Agree, I really like their emulations.. that's what I tend to lean to.

 

Interestingly it is based on samples from the real machines.

 

The GForce team works with great dedication and attention to detail; they also possess extensive technical expertise, which is why all their hardware emulations sound so good. GForce elevates the software into modern, up-to-date virtual synthesizers—complete with those special extras!

 

GForce make shrill-sounding toys just like Cherry Audio, only the later's TRIDENT works in my reggae tunes.

I've tried that GF P5, is is this a joke? MODEL80 wipes the floor with all of those VSTi's, I' haven't heard Acustica's this said and I'm a major NEBULA nerd but MODEL80 cost me 20 bucks on sale and sounds great, lotsa third-party banks too.

 

It works. I just tried it out from the sister site. Reading all of the posts there are several polar opposite opinions which I won't buy into.
It is pretty much like any emulation in vst form of a well-known analog synthesizer. Some will love it and others the opposite, some will choose it as their preference and others wouldn't consider it.

But - it works, like it or not.

 

GForce's synths are pretty much alright, but the "Solina" inside VSM is completely inaccurate. As it is sample-based, the only time it sort-of sounds like a Solina is with the completely dry samples. Their stereo samples were recorded with the chorus effect, so it means that when playing multiple notes, the chorus' LFOs are out of sync, so you completely miss the signature Solina vibrato. On top of that, being a sample-based instrument, the amount of sounds you can get out of it is very restricted.

On the other hand, Arturia's emulation does a fine job (at 1:06) :

Though this really shows that the Arturia plugin would greatly benefit from a "condition/age" knob. That chaotic chorus on the hardware is very nice.

While not on Softube, Synapse Audio or u-he's level, GForce is still leagues above Cherry Audio.

 

Last edited: Jun 16, 2026 at 10:09 PM

Having owned Solina's, Elka's, Crumars. and other stringers, along with Mellotrons/Chamberlins.... believe me, GForce >>>>>>>> Arturia by a country mile.

 

I don't know what people hear, but for me GForce's Oberheim collection is mindblowing.

 

Ah yes, the "basic ass" argument. I can assure you there is nothing "basic ass" about it.

Nothing could be more "basic ass" than a Fender Rhodes (Logic's epiano is a prime example), and yet, for those of us that grew up with a Mark I in their bedroom, very few of those "basic ass" emulations pass mustard. The sound is that ingrained in our brain's auditory sense that we can tell when one's artificial, or just a "basic ass" job.

Before I bought Keyscape, I had CD-ROMs (in Akai, EMU and Roland formats) by the German company Magnetica - that's how good and authentic sounding their Fender Rhodes was (in the late 1990s no less). I believe NI's e-Instruments bought out Magnetica's Rhodes Library, so that "Session Keys Electric R" (and its companion "Electric S") are now part of the NI fold.

Point being: for a library sampled and built in the 1990s to have withstood the test of digital time (and not been bested by any of their competitors for 20 years) shows there's nothing "basic ass" about emulating a sound as simple as a resonating tine struck by a plastic hammer. Likewise with sounds as diverse and complex as those generated by the Prophet 5.

 

Based on the Starsky Carr video (I don't own the real hardware) they nailed it (I think this is based on the Prophet 5 Rev 4), hats off to GForce for another gem! Comparing it to Model 80 and Repro 5 there are minor differences but they all sound like P5s in a very convincing way.

 

Just this. The kind of thread with some extreme opinions you know they aren't to be trusted. "X is shit. Y is god" style

On the other hand, there's some reasoned critiques here too. I can agree more or less with them, but they're useful.

 

It's not worth the extra effort. Imagine you work 3 years to model every single component in meticulous detail devoting time and money and your life, creating a plugin that is sample by sample indistinguishable from a Prophet 5, including inconsistencies and imperfections and somebody in the forum will say "I'm not impressed" or "Arturia sounds better" or that nothing can match the original hardware...Then someone makes a video with unknown recording equipment, unknown audio routing, eq, with an uncalibrated prophet 5 and will say - oh there is an audible difference and the hardware has better low/mid range. Guys have you heard about EQ on an audio forum?

 

To everyone who has watched the demo videos of the plugin:

What additional features does the plugin offer compared to the hardware? Unfortunately, I don’t have much time at the moment to watch all the videos.
I don’t mean the effects, but rather the modulation options that the hardware Prophet-5 doesn’t have.
I’m wondering whether I could transfer (by hand tweaking) at least some of the additional presets to the real Prophet.

The only thing I’ve picked up so far is that the plugin has a tempo-synced LFO if i am not mistaken.
Apart from that, I unfortunately don’t know much.

Thanks!

 

You get an extra LFO (syncable with 8 waveforms) and an envelope (a loopable DADSR) per layer both of which can have multiple destinations each. Also (unless you count the modern rev 4 reissue) then you also get velocity and aftertouch. And yes, the "original" non-extra LFO can also be tempo synced.

The XLFO/XADSR can also be assigned to effect parameters so you can integrate them better to a patch.

 

Ok, thanks buddy!