http://www.arturia.com/evolution/en/pro ... tails.html
so they updated their page on schedule...
but no audio/video examples until Nov 25th.
And it's not shipping until December.
250usd / 230eur
Too rich for my blood.
Arturia "Oberheim SEM V" ...
Re: Arturia "Oberheim SEM V" ...
Yawn, more garbage from Arturia, the kings of hype.
All their virtual "analog" synths sound the same, because their programmers were caught by UK's Sound on Sound magazine, using the same code for the oscillators between their synths..
Yep, somehow the geniuses at Arturia think that a saw oscillator is interchangable between different analog synths..
worse yet, their oscillators are not even band limited and alias really bad in the high frequencies.
The results? their synths sound nothing like the originals, not even remotely.
On top of that, most of their synths are very CPU hungry and need to be rendered to be used in a real music production environment.
So with this "new" synth, you get a fancy looking interface, and Arturia's recycled virtual "analog" oscillators and filter code from all their other overpriced synths.
How exciting.
MemoryMoon's $40 ME80 and $30 MemoryMoon puts Arturia's overpriced and fake-sounding CS80 & Minimoog digital clones to shame
I am glad companies like XILS, U-he and others are coming up with very realistic virtual analog synths.. hopefully people will stop spending money in Arturia's overpriced garbage synths.
It is amazing what marketing hype and sleek advertising can do..
http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/jun05/a ... ia2600.htm
All their virtual "analog" synths sound the same, because their programmers were caught by UK's Sound on Sound magazine, using the same code for the oscillators between their synths..
Yep, somehow the geniuses at Arturia think that a saw oscillator is interchangable between different analog synths..
worse yet, their oscillators are not even band limited and alias really bad in the high frequencies.
The results? their synths sound nothing like the originals, not even remotely.
On top of that, most of their synths are very CPU hungry and need to be rendered to be used in a real music production environment.
So with this "new" synth, you get a fancy looking interface, and Arturia's recycled virtual "analog" oscillators and filter code from all their other overpriced synths.
How exciting.
MemoryMoon's $40 ME80 and $30 MemoryMoon puts Arturia's overpriced and fake-sounding CS80 & Minimoog digital clones to shame
I am glad companies like XILS, U-he and others are coming up with very realistic virtual analog synths.. hopefully people will stop spending money in Arturia's overpriced garbage synths.
It is amazing what marketing hype and sleek advertising can do..
http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/jun05/a ... ia2600.htm
It turned out that, as I had suspected, Minimoog V and 2600V share blocks of common code. Arturia justified the use of a common 24dB-per-octave filter by suggesting that, as ARP had been sued in the 1970s for breaching Moog's filter patent, the response of the ARP 4012 would be identical to that of the Minimoog filter. When I suggested that this was not the case, they undertook to look into it and, if necessary, consider changing 2600V's filter
Re: Arturia "Oberheim SEM V" ...
I dont normally jump in to take issue with negative opinions about products but I kinda want to here.
The same SOS reviewer who discovered the recycled code a) said Arturia were very open and upfront with him about it. This is not something they did with every product but in the case of the ARP 2600 filters, as quoted above, they cited the fact that Moog brought a lawsuit against arp for using their filters. While this may have been obvious cost cutting, its also fairly understandable. And b) he also commented a reviewer on a well known forum who said (in this particular case) that the Jupiter 8 sounded NOTHING like the original was patent nonsense.
His general findings are that in some areas the arturia products excelled at close emulation and in other areas fell flat but overall they were very compelling and useable products. And he commented that only the most churlish and bodfin-y naysayers would find these unacceptable emulations.
As for using the "sharktooth" waveform from the mini in place of the triangle in the arp, again they admitted it but I have to be honest and say that without putting a scope on it, and in general use its a fairly minor thing imo.
Its very arp-y. Straight up. And the Jupiter is very Jupiter-y. And the mini is mini-ish and the modular might be the best soft synth I have ever heard. And so on.
I have owned or worked with all of these models in harware form, and while there were some differences, I gurantee you that if someone makes a track with any of these soft synths (and could reasonably be expected to acccess and use the originals as easily as the emulations), not only would I say - every time- "oh, a jupiter" (or a prophet or CS-80 etc) but i probably would be vary hard pressed to know whether they used the soft or hard versions.
Also worth mentioning is that the same reviewer almost always reviewed the first releases of the software which were badly affected by cpu variances and noted how responsive to feedback arturia was and how they always checked his findings and happily made changes or logged as bugs whatever they confirmed.
The one product I have used by arturia that I cant stand because it just sounds weird and crashes all the time is the the analog laboratory. I wrote this and told them what I thought and they were very cooperative and gave me a generous price break on completing my collection since I had no plans to use the labratory (at the time I only had the modular and the laboratory)
As for the OB SEM, it sounds great, the tones have the same hard to describe smoothness that just takes me somewhere else and that filter is the bomb. It is not a recycled block of code.
Everyone is entitled to an opinion of course and the only reason I chimed in was that I found the extent of negative reviews vs positive on this thread a bit over the top and in my opinion misleading to potential delighted users
The same SOS reviewer who discovered the recycled code a) said Arturia were very open and upfront with him about it. This is not something they did with every product but in the case of the ARP 2600 filters, as quoted above, they cited the fact that Moog brought a lawsuit against arp for using their filters. While this may have been obvious cost cutting, its also fairly understandable. And b) he also commented a reviewer on a well known forum who said (in this particular case) that the Jupiter 8 sounded NOTHING like the original was patent nonsense.
His general findings are that in some areas the arturia products excelled at close emulation and in other areas fell flat but overall they were very compelling and useable products. And he commented that only the most churlish and bodfin-y naysayers would find these unacceptable emulations.
As for using the "sharktooth" waveform from the mini in place of the triangle in the arp, again they admitted it but I have to be honest and say that without putting a scope on it, and in general use its a fairly minor thing imo.
Its very arp-y. Straight up. And the Jupiter is very Jupiter-y. And the mini is mini-ish and the modular might be the best soft synth I have ever heard. And so on.
I have owned or worked with all of these models in harware form, and while there were some differences, I gurantee you that if someone makes a track with any of these soft synths (and could reasonably be expected to acccess and use the originals as easily as the emulations), not only would I say - every time- "oh, a jupiter" (or a prophet or CS-80 etc) but i probably would be vary hard pressed to know whether they used the soft or hard versions.
Also worth mentioning is that the same reviewer almost always reviewed the first releases of the software which were badly affected by cpu variances and noted how responsive to feedback arturia was and how they always checked his findings and happily made changes or logged as bugs whatever they confirmed.
The one product I have used by arturia that I cant stand because it just sounds weird and crashes all the time is the the analog laboratory. I wrote this and told them what I thought and they were very cooperative and gave me a generous price break on completing my collection since I had no plans to use the labratory (at the time I only had the modular and the laboratory)
As for the OB SEM, it sounds great, the tones have the same hard to describe smoothness that just takes me somewhere else and that filter is the bomb. It is not a recycled block of code.
Everyone is entitled to an opinion of course and the only reason I chimed in was that I found the extent of negative reviews vs positive on this thread a bit over the top and in my opinion misleading to potential delighted users
Last edited by donmich on Mon May 14, 2012 4:54 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Arturia "Oberheim SEM V" ...
i have p5v, j8v and sem and the dont sound the same at all
macbook pro 2.5 i5 os 10.12 , TC Electronik Konnekt 48, Live 9, Cubase 9, event 20/20, Waldorf Blofeld, roland tb-03, roland Jx-03, korg mikrokontrol, novation nocturn, akai lpd8
Re: Arturia "Oberheim SEM V" ...
Of course they dont. They sound like what they're modelling. In many ways, uncannily so. If people want zero differnce they are going to have to plunk down $3K + for actual hardware and not $200. But they are definitely the closest things around to working with the real thing.
For example the CS-80 is, if you want to do something other than sound like Vangellis not the easist synth to coax mind blowing shit from. But if you are patient and know what youre doing you can do really distinctive stuff. And its the same with the arturia version. Very much so. The memorymoon is a good deal, but a) is only available as a vst and b) not even in the same hemisphere if you want the true behaviour of a CS-80 (for better or worse)at the sound design level. But put arturia to shame? Nonsense.
People who hate the sound of the arturia products would probably be surprised and disappointed by the real thing as well. For a generic "juicy" or "fat" analog synth sound with lots of flexibility etc, DCAM and U-he are definitely great products and I wouldnt steer people to arturia who just want to do their own thing and explore synthesis or make dance tracks or whatever. But If you specifically want to work with a moog or SEM or JP etc and cant get your hands on them or cant afford them - arturia. Straight up.
For example the CS-80 is, if you want to do something other than sound like Vangellis not the easist synth to coax mind blowing shit from. But if you are patient and know what youre doing you can do really distinctive stuff. And its the same with the arturia version. Very much so. The memorymoon is a good deal, but a) is only available as a vst and b) not even in the same hemisphere if you want the true behaviour of a CS-80 (for better or worse)at the sound design level. But put arturia to shame? Nonsense.
People who hate the sound of the arturia products would probably be surprised and disappointed by the real thing as well. For a generic "juicy" or "fat" analog synth sound with lots of flexibility etc, DCAM and U-he are definitely great products and I wouldnt steer people to arturia who just want to do their own thing and explore synthesis or make dance tracks or whatever. But If you specifically want to work with a moog or SEM or JP etc and cant get your hands on them or cant afford them - arturia. Straight up.
Re: Arturia "Oberheim SEM V" ...
One thing I do know is if we're just comparing raw sound, WayOutWare's 2600 emulation is damn close to the real thing..
A good friend of mine has an actual hardware 2600 and I sat down with him to do some comparisons. To even him, WOW's emulation was much closer in tone.
That said, I still hate iLok.
A good friend of mine has an actual hardware 2600 and I sat down with him to do some comparisons. To even him, WOW's emulation was much closer in tone.
That said, I still hate iLok.
Re: Arturia "Oberheim SEM V" ...
WOW's ring mod is actually still quite a bit closer (and better imo) than Arturias. What i like about their site though is the ab comparisons of the sweeps between the hardware and emulation they provide. Thats a very honest and transparent move. To be honest they sound different and the hardware sounds better. But im sure if arturia did the same sweeps they would also sound different. As to which soft synth one would prefer its subjective if they both sound different than the original. Id be happy with either of them but of course Id rather have a room full of mint vintage gear. But in many cases there are diminishing returns with that kind of investment - especially when you have the sound in a mix. My main point was about the utter disdain for arturia and the false claims about all their emulations sounding the same - and poor. Neither is true. But since i dont get paid to defend them, I'll just shut up now. 