DCOs aren't quite digital. They are digitally controlled (which is really interesting and great from a tuning perspective, some other time...), in that there is a clock that could be analog or digital... (the Poly-61 is actually analog). This clock plays the role of a timer to drive the capacitors which make each waveshape. So all-analog circuitry, fed by a clock. No digital-analog conversion involved (digital waves/PCM)
Absolutely gorgeous sound, I've loved everything by Black Corporation I've heard, just the depth of sound design you can do on one of their units is incredible. Thank you for sharing this glimpse at a synth, I know its outside of my price range but still just looove hearing it and seeing how it works.
Really a magical synth. Thanks for this awesome video Enrique, you make some really great presentations. I'd love to own one of these. For anyone who thinks it's too expensive, I think they're kind of missing the point. It's not just about the synth, it's about the long term value of it. These will be extremely limited, and therefore will become quite the collector's items in the future. Try buying one for less than $10k in ten years time.
"This BLEEP is insane!" needs to be a T-shirt. 19:56 picks up where the CS-80 left off as a poly synth. very cool indeed. very much reminds of early '80s one-off keyboards that were weird and cool ... like the Elka. Sounds super expressive.
Incredible, gorgeous sounds. It is true, the wavetable front end sends so much overtone richness through the signal path. I recently bought a Waldorf Rocket (digital front end, analog filters, LFO, etc)... and though nothing NEAR that synth in price, or capability... I understand the beauty and power of this type of architecture now.
This isn't a wavetable front end. They're DCOs. They are just oscillators that are controlled by a digital counter instead of voltage. You can consider them as just like VCOs, only very stable.
I've been looking forward to this one, BC work with this dude called Pandomonium on Souncloud and his demos have been just outstanding. Lots of extra bells and whistles on top of the Synthex base coupled with their usually awesome sound...
Ok, so it’s $800 less than their other synths that also have similar UI and architecture but which are built around CEM cloned VCOs. Still way too pricey for what it is, not quite sure who it’s aimed at. Doesn’t sound that great or special to my ears, for what else one could get for $3K. Actually, $3K for a DCO poly synth is just kind of insulting, no matter how you slice it..if you want to go that route, you can get a used DSI Poly Evolver for less than that these days, which has less voices but is a far more interesting instrument in my opinion, and has an expression keyboard and controller, for example.
Fully agree. It sounds awful , "it sounds not so great" is a gentle pleonasm..., this thing is like a farfisa on steroid but sound like a farfisa (or more exactly like an Elka !). Not mentioning the price... Get a prophet Rev 2 for a 16 poly voices true analog machine, half the price, twice the voices, and a sound that proven its worth...
Idk where you live but this is pretty much the market price for the amount of circuitry this thing contains. In every universe but the one uli lives in.
0:55 Digital waveshapes? Not really. That would imply something like wavetables or sampled looping waveforms. The Xerxes has DCO's which are analog waveforms tightly constrained by digital means. In analog VCO's a capacitor controls the cycle where in DCO's a digital clock resets the waveform cycle. But it's still an analog waveform in the Xerxes (and Synthex and Juno), parented by a digital clock (16 bit or whatever).
What's weirder is the synth this is copy does have digital waveshapes. The original Synthex used dacs to produce it's waveforms and crude digital processes to shape them, not analog waveshapers.
@@dereverberatedambient5010 No. Digital waveshapes imply using memory-stored waveforms. Synthex/Xerxes do not do that. The ramp generation is an analog process with digitally-controlled current source charging a capacitor for the ramp. All other waveform processing is done in analog for both Synthex and Xerxes, as they both use identical circuits for that.
@@MrPandoman have you looked at the circuit for the synthex, because it’s not what you’re describing. Last time I looked it used a dac to generate the waveform, and inverted bits of a saw to make a triangle. To be clear, I know what a DCO (exactly what you described), and synthex isn’t that… unless my memory is wrong. I’ll have to check the schematic again, I remember the design pretty clearly because it was so odd.
@@repairerofreputationsmusic Yeah, please check again. But looks like we're describing the same thing, just different terminology. I simply described how that "dac" works in greater detail. I have reverse engineered Synthex voices and chorus down to component level so I'm pretty familiar with it.
For that money I could buy a studio with tons of "good" synths (4 different new Korg synths to start with, all the Behringer stuff), and zillions of softsynths...AND get a long nice vacation, lol.
Very cool, thanks for great demo showing its capabilities. Like a lot of people I’d love to buy one and it’s price is understandable for what is a hand-made boutique instrument but sadly it does make it unaffordable for most synth enthusiasts like myself. It deserves to be a success so hope that anyone that can afford it buys one!
PAM-seems like you could get the same effect by just throwing your Pulse (or whatever wave you want) through another VCA in advance, which I’ve sometimes done..ok, just use any cheap VCA and mod source for that within a modular system. It is funny how many fixed synth features seem fairly passé when you look what exists in modular.
Yeah I'm like, is it literally just amplitude modulation from/of the pulse wave? In that case it wouldn't even need a proper vca, just a single transistor would suffice cos it's just turning the signal on/off. I'd hope it was something a bit more interesting, I dunno if theres much synthesis utility to have both ringmod and "AM" from the same source on one oscillator
@@nutritionalyeast7978 Hmm, well there are a number of modules/complex oscillators that have combined ringmod and/or AM, so perhaps it's a simpler version of that--interesting about transistor--is that like a gate then, because if it's just on or off isn't that either 100% or 0%? That's different then anywhere in between, which is what you'd get with a VCA and mod source of your choice.
Those sounds around the 7-8 minute range remind me a lot of the sounds I loved from the SID chip.. was expecting Forbidden Forest to start playing at some point. :D
That's really nice, I'm tempted to... _HOW MUCH?!?_ ...and you'd think that charging that much for it, they'd be able to afford a website / domain that actually works.
Are yo aware of these innovative products called 'midi keyboards'? They take up very little space and can be just as function as the 'keyboard' version you seek.
Nice - thinking on building one of the Black Co. synths when i retire this year .. too bad this isn't a kit. Re:: "PAM" - isn't that a syncing from one Osc to the other with the twisting of knob changing the sync point?
No, that's the variable phase sync knob you are describing. PAM is Pulse Amplitude Modulation, which modulates the pulse amplitude of one oscillator from the other oscillator.
True... Even I really like it, its completly nonsense at this pricepoint. Very similar synth with similair options and sound is Novation Peak and costs around 1/3 of price...
@Boofsquad Seems to me your trying really hard to convince yourself that you are something that you are not. Keep trying to put someone down to build yourself up little boy. I am not impressed by your small minded foulness, and lack of originality. Come on, show us what you really are made of, chopping away at your keyboard like you are some kind of Rambo... Maybe you should take a lesson from Behringer and clone a better version of yourself....
Hey Ricky, thanks for the review. That box sounds incredible. A question to you, because there is no manual online available: Can the Xerxes do a voice pan spread, so voices are spread across the panorama stage automatically (if you still can remember)? I'd like to get wide sounds without having to use a chorus all the time.
@@jimlampshady I don't really get the big deal, honestly. It seems like a turing machine module or some version of that, with a quantizer. TINRS already has the Tuesday which operates on a similar principle, I guess? Personally, these types of sequencers are not very appealing to me because you just end up with something sort of algorithmic and "in the ball park" of suitability, but you will never arrive at complex, evolving results that are more intentional from a compositional perspective from this approach compared to being able to enter in individual notes at certain times, adjust the gate length of each one, etc...that's why I love the Vector.
@@NickHchaos You clearly know much more about hardware sequencers than I do - but did you not find the results that Ricky Tinez was getting out of that unit interesting? I did.
I'm always a bit confused because the original Synthex did not use DCOs, despite mislabeling prevalent online. It actually used digital to analog converters to produce it's waveforms, and weird things like half cycle bit flipping to produce the triangle wave from the saw tooth. I almost wonder if Black Corporation did not look at the schematics when they designed this... I still want one.
Is it very easy to overdrive the mixer section of this? It sounds like there is a permanent overdrive strapped on the outputs that exaggerates the mid range and this is throughout the video. Something does not sound right with this one.
8:25 - Behringer will cover all types of synths in 2-3 years... then "game over!" Sadly Black Corporation seems to not study the lesson. They _need_ to expand! To produce more, cheaper and sell more.
>Sadly Black Corporation seems to not study the lesson. Sad? lol. You don't get it. Black Corp know exactly what they are doing, and it's not doing Behringer. They aren't hurting for sales or eager for low-budget market share. This is about superb engineering, powerful features, high-quality components and build, in a awesome compact form-factor.
@@DOSputin I'm glad that you can afford their gear. But my initial comment wasn't about this. If you're one of Black Corp., then I'm glad that you're doing something (at least). I wanted to buy DD's kit but... It's too expensive and needs even more patience to make it fully working. If we'll compare BC's gear with new top synths from Moog... Then it's just one big thing that really stops me from buying "The one" (over any BC's synthesizers, although they're great).
@@KiR_3d I have to agree. I bought the second batch DD prebuilt. Great synths but there is a similar sound to their synths and for the prices they are going to have issues in the future like all previous synth manufacturers who went down the same road.
Think about instruments like the Roland 808 and how they changed music forever because regular people bought them at pawn shops and got creative with them. For that reason, Xerxes will never be an iconic instrument that moves the musical landscape. If Black Corporation ever wishes to break out of the luxury space and make a groundbreaking musical instrument, they'll need to aim at affordability and mass production from the start.
Right said, Sir...!! You should be the next elected president of the USA... Or, at least, of UK...!! Wise comments always welcome and appreciated... Best wishes Mr. Fowler...!
Oh yes, because the CS-80 and the Jupiter-8 were widely available for the public and mass produced. This legit just sounds like you‘re dealing with the cognitive dissonance of not being able to afford one of these. Stop making a fool of yourself and think a little bit, before saying such obviously stupid things. FR
Does explicit negative glide mean "only glide when moving to a note lower than the current one", or does it mean "ALWAYS glide downward to the next note, even if the previous note was lower than the next one". If the latter, (a) that's pretty wild, and (b) where does it start the glide? Is it proportional to the change? Like, if you're at C1 and then play C2 but with a negative glide, does it start the glide from C3? Or do the glide numbers define a consistent relative starting point, like -5 means "always start the glide 5 semitones above the target note and glide downward to it"?
Sounds great. As an owner of the MFB Dominion-1, I am sooo curious to hear the new MFB Synth Pro: has switchable VCO/DCO's. Listing @ 1080 Euro. mfberlin.de/en/device/synthproe/
@@skuggasveinn_music Factory preset 1 is a modified Laser Harp preset that has velocity and aftertouch enabled as well (which Synthex doesn't have). A more authentic Laser Harp patch is VNT (vintage bank) patch #46. In fact, all patches in VNT bank are 1:1 replicas of the original Synthex factory presets.
@@MatthewHyatt yeah, just $3,000... no biggie. I'll just dig under my couch cushions and pull that out. If I had 3k to drop on gear there's loads of other shit I'd get over this.
I don't know. It doesn't look or sound like a $3,000 synth to me. I think any number of U-He virtual analogue synths sound better, and while I like how it looks, it just doesn't merit the pricetag. You can get a lot of synth for $3,000 elsewhere.
Well, they sound different - whether that is better or worse is a matter of taste, of course. Also, if one intends to record an analogue synth digitally, you're also removing a lot of the analogue advantage. I was also alluding to the fact that there are far cheaper analogue synths that I think sound more interesting.
@@SPAZZOID100 Why would analogue sound "far beyond any VST"? electronic circuits can be accurately emulated at component level. Computing power is no longer the limitation for that. If you have an analogue emulation VST with sample-rate resolution that creates 48/24 audio files and you record an analogue synth at 48/24, what is the difference between the two? The only difference would potentially be character of the random variability and noise of analogue circuits, which can also be emulated, though usually an emulation is based on a single machine while there will be variability from one analogue synth to the next due to the components never being 100% identical. Sonically, there is no appreciable difference unless you have an analogue synth that either has some technical issues or that is under the influence of variable electrical interference. Analogue synths are usually made to sound as predictable as possible, and therefore closer to an emulation. The main difference between virtual analogue and analogue synths is the user interface, the physicality of using them, which is a huge part of the experience, and of course a major source of inspiration and creativity, but the sound itself isn't significantly different. I didn't say anything about removing its "analogueness" by the way, just that you removed one of the analogue's advantages (of infinite audio resolution - which I probably should have specified) if the end result is a digital recording. The main part of analogueness is that it's a physical object, no more, no less. Also, my main point was really that it doesn't sound that interesting to me, and I know of many far cheaper synths I prefer listening to. And, yes, I prefer playing hardware synths myself. Not because they sound better than virtual ones, but because they are more enjoyable to use.
![Quando Rondo - Grow Up [Official Music Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/8zFnCg3BO4Q/mqdefault.jpg)
DCOs aren't quite digital. They are digitally controlled (which is really interesting and great from a tuning perspective, some other time...), in that there is a clock that could be analog or digital... (the Poly-61 is actually analog). This clock plays the role of a timer to drive the capacitors which make each waveshape. So all-analog circuitry, fed by a clock. No digital-analog conversion involved (digital waves/PCM)
Black Corporation has the best corporate name maybe since Super Evil Megacorp.
Screens too big...
The things got like 6plugs in the back, they had to compromise somewhere.
What scree.. oh
Absolutely gorgeous sound, I've loved everything by Black Corporation I've heard, just the depth of sound design you can do on one of their units is incredible. Thank you for sharing this glimpse at a synth, I know its outside of my price range but still just looove hearing it and seeing how it works.
Cherry Audio’s Elka Synthex recreation isn't half bad either, and much easier on the budget. ;-)
I like your review of this synth, Ricky. Thanks for giving us a chance to hear it. You should have more of these freaky dates.
the design is mouthwatering imo
All those synth for Black Corp. sounds amazing! three out of three!
Man, more than the synth itself is the beauty of your shots that blew me out. Perfect lighting, perfect image. Just gorgeous. That just looks so cool.
Really a magical synth. Thanks for this awesome video Enrique, you make some really great presentations.
I'd love to own one of these. For anyone who thinks it's too expensive, I think they're kind of missing the point. It's not just about the synth, it's about the long term value of it. These will be extremely limited, and therefore will become quite the collector's items in the future.
Try buying one for less than $10k in ten years time.
"This BLEEP is insane!" needs to be a T-shirt. 19:56 picks up where the CS-80 left off as a poly synth.
very cool indeed. very much reminds of early '80s one-off keyboards that were weird and cool ... like the Elka. Sounds super expressive.
Very tempted.
Classic Jarre LaserHarp, sync where Glide affects the synced DCO
I like the jawbone, is that a teenage engineering accessory?
😂😂
Good synth. Does not sound much like a Synthex though. Maybe Behringer is working on an actual remake???
Incredible, gorgeous sounds. It is true, the wavetable front end sends so much overtone richness through the signal path. I recently bought a Waldorf Rocket (digital front end, analog filters, LFO, etc)... and though nothing NEAR that synth in price, or capability... I understand the beauty and power of this type of architecture now.
This isn't a wavetable front end. They're DCOs. They are just oscillators that are controlled by a digital counter instead of voltage. You can consider them as just like VCOs, only very stable.
I've been looking forward to this one, BC work with this dude called Pandomonium on Souncloud and his demos have been just outstanding. Lots of extra bells and whistles on top of the Synthex base coupled with their usually awesome sound...
Interesting, but it would be nice to see them make something at a more accessible price at some point.
instant dungeon synth
DAAAMN that thing looks vintage as fuck.
all their synths seem cool
Ok, so it’s $800 less than their other synths that also have similar UI and architecture but which are built around CEM cloned VCOs. Still way too pricey for what it is, not quite sure who it’s aimed at. Doesn’t sound that great or special to my ears, for what else one could get for $3K. Actually, $3K for a DCO poly synth is just kind of insulting, no matter how you slice it..if you want to go that route, you can get a used DSI Poly Evolver for less than that these days, which has less voices but is a far more interesting instrument in my opinion, and has an expression keyboard and controller, for example.
totally agreed
It sounds kind of retro but in a dull way. Could be the video, right enough
@@t55a2 Dull is the right word..e.g. Juno. No, I don't think it's just the video.
Fully agree. It sounds awful , "it sounds not so great" is a gentle pleonasm..., this thing is like a farfisa on steroid but sound like a farfisa (or more exactly like an Elka !). Not mentioning the price... Get a prophet Rev 2 for a 16 poly voices true analog machine, half the price, twice the voices, and a sound that proven its worth...
Idk where you live but this is pretty much the market price for the amount of circuitry this thing contains. In every universe but the one uli lives in.
0:55 Digital waveshapes? Not really. That would imply something like wavetables or sampled looping waveforms. The Xerxes has DCO's which are analog waveforms tightly constrained by digital means. In analog VCO's a capacitor controls the cycle where in DCO's a digital clock resets the waveform cycle. But it's still an analog waveform in the Xerxes (and Synthex and Juno), parented by a digital clock (16 bit or whatever).
What's weirder is the synth this is copy does have digital waveshapes. The original Synthex used dacs to produce it's waveforms and crude digital processes to shape them, not analog waveshapers.
@@dereverberatedambient5010 No. Digital waveshapes imply using memory-stored waveforms. Synthex/Xerxes do not do that. The ramp generation is an analog process with digitally-controlled current source charging a capacitor for the ramp. All other waveform processing is done in analog for both Synthex and Xerxes, as they both use identical circuits for that.
@@MrPandoman have you looked at the circuit for the synthex, because it’s not what you’re describing. Last time I looked it used a dac to generate the waveform, and inverted bits of a saw to make a triangle. To be clear, I know what a DCO (exactly what you described), and synthex isn’t that… unless my memory is wrong. I’ll have to check the schematic again, I remember the design pretty clearly because it was so odd.
@@repairerofreputationsmusic Yeah, please check again. But looks like we're describing the same thing, just different terminology. I simply described how that "dac" works in greater detail. I have reverse engineered Synthex voices and chorus down to component level so I'm pretty familiar with it.
@@MrPandoman that’s great, I’d love to see your work. It’s funny how the word digital can be slippery.
This is a nice synth, but to be honest, I'd get a Prophet X for another $500. Some very cool sweet spots on this synth though!
that was honey for my ears
Everything sounded really good. What a treasure
For that money I could buy a studio with tons of "good" synths (4 different new Korg synths to start with, all the Behringer stuff), and zillions of softsynths...AND get a long nice vacation, lol.
This thing is beautiful
Very cool, thanks for great demo showing its capabilities. Like a lot of people I’d love to buy one and it’s price is understandable for what is a hand-made boutique instrument but sadly it does make it unaffordable for most synth enthusiasts like myself. It deserves to be a success so hope that anyone that can afford it buys one!
Sounds great but not making me regret my choice to build a Kijimi.
Damn went to the site and saw $999 and was like daaaaaaamn. Then saw thats the down payment lol. Still an absolutely beautiful synth.
Same for me. But an overall $3000 is overpriced. I’d perhaps buy it for $2000.
PAM-seems like you could get the same effect by just throwing your Pulse (or whatever wave you want) through another VCA in advance, which I’ve sometimes done..ok, just use any cheap VCA and mod source for that within a modular system. It is funny how many fixed synth features seem fairly passé when you look what exists in modular.
Yeah I'm like, is it literally just amplitude modulation from/of the pulse wave? In that case it wouldn't even need a proper vca, just a single transistor would suffice cos it's just turning the signal on/off. I'd hope it was something a bit more interesting, I dunno if theres much synthesis utility to have both ringmod and "AM" from the same source on one oscillator
@@nutritionalyeast7978 Hmm, well there are a number of modules/complex oscillators that have combined ringmod and/or AM, so perhaps it's a simpler version of that--interesting about transistor--is that like a gate then, because if it's just on or off isn't that either 100% or 0%? That's different then anywhere in between, which is what you'd get with a VCA and mod source of your choice.
That chorus is very BOC esque
Makes me wanna buy the Hydrasynth..
Polyphonic Aftertooooouch
Those sounds around the 7-8 minute range remind me a lot of the sounds I loved from the SID chip.. was expecting Forbidden Forest to start playing at some point. :D
forbidden forest, that sparked some parts of my brain that hadn't been used in awhile
Seems pretty close to me! Great choice to go with true analog BBDs!
Not at all.
This synth holds the record for the smallest screen of any synth. Smaller then the buttons. Wtf
Sounds good. Reminds me a bit of korg DW8000
Luckily you rarely need the screen! Has a ton of knob per function
I think Korg Minilogue is in the same league
Have you checked the GS e7? A 7 voice synth that sounds amazing, but the screen is probably as small this one
That's really nice, I'm tempted to... _HOW MUCH?!?_
...and you'd think that charging that much for it, they'd be able to afford a website / domain that actually works.
It sounds fantastic but... i'm sorry £3,500 is just an insane asking price, especially for a desktop module.
This toy is so for me ✨❤️
Really wonderful. But, the most important question ... does it do "Laser Harp?"
Yes, its one of the factory presets
That chorus is sweet!
PWA I believe was done on Buchla 144 dual square wave generator
Old school video game music tricks!!
damn sick! i need to look into this, it sounds super cool
God I want one of these so bad
Too expensive for what it is☹️
give it to em boof
Beautiful design.
Further proof that digital synths are being accepted again, and for damn good reasons.
@@BarryWarne Agreed!
or hybrid as well: hybrid synths have a lot to offer
I think the Novation Peak/Summit is all the proof you need of that.
@@squoblat Totally. I own a Peak and it's my favorite, right there with the also mostly digital Pro 2.
Donald Priola not digital.
I would buy this if they make a keyboard version.
Are yo aware of these innovative products called 'midi keyboards'? They take up very little space and can be just as function as the 'keyboard' version you seek.
@@bertbing3406 lel
Bert Bing no thanks. I prefer my keyboards built in.
Nice try smartass!!
I appreciate you also say Gnar Gnar
11:34 any modules out there that do OSC PAM? nice video :)
Really excellent! But the demo will be better with a keyboard..
That open made me think of a South Park episode featuring Xerxes. Lulz.
Where is the 4 part sequencer? 😩
Nice - thinking on building one of the Black Co. synths when i retire this year .. too bad this isn't a kit. Re:: "PAM" - isn't that a syncing from one Osc to the other with the twisting of knob changing the sync point?
No, that's the variable phase sync knob you are describing. PAM is Pulse Amplitude Modulation, which modulates the pulse amplitude of one oscillator from the other oscillator.
Once again, Black Corporation with yet another masterpiece. Thanx for the demo.
It sounds absolutely gorgeous. But for over $3k.... this clearly wasn't made for me :(
Maybe Behringer will come to the rescue for the masses...
True... Even I really like it, its completly nonsense at this pricepoint. Very similar synth with similair options and sound is Novation Peak and costs around 1/3 of price...
SHRED 'EM BOOFDAWG, LET EM HAVE IT
@Boofsquad
Seems to me your trying really hard to convince yourself that you are something that you are not. Keep trying to put someone down to build yourself up little boy. I am not impressed by your small minded foulness, and lack of originality. Come on, show us what you really are made of, chopping away at your keyboard like you are some kind of Rambo... Maybe you should take a lesson from Behringer and clone a better version of yourself....
@Boofsquad
You are not well, are you.
@Ricky Tinez, What made you keep the Kijimi over this one?
When is this going to come available to the public?
@4:10 oh man I wanna hear that with some drums behind it
its a turbo Sq80.
was looking forward to this vid
Lets see, when Behringer will clone this one.. ; )
The buttons make me wanna play dominoes.
Throw out the double Xerxes.
Murada the buttons are fine.
Hey Ricky, thanks for the review. That box sounds incredible. A question to you, because there is no manual online available: Can the Xerxes do a voice pan spread, so voices are spread across the panorama stage automatically (if you still can remember)? I'd like to get wide sounds without having to use a chorus all the time.
The v2 does if you happened to have an extra few thousand laying around
Elka Synth EX!
can you do a video of all the external psu's in the studio
If you had to pick one / xerxes or kijimi ?
Nice call out to Nick.
Sounds very desirable!
Great demo!
Addendum after checking price....obscene price!
Deluded.
Ricky, did you say it had digital oscillators, that are effected by analog waveshapers? Sounds amazing whatever they are!
dat chorus man
Bargain. I’ll take 5..........
Dude, I'd be interested to hear this synth sequenced by that nutty QuBit Bloom module.
jim barnard there’s a million sequencers out there, nothing particularly special about it being sequenced by that one.
@@NickHchaos I understood there was something very different about the Bloom. Did we watch the same video?
@@NickHchaos ruclips.net/video/hLTYH5iWsXY/видео.html
@@jimlampshady I don't really get the big deal, honestly. It seems like a turing machine module or some version of that, with a quantizer. TINRS already has the Tuesday which operates on a similar principle, I guess? Personally, these types of sequencers are not very appealing to me because you just end up with something sort of algorithmic and "in the ball park" of suitability, but you will never arrive at complex, evolving results that are more intentional from a compositional perspective from this approach compared to being able to enter in individual notes at certain times, adjust the gate length of each one, etc...that's why I love the Vector.
@@NickHchaos You clearly know much more about hardware sequencers than I do - but did you not find the results that Ricky Tinez was getting out of that unit interesting? I did.
I'm always a bit confused because the original Synthex did not use DCOs, despite mislabeling prevalent online. It actually used digital to analog converters to produce it's waveforms, and weird things like half cycle bit flipping to produce the triangle wave from the saw tooth. I almost wonder if Black Corporation did not look at the schematics when they designed this... I still want one.
Is it very easy to overdrive the mixer section of this? It sounds like there is a permanent overdrive strapped on the outputs that exaggerates the mid range and this is throughout the video.
Something does not sound right with this one.
i am curious about this too, early in the video he mentions it might be clipping the h4 he is using to record though so might just be that
how is this machine for bass? how are the envelopes?
I miss seeing a regular keyboard being used in these reviews. And this synth is too expensive, by the way.
agreed on the keyboard thing. I think it needs to be demo'd using a traditional KB.
8:25 - Behringer will cover all types of synths in 2-3 years... then "game over!"
Sadly Black Corporation seems to not study the lesson. They _need_ to expand! To produce more, cheaper and sell more.
>Sadly Black Corporation seems to not study the lesson.
Sad? lol. You don't get it.
Black Corp know exactly what they are doing, and it's not doing Behringer.
They aren't hurting for sales or eager for low-budget market share.
This is about superb engineering, powerful features, high-quality components and build, in a awesome compact form-factor.
@@DOSputin I'm glad that you can afford their gear. But my initial comment wasn't about this. If you're one of Black Corp., then I'm glad that you're doing something (at least). I wanted to buy DD's kit but... It's too expensive and needs even more patience to make it fully working.
If we'll compare BC's gear with new top synths from Moog... Then it's just one big thing that really stops me from buying "The one" (over any BC's synthesizers, although they're great).
@@KiR_3d I have to agree. I bought the second batch DD prebuilt. Great synths but there is a similar sound to their synths and for the prices they are going to have issues in the future like all previous synth manufacturers who went down the same road.
Very Cool !
Yo whats the difference between this one and the other two synth they've made?
they r replicas of different classic synths with additional features, this one is Elka Synthex, Deckard's Dream was CS80 , Kijimi was RSF Polykobol II
talk slopes to me baby
uhm...ofcourse i had to see this after a few beers....must....not..........be...tempted....
3k? No way! I’ll wait for Behringer’s version
Think about instruments like the Roland 808 and how they changed music forever because regular people bought them at pawn shops and got creative with them. For that reason, Xerxes will never be an iconic instrument that moves the musical landscape. If Black Corporation ever wishes to break out of the luxury space and make a groundbreaking musical instrument, they'll need to aim at affordability and mass production from the start.
Right said, Sir...!!
You should be the next elected president of the USA... Or, at least, of UK...!!
Wise comments always welcome and appreciated...
Best wishes Mr. Fowler...!
kaiwetronic metromatic thanks for the kind words
Oh yes, because the CS-80 and the Jupiter-8 were widely available for the public and mass produced. This legit just sounds like you‘re dealing with the cognitive dissonance of not being able to afford one of these. Stop making a fool of yourself and think a little bit, before saying such obviously stupid things. FR
Smallest display ever.
Geiles maschin ;)
Does explicit negative glide mean "only glide when moving to a note lower than the current one", or does it mean "ALWAYS glide downward to the next note, even if the previous note was lower than the next one". If the latter, (a) that's pretty wild, and (b) where does it start the glide? Is it proportional to the change? Like, if you're at C1 and then play C2 but with a negative glide, does it start the glide from C3? Or do the glide numbers define a consistent relative starting point, like -5 means "always start the glide 5 semitones above the target note and glide downward to it"?
@@MrPandoman
Thanks man... I learned something... a good day...
Sounds great.
As an owner of the MFB Dominion-1, I am sooo curious to hear the new MFB Synth Pro: has switchable VCO/DCO's. Listing @ 1080 Euro.
mfberlin.de/en/device/synthproe/
They're some reviews in RUclips and it sound not even far of the Xerxes..
If it's a synthex, where's the Laser Harp preset?
Factory preset nr 1 ;)
@@skuggasveinn_music Factory preset 1 is a modified Laser Harp preset that has velocity and aftertouch enabled as well (which Synthex doesn't have). A more authentic Laser Harp patch is VNT (vintage bank) patch #46. In fact, all patches in VNT bank are 1:1 replicas of the original Synthex factory presets.
I mean... it's cool and all... but $3,000+? Nah fam
It’s just money. Lol.
@@MatthewHyatt yeah, just $3,000... no biggie. I'll just dig under my couch cushions and pull that out. If I had 3k to drop on gear there's loads of other shit I'd get over this.
Quand sera t'il prêt ?
C'est déjà commendable sur leur site
The biggest drawback and downside of Black Corporation synths is their price, good Lord...
The OSC Sync adds that mid-range "fuzziness" that you hear with a CS-80. Nice! Oh, and isn't pronounced "zer-sees" instead of "zerk-sees?"
$4k price. omg
$3K :)
Audio is quite crackling
Yeah, that was my audio recorder. User error. I fixed it throughout the video
@@RickyTinez yes right it's around min4 only
Not sure if I’m sold on this one yet. Deckard and Kijimi are pretty special, but this sounds somewhat bland and uninteresting.
I don't know. It doesn't look or sound like a $3,000 synth to me. I think any number of U-He virtual analogue synths sound better, and while I like how it looks, it just doesn't merit the pricetag. You can get a lot of synth for $3,000 elsewhere.
3k is pricey, but the sound is far beyond any vst.
Well, they sound different - whether that is better or worse is a matter of taste, of course. Also, if one intends to record an analogue synth digitally, you're also removing a lot of the analogue advantage.
I was also alluding to the fact that there are far cheaper analogue synths that I think sound more interesting.
Hakon Soreide Recording any analog synth digitally DOES NOT remove it’s “analogness”. Not sure where you are getting your info from.
@@SPAZZOID100
Why would analogue sound "far beyond any VST"? electronic circuits can be accurately emulated at component level. Computing power is no longer the limitation for that.
If you have an analogue emulation VST with sample-rate resolution that creates 48/24 audio files and you record an analogue synth at 48/24, what is the difference between the two?
The only difference would potentially be character of the random variability and noise of analogue circuits, which can also be emulated, though usually an emulation is based on a single machine while there will be variability from one analogue synth to the next due to the components never being 100% identical.
Sonically, there is no appreciable difference unless you have an analogue synth that either has some technical issues or that is under the influence of variable electrical interference. Analogue synths are usually made to sound as predictable as possible, and therefore closer to an emulation.
The main difference between virtual analogue and analogue synths is the user interface, the physicality of using them, which is a huge part of the experience, and of course a major source of inspiration and creativity, but the sound itself isn't significantly different.
I didn't say anything about removing its "analogueness" by the way, just that you removed one of the analogue's advantages (of infinite audio resolution - which I probably should have specified) if the end result is a digital recording.
The main part of analogueness is that it's a physical object, no more, no less.
Also, my main point was really that it doesn't sound that interesting to me, and I know of many far cheaper synths I prefer listening to.
And, yes, I prefer playing hardware synths myself. Not because they sound better than virtual ones, but because they are more enjoyable to use.
At 19:55 i made such a mess of myself, thank you. I need this synth in my studio ASAP
$4500 cool
Sounds like my elka22 injected with steroids
$2999 -- oof
Threethousand Bucks? Are they nuts?