Think you just saved me a few thousand bucks. I bought the Arturia V 8 collection over the new year while I was very drunk and stoned one night. Completely forgot about it since...until I watched this vid. So...off to have a play now. Cheers. PS: after a seven year break I can't believe how far softsynths have come. Mind blowing. Time to upgrade my PC.
It's always so sad to read that Americans are ruined for medical treatment. It's unimaginable here in Germany. fight for reasonable health insurance for everyone!
Mate. Another great comparison. I have just got the OB-Xa V as an addition to my Arturia collection and this video really shows the quality of Arturias soft synths. Though Hardware is nearly always better - and more fun to play with. Thanks for the entertaining video and good to see you don't have dandruff. Take care in this crazy world. Stay healthy we need people like you to keep us sane.
The OB6 is not based on the OBXA. It gets compared to it because DSI used the XA’s color scheme but it’s really more an OBX/SEM. That means we still need a real OBXA to OBXA comparison and an OB6 to OBX comparison.
@@brentvalleywhag3477 OPX is and its way better price tag. Plus the OPX has switches to change the filters, voices, xmod, etc that make it sound like Jupiter or Prophet. Plus the drift capabilities alone of OPX make it the best sounding VA and honestly might just be better than the real deal in many ways and sound.
@Edward Godsall to be fair, OPX PRO II emulates the OB-X, whereas Arturia does the OB-Xa. The hardware synths have a different architecture and thus a different sound (discrete circuits for oscillators and filters vs. Curtis chips)
It's amazing how good software synths are nowadays. That "fizzy" sound in the upper range seems to always be missing in softsynths but everything else is so close to me.
Great job showing us how these match up! I will say that it is definitely important to be able to test these in person to truly be able to tell the difference in tone quality, etc. Still, this gave a very good idea of what you can get from both!
I have both, and obviously, without question, if you want the real thing and are willing to pay for it, get an OB-6. The quality of actual analog sound can never be adequately replicated in software. But if you don't want to get that, and you want the next best thing, this (OB-XA V) is it. I've used other OB-X plugin versions in the past, and this one gets closer to the real thing than any other.
What all your videos including this one have ultimately showcased are while there are differences in Synths/Software.. Your ability to program is more important than the synth itself. You can get relatively close in sound with a synth (hardware or Vst) when you actually know what you are doing. And... With so many high quality Vst hardware replicas If you can't make good Music, I promise you The VST isn't the reason it doesn't sound great!! hardware synths in today's market are a luxury (And I have a few) lol
I got to agree. VST’s like Diva and Serum are go to sonic tools for me. I have 13 other pieces of hardware I love to use, but mostly because I find I inspiring to have them around and tactile feel adds a lot. But other than that, my Diva bass lines slap hard even side by side with my hardware.
@@DeadlyCornbread Nice.. I use Ana 2, and Rob Papen Predator 1+2. But they are based on subtractive synthesis. Either way when I see people in the comments say it doesn't sound the same I laugh now.. Just say u wanna own it and can afford it and don't go no further lol
17:13 shows why real analog hardware is always getting a richer sound. The only new insight I have gained with this video is that Starsky Carr is a redhead 👨🦰 🤪
@@HOLODECK-MUSIC-PROJECT because that level of richness is gonna be the difference between a great song and a bad one!! LOL... Making music is more important that buying new gear
I was happily surprised at how close you got the software to mimic the OB-6 at least. Any shortcomings in analog or hardware nuances can be made up with talent and performance.
Thanks for the comparison. 👍 As you mentioned, they both are different but share the same heritage. To me the OB 6 adds a bit more to the top end and low end, it seems to be richer overall. More character, more harmonics. When you play just one or two notes or a simple chord it is obvious, but it adds up when you play a whole arrangement, where the sounds fade out and others fade in, then you can create such amazing overtones that I don’t hear the Arturia is capable of producing. I will keep my OB 6 😊!
That's funny.. one of the first sounds I programmed on the OB-XA V was also that S&H filter thing from the intro to the Beautiful ones! It's such anOberheimy sound! Thanks for the video man, I'd love to hear your entire reproduction of the Beautiful ones.. still one of my favorite Prince songs!
Similar to what @Fernando Blanc said, I run my version of the OBXAV as a direct .dll VST plugin to LMMS (My daw). Im still pretty new to music production, so I don't have any external MIDI controller like a keyboard, but luckily LMMS has an integrated one you can write in MIDI with. So I just run it like that and use a mouse and keyboard to make all my music. Pretty crazy to think, about but it does work fine! Total cost minus a computer? 160 for the OB-XaV and I can do the fine tuning to affects during the song via Automation tracks and what not so no need for and actual external bank.
The Arturia is not cobalt blue, it taxes the CPU too much, it drops the key split of the OB-Xa, and you can't put the old patch sheets on the front panel because it is not calibrated to the OB-Xa panel of old.
Hard to beat that discrete SEM character on OB-6 (or OB-X if you can get hands on one :) ), smooth and full of character. Anyways I still very happy with my ultimate decision in getting Matrix 6, extreme amount of possibilities (far beyond OB-X or OB-Xa/8), routings and expressive options and still similar sound as OBXa when you want it and for very reasonable funds. (still dreaming about Matrix 12 anyways.. :P )
Are they identical, no. Are they similar? I would have to say, absolutely. The LFO PW was weird how the travel was not smooth. I don't have an OB-X either so maybe that's how they were, but I have my doubts. My old OB-Xa was pretty smooth. Sadly it's not working so I couldn't compare it to this Arturia V. For my 2 cents worth.... The original SEM sound with it's variable state filter is the original, and maybe the OB-X probably is close as it's filters are discrete. Next the OB-Xa which used the CEM chips for oscillators, filters and envelopes like the Rev 3 Prophet 5 synths. The OB-8 series and Matrix that followed used different circuits also so their sounds are similar but not identical. Now we have the OB-6 which does have an Oberheim sound, but it's not identical to the earlier machines either. The OB-6 filter is closest to the original SEM design but it's not identical, just very similar. The new Prophet 6 and OB-6, along with the new Moog synths like the Sub Phatty and most of the synths after that, including the big Moog One poly, all seem to have the same sweeping oscillator wave shape control, though just a slight bit different on the Moog One. The benefit is you can modulate the wave shape and get some nice animation, but you cannot get the identical sounds of a Prophet 5 or Memorymoog where you could select both Pulse/Square and Saw at the same time for a combo waveform shaped VCO. I wonder if just like back in the days where they all used the same CEM 3340 chips for VCOs, today do they all use the same VCO chip which is sweeepable thru waveform oscillator selection?
Get your OBXa working! ;-) And about the modern oscilators.. I think its just about way of thinking nowdays, since its not that complicated to have that feature, its fine and great to have it. Modern synths are all using quite different architectures. OB-6 has discrete, P6 have VCO chips and Moog One has some pretty sophisticated variable core VCOs.
A win for the OB-6 in terms of sound but plugins are getting very good these days. The plugin is noticeably harsher in the high end during the single note tests. When it comes to chords you notice a big difference in how full the OB-6 sounds. The plugin sounded quite flat.
Hey Starsky, I allways follow your great comparison videos and love them. Is it (or will it) be possible for you to compare an OB-XA with the Artuira OB-XA ? that would be a much better comparison to me ... also if Behringer brings out the OB-XA clone at one day (still hoping for it), that would be as well a very interesting comparison. Not sure if you can get your hands on a OB-XA
I already have the 'OP-X pro II' and that sounds amazingly good. I would only buy additional synth, if they are physical reproductions like the UB-Xa. Hopefully that will become reality.
What I would like to know is why Arturia left out the Keyboard modes (split, double, upper, lower) on the original OB-Xa? If it's there, I can't find it. One of the greatest things about the original synth is the DOUBLE keyboard mode where you can layer two patches on top of each other [Simple Minds - Don't You (Forget About Me)] is a double patch. Disappointed that's in the OB-Xa V.
This is an emulation of the OB-Xa, which has pretty much nothing in common with the OB-6. It’s not supposed to sound like an OB-6. That said, ignoring the specifics and just talking about the overall sound, the OB-6 does blow the doors off this plugin (and at 40x the price it damn well better), and IMO sounds better than most analog synths too.
I really hope that Synapse Audio simulation will be better than Arturia's version (even if i think is not bad at all, they did something similar with some differences that doesn't sound bad at all), if the job done will be as good as with "The Legend" synth it will be better for sure, coming soon, trailer video is out already.
Great comparison. I have been using SonicProjects for years OPX. Even the mighty Purple One couldn't tell the difference and he was an analog purest. Having owned a OB6 I found that it was the closest to the hardware I could find. If you a know a little bit of programming (Synthesis) you can fool even the purest, especially in the context of a mix and for what I do the mix is what matters most. Where is your video showing the Beautiful Ones? I would love to hear it. I couldn't find it.
Hey Starsky! As always great videos! Any chances you share Prince’s The Beautiful ones patches for us mere humans? Cheers!!! Keep up you great work of joying us with amazing and reliable synth wizard info!
Unfortunately, each of the parts was played on a different synth. It was quite a while ago so if I can find them I'll only have a couple that might be of use.
I’ve a video demoing how I made it. I think it plays all the way through on it ms own in that. I don’t think it’s on my bandcamp - where I put some of my little musical doodlings.
Often if you compare raw tones and basic patches things sound the same..even like free vsts vs hardware analog.. But the differences come out in more full patches.. Complex arrangements etc . as well there are "difficult sounds and easy sounds" for the software to get right ..
Here they have such different architectures that comparing complex tones isn’t possible. As soon as you move from simple there are differences that creep in normally I make a few more complex patches on each at the end o f the video. It just didn’t make sense here.
Well, listening to this, it wouldn't be hard to pick them apart in a blind test, that's for sure, although I will say it does come close enough to confuse me here and there. The OB-6 is certainly more alive and most of all pleasant-sounding, however. They obviously still haven't quite been able to get rid of that plasticky hardness in the software. All in all, a fairly good effort from Arturia, but I guess I had expected them to come a little further by now. Can't wait for the Synapse Audio Oberheim emulation to come out. While I'm not as sold on The Legend as some others, it's been a while since that synth was coded, so I'm certainly interested in hearing what they've been able to come up with this time. And Synapse's synths have such musicality to them - they really make you want to keep playing them, which isn't always the case with software, obviously. And I won't be buying the Arturia, I think. While it can certainly be a useful synth, it kinda misses the point when it comes to why we love the sound of analog. Process it with the right outboard and you might just get there, but I'm pretty sure that will be the case with the Synapse as well, so... Anyway, you've done a great job here once again, Starsky Carr. Keep up the good work.
On the first comparison patch. Im hearing a twinge of cross mod on the release of the ob6 not present on the Arturia release. That cross mod just gives that lushness. Shame
@@LCRLive687 That's a fact. And I believe that arturia clearly has its value in the art of deceiving the senses. Who knows, maybe one day they will reach imperfection.
I don't understand something. You say that the Arturia can't beat the X-mod capabilities of the OB6, but I think of X-mod as an inferior band-aid covering the fact that there isn't a per-voice/polyphonic LFO or an additional envelope. Wouldn't it be better to have another envelope or a polyphonic LFO rather than having to sacrifice a VCO to achieve this? Am I missing something? Thanks.
X mod is completely different than an extra LFO or env. You can do similar things at low frequencies, but it’s in the higher registers that you can get those specific FM tones - definitely not a band aid. Sure it could be better to have more LFOs etc... much easier in the digital domain. But here I’m looking at how similar they are or if the Arturia could replace your hardware. If you want those specific OB FM tones you can’t get them all from the software, if you don’t use x mod as much then the software may be the better option.
@@StarskyCarr Thank you. I'm on the verge of buying an OB6, and I'm trying to understand it. So it's the fact that VCO2 as a modulator can go into audio range, and most analog LFOs can't do that (although many digital ones can). Don't those FM sounds have to be monophonic or sound-effects-ish, since the frequencies of the VCOs aren't sufficiently matched for each key to produce a consistent sound? I don't mean to argue, just trying to understand what all the fuss is about when VAs have been doing audio-rate modulation for years. (Before the Prophet 6, I always thought poly-mod was what they had to do in the old days before modern LFOs and envelopes.) Thanks!
@@robertfischer1895 you can tune the FM by tuning the amount and the freq of the modulating oscillator to get musical tones. So it not all Fx, although it’s good for that as well. You get more interesting harmonic sounds. I make some on my Minimoog vs Model D video - te main lead sound in the intro/outro track, plus some nice pad style tones when comparing at the end. (Just ones I can think of at the mo.!) some LFOs can go a bit into audio rates but nothing like an oscillator. It’s just a different palette of tones that are available. Not hugely important ... but as I said - if you want to recreate the feel of the originals then you’ll need it. I’ve just been testing the Uhe Repro5 bs Arturia ProV vs my Prophet 5 . The U-he does it extremely well but the arturia not so much.. making replicating a lot of tones from the hardware either difficult or impossible. It’s not something I’d get too bothered about tbh
5:55 - Hi, Starsky Carr! But where are your side to side oscilloscope comparisons? Probably I hear some difference in their waves but not sure. It's YT sound and can be different a bit. Graph. shows more! P.S. Oh, I see the spectrum, pardon! But seeing the waves is a bit different anyway... What are they in your words?
I did record the osc comparisons, but the audio stopped recording without me realising until the edit! I’d taken the rig down when I noticed but it didn’t add much to the video anyway.. not much to say - although the Arturia saw wasn’t as sharp as the OB at the peaks. A little more of a gradient than a VSTi always line between the max and min points - if that makes sense.
@@StarskyCarr OK, I understand! Thanks! I've also noticed sonically that the real OB Xa's saw has more crispness. If nothing was really invented in VA algorythms then Arturia uses the same PolyBLEP procedure as others. It's effective against aliasing but has this particular downside - less wave's details on high frequencies. It can be done with a better resolution (my guess that RePro by U-He utilizes this idea) of PolyBLEP routine. But currently the latest actual (2-3 year old) CPUs can't get close enough to this (without using more than 50% of CPU power). www.martin-finke.de/blog/articles/audio-plugins-018-polyblep-oscillator/ - here you'll get the best explanation. It clearly shows that this procedure sacrifices the transient peaks of waves to get the cleanest modulations (via sines). Also as I hear DSI's filters sounds a bit more detailed. Maybe it's only in my mind but I hear that Arturia's algo gives a bit flatter response. It can be due to the internal analog parasitic effects possibly (in DSI). But I'm not sure as they uses ICs (as a whole osc.) instead of discreete circuits (so they're protected better). They spend much more time on additional features, UI and presets than on the actual sound. It's my impression.
The Arturia sounds better closer to an actual OB-Xa However, the tactile feel and engagement of the OB-6 hardware can’t be beat particularly for live playing. Maybe Dave will make an OB-Xa to follow the Prophet 5/10
Hah I think we can now add oberheimyish to the dictionary as it’s been used 3 times now 😂 even though I put that bit together myself it really takes me back as well. My daughter has a purple rain T shirt and didn’t even realise it was a film/album... sacrilege!!!
I wouldn’t expect them to sound all that similar, since the OB-6 and OB-Xa have completely different filters (SEM vs. Curtis), and beyond that have very little in common besides similar graphic styling. Since Arturia wasn’t trying to emulate an OB-6, it would be just as useful to compare their new plugin to a Prophet 5.
I do explain that all the way through.. but people were interested and asked if I could demo it. I think it's more worthy than a P5 vs OBX video though!
@@StarskyCarr Not sure it is. The only thing they have in common is the word Oberheim and the blue lines (okay, they both have a keyboard and knobs too). The Prophet 5 (rev 3) has the exact same Curtis CEM3320 filter as the OB-Xa, and they also use the same VCO and EG chips too (Curtis CEM3340 and CEM3310, respectively). Meanwhile the (totally different) SEM SVF filter in the OB-6 is pretty much the key component that defines its character. Doesn’t mean you can’t compare them, of course, and you always do a good job of that. My only concern is this video (even if you mention the caveat several times, because people just ignore those kinds of qualifications) implies the Arturia OB-Xa V is supposed to sound like an OB-6. A quick glance at the comments confirms people are judging it that way and declaring it a success or failure in terms of its ability to sound like something very different from what it’s actually based on.
@@Abruzzo333 If you have decent monitors and your ears are focused, you can hear the difference and know it. Analog sounds seem to live outside of the monitors, digital lives inside the monitors and you have to push them outside to sound real. Best way for me to describe it.
Question is: will you also hear it in a mix after the track being mastered? Sure, softsynth have harsher high frequency spectrum and less bottom, but then, music generally doesn't sound like those synth demos above. It puts sounds into a context and does EQing.
It will later in V8 collection. However they wanted to release rather than wait. If you have V7 can pick up for great discount price in your account. They also doing a bundled price with V7. Hope that helps 😊
I noticed on their website you can get the V Collection and the OBXA bundled for $300. I'm wondering if I should buy now or wait for V8. Maybe there will be more.
Yes. I buy and sell, keep some, sell some. Some stay for years, others come and go quickly. It costs a fair bit, hence I've started a Patreon page! www.patreon.com/starskycarr
@@StarskyCarr yeah, I can see why! You're doing a great job. Very knowledgeable with good musicianship. Plus you're very positive. I'm a noob with synths (guitars are my thing) but you give me GAS. :)
I don’t mean to be picky but you’re comparing the OB6, which is a MODERN Oberheim with 30 years of technological progress, to the OBXa V which is a recreation of a 35 year old synth with a few tweaks. That’s not actually like for like then in all fairness so it’s not surprising you say at the start they don’t match. Just my humble opinion and thank you for making the video 🙂
Well, Tom's basic oscillator and filter designs have been pretty consistent. There is an "Oberheim sound". The difference between the OB-Xa and the OB-X or OB-6 is that it used Curtis chips, while the other two use discrete circuitry. And the OB-6 has a state variable filter, which was only previously possible on the SEM. But the core sound is basically there in all of them.
Thanks for doing this. I bought the OB-6 a few years ago and am very disappointed with it. It comes nowhere near the original OB-Xa, especially with more complex modulation tasks. Now when I hear this Arturia simulation that sounds like pure plastic and has absolutely nothing in common with any Oberheim (not even with my two paralleled "poor man's stereo" Matrix1000's), I think I will give the OB-6 another chance. If you want to know why Arturia failed big times once more, you can choose any YoutTube demo of an OB-Xa. Just a few notes, and you will know. Example for immediate enlightenment: ruclips.net/video/soAKkx4XWZk/видео.html. Or, comparing OB-6 with OB-Xa: ruclips.net/video/fPtYpjUWujM/видео.html
@@StarskyCarr Indeed. Discrete circuits have a sweetness to their aroma. When I'm in dire need of that fix, I kick on my old Hammond L-102. Between the electronics and the oil, the sniff is golden!
ehmmm sorry but you compare a digital version of the original Oberheim Xa with an original Oberheim OB-6... Why not compare it with the original Oberheim Xa? That would make a lot more sense. So yes of course they are not similar. The digital version is not a clone of Oberheim OB-6 ;)
Yes, IMO it renders this whole comparison meaningless, and further adds to the confusion that all Oberheim synths have a certain sound. The OB-Xa is much more similar to the Prophet 5 (rev 3) than the OB-6. Oberheim didn’t do anyone any favors by using the same blue lines and similar names on a series of totally different synths.
If anything the Arturia sounds fatter because its a digital model the components of a NEW Ob. The reason why the Arturia doesnt sound as fizzy is because the OB6 has aged components and its filters have naturally gone shoddy as the years have passed and are not doing the same job as when they were new components. Whats hilarious to note is how so many people who spent that much money on the real hardware suffer from the nocebo effect to try to justify their purchase when others now can get the exact same humanly unnoticeable sound) from spending like 1 percent of that amount. The only differences that can be heard here is that the hardware is just EQ-ed differently or the aging of the components are not factored into the complex analog modeling... because its impossible that the same settings yield the same result. But its not a difference in any lack of analog matching quality. As far as analog integrity, the two cannot be set apart in a blind test and I will bet any person in here any money they want that they cannot tell if the real one or the model is playing any day of the week to prove their delusion is quite active. Only the scope can register any subtle difference and it has nothing to do with analog modeling integrity.
@@JimijaymesProductions I agree. Takes longer than that... Someone doesnt own a OB-6 and is justifying there software. Which is fine... To Each Their Own. If you buy software... you aint reselling it. If you buy a used OB-6, you can resell it a day or years down the road and its worth basically the same. Not really losing maybe gaining money. If you buy a computer, when you sell it you will lose money a day later, a year later, and definitly 2 years later... so it will not hold value. Plugins are great for convinience, but it sucks having to replicate analog... ruclips.net/video/iCdD7SabVb8/видео.html The link is for your Arsenal "Pro" Audio. Enjoy
Yeah, people were interested in how it compares with a hardware OB style synth. So it’s definitely not representative of an Arturia vs OBXa test. I did this at the request of some people .. and very much took the approach that they’re both different beasts, but as they asked I thought I’d oblige.
Arturia PWM is wrong, way wrong compared to hardware..also big test for VSTs, hold down an octave on single oscillator saw..listen..sounds is static there is no movement in harmonics, a hardware oscillator on the other hand is free running, dynamic, has movement..
Ha ben merde alors, j'ai acheté un synthé 3000€ pour qu'un biesse vst a 150€ l'égal ou le surclasse... Ben voilà il me reste plus qu'a virer mes synthés et acheter du Elektron, c'est bien la firme que personne ne sait copier.
Think you just saved me a few thousand bucks. I bought the Arturia V 8 collection over the new year while I was very drunk and stoned one night. Completely forgot about it since...until I watched this vid. So...off to have a play now. Cheers. PS: after a seven year break I can't believe how far softsynths have come. Mind blowing. Time to upgrade my PC.
Saddest day of my life was selling My Obxa, Ob-8, DSX and DMx to pay medical bills
Do not be sad, whoever loses his life wins the eternal home with Jesus!
Healt first
What a crime you had to do that. You deserve better
It's always so sad to read that Americans are ruined for medical treatment. It's unimaginable here in Germany. fight for reasonable health insurance for everyone!
Oh Man!!! I feel your pain! Don't despair, Buddy! You can always get back with plug-in's!
Mate. Another great comparison. I have just got the OB-Xa V as an addition to my Arturia collection and this video really shows the quality of Arturias soft synths. Though Hardware is nearly always better - and more fun to play with. Thanks for the entertaining video and good to see you don't have dandruff.
Take care in this crazy world. Stay healthy we need people like you to keep us sane.
The OB6 is not based on the OBXA. It gets compared to it because DSI used the XA’s color scheme but it’s really more an OBX/SEM. That means we still need a real OBXA to OBXA comparison and an
OB6 to OBX comparison.
ruclips.net/video/0dgyUpDDZnY/видео.html here is a comparison with the ob6 versus ob8
Excellent comparison. I think Arturia has done an outstanding job with OB-Xa V. Thank you for this great video.
Edward Godsall Synapse isn’t even out yet. Biased much?
@@brentvalleywhag3477 OPX is and its way better price tag. Plus the OPX has switches to change the filters, voices, xmod, etc that make it sound like Jupiter or Prophet. Plus the drift capabilities alone of OPX make it the best sounding VA and honestly might just be better than the real deal in many ways and sound.
loren morgan so OPX is better than arturia sound wise?
@Edward Godsall to be fair, OPX PRO II emulates the OB-X, whereas Arturia does the OB-Xa. The hardware synths have a different architecture and thus a different sound (discrete circuits for oscillators and filters vs. Curtis chips)
It's amazing how good software synths are nowadays. That "fizzy" sound in the upper range seems to always be missing in softsynths but everything else is so close to me.
That introduction with the blue lines....Nice touch!
Great job showing us how these match up! I will say that it is definitely important to be able to test these in person to truly be able to tell the difference in tone quality, etc. Still, this gave a very good idea of what you can get from both!
Thank you for playing Prince instead of Jump! RIP Prince Roger Nelson!
fantastic how quickly you made this happen!
Thank you! Cheers!
Man, thank you for all your videos! You’ve been instrumental intel to inform my synth purchases!! Keep up the good work
Keen for Tom to announce his upcoming poly synth! Great video as all ways
I have both, and obviously, without question, if you want the real thing and are willing to pay for it, get an OB-6. The quality of actual analog sound can never be adequately replicated in software. But if you don't want to get that, and you want the next best thing, this (OB-XA V) is it. I've used other OB-X plugin versions in the past, and this one gets closer to the real thing than any other.
What all your videos including this one have ultimately showcased are while there are differences in Synths/Software.. Your ability to program is more important than the synth itself. You can get relatively close in sound with a synth (hardware or Vst) when you actually know what you are doing. And... With so many high quality Vst hardware replicas If you can't make good Music, I promise you The VST isn't the reason it doesn't sound great!! hardware synths in today's market are a luxury (And I have a few) lol
I got to agree. VST’s like Diva and Serum are go to sonic tools for me. I have 13 other pieces of hardware I love to use, but mostly because I find I inspiring to have them around and tactile feel adds a lot. But other than that, my Diva bass lines slap hard even side by side with my hardware.
@@DeadlyCornbread Nice.. I use Ana 2, and Rob Papen Predator 1+2. But they are based on subtractive synthesis. Either way when I see people in the comments say it doesn't sound the same I laugh now.. Just say u wanna own it and can afford it and don't go no further lol
17:13 shows why real analog hardware is always getting a richer sound.
The only new insight I have gained with this video is that Starsky Carr is a redhead 👨🦰 🤪
@@HOLODECK-MUSIC-PROJECT because that level of richness is gonna be the difference between a great song and a bad one!! LOL... Making music is more important that buying new gear
Haha.. I think that's a trick of the camera :) My lighting skills are obviously on par with my quality camera work!!
I was happily surprised at how close you got the software to mimic the OB-6 at least. Any shortcomings in analog or hardware nuances can be made up with talent and performance.
Thanks for your work ! Excellent comparison
I also had trouble making the PWM sound nice. Glad it's not just me 😅 and good to know it's easier on the OB6. Thank you for the comparison!
Another Starsky treat. Thanks mate
Thanks for the comparison. 👍
As you mentioned, they both are different but share the same heritage. To me the OB 6 adds a bit more to the top end and low end, it seems to be richer overall. More character, more harmonics. When you play just one or two notes or a simple chord it is obvious, but it adds up when you play a whole arrangement, where the sounds fade out and others fade in, then you can create such amazing overtones that I don’t hear the Arturia is capable of producing.
I will keep my OB 6 😊!
Always brilliant reviews! Thx!
That's funny.. one of the first sounds I programmed on the OB-XA V was also that S&H filter thing from the intro to the Beautiful ones! It's such anOberheimy sound! Thanks for the video man, I'd love to hear your entire reproduction of the Beautiful ones.. still one of my favorite Prince songs!
What do I need to do to use the Arturia? Keyboard, cables, plug-ins, amp? Help?
Similar to what @Fernando Blanc said, I run my version of the OBXAV as a direct .dll VST plugin to LMMS (My daw). Im still pretty new to music production, so I don't have any external MIDI controller like a keyboard, but luckily LMMS has an integrated one you can write in MIDI with. So I just run it like that and use a mouse and keyboard to make all my music. Pretty crazy to think, about but it does work fine! Total cost minus a computer? 160 for the OB-XaV and I can do the fine tuning to affects during the song via Automation tracks and what not so no need for and actual external bank.
Thank you guys. I got it
The Arturia is not cobalt blue, it taxes the CPU too much, it drops the key split of the OB-Xa, and you can't put the old patch sheets on the front panel because it is not calibrated to the OB-Xa panel of old.
Yes! It is such a horrible CPU hog. I really hope they patch it to reduce this like Arturia have done previously with other VSTs
Hello, OP-Xa V I can't find mono Low or Legato Low, maybe that function is missing?
Hard to beat that discrete SEM character on OB-6 (or OB-X if you can get hands on one :) ), smooth and full of character. Anyways I still very happy with my ultimate decision in getting Matrix 6, extreme amount of possibilities (far beyond OB-X or OB-Xa/8), routings and expressive options and still similar sound as OBXa when you want it and for very reasonable funds. (still dreaming about Matrix 12 anyways.. :P )
I'm dying for an Abstrakt VS-1
@@MadelnMachines Yeah, readed about it. Really hope and wish it to be sucessfull and accurate to the original.
I have heard that filter sweep someplace before...
Thank you for all the video's!
Are they identical, no. Are they similar? I would have to say, absolutely. The LFO PW was weird how the travel was not smooth. I don't have an OB-X either so maybe that's how they were, but I have my doubts. My old OB-Xa was pretty smooth. Sadly it's not working so I couldn't compare it to this Arturia V.
For my 2 cents worth.... The original SEM sound with it's variable state filter is the original, and maybe the OB-X probably is close as it's filters are discrete. Next the OB-Xa which used the CEM chips for oscillators, filters and envelopes like the Rev 3 Prophet 5 synths. The OB-8 series and Matrix that followed used different circuits also so their sounds are similar but not identical.
Now we have the OB-6 which does have an Oberheim sound, but it's not identical to the earlier machines either. The OB-6 filter is closest to the original SEM design but it's not identical, just very similar.
The new Prophet 6 and OB-6, along with the new Moog synths like the Sub Phatty and most of the synths after that, including the big Moog One poly, all seem to have the same sweeping oscillator wave shape control, though just a slight bit different on the Moog One. The benefit is you can modulate the wave shape and get some nice animation, but you cannot get the identical sounds of a Prophet 5 or Memorymoog where you could select both Pulse/Square and Saw at the same time for a combo waveform shaped VCO. I wonder if just like back in the days where they all used the same CEM 3340 chips for VCOs, today do they all use the same VCO chip which is sweeepable thru waveform oscillator selection?
Get your OBXa working! ;-) And about the modern oscilators.. I think its just about way of thinking nowdays, since its not that complicated to have that feature, its fine and great to have it. Modern synths are all using quite different architectures. OB-6 has discrete, P6 have VCO chips and Moog One has some pretty sophisticated variable core VCOs.
Please make Synapse Audio Obsession vs. OB-XA
I’ll see what I can do ;)
Thanks for this video. These are so helpful to us trying to make buying decisions, etc.
Thanks for this great revue
Love your videos, btw you remind me of Jeff from Peep Show.
A win for the OB-6 in terms of sound but plugins are getting very good these days. The plugin is noticeably harsher in the high end during the single note tests. When it comes to chords you notice a big difference in how full the OB-6 sounds. The plugin sounded quite flat.
Yeah, the phasing of the analog oscillators is hard to replicate, it seems
@@xanderpills Always the problem. Thats why i would rather pay for analog alot of the time so i dont gotta go through that processing... ughh
Thankx for the comparison!
Nothing gives you the pleasure of hardware., plus always a resale value, often going up!
You had me at The Beautiful Ones…what drums were used?
Hey Starsky, I allways follow your great comparison videos and love them. Is it (or will it) be possible for you to compare an OB-XA with the Artuira OB-XA ? that would be a much better comparison to me ... also if Behringer brings out the OB-XA clone at one day (still hoping for it), that would be as well a very interesting comparison. Not sure if you can get your hands on a OB-XA
if only... that would be great. I've tried to get y hands on an original OBXa but no joy I'm afraid.
I already have the 'OP-X pro II' and that sounds amazingly good. I would only buy additional synth, if they are physical reproductions like the UB-Xa. Hopefully that will become reality.
What I would like to know is why Arturia left out the Keyboard modes (split, double, upper, lower) on the original OB-Xa? If it's there, I can't find it. One of the greatest things about the original synth is the DOUBLE keyboard mode where you can layer two patches on top of each other [Simple Minds - Don't You (Forget About Me)] is a double patch. Disappointed that's in the OB-Xa V.
to my ears the OB-6 has more fizz to it's sound and it does look beautiful!
Using hardware is 100 times better. Is like having a real girlfriend 😊
@@fjfrancois Amen to that
This is an emulation of the OB-Xa, which has pretty much nothing in common with the OB-6. It’s not supposed to sound like an OB-6. That said, ignoring the specifics and just talking about the overall sound, the OB-6 does blow the doors off this plugin (and at 40x the price it damn well better), and IMO sounds better than most analog synths too.
I've always thought the OB6 is too fizzy. Much more than the the OBXA and OB8.
I hope the oscillators are free running in the soft synth. Otherwise it will never sound the same.
Great job, thank you! :)
Of course you also have OB6. I hate you!!
Great as always ;)
to my ears, the Arturia does not sound convincing. Even other Obee software sounds better to me. Thanks a lot for another great in depth comparison!
Check your ears or maybe upgrade your speakers \ headphones ... something is wrong on your end
I really hope that Synapse Audio simulation will be better than Arturia's version (even if i think is not bad at all, they did something similar with some differences that doesn't sound bad at all), if the job done will be as good as with "The Legend" synth it will be better for sure, coming soon, trailer video is out already.
Does the Arturia OB-Xa V add any capabilities beyond those of their Matrix-12 V (which is already bundled into the V7 collection)?
Great comparison. I have been using SonicProjects for years OPX. Even the mighty Purple One couldn't tell the difference and he was an analog purest. Having owned a OB6 I found that it was the closest to the hardware I could find. If you a know a little bit of programming (Synthesis) you can fool even the purest, especially in the context of a mix and for what I do the mix is what matters most. Where is your video showing the Beautiful Ones? I would love to hear it. I couldn't find it.
I used OP-X for a while, and for a while it was the best. But that was a while ago. This Arturia is much better.
@@vaportrails7943Very interesting. Can you please elaborate a bit more on why you prefer Arturia over OP-X II?
Hey Starsky! As always great videos! Any chances you share Prince’s The Beautiful ones patches for us mere humans? Cheers!!! Keep up you great work of joying us with amazing and reliable synth wizard info!
Unfortunately, each of the parts was played on a different synth. It was quite a while ago so if I can find them I'll only have a couple that might be of use.
@@StarskyCarr Gee... that's a sorrow... it sounded great! One of my favorite Prince songs, OB's are amazing.
Have a copy of that Prince remake anywhere? Thanks
I’ve a video demoing how I made it. I think it plays all the way through on it ms own in that. I don’t think it’s on my bandcamp - where I put some of my little musical doodlings.
Often if you compare raw tones and basic patches things sound the same..even like free vsts vs hardware analog.. But the differences come out in more full patches.. Complex arrangements etc . as well there are "difficult sounds and easy sounds" for the software to get right ..
Here they have such different architectures that comparing complex tones isn’t possible. As soon as you move from simple there are differences that creep in normally I make a few more complex patches on each at the end o f the video. It just didn’t make sense here.
Nice comparison. Good to know..
Well, listening to this, it wouldn't be hard to pick them apart in a blind test, that's for sure, although I will say it does come close enough to confuse me here and there. The OB-6 is certainly more alive and most of all pleasant-sounding, however. They obviously still haven't quite been able to get rid of that plasticky hardness in the software. All in all, a fairly good effort from Arturia, but I guess I had expected them to come a little further by now. Can't wait for the Synapse Audio Oberheim emulation to come out. While I'm not as sold on The Legend as some others, it's been a while since that synth was coded, so I'm certainly interested in hearing what they've been able to come up with this time. And Synapse's synths have such musicality to them - they really make you want to keep playing them, which isn't always the case with software, obviously.
And I won't be buying the Arturia, I think. While it can certainly be a useful synth, it kinda misses the point when it comes to why we love the sound of analog. Process it with the right outboard and you might just get there, but I'm pretty sure that will be the case with the Synapse as well, so...
Anyway, you've done a great job here once again, Starsky Carr. Keep up the good work.
Can’t wait to get my hands on the Synapse either!! Stay tuned :)
OB6 is much brighter sound than OB-Xa is`nt it? This different also seems happened between p5 and p6?
Definitely an optimist
what do you think of the new synapse audio emulation?
its called 'obsession'
Just putting a review together today :)
@@StarskyCarr yes, thank you so much, big fan of your channel
On the first comparison patch. Im hearing a twinge of cross mod on the release of the ob6 not present on the Arturia release. That cross mod just gives that lushness. Shame
The hardware sounds like a storm of harmonics.
The placebo effect works wonders for some I guess.
@@LCRLive687
That's a fact. And
I believe that arturia clearly has its value in the art of deceiving the senses. Who knows, maybe one day they will reach imperfection.
I don't understand something. You say that the Arturia can't beat the X-mod capabilities of the OB6, but I think of X-mod as an inferior band-aid covering the fact that there isn't a per-voice/polyphonic LFO or an additional envelope. Wouldn't it be better to have another envelope or a polyphonic LFO rather than having to sacrifice a VCO to achieve this? Am I missing something? Thanks.
X mod is completely different than an extra LFO or env. You can do similar things at low frequencies, but it’s in the higher registers that you can get those specific FM tones - definitely not a band aid. Sure it could be better to have more LFOs etc... much easier in the digital domain. But here I’m looking at how similar they are or if the Arturia could replace your hardware. If you want those specific OB FM tones you can’t get them all from the software, if you don’t use x mod as much then the software may be the better option.
@@StarskyCarr Thank you. I'm on the verge of buying an OB6, and I'm trying to understand it. So it's the fact that VCO2 as a modulator can go into audio range, and most analog LFOs can't do that (although many digital ones can). Don't those FM sounds have to be monophonic or sound-effects-ish, since the frequencies of the VCOs aren't sufficiently matched for each key to produce a consistent sound? I don't mean to argue, just trying to understand what all the fuss is about when VAs have been doing audio-rate modulation for years. (Before the Prophet 6, I always thought poly-mod was what they had to do in the old days before modern LFOs and envelopes.) Thanks!
@@robertfischer1895 you can tune the FM by tuning the amount and the freq of the modulating oscillator to get musical tones. So it not all Fx, although it’s good for that as well. You get more interesting harmonic sounds. I make some on my Minimoog vs Model D video - te main lead sound in the intro/outro track, plus some nice pad style tones when comparing at the end. (Just ones I can think of at the mo.!) some LFOs can go a bit into audio rates but nothing like an oscillator. It’s just a different palette of tones that are available. Not hugely important ... but as I said - if you want to recreate the feel of the originals then you’ll need it. I’ve just been testing the Uhe Repro5 bs Arturia ProV vs my Prophet 5 . The U-he does it extremely well but the arturia not so much.. making replicating a lot of tones from the hardware either difficult or impossible. It’s not something I’d get too bothered about tbh
@@StarskyCarr Awesome (as we say in the US). Thanks for your fast and informative replies.
5:55 - Hi, Starsky Carr! But where are your side to side oscilloscope comparisons? Probably I hear some difference in their waves but not sure. It's YT sound and can be different a bit. Graph. shows more!
P.S. Oh, I see the spectrum, pardon! But seeing the waves is a bit different anyway...
What are they in your words?
I did record the osc comparisons, but the audio stopped recording without me realising until the edit! I’d taken the rig down when I noticed but it didn’t add much to the video anyway.. not much to say - although the Arturia saw wasn’t as sharp as the OB at the peaks. A little more of a gradient than a VSTi always line between the max and min points - if that makes sense.
@@StarskyCarr OK, I understand! Thanks!
I've also noticed sonically that the real OB Xa's saw has more crispness.
If nothing was really invented in VA algorythms then Arturia uses the same PolyBLEP procedure as others. It's effective against aliasing but has this particular downside - less wave's details on high frequencies. It can be done with a better resolution (my guess that RePro by U-He utilizes this idea) of PolyBLEP routine. But currently the latest actual (2-3 year old) CPUs can't get close enough to this (without using more than 50% of CPU power).
www.martin-finke.de/blog/articles/audio-plugins-018-polyblep-oscillator/ - here you'll get the best explanation. It clearly shows that this procedure sacrifices the transient peaks of waves to get the cleanest modulations (via sines).
Also as I hear DSI's filters sounds a bit more detailed. Maybe it's only in my mind but I hear that Arturia's algo gives a bit flatter response. It can be due to the internal analog parasitic effects possibly (in DSI). But I'm not sure as they uses ICs (as a whole osc.) instead of discreete circuits (so they're protected better).
They spend much more time on additional features, UI and presets than on the actual sound. It's my impression.
Would love to get my Ears on the full track of "the beautiful ones " to sing on it :-d
The Arturia sounds better closer to an actual OB-Xa However, the tactile feel and engagement of the OB-6 hardware can’t be beat particularly for live playing. Maybe Dave will make an OB-Xa to follow the Prophet 5/10
Please do a comparison with Synapse's Oberheim emulation, Obsession. That blows Arturia out of the water.
I prefer the Aturia for its presets.
That intro .........😪.....very, very "Oberheimyish" and Linnyish and amazingly purple. That's the sound of my high school years.
Hah I think we can now add oberheimyish to the dictionary as it’s been used 3 times now 😂 even though I put that bit together myself it really takes me back as well. My daughter has a purple rain T shirt and didn’t even realise it was a film/album... sacrilege!!!
I wouldn’t expect them to sound all that similar, since the OB-6 and OB-Xa have completely different filters (SEM vs. Curtis), and beyond that have very little in common besides similar graphic styling. Since Arturia wasn’t trying to emulate an OB-6, it would be just as useful to compare their new plugin to a Prophet 5.
I do explain that all the way through.. but people were interested and asked if I could demo it. I think it's more worthy than a P5 vs OBX video though!
@@StarskyCarr Not sure it is. The only thing they have in common is the word Oberheim and the blue lines (okay, they both have a keyboard and knobs too). The Prophet 5 (rev 3) has the exact same Curtis CEM3320 filter as the OB-Xa, and they also use the same VCO and EG chips too (Curtis CEM3340 and CEM3310, respectively). Meanwhile the (totally different) SEM SVF filter in the OB-6 is pretty much the key component that defines its character.
Doesn’t mean you can’t compare them, of course, and you always do a good job of that. My only concern is this video (even if you mention the caveat several times, because people just ignore those kinds of qualifications) implies the Arturia OB-Xa V is supposed to sound like an OB-6. A quick glance at the comments confirms people are judging it that way and declaring it a success or failure in terms of its ability to sound like something very different from what it’s actually based on.
Yeah, the're similar alright. Escept the Arturia is still a VSTi, and you don't disguise that with no scilloscope.
Maybe I'm crazy, but I still think there's analog depth that comes through on the OB-6. Seems impossible to do with the XA V.
I'm curious what part are you referring to where you can hear this massive difference?>
@@Abruzzo333 If you have decent monitors and your ears are focused, you can hear the difference and know it. Analog sounds seem to live outside of the monitors, digital lives inside the monitors and you have to push them outside to sound real. Best way for me to describe it.
Question is: will you also hear it in a mix after the track being mastered? Sure, softsynth have harsher high frequency spectrum and less bottom, but then, music generally doesn't sound like those synth demos above. It puts sounds into a context and does EQing.
Moby - signs of love :) 12:54
Will it come bundled with the V Collection?
probably one day. V7 has just been on offer, so this may come bundled with V8.
It will later in V8 collection. However they wanted to release rather than wait. If you have V7 can pick up for great discount price in your account. They also doing a bundled price with V7. Hope that helps 😊
I noticed on their website you can get the V Collection and the OBXA bundled for $300. I'm wondering if I should buy now or wait for V8. Maybe there will be more.
There is an offer that includes the ob-xa with the V collection for 300
@@sammyretro3902 $50usd if you have v collection 7. Good deal at that price.
Do you own all the synths you review?
Yes. I buy and sell, keep some, sell some. Some stay for years, others come and go quickly. It costs a fair bit, hence I've started a Patreon page!
www.patreon.com/starskycarr
@@StarskyCarr yeah, I can see why! You're doing a great job. Very knowledgeable with good musicianship. Plus you're very positive. I'm a noob with synths (guitars are my thing) but you give me GAS. :)
Arturia never nails it
Their Moog Modular VST is pretty impressive.
I don’t mean to be picky but you’re comparing the OB6, which is a MODERN Oberheim with 30 years of technological progress, to the OBXa V which is a recreation of a 35 year old synth with a few tweaks. That’s not actually like for like then in all fairness so it’s not surprising you say at the start they don’t match. Just my humble opinion and thank you for making the video 🙂
I know.. I wasn't sure whether to make this, but so many people asked I thought I'd oblige.
Well, Tom's basic oscillator and filter designs have been pretty consistent. There is an "Oberheim sound". The difference between the OB-Xa and the OB-X or OB-6 is that it used Curtis chips, while the other two use discrete circuitry. And the OB-6 has a state variable filter, which was only previously possible on the SEM. But the core sound is basically there in all of them.
Hardware still a tad better, fuller but not enough that you would hear it in a mix imo. For the money the hardware costs, I'll take the Arturia 🙂
the synapse obessession '' its seem better than arturia again :o
Using synth software is like to be in love with a porn Star ❤️❤️❤️
Thanks for doing this. I bought the OB-6 a few years ago and am very disappointed with it. It comes nowhere near the original OB-Xa, especially with more complex modulation tasks.
Now when I hear this Arturia simulation that sounds like pure plastic and has absolutely nothing in common with any Oberheim (not even with my two paralleled "poor man's stereo" Matrix1000's), I think I will give the OB-6 another chance.
If you want to know why Arturia failed big times once more, you can choose any YoutTube demo of an OB-Xa. Just a few notes, and you will know.
Example for immediate enlightenment: ruclips.net/video/soAKkx4XWZk/видео.html.
Or, comparing OB-6 with OB-Xa: ruclips.net/video/fPtYpjUWujM/видео.html
You can only smell the Ob-6, which is what it’s all about. Sniffing charged electronics. So dirty.
My Alpha Juno has a distinct smell that reminds me of when I first bought it (my first synth),.. you can't beat a good sniff :)
@@StarskyCarr Indeed. Discrete circuits have a sweetness to their aroma. When I'm in dire need of that fix, I kick on my old Hammond L-102. Between the electronics and the oil, the sniff is golden!
I think French triangle is sonically inferrior, but their squares are bien.
Filter sounds WAY better on the OB-6. Digital synths just can't emulate analog filters properly.
ruclips.net/video/UFrOP5XFn6k/видео.html Just tested it on OBXd VSTi and PWM is working smoothly like on your OB-6.
interesting.. I wonder whether it's a bit of a glitch on the Arturia?
The ob 6 isn't what Arturia was copying, though. Wonder how it holds up to the original ob-xa from the 80's.
Yes, that’s something I mention time and time again during the video.
ehmmm sorry but you compare a digital version of the original Oberheim Xa with an original Oberheim OB-6... Why not compare it with the original Oberheim Xa? That would make a lot more sense. So yes of course they are not similar. The digital version is not a clone of Oberheim OB-6 ;)
Yes, IMO it renders this whole comparison meaningless, and further adds to the confusion that all Oberheim synths have a certain sound. The OB-Xa is much more similar to the Prophet 5 (rev 3) than the OB-6. Oberheim didn’t do anyone any favors by using the same blue lines and similar names on a series of totally different synths.
I made this as it was requested by a few people...
erm... sorry for not owning an OBXa. ;)
VST or Hardware? = Own a Car or Catch the bus?
I’d never dream of using a soft synth. It’s just not the same. Hardware all the way! 🎶🕶✌🏻
arturia sounds thin compared to the ob6 its OBvious
Ooh groan 😂
Synapse Obsession VS OB 6
Hurrah the sw!
If anything the Arturia sounds fatter because its a digital model the components of a NEW Ob. The reason why the Arturia doesnt sound as fizzy is because the OB6 has aged components and its filters have naturally gone shoddy as the years have passed and are not doing the same job as when they were new components.
Whats hilarious to note is how so many people who spent that much money on the real hardware suffer from the nocebo effect to try to justify their purchase when others now can get the exact same humanly unnoticeable sound) from spending like 1 percent of that amount.
The only differences that can be heard here is that the hardware is just EQ-ed differently or the aging of the components are not factored into the complex analog modeling... because its impossible that the same settings yield the same result. But its not a difference in any lack of analog matching quality.
As far as analog integrity, the two cannot be set apart in a blind test and I will bet any person in here any money they want that they cannot tell if the real one or the model is playing any day of the week to prove their delusion is quite active.
Only the scope can register any subtle difference and it has nothing to do with analog modeling integrity.
The OB6 has only been in production for 5 years (not sure how old this unit is but it can't be very old) how has the filters gone shoddy in that time?
@@JimijaymesProductions I agree. Takes longer than that... Someone doesnt own a OB-6 and is justifying there software. Which is fine... To Each Their Own.
If you buy software... you aint reselling it. If you buy a used OB-6, you can resell it a day or years down the road and its worth basically the same. Not really losing maybe gaining money. If you buy a computer, when you sell it you will lose money a day later, a year later, and definitly 2 years later... so it will not hold value.
Plugins are great for convinience, but it sucks having to replicate analog...
ruclips.net/video/iCdD7SabVb8/видео.html
The link is for your Arsenal "Pro" Audio. Enjoy
OB6 doesn't sound much like an OBXa anyway. Plenty of comparisons online will attest to that.
Yeah, people were interested in how it compares with a hardware OB style synth. So it’s definitely not representative of an Arturia vs OBXa test. I did this at the request of some people .. and very much took the approach that they’re both different beasts, but as they asked I thought I’d oblige.
Agreed. the OB6 sounds more like a Matrix 6 (which I got) than an Xa
(8) Baby baaby baaaaaby (8)
Ob6 kills this
The Arturia sounds like it has a stick up its butt. Stiff and a bit dull at the same time.
Arturia PWM is wrong, way wrong compared to hardware..also big test for VSTs, hold down an octave on single oscillator saw..listen..sounds is static there is no movement in harmonics, a hardware oscillator on the other hand is free running, dynamic, has movement..
But analog doesn't always sound better.
Too many ads , fed up with youtube
Ha ben merde alors, j'ai acheté un synthé 3000€ pour qu'un biesse vst a 150€ l'égal ou le surclasse... Ben voilà il me reste plus qu'a virer mes synthés et acheter du Elektron, c'est bien la firme que personne ne sait copier.
I wasn't expecting the Arturia to get that close tbh. Their Jupiter 8 is a laughable clone imho. This one seems rather close though.