I've noticed this in a number of UB-Xa videos. I don't think this is a flaw in the synth but rather programmers trying to make the thing sound "fatter" by getting the oscillators to beat against each other more. I don't notice this in the videos of the (much more expensive) OB-X8 , that synth sounds nice and fat even when producing a discernable pitch.
That pro-800 is quite something over here for what it is! UB-xa sounds quieter and bit thinner. The stacked voices makes the synth punchier but it sounds not that great and too detuned. weird but interesting quick compare test
@@AdamTheAd-vanc3dyeah. The release just needs to be dialed back slightly and it’s money. Actually I feel like the release could be dialed back on all these examples.
@@emilianolasalle it’s a great synth but it’s clearly more about knowing how to attain that sound. The Pro 800 does sound very close and it’s a $400 machine
Lovely synths, but the comparison is a bit all over the place with te levels and the tuning and effects. The UB-Xa sounds way too detuned. Fatness doen's come from detuning a synth, but is more of an inherent quality of a synth. That's how I see it anyway :)
Except for the last (with fx) variant, i matched the audio on my mixer to be roughly the same level. Maybe the youtube compression? But yeah, as have beed said by others i overdid the detune a little. However my goal wasnt to replicate the exact Jump Sound, i just took it as Inspiration for the comparison :D could have also been the axel F Bass Sound or anything arbritrary else
Unique thing abt UBXa is PAT and pan spread not reliant on FX. I have both DM12 and Rev 2, both offer diff usability and I think the UBXa is a somewhat child if both the Rev 2 n DM12 mated. I see all 3 having their own character and being able to do things better than the others can do. Thx for the upload.
Please, compare extensively DM12 and UBXa in places where they has ~the same features. I've bought Pro-800 few weeks ago and I've got a first surprise: it has _only one_ LFO for all 8 voices! :) It's freaking ridicilous. I understand that Pro-600 has the same thing... But adding +7 LFOs and thus making it normally polyphonic would be easy-peasy for any synth. making company. Also I'm not sure that there is a dedicated IC for that LFO because envelopes are digital and goes from the central core (as I understand) aka CPU. So Behringer could give us more LFOs maybe... Yeah, maybe I sound like a snob... But here I have a reason why this limitation is a bit frustrating for me. Although generally it sounds very cool! I wish just a deeper modulation for Polymod (I guess that it was tweaked down and it's a mistake IMHO!) and maybe an additional envelope (that would be a fantastic!). It may be real if the envelopes are not "rigid" relative to the schematic.
the behringer pro800 has two lfos one is asking for vibrato on the mod wheel triangle only the second one is multi wave and can be assigned to many destinations
Idk but I’m starting to think that Berhinger is using the internals of the PRO-800 for the UBX-A SYNTH and maybe that’s why most of the videos posted on line sound similar or the PRO-800 sounds better IMHO I’ve been watching recent uploads of some producer sound packs for the PRO-800 and it’s making me take a 2nd LQQK - right now i would BUY THE PRO-800 over the UBX-A cause I’m not convinced yet tbh
The pro 800 is fairly limited modulationwise though... not sure if thats important to you, but the modmatrix of ubxa is quite potent :) also it has a 2nd lfo
If you need a keybed, go with the ubxa or rev2. I think i got my rev 2 used for 1200€, it has better keybed (no aftertouch though)... i used the rev2 in almost all my own synth songs, but ubxa was also sounding nice... depends on what you prioritize
Fun comparison. But basically your trying to do 'too much' with the patch for the Jump sound. If you listen to the original version, it has no where near this much detuning and modulation going on in it. It's a straight forward 2-osc. per note sound. You also shouldn't use this much release envelop time. The sound should be much 'sharper'. And a bit of polyphonic portamento/glide should be added as well. I'm pretty sure the UB-Xa can be made to sound reasonable close to the record with the right parameter settings and effects (a bit of reverb and delay, is all really).
All sounded good. Id say Rev 2 and P 800 were the closest. Not to say the ubx a cant do the brass . Just needs a bit more tweaking like the env to oscillators modulation needs to be very sharp at the beginnimg and abrupt so the pitcb rises very subtly and quickly at the beginning.
Great work! To me they sound pretty similar.. U think the Ubxa is worth the extra price soundwise to Deepmind or Pro 800? Also, you feel it sounds more powerful or less to Rev2? Thanks 4 ur work!
I did design the Pro 800 patch, but may overdid the ubxa detune and 3 OSC per voice. Which isnt so easy with the pro 800 :D did you Listen to the ubxa with fx at the end? My eurorack fx module made the pro 800 sound better too
In this video, I also felt the Pro 800 sounded richer and creamier than all the other machines. It's EGs react differently (which has been a complaint in the past). But also, just a bit of difference in the detuning of the oscillators makes a huge difference in the movement of the sound. That may have changed the results of the comparison, who knows? My ears hear the Deepmind as being the thinnest, yet it probably had something chorusing, where the P-800 and UBX-a, likely did not? In the end, I would be happy to have any to my collection! Lol
Thanks for the video. Very useful. I think the pro-800 sounded better than all the others, with the rev2 a very close second - or equal but slightly different. Did you have an LFO slightly modulating the pitch of the UB-Xa? I think otherwise it was quite good but not as "spot on" (not only pitch-wise) as the pro800 and the rev2.
@@IonianBlueMusic-sr8xh thanks! Yeah i detuned the ubx too much... i was surprised by the pro800 as well, but i mean the ubxa should be more versatile in general
I have REV2 16V its a work horse synth... can do all but the SEM thing like OB-6 Patch 007 Broken EP... however its FX are the weakest point... When I put it through my Virus TI2 Fx Throughput it sounds amazingly more dynamic (as I guess all synths would through good FX).
Thanks for the vid. They all sounded pretty far away to me. Aside from the programming (need shorter stabbier hits, more detune/drift) the original recording, as I understand, was done with an OB-X through a Marshall stack.
@@ElectroPanPipes Linked where? Below what? I don't see why not, Eddie was a guitar player and putting a Keyboard through an amp is pretty common in rock music, especially back in the day.
@@EnervatedSociety Below my comment, it’s the isolated track. You can clearly hear the OB isn’t driven, although people did do it I agree. Give it a listen, the syncopated part doesn’t have reverb so you get a good listen Edit: link is getting hidden, I’ll try this ua-cam.com/video/xiG5D5po4Ws/v-deo.html
I can tell you absolutely they were many stacked Oberheims on Jump. Europe's final countdown, as relayed by the synth guy himself, was 11 synths and overdubs. That's what things were back then. So there4 is no way you are going to hear a one to one replication here. I will say the Pro-800 sounded good, but you can get the UB-XA better with synth knowledge application.
My first reaction to hearing sound demos of the UBXa is that it sounded like the Deepmind. Not a plus for me as I am not a fan of the Deepmind’s sound.
Poly AT... I had the hydrasynth, but sound design was too much menue diving. And when i write songs i use a sequencer to play all instruments at once in a track
I just hope the price drops because of how bad it sounds, at least it has a good control panel, but I wouldn't buy this one to make the Van Halen sound, it would be throwing a lot of money away.
This is the comparison I am really interested in, but unfortunately you have overdone it with the detuning and reverb on both UB-Xa and Deepmind. Listen how more focused is the same sound on Deepmind here: ua-cam.com/video/BfAwIuQKOdc/v-deo.html To my opinion DM here sounds even better than the original isolated track, which someone posted around. And even OPX-Pro 3 is more focused here, even though a little bit duller: ua-cam.com/video/VVpZCno0o0I/v-deo.html
nice video. one piece of advice....try using one finger per key on your right hand when playing jump. in fact id avoid playing two keys with one finger whenever possible. also using your pinky more might be helpful too.
0:00 Intro
0:27 Increasing OSC
0:50 Ub-Xa
1:24 Deepmind
1:55 Pro 800
2:24 Rev2
2:51 Ub-Xa with Fx
3:37 Outro
The UB-Xa seems to have excessive detune which weakens the sound. I think that's why the 800 sounds most accurate because it's more focused.
Good point , i was wiggling around with the voice detune knob to make it fatter, but i might have overdone...
I've noticed this in a number of UB-Xa videos. I don't think this is a flaw in the synth but rather programmers trying to make the thing sound "fatter" by getting the oscillators to beat against each other more. I don't notice this in the videos of the (much more expensive) OB-X8 , that synth sounds nice and fat even when producing a discernable pitch.
That pro-800 is quite something over here for what it is! UB-xa sounds quieter and bit thinner. The stacked voices makes the synth punchier but it sounds not that great and too detuned. weird but interesting quick compare test
Yeah, i overdid it with voice detuning :)
I thought the pro 800 sounded closest to the original. But I’ve seen people get spot on with the Rev2.
Omg I agree that Pro 800 holy schmoly.
Even without the additional chorus of the original sound the detuned amount is madly close .
@@AdamTheAd-vanc3dyeah. The release just needs to be dialed back slightly and it’s money. Actually I feel like the release could be dialed back on all these examples.
I think the release was added so he had more time to lift his hands between chords due to his playing capability.@@KBizzy
Because the rev2 is the best synth for the budget
@@emilianolasalle it’s a great synth but it’s clearly more about knowing how to attain that sound. The Pro 800 does sound very close and it’s a $400 machine
Lovely synths, but the comparison is a bit all over the place with te levels and the tuning and effects. The UB-Xa sounds way too detuned. Fatness doen's come from detuning a synth, but is more of an inherent quality of a synth. That's how I see it anyway :)
Except for the last (with fx) variant, i matched the audio on my mixer to be roughly the same level. Maybe the youtube compression? But yeah, as have beed said by others i overdid the detune a little. However my goal wasnt to replicate the exact Jump Sound, i just took it as Inspiration for the comparison :D could have also been the axel F Bass Sound or anything arbritrary else
Unique thing abt UBXa is PAT and pan spread not reliant on FX.
I have both DM12 and Rev 2, both offer diff usability and I think the UBXa is a somewhat child if both the Rev 2 n DM12 mated.
I see all 3 having their own character and being able to do things better than the others can do.
Thx for the upload.
In this comparison the Pro-800 came the closest! WOW!
Pretty good yeah i was surprised as well :D
Please, compare extensively DM12 and UBXa in places where they has ~the same features.
I've bought Pro-800 few weeks ago and I've got a first surprise: it has _only one_ LFO for all 8 voices! :) It's freaking ridicilous. I understand that Pro-600 has the same thing... But adding +7 LFOs and thus making it normally polyphonic would be easy-peasy for any synth. making company.
Also I'm not sure that there is a dedicated IC for that LFO because envelopes are digital and goes from the central core (as I understand) aka CPU. So Behringer could give us more LFOs maybe...
Yeah, maybe I sound like a snob... But here I have a reason why this limitation is a bit frustrating for me.
Although generally it sounds very cool! I wish just a deeper modulation for Polymod (I guess that it was tweaked down and it's a mistake IMHO!) and maybe an additional envelope (that would be a fantastic!). It may be real if the envelopes are not "rigid" relative to the schematic.
the behringer pro800 has two lfos one is asking for vibrato on the mod wheel triangle only the second one is multi wave and can be assigned to many destinations
The rev2 is the best sounding here by far
Idk but I’m starting to think that Berhinger is using the internals of the PRO-800 for the UBX-A SYNTH and maybe that’s why most of the videos posted on line sound similar or the PRO-800 sounds better IMHO I’ve been watching recent uploads of some producer sound packs for the PRO-800 and it’s making me take a 2nd LQQK - right now i would BUY THE PRO-800 over the UBX-A cause I’m not convinced yet tbh
The pro 800 is fairly limited modulationwise though... not sure if thats important to you, but the modmatrix of ubxa is quite potent :) also it has a 2nd lfo
Did you play "Outro" as the outro?
Yeah :D
With Reverb it sounds epic!
@johntrasher someone probably asked this already, but which synth do you recommend if you want to buy only 1 "budget" synthesizer? The UB-Xa?
If you need a keybed, go with the ubxa or rev2. I think i got my rev 2 used for 1200€, it has better keybed (no aftertouch though)... i used the rev2 in almost all my own synth songs, but ubxa was also sounding nice... depends on what you prioritize
Fun comparison. But basically your trying to do 'too much' with the patch for the Jump sound. If you listen to the original version, it has no where near this much detuning and modulation going on in it. It's a straight forward 2-osc. per note sound. You also shouldn't use this much release envelop time. The sound should be much 'sharper'. And a bit of polyphonic portamento/glide should be added as well. I'm pretty sure the UB-Xa can be made to sound reasonable close to the record with the right parameter settings and effects (a bit of reverb and delay, is all really).
Yeah you're right, but i was mostly trying to compare these synths with similar settings. But your recipe is definetly doable with the ubxa.
I agree, amp envelope release was too slow.
All sounded good. Id say Rev 2 and P 800 were the closest.
Not to say the ubx a cant do the brass . Just needs a bit more tweaking like the env to oscillators modulation needs to be very sharp at the beginnimg and abrupt so the pitcb rises very subtly and quickly at the beginning.
veery entertaining!
The jump sound has portamento in it if you listen to the isolated track
yep i thought so too--the blip at the front of the sound
Great work! To me they sound pretty similar..
U think the Ubxa is worth the extra price soundwise to Deepmind or Pro 800?
Also, you feel it sounds more powerful or less to Rev2? Thanks 4 ur work!
I would say it sounds more powerful than the rev-2 8 voice, but not as powerful as the 16 voice equivaent
The Pro-800 in this video sounds the best, I think you just don’t know how to design the right patch on the UB-Xa
I did design the Pro 800 patch, but may overdid the ubxa detune and 3 OSC per voice. Which isnt so easy with the pro 800 :D did you Listen to the ubxa with fx at the end? My eurorack fx module made the pro 800 sound better too
Im sure its just how you had them setup, but the Pro 800 killed the others ones, IMO
Pro 800 sounds better than the UB XA
In this particular patch, but the pro 800 is less flexible modulationwise... great about the ubxa is for example the panning feature
In this video, I also felt the Pro 800 sounded richer and creamier than all the other machines. It's EGs react differently (which has been a complaint in the past). But also, just a bit of difference in the detuning of the oscillators makes a huge difference in the movement of the sound. That may have changed the results of the comparison, who knows?
My ears hear the Deepmind as being the thinnest, yet it probably had something chorusing, where the P-800 and UBX-a, likely did not?
In the end, I would be happy to have any to my collection! Lol
Pro 800 wins
You need to work on your timing. It’s embarrassing.
And you need to work on your manners, they're also embarrassing!!!
Thanks for the video. Very useful. I think the pro-800 sounded better than all the others, with the rev2 a very close second - or equal but slightly different. Did you have an LFO slightly modulating the pitch of the UB-Xa? I think otherwise it was quite good but not as "spot on" (not only pitch-wise) as the pro800 and the rev2.
@@IonianBlueMusic-sr8xh thanks! Yeah i detuned the ubx too much... i was surprised by the pro800 as well, but i mean the ubxa should be more versatile in general
I have REV2 16V its a work horse synth... can do all but the SEM thing like OB-6 Patch 007 Broken EP... however its FX are the weakest point... When I put it through my Virus TI2 Fx Throughput it sounds amazingly more dynamic (as I guess all synths would through good FX).
Thanks for the vid.
They all sounded pretty far away to me. Aside from the programming (need shorter stabbier hits, more detune/drift) the original recording, as I understand, was done with an OB-X through a Marshall stack.
I doubt it was put through a Marshall. I've linked the isolated below. But I agree, none are that close. Too much detune, reverb and no porta
ua-cam.com/video/xiG5D5po4Ws/v-deo.html
@@ElectroPanPipes Linked where? Below what?
I don't see why not, Eddie was a guitar player and putting a Keyboard through an amp is pretty common in rock music, especially back in the day.
@@EnervatedSociety Below my comment, it’s the isolated track. You can clearly hear the OB isn’t driven, although people did do it I agree. Give it a listen, the syncopated part doesn’t have reverb so you get a good listen
Edit: link is getting hidden, I’ll try this
ua-cam.com/video/xiG5D5po4Ws/v-deo.html
I can tell you absolutely they were many stacked Oberheims on Jump. Europe's final countdown, as relayed by the synth guy himself, was 11 synths and overdubs. That's what things were back then. So there4 is no way you are going to hear a one to one replication here. I will say the Pro-800 sounded good, but you can get the UB-XA better with synth knowledge application.
My first reaction to hearing sound demos of the UBXa is that it sounded like the Deepmind. Not a plus for me as I am not a fan of the Deepmind’s sound.
Curious as to why you picked up a UB-XA. Seems like you have several other synths that can do the same thing.
Poly AT... I had the hydrasynth, but sound design was too much menue diving.
And when i write songs i use a sequencer to play all instruments at once in a track
I just hope the price drops because of how bad it sounds, at least it has a good control panel, but I wouldn't buy this one to make the Van Halen sound, it would be throwing a lot of money away.
fx render this null
This is the comparison I am really interested in, but unfortunately you have overdone it with the detuning and reverb on both UB-Xa and Deepmind. Listen how more focused is the same sound on Deepmind here:
ua-cam.com/video/BfAwIuQKOdc/v-deo.html
To my opinion DM here sounds even better than the original isolated track, which someone posted around.
And even OPX-Pro 3 is more focused here, even though a little bit duller:
ua-cam.com/video/VVpZCno0o0I/v-deo.html
And here is also Rev-2. It sounds a tad closer to the original than Deepmind, because is brighter:
ua-cam.com/video/58yog7dDJHU/v-deo.html
Using external FX for the UB-XA and the 800, and only internal FX for the other 2, made this LITERALLY NOT A COMPARISON … 🤦🏻♂️
Well the two others do have internal FX, Pro 800 and Ubxa do not.
nice video. one piece of advice....try using one finger per key on your right hand when playing jump. in fact id avoid playing two keys with one finger whenever possible. also using your pinky more might be helpful too.
haha i thought that was a pro move, to play to keys with 1 Finger... :D i usually play guitar and didnt have classical piano training!
Did you try using deepmind but using 3 osc per voice? ( if anyone needs to know how to do this, comment and I'll explain)
i am curious? how can u do it?
Great demo, thank you! That Pro-800 sounds beautiful. Was that M83's Outro at the end? You might have just earned a new sub...
Thank you very much! Yeah it was!
Remember, the pro 800 has external fx on it, but yeah pretty good right? Sufficient one might say
Of course, you can't really M83 without lots of effects... lol
Have you tried tuning your synths?
I detuned the voices in the ub-xa a little, also it was 3 Oscs per voice... so it sounds broad and wide