the latest Behringer-gate

[The Elf]

I sold my TR-909 and 808 and replaced with a TR-8... that I grew to dislike. I'd certainly consider these clones for the times I need them (and they are still requested a heck of a lot from various clients).

Pity about the external PSU, but sub 300 quid I can forgive it.

[Dave B]

In that scenario, I'd actually be looking at the Roland (shock horror!!!) TR8S. I wasn't impressed by the original TR8, but the new S version seems to be a proper product. And they've even fixed it now so it stays in time!

[The Elf]

Yes, the TR-8S is a much better machine. I took a good look at SynthFest and I was impressed that Roland had addressed many of the issues with the TR-8, especially the lack of outputs, though I feel that the 8S is still a couple of outputs short.

Roland has been asked for recreations of its analogue gear for long enough, yet they seem to choose to ignore it. They had their chance.

Behringer's clones are analogue - and they're priced to move in big numbers (and have oodles of outputs). I'd say that they're going to sell like the proverbial cakes.

[Dave B]

Roland have (apparently) just rolled off two bumper years and have sold more than they have in the last couple of decades. They credit this to the boutique range. I should really have asked if this was just units sold or actual profit... But anyway, they seem happy with what they have so good luck to 'em.

But it does raise some interesting questions about the ability to produce actual analogue hardware. Behringer seem to have invested in this - as have Korg and lots of smaller companies - and are able to do it competitively which leaves me wondering why Roland and Yamaha haven't also.

Meh ... not my problem. I have lots of lovely proper analogue kit to play with at the moment so I'm fine ...

[johnny h]

Roland have (apparently) just rolled off two bumper years and have sold more than they have in the last couple of decades. They credit this to the boutique range. I should really have asked if this was just units sold or actual profit... But anyway, they seem happy with what they have so good luck to 'em.

The boutique range is very ironically named. They use the cheapest possible materials and they are all absolutely identical inside, just with different front panels. This is why the TR09 has tiny bunched up knobs. They haven't even bothered to put a proper balanced full sized output on them, and the hum from the USB power is absolutely awful. Of course they make money from them. They must cost virtually nothing to manufacture.

But it does raise some interesting questions about the ability to produce actual analogue hardware. Behringer seem to have invested in this - as have Korg and lots of smaller companies - and are able to do it competitively which leaves me wondering why Roland and Yamaha haven't also.

Yamaha and Roland ditched their analogue teams back in the 80s. Roland get Studio Electronics to make their Minimoog clone. Roland just do the badge and marketing. Yamaha have absolutely no respect for their analogue legacy. They sent all their GX1s to the scrap yard back in the 80s.

[BillB]

Yamaha and Roland ditched their analogue teams back in the 80s.

I doubt that it is an issue of missing expertise. Most decent hobbyists could pick up a Robert Penfold electronics book and put together an analogue synth, so it is well within the scope of these mighty corporations. They will have all of the circuit diagrams etc of their analogue classics, and the wherewithal to convert them into modern, lower-cost manufacturing processes (as Behringer / Korg / Sequential / others have done). It would appear to be more down to market choices.

As Elf said

Roland has been asked for recreations of its analogue gear for long enough, yet they seem to choose to ignore it. They had their chance.

Given that many of designs are out (or will be coming out) of copyright, meaning no option to protect past works, it does seem foolish to miss the opportunity that others have so clearly seen. Even to test the water, as Korg did with the Monotron - 8 years ago!
https://www.soundonsound.com/reviews/korg-monotron

[BillB]

Ooh, Ooh! SOS Posts = 500! Yay!
I aim for small, achievable targets in life

[Drew Stephenson]

[The Elf]

I have lots of lovely proper analogue kit to play with at the moment some of which I will be bringing along to the next SOS meet...

FTFY

[nathanscribe]

The RD-909 looks good! I've been pondering the relative merits of the Behringer 808 thingummy versus the Roland TR-8s, given that I've already got the 909 and 606 covered. I'd always prefer analogue sounds to emulations, but the sampling side of the Roland might swing it. I've had a go with one for maybe 45 mins, and although it was fun I was not entirely convinced by the hats and cymbals to be honest.

I mean, finding actual examples of any of these machines is like *insert proverb of choice*. Just trying not to spend my money on something else in the meantime...

[johnny h]

They will have all of the circuit diagrams etc of their analogue classics, and the wherewithal to convert them into modern, lower-cost manufacturing processes (as Behringer / Korg / Sequential / others have done). It would appear to be more down to market choices.

Its not hard to make analogue synths, but they will never be cheaper to produce than a bargain basement DSP chip, mini-USB port and 3.5mm jack socket in a flimsy plastic case.

[BillB]

Agreed, Johnny, but cost, or more specifically cheapness, is only one element of a sales strategy. The Monotron only costs £30-40. Korg's recent new and old (mini-MS20) analogues are in a similar ball park to Roland's boutiques. I'm just suggesting that cost is probably not a barrier to Roland/Yamaha, nor is technical know-how. It seems to be more a case of attitude and the way that small decisions, to do / not do a market experiment, can influence their approach to the market.
All wild speculation, of course

Maybe its not a bad thing. when the likes of Gordon Reid summarises the (4-voice polyphonic) SH-01a https://www.soundonsound.com/reviews/roland-sh-01a as:

The SH-01A does a remarkable job of emulating the SH-101, and then goes a lot further. The line between analogue and digital synthesis keeps getting narrower and, in the studio, I probably wouldn’t hesitate to use the SH-01A in place of the vintage synth. Whether I would take a module requiring micro-USB power and offering 3.5mm audio sockets on stage is another matter.

then actually our choices have increased, not decreased.

[johnny h]

Agreed, Johnny, but cost, or more specifically cheapness, is only one element of a sales strategy. The Monotron only costs £30-40. Korg's recent new and old (mini-MS20) analogues are in a similar ball park to Roland's boutiques. I'm just suggesting that cost is probably not a barrier to Roland/Yamaha, nor is technical know-how. It seems to be more a case of attitude and the way that small decisions, to do / not do a market experiment, can influence their approach to the market.
All wild speculation, of course

The cost difference between a 3.5mm socket and a 6.35mm one is minuscule. That Roland would cheap out on such a vital component indicates that the company is firmly in the grip of the pettiest of beancounters.

[Hugh Robjohns]

The cost difference might be trivial, but the additional panel and PCB space in such a compact product might not be. And then there's also the user-base expectation and requirements -- sadly as so much gear now uses 3.5mm sockets it could be perceived that the user-base actually expect it want it!

I'm not defending it, and I'd much rather have full-size products with full size connectors, but miniaturisation is deemed to be a desirable 'thing' in many quarters...

H

[johnny h]

The cost difference might be trivial, but the additional panel and PCB space in such a compact product might not be. And then there's also the user-base expectation and requirements -- sadly as so much gear now uses 3.5mm sockets it could be perceived that the user-base actually expect it want it!

I'm not defending it, and I'd much rather have fill-size products with full size connectors, but miniaturisation is deemed to be a desirable 'thing' in many quarters...

The 3.5mm socket is just about forgivable. The hum that comes out of it while using USB power is not!

[Hugh Robjohns]

The 3.5mm socket is just about forgivable. The hum that comes out of it while using USB power is not!

Changing the size of the connector won't change the susceptibility towards ground-loops. That's either a fundamental design issue, or an incompetent user installation!

H

[johnny h]

The 3.5mm socket is just about forgivable. The hum that comes out of it while using USB power is not!

Changing the size of the connector won't change the susceptibility towards ground-loops. That's either a fundamental design issue, or an incompetent user installation!

Its a well known fundamental design issue. My point wasn't that the smaller socket caused the hum, it was that the Roland Boutique series suffers from multiple sloppy design choices that indicate extreme cost cutting was the overriding design priority.

I'm not a qualified engineer but surely it isn't that difficult to design an output that doesn't hum while connected to power, even in a small, cheap device. Especially by a long established company like Roland. The slightly bigger Pioneer AS-1 manages to offer true analogue circuitry, separate L/R 1/4" balanced outputs and rock solid build quality.

[Hugh Robjohns]

My point wasn't that the smaller socket caused the hum, it was that the Roland Boutique series suffers from multiple sloppy design choices that indicate extreme cost cutting was the overriding design priority.

Ah... I'm glad you explained what your point really was, as I was distracted by the specifics you had mentioned. Yes, cheapness does bring significant compromises, doesn't it?

...surely it isn't that difficult to design an output that doesn't hum while connected to power, even in a small, cheap device.

No it's not... But it does rely on connecting to equally well-designed equipment in a sensible way. And sadly, a lot of end users don't understand analogue interconnections well enough to do that. So while I don't defend Roland's budget designs, it's not all their fault and intelligent installation will avoid the hum issues you've mentioned.

H

[Eddy Deegan]

I did buy one of the TR-08s, but I sold it after a short while as I found the lack of proper pattern chaining too big a compromise. I was given a TB-03 in exchange for a mixing desk I wasn't using, and I ended up giving it away as it sounded 'OK' but it didn't wow me and in the end I never used it for that reason.

I've steered clear of the rest of the Roland boutique stuff as a result. A friend of mine has had a few of them but never kept any, and I tried them all out and I felt 'meh' about them. I can't put my finger on it and it's very subjective but to me they don't have any personalty or charm.

The TR-08S looks on paper to be a very interesting device but I'm surprisingly (or maybe not, in light of the above) un-tempted. Also, looking at their guts they are extremely dense chips - most of them seem to be the same board running different software, and I have some (relatively minor, but ...) concerns about their longevity.

That said, I've not really been a fan of Roland synthesizers and drum machines since the days of the D50 and earlier. No denying the mighty Jupiters and there was something about the D-series boards that I did like a lot, but I just don't like 'the Roland sound' since then for some reason. Again, that's purely subjective.

If the RD-909 is anything like as good as the Model D clone then I'll be in line. Even if the sounds are a bit cliche now, they can be processed and also, I'm hoping, layered with external drum sounds driven over MIDI.

I'm currently more interested in a Squarp Pyramid than anything else, strangely enough ... but I'm going to have to be patient and wait a month or two to justify the pennies if I decide to go for it

[DGL.]

Another update from 'the other world'.
The Behringer odyssey is now in pre production and should start full mass production soon.
Despite having a full size keyboard, metal case, built in multi-FX and built in sequencer it should be $399 that's cheaper than any of the KORG reissues.

[Eddy Deegan]

Very interesting.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V3IgFHE1g74

The resurgence of analogue at reasonable prices is something I'm a huge fan of. Apart from the fact that analogue gear sounds lovely (as a rule) I believe it to be a good thing that there are 'cool' instruments rapidly re-appearing that are not 'one press gives a whole arrangement' affairs as to use these analogue beasties effectively requires putting some actual thought into what you are creating as opposed to simply layering preset complex multi-track patterns.

Not that mashups aren't a fun thing to do, but I genuinely hope that the new generation of analogue instruments encourages more people to create music from scratch as opposed to relying on the preset performances and combinations omnipresent in the advanced contemporary rompler-pluses

I'm encouraged by the increase in eurorack-style noises in various films and TV programme soundtracks over the last few years and hopefully this sort of thing will continue.

Another benefit as I see it is to put a little pressure on the established manufacturers of analogue gear to either drop the premium slightly or innnovate more. Not that I'm complaining really, but these comparisons between (for example) the Prophet 6 /OB 6 and the Deepmind 12 serve to illustrate my point https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8K6M9vkh4wUhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vPSxSvYXxpE

(I'd still by the Prophet 6 or OB 6 but look at what you can get for less than half the price if you're stretched for budget)

As Behringer are obviously able to produce these clones at such low prices I really hope they start producing more original synths of their own design, like Arturia did (albeit Arturia did so at rather higher premiums).

[The Elf]

Got to say that so far all the Berry synths I've used are spot on for the money.

Love my Odyssey, but I have to try the newbie - the built-in effects would be a huge advantage for stage.

[Eddy Deegan]

Got to say that so far all the Berry synths I've used are spot on for the money.

Love my Odyssey, but I have to try the newbie - the built-in effects would be a huge advantage for stage.

Also I'm intrigued by the presence of multiple filter types in the Berry. I've never owned an original Odyssey but if I understood the video correctly, the Berry one has all of the filter versions present in the various original models.

2019 looks like it'll be a good year for us on the synth front!

[DGL.]

Got to say that so far all the Berry synths I've used are spot on for the money.

Love my Odyssey, but I have to try the newbie - the built-in effects would be a huge advantage for stage.

Also I'm intrigued by the presence of multiple filter types in the Berry. I've never owned an original Odyssey but if I understood the video correctly, the Berry one has all of the filter versions present in the various original models.

2019 looks like it'll be a good year for us on the synth front!

Yes it has all filter types, also according to the Amazona.de review it sounds more authentic than the KORG clone.
Isn't it nice having a synth nut running a big MI company?
All we need now is the 2600, which I understand is in the works.