Did you expect something else ? Each Arturia synth classic emulation sound as any other Arturia synth

 

agree. nice tool. comes somehow close to an jp8000 but its missing that certain stuff that made the hardware special compared to other synths back then.
snappy envelope, cutting eq and delay. more edgy.

its nice to have as an addition, but won't replace the hardware for me

 

I listened to some youtube Demos now and it sounds very Generic, cold and thin. I also listened to some Real HW Jp8000 Demos and thats a huuuuge Difference in Everything. The Hardware sounds "Phatter" and more 3D. I think i use this combnation of words since years. But when you had a HW Synth or use the DSP56300 than you definitly hear the Difference between Hardware, Emulation and VST "Simulation".

Sad, i really thought this could be something.

 

Well it turned out to be real.

The authenticity isn't 100% (especially filter, osc sync and FX wise) and it doesn't load JP8K patches.

It's in the ballpark but it isn't the same.

 

Now there is an option to import jp8x and aplst files, what are they? Anyone able to export files from the hardware as jp8x format, then import into JUP 8000?

 

Just take the new Arturia Jp-800 V as it is and see what it can do and what possibilities it offers you.

 

I haven't owned a JP8000 but had a friend that had one when they first came out, to my ears this sounds pretty close and also sounds very similar to what I hear on YT, obviously Roland probably would want to allow a bit of scope for their own cloud version which will possibly be even closer (if they ever get around to it) but I think this definitely sounds like a JP8000.

 

The claim that all Arturia vst emulations sound the same is a load of BS. There are plenty of videos online comparing them to their hardware counterparts...and most sound very accurate. There's a blind test with the OB-XA V which listeners had a very hard time picking out. Charlie Clouser of NIN has also released the results of his comparisons between the Prophet VS and Oberheim Matrix 12 and nobody on Gearslutz could tell the difference. He's used both synths for almost 40 years, knows them inside and out and says those two emulations are dead on accurate. So take with a grain of salt people online that have probably never touched any of these synths in real life.

 

This is the kind of thing that happens all the time with the soft versions of analogs synths. Some say they aren't even close, others say it sounds "right" to them... No one can be even 50% sure about any of these unless they have the original device sitting in front of them to compare.

However, given arturia's track record with analog emulations - IMO, none of their analog vst offerings accurately (some not even close) mimics the original hardware, neither in operation or sound quality. It's like they get so far on the dev of a vst, hit some sort of time deadline and just drop it on the floor and say "done"... Many of their analog emu's are like this - kind of half baked half assed attempts that just scream "hey we took a stab at it, but this is it, we give up"... One would think that at the very least it would be able to load actual hardware JP-8000 patches. This arturia JP8K falls short even in this category.

My personal take on it would be to let Roland release their vst of the 8000. Although the Roland release of the Jupiter 8 met with much criticism when it finally came out - more rando speculation clouding the issue regarding how well the vst measured up with the real device.

 

Last edited: Apr 25, 2025 at 12:36 AM

All the patches I have seen for the hardware jp-8000 have been .syx (sysex) or .MID (midi - to be xferred via hardware midi port). I have seen zero mention of anything called a ".jp8x" format. My guess it's a nonsensical format made up by arturia for import/export of it's own proprietary presets.

Leave it to arturia to install a crap-ton of junk for one single vst.

 

Last edited: Apr 25, 2025 at 12:24 AM

just tried it. it sounds good.. but i think access virus is better! needs more presets

even nexus 5 sounds better.. this is nothing special.. not bad but not wow
alot of presets that are useless

 

Last edited: Apr 24, 2025 at 11:07 PM

That comment is a bit disingenuous. Firstly it was on Gearspace, he didn't give it enough time for more than one person to attempt a guess.

https://gearspace.com/board/showpost.php?p=16012988&postcount=186

They clearly sound different, there is a difference in stereo image, the "A" of the the Matrix comparison has more chorusing and the octave up part sounds much punchier on "B", perhaps due to a difference in envelopes.
Whereas for the Prophet VS, there is an even bigger difference in the stereo image too and "B" sounds a bit punchier/more lively in the high end. I assumed the wider stereo image = hardware, although I admit I wondered whether that is a result of the patch conversion process so my guess might have been unreasonably biased.


Whether anyone cares about the difference in a heavily processed mix is a matter of opinion.

Secondly, Charlie has also said:

Granted he was much more impressed with the new version of Arturia's Prophet VS compared to the old one.

https://vi-control.net/community/th...o-talk-w-armin-van-buuren.60495/#post-4064389

The biggest differences between Arturia (or any analog emulation for that matter) tend to be differences in features like crossmod etc. That is where Arturia versions often sound very different to the hardware, though they don't necessarily sound bad.

 

Last edited: Apr 25, 2025 at 12:03 AM

The question is not what synths sound "better" to you than the one being emulated. Does it sound precisely like the emulated synth? That's pretty much all that counts.

 

they do all sound the same. at least all of the "analog" ones. the digital and sample based ones are a bit different. Pigments and Acid as well.

Id guess they are all the exact same engine, just repackaged with a new ui.

I own some of the synths in the V collection, and have had the pleasure of working with most of them intimately over the years. None of them do the real thing justice. They can still be useful, sure, but they are far from being accurate. I wouldnt be surprised if Charlie was a paid shill.

 

I would be surprised.

https://vi-control.net/community/threads/arturia-v-collection-9-out-now.124818/page-6#post-5104028

 

haha awesome.

 

The only difference with the DSP56300 emulations and DSP56300 hardware is the circuit to drive the analog outputs. That of course is analog.
So you are talking about the "phat" sound of op amps, capacitors, resistors, etc, and the design of THAT circuit. You are no longer talking about sound synthesis or DSP56300.

It's like a tube amp guy whose friend uses solid state amps. Tube amp guy says his Beatles CD sounds phatter than his friend's Beatles CD. Even when he borrowed his friend's speakers and headphones he says his CD sounds phatter...

Well, the CDs sound the same, and the rest IS the same.
The difference is the analog outputs (amps).

 

Last edited: Apr 25, 2025 at 2:39 AM

The difference in the DAC or output stages is trivial and inaudible in the case of DSP56300 based synthesizers.

The age of non-transparent DACs was over in the 90s, in high quality synthesizers, because they deliberately made sure the DACs were transparent in sound quality. Now someone might cite some niche and more recent synth that deliberately uses a lo-fi DAC, but that is a choice (and the same sound effect could be achieved in software anyway).

In the case of JUP-8000, there are genuine differences in sound due to non exact emulation, but that difference in sound is not due to the DAC/analog output stages of the synthesizers.

 

I'm sure some people will cry a river complaining about how it is not a 1:1 replica of the original hardware, but I personally liked it.

 

Of course.
I am referring to those 56300 emulations that are based on synths that USE 56300 chips.