Diva vs Behringer D blind test...

Official support for: u-he.com
RELATED
PRODUCTS

Post

They are very close but I would say that A is Diva and B is the Model D. More presence for the second ...

Post

I think A is Diva.

Post

I have no idea which is which but I would choose A.

Post

akira2 wrote: Wed Nov 13, 2019 2:51 pmWould be great a Repro1 vs Behringer Pro1 ;)
Apparently they sound very different. I have yet to run my tests on our BPO.

Post

Urs wrote: Wed Nov 13, 2019 4:31 pm
akira2 wrote: Wed Nov 13, 2019 2:51 pmWould be great a Repro1 vs Behringer Pro1 ;)
Apparently they sound very different. I have yet to run my tests on our BPO.
That's surprising since I've seen detailed comparisons of the Behringer and original Pro-1 and they are almost identical.

Post

zvenx wrote: Wed Nov 13, 2019 2:53 pm I have no idea which is which but I generally preferred A.
It sounded a bit more organic to me for some of those sounds.

I wondered though that it's a bit bright, and, IIRC, Urs once mentioned that they made Diva a bit more bright than the original they modelled it on, so, i'm not sure really.

I still think A is the Behringer though, and B is Diva.

Post

"A (or B) sounds better to me so it must be the hardware". That is Cognitive Bias. :lol:
None are so hopelessly enslaved as those who falsely believe they are free. Johann Wolfgang von Goethe

Post

Echoes in the Attic wrote: Wed Nov 13, 2019 4:50 pm
Urs wrote: Wed Nov 13, 2019 4:31 pm
akira2 wrote: Wed Nov 13, 2019 2:51 pmWould be great a Repro1 vs Behringer Pro1 ;)
Apparently they sound very different. I have yet to run my tests on our BPO.
That's surprising since I've seen detailed comparisons of the Behringer and original Pro-1 and they are almost identical.
Well, we've got two Pro-Ones and they're pretty far off from each other, and so were the audio clips I got sent from others. I found a few things after a couple of minutes which strike me as odd, but I have yet to compare to the real deal.

Post

This guy does good comparisons:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T4LN3BZGrog

Post

Urs wrote: Wed Nov 13, 2019 2:27 pm Can't really say... after listening a few times I find giveaways for either in A and B. Goes to show that the Behringer is actually quite close.
haha yes the Behringer emulation of Diva is not far off although there are are few areas I will point out after the reveal I think are a bit inaccurate...not bad effort tho!
The unshushable Coktor wrote: Wed Nov 13, 2019 2:45 pm
You didn't EQ anything, did you, SwanAudio?

Viktor
Hi Viktor no EQ! ...only careful level matching...

Some ask did I put Diva through a converter loop the answer is no. I don't honestly think that is an important stage considering no one ever has passed a blind test of a single converter stage I know of...

The sounds were mostly my presets then I matched them with the Boog as close as I could (the knob ranges can be tricky)....then I recorded the audio in a MOTU 16a at 44.1 24bit, then I worked a bit on the Diva preset matching the recorded audio for the last fine stages of matching the sound. It's much more efficient this way as when it comes down to the fine detail, you need to take a bit of time and rest the ears etc...which of course you can do much easier when its in the box vs an analogue box with no presets and temperature/tuning etc...

Some people have talked about bias but I aim to eliminate it as much as possible (especially around levels). I started off testing out of interest and now it has developed into presets, but it was fairly obvious that the emulations are close enough, and people tend to get it wrong. Not that I would cheat otherwise, but you simply don't need to be biased.

Traditionally people arguing for the cause of analogue would often make a plugin sound worse (more open cutoff or horrible sound example etc) in order to show the world how much better their analogue synth sounds.

In this case it is in my interest to make the plugin sound as close as possible, but I don't see how this can be manipulated because there is no benefit in making the hardware sound different (better/worse) to the software - the software by design is meant to emulate the hardware - you cannot make the plugin sound 'more analogue' than the analogue....there are of course the occasional 'edges' that crop up the software in areas like tuning, cutoff, filter env (the highs) etc...but usually it is a matter of very fine changes (shift key) and suddenly the difference almost disappears...

...that is the fascinating thing about this area, that I do think there can be differences, but they are transient depending on the sound and sometimes a very slightly inaccurate programming which can make you believe the plugin is not close, when it's actually a tiny programming difference...

....trying to think when to reveal now...
Presets for u-he Diva -> http://swanaudio.co.uk/

Post

Echoes in the Attic wrote: Wed Nov 13, 2019 5:53 pm This guy does good comparisons:
Yep, he does.

I just spent half an hour with Pro-One vs. Pro-1 and I think latter sounds comparably clean. It's got much more of a low end even though the filter doesn't go below about 80Hz. I don't see how to make a Yazoo-style base drum with it, for instance. I think it sounds very smooth on the top end, unlike the Pro-Ones we used for modelling. It has more beef and less cut-through. I can't see any technical oversight though, everything does what it should, down to low note priority in normal mode and last note priority in retrigger. I had no difficulty spotting major differences on and earlier prototype, so Behringer did their homework and got it all right. Pretty much. Maybe one just needs to patch -1V into the Cutoff CV to close the filter to proper frequencies.

Post

Urs wrote: Wed Nov 13, 2019 6:30 pm
Echoes in the Attic wrote: Wed Nov 13, 2019 5:53 pm This guy does good comparisons:
Yep, he does.

I just spent half an hour with Pro-One vs. Pro-1 and I think latter sounds comparably clean.
A precious half of an hour that could have been better spent for the Zebra 3 development!
:smack:

Post

enCiphered wrote: Wed Nov 13, 2019 6:34 pm A precious half of an hour that could have been better spent for the Zebra 3 development!
:smack:
That *IS* Zebra 3 development. Gotta know what's up out there to make something that surpasses it.

Post

Urs wrote: Wed Nov 13, 2019 6:36 pm
enCiphered wrote: Wed Nov 13, 2019 6:34 pm A precious half of an hour that could have been better spent for the Zebra 3 development!
:smack:
That *IS* Zebra 3 development. Gotta know what's up out there to make something that surpasses it.
:hihi:

Post

chk071 wrote: Wed Nov 13, 2019 1:49 pm

How can a promotion for your soundset be unbiased?

It's unbiased because it's a wide variety of sounds that could favour either the software OR the hardware. The comparison is clearly not trying to prove one way or the other as a lot of them are.

I don't care if it's wrapped up in a soundset promo when presented like this.

Post Reply

Return to “u-he”