Behringer has a new synth

[Kevin Nolan]

Great! Agreement!!

So how does this debate relate to the Behringer Synth ??

Back on topic - I have to say I like what the promo's suggest:

1. Strong sound

2. Seemingly very "Roland-like" layout control surface, with Mini-moog like modulation and pitch bend wheels

3. Full sized keys.

4. 48 (4 octave) keyboard - for solo / lead work - a dream


Behringer look like they've gotten it 'right', as far as the promos's suggest. With a good price point - this could be a winner.

[Sharp]

Hi Kevin.
When I think Analog innovation, evolution and development, I instantly think of the Alesis Andromeda A6. Far as I'm concerned, the A6 is the best Analog ever built to date.

Every other Analog just seems to be history repeating itself and void of innovation.

This Behringer will be no different. I will welcome it, and enjoy listening to the digital records of it through YouTube's compression, but that's as far as it will go.

If I ever win the Lotto, it's an A6 for me. I'd rather a VA like the Virus anyday than settle for somthing less than an A6.

Regards
Sharp.

[Joe Gerardi]

At a classical concert two or three years ago I was at Nicola Benedetti was playing a violin concerto and she was using a very expensive violin (I believe a Stradivarius) and during an Allegro movement one of the strings broke on her violin. In the most amazing move I've ever witnessed, she turned to the lead violinist of our (Ireland's) National Symphony Orchestra and literally threw her violin to the lead violinist while simultaneously the lead violinist threw her violin to Nicola Benedetti; and without missing a beat, she picked up and blasted on with her virtuoso playing.

That's actually the Concermaster's job. (That's what you called the "Lead Violinist.") They are prepared to hand over their fiddle to the soloist at a moment's notice in situations like that.

Had you continued to watch him, he would have been handed the instrument by the person sitting behind him, who then just sits there until the piece was finished.

And it wasn't that the Concermaster's instrument wasn't of quality- believe me- he probably has something very close or even a Strad himself, and a couple of hundred grand minimum invested in the instrument. No, it was that the soloist didn't know the instrument, and didn't know how to coax the sound out of it properly. Those are handmade instruments, and the playability of them is particular to each instrument- the sounding point (where to place the bow on the strings in relation to where the left hand is stopping the notes and the type of sound you're trying to get) is different on every instrument and it takes a long time to get to know it. Sarah Chang has a multi-million dollar Guarneri Del Gesu (actually considered by many the better-sounding instrument for the soloist than the Strad) that she got 16 years ago, and stated it was only about 3 years ago that she started to really understand its sound and how to coax what she really wanted out of it.

And if you ever heard her play, that's hard to believe, but the nuances are incredibly detailed.

..Joe

[Ksynth]

Yes, but can she a play a synth?

[Kevin Nolan]

At a classical concert two or three years ago I was at Nicola Benedetti was playing a violin concerto and she was using a very expensive violin (I believe a Stradivarius) and during an Allegro movement one of the strings broke on her violin. In the most amazing move I've ever witnessed, she turned to the lead violinist of our (Ireland's) National Symphony Orchestra and literally threw her violin to the lead violinist while simultaneously the lead violinist threw her violin to Nicola Benedetti; and without missing a beat, she picked up and blasted on with her virtuoso playing.

That's actually the Concermaster's job. (That's what you called the "Lead Violinist.") They are prepared to hand over their fiddle to the soloist at a moment's notice in situations like that.

Had you continued to watch him, he would have been handed the instrument by the person sitting behind him, who then just sits there until the piece was finished.

And it wasn't that the Concermaster's instrument wasn't of quality- believe me- he probably has something very close or even a Strad himself, and a couple of hundred grand minimum invested in the instrument. No, it was that the soloist didn't know the instrument, and didn't know how to coax the sound out of it properly. Those are handmade instruments, and the playability of them is particular to each instrument- the sounding point (where to place the bow on the strings in relation to where the left hand is stopping the notes and the type of sound you're trying to get) is different on every instrument and it takes a long time to get to know it. Sarah Chang has a multi-million dollar Guarneri Del Gesu (actually considered by many the better-sounding instrument for the soloist than the Strad) that she got 16 years ago, and stated it was only about 3 years ago that she started to really understand its sound and how to coax what she really wanted out of it.

And if you ever heard her play, that's hard to believe, but the nuances are incredibly detailed.

..Joe

Just for correctness, the concert master was a a lady. Indeed I did notice the rest of the handover. However - you're incorrect on the comparison of the two violins in this instance - I really mean it. The tone and strength of that violin was instantly noticeable as incredibly weaker in tone. There was no doubts about it (I do actually know enough about orchestral instruments to know this, as I compose orchestral music, though I'm sure everyone in the audience noticed it, blatantly). There was no comparison between the two violins; the Strad was hugely richer, more present, ... use whatever superlatives you'd like. It wasn't down to the player not knowing the violin.

While I totally get where you're coming from and that is remarkable story about Sarah Chang, it's not all down to that. There are objective differences between instruments that even the most tone deaf of us can tell - a new Steinway Grand give a better piano sound that an banged up 100 year upright; and a Fender copy doesn't sound as good as a real Fender Strat. There's no opinion in that - it's universally accepted ( I acknowledge that if you want a 'copy' sound, then the copy is better at that, or is you want a honky-tonk piano then the 100 year old piano will deliver that better); but there are good instruments and bad instruments quite widely acknowledged.

@Sharp: I do accept it's harder to determine this in synthesis - I think the overwhelming factor influencing our liking of particular synths is what we grew up, aspired to own or heard on important tracks to us - but despite all of that - there are still 'good' synths and bad synths of all kinds. I accept the Andromeda A6 is an excellent analogue synth - but - it is computer controlled so there are many performance possibilities it can't deliver because of quantization issues that just won't be present in a Minimoog for example, so calling it the best analogue synth ever is surely stretching it. It's surely up there with the best. To me, the use of an instrument in iconic tracks weighs in on how I regard an analogue synth (any synth for that matter) because it has to be surely an important factor as to the music that was enabled by the synth. Hence the Schmidt 8-voice will never be a classic, though it is a very good synth.

Finally, while developing new synths and synth types is paramount; I still think there is room for really well made synths of existing designs - I'm primed to buy a Model D the minute it's announced for that reason - and if this Behringer is actually a good musical instrument, that's good enough for me. After all, nobody is complaining about the continuing production of pianos, violins, flutes, guitars, ...

If copies / clones where the only synths coming out then I'd agree, but there does seem to be quite a lot of innovation going on too - the Montage, Omnisphere2, ..... to name but two

[Sharp]

Hi Kevin.
I understand exactly what your saying, but I just don't have the passion for Analog in the same way as you do.

In many ways it's the same as how I don't get why some people think vinyl records sounds better than CD's.

Regards
Sharp.

[Joe Gerardi]

Just for correctness, the concert master was a a lady. Indeed I did notice the rest of the handover. However - you're incorrect on the comparison of the two violins in this instance - I really mean it. The tone and strength of that violin was instantly noticeable as incredibly weaker in tone. There was no doubts about it (I do actually know enough about orchestral instruments to know this, as I compose orchestral music, though I'm sure everyone in the audience noticed it, blatantly). There was no comparison between the two violins; the Strad was hugely richer, more present, ... use whatever superlatives you'd like. It wasn't down to the player not knowing the violin.

Ah. Concertmistress. Sorry.

Yup. Two handmade instruments can sound different, even when made by the same person. There's no way to tell if they weren't both Strads.

Most of them today sound like s**t because they're being bought as investments by corporations (the rate of return on a Strad or Guarneri is magnitudes higher than other investments) and get locked away in vaults to protect them. A fiddle needs to be played to be kept open. Even my best fiddle (which is only an $8000.00 instrument) will sound like crap after a couple of weeks on not playing it.

..Joe

[SanderXpander]

Hi Kevin.
I understand exactly what your saying, but I just don't have the passion for Analog in the same way as you do.

In many ways it's the same as how I don't get why some people think vinyl records sounds better than CD's.

Regards
Sharp.

That's one of my pet peeves actually. Different, yes. Better? Subjective. More accurate? Hellz no.

[Kevin Nolan]

Hi Kevin.
I understand exactly what your saying, but I just don't have the passion for Analog in the same way as you do.

In many ways it's the same as how I don't get why some people think vinyl records sounds better than CD's.

Regards
Sharp.

Actually I think we're all pretty much in agreement - earnestly. If we were all sitting around a cup of coffee, we'd probably come to a consensus.

Now - onto that vinyl thing (I have an opinion on everything) - so will be interested in responses to this:

Tape and Vinyl are regarded as "warmer" because of their ability for non-linear distortion where you get colouration (warmth) as distinct from a completely linear response and hard distortion / clipping on digital systems).

So - tape and vinyl are more forgiving for traditional loud recorded music; and as said, we hear that as warmth. A bit like the difference between valve and transistor based amps.

Actually - I think noise reduction probably has an input here too - but I don't know enough about that to be certain. None the less, as we speak, I'm rebuilding a piece I originally composed on 4-track with Dolby C noise reduction. The pieces is pure electronic, featuring MonoPoly and Juno106 passed through lashings of SDD1000 DDL. Amazingly, on listening closely to the piece, a constant arpeggio playing by the MonoPloy through the piece is fading significantly when loud special effects enter. I never noticed it before last week - but - the non-linear and arguably limited capability of the tape means that some audio is literally dominated by other tracks at moments when they enter, and returns when there is less activity on those other tracks. It gives the piece a subjective 'depth' that I'll have to emulate when redoing this piece on Logic Pro - if I leave the sequence running constantly with no change in volume, I won't capture the very exciting and broad feel of the original.

But Sharp - apart from real differences between analogue and digital recording systems - there's another more human reason why it's valid to prefer analogue recording and playback systems for music recorded before DAT/CD - namely - the history or recorded music happened on analogue systems for decades, but critically, from its inception. So - in every human way, music created in a recorded medium on analogue systems sounds best on analogue systems, including vinyl.

My favourite album is Equinoxe by Jarre, and, as good as it sounds on CD, it pales by comparison to listening to it on vinyl. I can hear the differences - and they are huge. Why - Equinoxe was created on purely analogue instruments, recorded and mastered on tape, with a view to release on Vinyl and Cassette - so they are it's best mediums (it doesn't help when Jarre remixed it, especially Equinoxe 5, for CD). In summary - any music conceived in the analogue recording era, intended for vinyl, sound 'correct' on that medium, and less so on CD. Had Equinoxe been composed in the digital ear, even on the same synths, it would have sounded significantly different from day one. Not less valid - just different. But it wasn't - it was composed in the analogue era so playback on analogue systems is more correct to the original.

I'm OK with transferring a Vinyl version to CD - that delivers the warmth (captured by the digital accuracy of CD) - so that's good enough to me - but there are many who argue for the vinyl "listening session" needing to be on vinyl - and there's a certain kind of validity to that too because every vinyl listening session will be slightly different.

Michael Giacchino, in recording the brass sections for the film The Incredibles, went out and bought two 24-track 2" tape machines - to capture the "warmth" needed to make the brass sound "James Bond' like.

[SanderXpander]

Tape and vinyl are vastly different technologies with completely different strengths and pitfalls. For example, most likely that arpeggiator fading in your example is a result not of noise reduction but tape compression, an effect entirely absent from vinyl productions. It would also be relatively easy to recreate in Logic with something like Kramer Master Tape from Waves or a host of similar plugins, though authenticity will always remain a point of debate.

A typical problem with vinyl productions is transient strength and bass level. If either is too high the needle jumps out of the groove.

[spaceman3]

There is no consensus on this subject of anologue synth vs digital. or records vs cd.
Seems about 50, 50 so far.
Only when every member of this forum gives thier opinions, and all those opinions are the same can there be consensus on this forum.
Not seeing that.

[csteen]

There is no consensus on this subject of anologue synth vs digital. or records vs cd.
Seems about 50, 50 so far.
Only when every member of this forum gives thier opinions, and all those opinions are the same can there be consensus on this forum.
Not seeing that.

And lucky for us we do not see that .

[spaceman3]

Indeed.

[Kevin Nolan]

Everything isn't about opinion. There are 'facts' too. I teach science communications, and this is part of what I teach. In science, a fact means a truth given the available evidence, for now; where truth is taken to me a 3-sigma (three standard deviation, or 99.7%) confidence that something (in nature when talking about science) is the way it is. A fact never means 100% truth - that doesn't exist in describing nature.

The point being - almost nothing is a 50 - 50 consensus when describing phenomenon. It it seems that way, it's usually skewed that way by those doing the measurement. A classic (and well acknowledged) issue is with journalism today. In presenting the case publicly on issues from climate change to differences in political ideology, they feel the need to give equal representation to both sides of the argument - so they'll ask one person from each stance to offer an opinion so as not to seem like hey are biased - but - they are almost always biased - because opinions are almost never 50-50 split.

On the topic we're talking about now - there isn't a 50-50 split. For example, if you ask guitarists which they prefer - a new transistor amp or a classic valve amp, almost 100% will choose the valve amp. Why? Because the non-linear response of that system offers significantly better sound, and distortion effects. It's technologically less advanced (by design), but it's a better musical sound.

If to ask Tony Bennett, or any classic crooner, which recording medium they prefer, they'll pick tape, almost every time.

The non-linear harmonic distortion / warmth effects of tape, vinyl, tube technology are not a matter of opinion, they are real effects, and lauded universally - it's why the likes of UAD produce emulations of these, and why they sell by the bucket load.

[spaceman3]

Science and facts?
It has already been provided on this forum and everywhere else.
The science supports my opinion just as much as yours.
But i get it.
If you say we have consensus, yet me and others here know we do not.
Then you switch it to science.
Because the pros and cons of both digital and analogue, it still comes down to opinions.
As far as recording analogue.
Yes i would prefer the sound of reel to reel.
But i do not prefer records over cds.
Of course we all love analogue preamps and devices that add warmth to the sound. but i am not talking about those things.
As far as the 50 50 .
I was bieng general.
Untill every member on this forum that plays synths, gives an opinion.
You or i will never know just what excactly that percentage is.