're asking for it these days. I've been using the Arturia version for that one only to learn that the Softube and Synapse version sounded much closer. I don't want to spend more money on the Softube version, but I already owned the Synapse version long before I got the Arturia bundle. Now I know I'd be better off returning to Synapse Legend. In fact I've always been using Synapse Legend alongside the Arturia Mini V anyway. I like how they differ in character. It's like you have two different sounding Model D's. The Legend is good for basses, sequences and any type of authentic Model D sounds. The Mini V is a lot brighter and has an interesting sounding filter. I think it's quite suitable for leads. That actually illustrates my main opinion on software emulations in general. Maybe you just shouldn't compare them to the hardware too much, and just create sounds that happen to sound nice on the software. I think you get the most out of them that way and it really doesn't matter that much how they sound compared to the hardware. How many people who listen to your songs will even know it's "supposed to be" a Model D or Prophet 5 anyway?
I think part of the fun of any of these emulations is being able to play within the limitations and quirks of the originals. As you say.. who knows?
Btw did you ever see this… my Minimoog bst comparison.. it agrees with your assessment :)
Minimoog Softsynth Shootout: Diva MiniV3 Monark Legend Minimonsta vs Model D
ruclips.net/video/S1h07ws--CM/видео.html
@@StarskyCarr Yes I have seen that comparison video and the comparison between the Synapse and Softube version as well. I think the Softube version sounds best, but I have the Synapse version already. I always liked the sound of it and I'm glad it comes out of the tests pretty well. Not just your test, but other people's tests too. I have NI Monark as well. It was included in NI Ultimate Collectors edition, which I got mainly for Kontakt. I have too many soft synths to explore. Sometimes I have to see other people's reviews to find out how good something is that I've owned for years, but never have done anything with.
You're right it fun to play with these vintage synths with their limitations. It's nice to use these sounds for semi-authentic 70's or 80's style songs without needing to own any real equipment from that era. Some simply sound great as well. It's a good way to explore and learn about the legendary vintage synthesizers. Most I will never own in my life. It got me into buying a Prophet 5, OB-X8 and a MODX6 (it can do FM like the DX7 and a bunch of more modern wave table stuff).
What all those who swore by HW fail to realize is that software has exactly the same soul and character as good old HW analog synths. There are no two analog synths who sounds EXACTLY the same. Even the one same unit can sound a slightly different under different condition (temperature etc.). But what I really REALLY REALLY wish for are all those SW haters to sit on their asses and take some time to learn at least the very foundations of what the heck the Fourier transformation is, how synths (both analog, digital/software) work. There is a ton of videos even with tests with electronic oscillators and it's absolutely clear that at the current state of our digital equipment difference between discreet (software) and continuous (analog) is literally imperceptible unless you have some serious genetic oddity regarding ears.
Start here: ruclips.net/video/UqiBJbREUgU/видео.html
It's not about synths but if you still believe all that crap about how digitalization is soooooo hearable and it is definitely not psychology and bias at play well you are beyond saving I guess.
is the u-he on HQ mode?
Not for most of it (it didn’t make a difference) and I had to watch the CPU - playing the synths live at times within Logic while recording the session on GarageBand and recording the screens takes it’s toll. But I did record some bits off-line separately. … the video folder contains 185 files!
@@StarskyCarr oh you do this all with the same computer at the same time? wild ha!!!
I do a lot of consultation with software developers and from what i understand in Diva's case the HQ would make a difference for filter saturation and anything to do with FM and sync and whatever..so it does them a bit of a disservice not to have it on in a comparison for accuracy.
@@0e0 true, it is on for some - I should’ve taken more care to note for viewers. Just gets so complicated!
Just wondering what cents Tuner is that your using?😁
It’s Logic’s own.
Does the Softtube Model 80 have effects? It's half the price of the U-He Repro-5 ($69 versus $149).
@@JeffreySaxophoneTallNewton no built in FX
Repro is closest to the raw oscillators… but once you get the filter in there, Softube comes closer to the original.
If you're after a "Bog Standard Prophet i would agree Model 80 ticks all the boxes...... ironically Arturia is the most expensive....
I love the Model 80... so close to my hardware. The Arturia V Collection is amazing though for the amount of synths you get. Sometimes its not about the perfect sound but the interface and limitations - and the fun and inspiration that comes with playing different and v expensive classic synths
I knew could count on you
Prophet 5 is great, but it's not the one I like the most, for me prophet 600 is a little better with the gli-gli modification. Realmete that far exceeds the prophet 5 rev2.
The arturia plugins are not really good for me, but the u-he emulations I like better and I think they sound closer to this one. I also find the pro-1 emulation of u-he more convincing on filters with envelopes and amps.
I was most surprised by how good the Arturia Prophet 5 sounded. They have come a long way since their earlier Prophet V (or was it VS? The combo one with both Prophet 5 and VS in it).
That old one sounded really "sterile" and cold compared to this one!
Yeah I did a comparison and the the now one really does sounds better (as a lot of their updated stuff). I get that by comparison softube sounds a bit better (and maybe u-he) but it's really not too shabby (and also I can't live without at least a second lfo).
The best prophet 5 sample ironically is in Sequentials own Prophet X. … don’t believe me, play it for yourself, you actually have to play it. It’s sampled from Dave Smiths own prophet 5
Arturia is the best because that’s the one I own. Lol😂
Now do it all over again with the Native Instruments Poly Synth 😂lol. No worries, I did it for you! After about 2 hours, I can conclude that the softube and the Poly Synth are nearly identical in sound if not always behavior (but with slightly different adjustments you can get the envelopes to behave identical as well). Maybe (big maybe) the softube sound a little richer on the low end and denser in the high end but that's a big maybe. It's so small that the ears begin to play tricks on our perception. The softube lacks the inverted envelope and 16 voices of the poly but the poly has no vintage knob (I use Isotope's vinyl effect for vintage anyway (highly recommended for adding additional pitch wobble and warm distortions.) Of course the poly interface is boring and bland but utilitarian in exchange.
Arturia VCF FM sounds awful no matter sample rate. VCF FM needs gobs of oversampling. No such thing as trough zero on PW.
Softube model80 > uhe repro5 > arturia prophet5v
@ghost mall agreee
Arturia are garbage 🗑️
Tried watching this in the hope of learning something regarding the Prophet V, but after 10 minutes, I decided to make an appointment with my dentist to have a few fillings and teeth extractions without any anesthetic. obviously a site for "purists" rather than newbies.
Haha.. yeah this is for those that are interested in the specifics of the sound engines .. not for the faint hearted! If you want to see some patch creation demos and what the Prophet 5 can do check this one out: ruclips.net/video/Txn5yGzwZFA/видео.html
Your voice audio is boomy/mucky. You need some mids, and some highs, sibilance is poor.
Thanks for the advice
@@StarskyCarr I'm just telling you I can't hear what you are saying, how it comes through on my system. Looking back my comment looks a little bossy. Sorry!
@@StarskyCarr Here, let me balance it out... "Starsky! Sharsky! Starsky!"
Can I call you Starsky or is that presumptuous? :)
@@StarskyCarrSit up straight! Comb your hair! Clean your room! Haha.
@@t.c.494 haha… FYI I’ve been testing a new bit of adobe software to reduce room ambience. I normally have to hang thick blankets around the area if I’m not in the studio as the room is so reverberant. This was the first attempt - it’s AI based and I think it’s getting better. It’s a massive hassle trying to get the right room, lighting, ‘look’ etc plus the sound of the synths and the voice spot on. The vox have always let me down when recording in that room.
Have the Arturia devs have ever even heard what an actual Prophet 5 sounds like before they modeled it? It's absolutely appalling how terrible it sounds; especially by 2023 standards.
Standard Farturia😅
Lol, it does sound bad. Which is bizarre cause I have their MiniMoog and the SEM and think they're fantastic
Arturia don't care about getting anything accurate. They just charge lots of money and posers buy to look rich on RUclips screen capture Ableton live breakcore videos to theor 734 subscribers.
This seems like the old Arturia Prophet? Yeah this has the brighter wooden finish which is uglier as well. They did a much needed update of it like a year before this video
@@MrACangusyoungDC the video features the new one. IMO it sounds a lot better than the old one and saying it sounds bad is a bit much (maybe these people are talking about the old one?). I agree softube probably sounds better but the arturia is really not a bad emulation.