PlanetZ forums - scopeusers.com

Sounds good.What do you guys think?Has anyone compared it to original?

what do you mean by "original"? the old (truly original) hardware incarnation, or the previous (original to SFP) Bowen/ Sequential version for SCOPE?

Wasn't it based on an old analogue synth?

yes it is based on the original Sequential Circuits Pro~One circa 1981.

it is interesting to me that you are wondering how it compares to the original if you don't know how the original sounds, yourself. does it really matter how accurate the reproduction is, so long as the CreamWare Pro~One sounds good to your ears?

i would only be concerned about accuracy if i was very specifically needing to have *that* Sequential sound.

anyway, check these out for more info:

http://www.vintagesynth.org/sci/seqpro1.shtml

http://www.vintagesynth.org/sci/pro1.shtml

trust your own ears, not what other people tell you (accurate or not). try the demo for yourself.

cheers,

stephen

http://www.track0.com/wavelength/

I sounds great - I purchased it last week. I have know idea how it compares to the original - does it matter?

Hmmm, well it doesn't really matter as long as it sounds good, but since they are specifically selling it as a Pro One emulation I think it's fair to ask how close it comes to the original.
I did a A/B test with the zarg version and a guy who had a real one by sending mp3's and snapshots of the knob-settings over the internet. Granted - not an ideal way of comparing, but the sounds we got were nearly identical (although of course he claimed that the real one sounded deeper etc etc. ), although you sometimes had to tweak the knob to sligthly different positions.

could anyone compare the creamwares´ pro one with ni pro53 or have anyone an opinion?

that would be really interesting to me.

We're in apples and oranges territory here. Comparing Zarg's Prophet to Pro53 would be more valid as they emulate the same thing. Pro One is a different kettle of fish. i tried Pro52 against Zarg's Prophet and wasn't blown over by Pro52, although i hear Pro53 is better than Pro52 (still doubt it's better than Zarg's Prophet though).

i only use two VSTis - Oddity and M-Tron and that's only because they're not available for SFP (shame). i just got B-2003, don't know how it compares to B4 but i love it. If i can do it in SFP it's always preferable in my book.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Mr Arkadin on 2003-07-20 12:31 ]</font>

I agree with Mr Arkadin. SFP always sounded superior than any native synth I tried.
I have NI's B4 and ran it parallel to B2003. You can clearly hear that special 'NI-sound', which I wouldn't have expected in the organ emulation. Obviously large parts of their system are reused, so the Sequential emulations probably have the same sound coloring.
Basically I wouldn't consider this feature bad in itself, but if you market something as a 'true emulation' instead of 'inspired by' then it stands in the way.
And of course if you love the full, rich SFP sound, which NO Reactor setup can achieve

cheers, Tom

it is interesting to me that you are wondering how it compares to the original if you don't know how the original sounds, yourself. does it really matter how accurate the reproduction is, so long as the CreamWare Pro~One sounds good to your ears?

trust your own ears, not what other people tell you (accurate or not). try the demo for yourself.

cheers,

stephen

http://www.track0.com/wavelength/

Yes it sounds good very good as does the minimax of which I bought.It is important because if it sounds as good as the original it excites me so much about my SFP platform.This being that it can emulate something's with just a buch of DSP's.I'm not a native fan,but I've been blown away with the sound quality of these 2 emulations,and anwsers my question that one day we will have pro quality in the bedroom.
Thx for links by the way.

I concede that it is vital that an "emulation" be as accurate as possible. I just don't like to get caught up in the recent emulation marketing hype... otherwise we would all accept that the Pro-52(3) is what a Prophet-5 actually sounded like. If you are very concerned about the exactitude of an emulation try and arrange an A/B yourself.

I always try to play a new device on its own terms, ie: what can I do with this unit, as it is/ how can it add to my sound?

Even children's toys can be "professional" instruments in the right hands... or two simple wooden sticks beating on skins?

I guess my point was really not to buy something just because it is reportedly accurate (or hip), but because it is special (and useful) to you. If the original Pro~One was already special and useful to you, then I could understand your question.

On 2003-07-20 07:17, King of Snake wrote:
Hmmm, well it doesn't really matter as long as it sounds good, but since they are specifically selling it as a Pro One emulation I think it's fair to ask how close it comes to the original.
I did a A/B test with the zarg version and a guy who had a real one by sending mp3's and snapshots of the knob-settings over the internet. Granted - not an ideal way of comparing, but the sounds we got were nearly identical (although of course he claimed that the real one sounded deeper etc etc. ), although you sometimes had to tweak the knob to sligthly different positions.

of course, even vintage Pro~One units' sounds varied fairly widely from unit to unit (especially over time)... the true nature of analogue, right? it really depends on which actual hardware Pro~One was being modelled, as to the sound of the resulting emulation... food for thought?

On 2003-07-20 17:57, wavelength wrote:
I always try to play a new device on its own terms, ie: what can I do with this unit, as it is/ how can it add to my sound?

I used to be caught up in a need for very good electric guitar sound. It was quite a problem, as this was not always awailable with the gear at hand. Then I changed in the direction you descibe above, and suddenly even a small Hohner amp would be usefull. I just had to play with and let my self inspire by the conditions at hand. Sorry for OT, but maybe it is still relevant?

etc. ), although you sometimes had to tweak the knob to sligthly different positions.

perhaps try the new CW one which should be more accurate, especially with the knob positions.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: medway on 2003-07-20 22:46 ]</font>

perhaps. I'm just not very keen on upgrading to the CW version, since it misses the sequencer from the zarg version, and also the unison mode.

King of Snake wrote:

it misses the sequencer from the zarg version, and also the unison mode.

Sounds more like my Pro One SOLO, apart from polyphony (which i wouldn't use that often) - even i would lose features, mainly random arpeggio it seems. The new Pro One sounds like it's more authentic than the old one, but they've added effects, so why get get rid of a better arpeggiator/sequencer - how about giving two sequencer modes: easy (Zarg) and authentic.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Mr Arkadin on 2003-07-21 06:27 ]</font>

I'm not sure if to upgrade or not -I've just (a few days ago) purchased the Zarg pro 1 and now I've got to fork out another 99 euros for what looks like a more accurate model - but better sounding?