Behringer System 55

Cwejman, Livewire, TipTop Audio, Doepfer etc... Get your euro on!

Moderators: Kent, Joe., luketeaford, lisa

Post Reply
User avatar
galanter2
Common Wiggler
Posts: 249
Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2014 8:32 pm
Location: Texas A&M University
Contact:

Re: Behringer System 55

Post by galanter2 » Sun Jan 19, 2020 2:05 pm

mbartkow wrote:
Sun Jan 19, 2020 8:43 am
galanter2 wrote:
Sun Jan 19, 2020 1:03 am
Regarding the fixed filter bank...
This is at the edge of my electronics understanding, but it is possible to simulate inductors with other parts.
Gyrators only simulate the linear inductance and are one of the many methods to convert passive RLC filters to active structures. However, gyrators will never simulate the complex nonlinear effects of inductors with a solid core, related to magnetic residue (hysteresis). These effects are responsible to particular analog distortion in audio signals, and the associated sound, just like the sound of magnetic tape.
I did mention magnetic interaction, and yes what I posted was an example of an alternative not the only alternative.

Nonlinearity can be found in just about any nontrivial design, but the amount of distortion it takes to be audible is always a controversy. In such cases I would trust double blinded juries more than bench tests and theory. As complicated as electronics can be, the neurology and perceptual psychology of hearing is even less well understood.

User avatar
EATyourGUITAR
has no life
Posts: 5798
Joined: Tue Aug 31, 2010 12:24 am
Location: Providence, RI, USA

Re: Behringer System 55

Post by EATyourGUITAR » Sun Jan 19, 2020 2:46 pm

galanter2 wrote:
Sun Jan 19, 2020 2:05 pm
I did mention magnetic interaction, and yes what I posted was an example of an alternative not the only alternative.

Nonlinearity can be found in just about any nontrivial design, but the amount of distortion it takes to be audible is always a controversy. In such cases I would trust double blinded juries more than bench tests and theory. As complicated as electronics can be, the neurology and perceptual psychology of hearing is even less well understood.
I think this misses the point. we are not looking for any non-linearity. we are looking for that specific non-linearity and hysteresis from very specific inductors. I also think that we create additional harmonics of a specific order when we exceed Isat. even more hard to replicate if the iron core becomes permanently polarized over time. this is getting into the realm of simulating particle smashing or air turbulence. it is very much non-trivial.

simulating an inductor with an opamp is just a capacitor and an opamp. no iron core in that simulation either. if this was the case, then everyone would be selling off vintage moog FFB to buy the eurorack version with TL072 and kemet film caps. it is trivial to simulate and RC filter therefor it is trivial to make a very linear RLC substitute. whether or not people notice a difference depends on the person. they can't all have golden ears. if you increase your input level past Isat then I can pretty much predict that any trained ear can pickout the real one in a blind test %100 of the time. at lower input levels then maybe you would be correct also.
WWW.EATYOURGUITAR.COM <---- MY DIY STUFF

User avatar
EPTC
Super Deluxe Wiggler
Posts: 1379
Joined: Thu May 14, 2015 9:01 am
Location: Austin TX
Contact:

Re: Behringer System 55

Post by EPTC » Sun Jan 19, 2020 2:55 pm

galanter2 wrote:
Sun Jan 19, 2020 1:03 am
Regarding the fixed filter bank...

Ultimately the only way to know is to do side by side tests
Well I could be playful and suggest 'if only there was a forum with a search feature that has discussed this before'. :hihi:

But will say the difference in 5U FFB's that are with or without inductors is heavily compared and discussed here. And you seriously do know the difference when you're comparing the two designs. The closest non-inductor version is YuSynth's (and I think Mos-Lab's) but you really know when you're hearing a genuine FFB with inductors (the two best are COTK's which is very difficult to order, and Synth Werk's which is north of a $1500 I think) - Non inductor ones like synthesizer.com are regularly considered underwhelming, both in their volume drop and lack of musical feeling. And that's in full sized 5U. It's being attempted to clone without these parts before and is very very difficult. It's a lot more than a filter. In eurorack there are interesting non-inductor FFBs. Verbos' Bark Filter comes the closest to my ears, but it's around $1000 itself.

I can show an inductor example here. The drumming is moog percussion (with some metasonix) but these are all different interactions from the same loop. Inductors can make a moog into sounding very wooden, and add enough variation when given enough signal to distort on their own and make nice moments from just the components saturating and dissipating. At around 2:15 you hear the FFB itself starting to self-distort on its own. It's a good demonstration of what surprising moments can happen with inductors, or what they're capable of doing:



It's not gatekeeping to suggest that a really great FFB is partly due to the unstable erratic sound, and that's the components. You either have those components or you don't. Or more comparably, if you want tacos with avocados, you have to have avocados, and they can't be made with bananas.

Those hand-wired inductors are full of possible moments of flaw in tension in each one (not unlike a guitar) - all of this is to politely say the Moog sound really comes down to the FFB in a lot of places. The ladder filter, too, of course. But when people go apeshit for those vintage systems there's a few key modules there that aren't in the Model D and forward. Inductor FFB's are as much the sound as unstable 901's. Early moogs are really unstable and really wonderful. It's just something to be aware of if you think you're assembling a System off of behringer's effort here.

Pretty sure AION 907 (https://www.perfectcircuit.com/aion-907a.html) is without inductors.

I think the only modern products that use inductors are the Neve 551 and other post-$1000 gear. If behringer would like to take on those kinds of console makers it'd be interesting (a Beve!). But it's more likely they'll just bypass this part of the moog sound and people won't know because they've never used one. But it's a huge part of the sound. A very emotional harmonic part of moog module systems come from that FFB.
Last edited by EPTC on Sun Jan 19, 2020 3:03 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
EPTC
Super Deluxe Wiggler
Posts: 1379
Joined: Thu May 14, 2015 9:01 am
Location: Austin TX
Contact:

Re: Behringer System 55

Post by EPTC » Sun Jan 19, 2020 3:14 pm

EATyourGUITAR wrote:
Sun Jan 19, 2020 2:46 pm

I think this misses the point. we are not looking for any non-linearity. we are looking for that specific non-linearity and hysteresis from very specific inductors. I also think that we create additional harmonics of a specific order when we exceed Isat. even more hard to replicate if the iron core becomes permanently polarized over time. this is getting into the realm of simulating particle smashing or air turbulence. it is very much non-trivial.

simulating an inductor with an opamp is just a capacitor and an opamp. no iron core in that simulation either. if this was the case, then everyone would be selling off vintage moog FFB to buy the eurorack version with TL072 and kemet film caps. it is trivial to simulate and RC filter therefor it is trivial to make a very linear RLC substitute. whether or not people notice a difference depends on the person. they can't all have golden ears. if you increase your input level past Isat then I can pretty much predict that any trained ear can pickout the real one in a blind test %100 of the time. at lower input levels then maybe you would be correct also.

Rockin' good reply. Realizing, Rupert Neve (or his company) has commented on this, too:

https://rupertneve.com/products/551/

Why Inductors?

So, what are inductors? They’re wires wound around a coil that provide a form of frequency-dependant resistance. When they saturate, they bring out beautifully musical harmonics that give your tracks the smooth, polished sound that has made Rupert’s consoles and equipment so desirable for over fifty years.

While capacitor-based designs – like the 5033 – are often preferable for surgically sculpting tracks, the inductor EQ found in the 551 is capable of adding punch, vibrance, and personality to the source material that goes far beyond general frequency modification.
If Behringer is reading this and considering 'heck let's just jam some inductors on these', Neve and others mention:
While it is possible to create a functioning EQ using off-the-shelf inductors, the attention to detail in controlling variables such as the winding and core materials in relation to the surrounding circuitry (is an important consideration, as well)
I'm not sure if Moog has ever had mass-produced/non-hand-wound inductors. Though just to cover appearances, it'd be a fun gimmick and I'd credit their gamesmanship, if Behringer used something like this: https://www.mouser.com/ProductDetail/Co ... R9EALw_wcB
Last edited by EPTC on Sun Jan 19, 2020 3:36 pm, edited 3 times in total.

User avatar
EATyourGUITAR
has no life
Posts: 5798
Joined: Tue Aug 31, 2010 12:24 am
Location: Providence, RI, USA

Re: Behringer System 55

Post by EATyourGUITAR » Sun Jan 19, 2020 3:43 pm

circuit abbey has a 2HP 3 channel logic inverter for < $100. is this really going to be too big or expensive or complicated to use? but this only matters if you want to use the fake moog ADSR. or VCO sync. if not then you just patch your ADSR from eurorack. think of the money you save.
WWW.EATYOURGUITAR.COM <---- MY DIY STUFF

User avatar
SphericalSound
Wiggling with Experience
Posts: 367
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2018 9:23 am
Location: Spain

Re: Behringer System 55

Post by SphericalSound » Sun Jan 19, 2020 6:07 pm

Boring bread n butter clones but fascinating chat about inductors and FFB. Even thinking in coil my own inductors to do a DIY version.

What would be the difficulties? Can be done with just one kind of wire or you need different gauges?

User avatar
huffnPuff
Super Deluxe Wiggler
Posts: 1697
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2016 9:50 pm

Re: Behringer System 55

Post by huffnPuff » Sun Jan 19, 2020 10:59 pm

EATyourGUITAR wrote:
Sun Jan 19, 2020 3:43 pm
circuit abbey has a 2HP 3 channel logic inverter for < $100. is this really going to be too big or expensive or complicated to use? but this only matters if you want to use the fake moog ADSR. or VCO sync. if not then you just patch your ADSR from eurorack. think of the money you save.
A VERTY will work if you can find one in stock, their 2hp series seems to have imploded. Be aware that some of those modules had issues (several XORY modules that return NOT XOR instead) and CA doesn't seem to care about making things right. Ask me how I know... I wouldn't be giving those people my money but you haven't been burned so why should you care?

On the other hand those faulty (NOT)XORY modules can work as inverters with only one input plugged in. Sometimes two wrongs do make a right.

User avatar
EPTC
Super Deluxe Wiggler
Posts: 1379
Joined: Thu May 14, 2015 9:01 am
Location: Austin TX
Contact:

Re: Behringer System 55

Post by EPTC » Sun Jan 19, 2020 11:10 pm

SphericalSound wrote:
Sun Jan 19, 2020 6:07 pm
Boring bread n butter clones but fascinating chat about inductors and FFB. Even thinking in coil my own inductors to do a DIY version.

What would be the difficulties? Can be done with just one kind of wire or you need different gauges?
Fun question, Spherical! - Here's the best DIY resource for making a 914: http://analoguerealities.com/projects/f ... -bank-914/

They mention this supplier for inductors, perhaps you could ask them about the process: http://www.analog-monster.de/shop_en.html (beautiful photos of the components there)

And here's some additional reading: http://www.analog-monster.de/mmt914_en.html

User avatar
SphericalSound
Wiggling with Experience
Posts: 367
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2018 9:23 am
Location: Spain

Re: Behringer System 55

Post by SphericalSound » Mon Jan 20, 2020 5:09 am

EPTC wrote:
Sun Jan 19, 2020 11:10 pm
SphericalSound wrote:
Sun Jan 19, 2020 6:07 pm
Boring bread n butter clones but fascinating chat about inductors and FFB. Even thinking in coil my own inductors to do a DIY version.

What would be the difficulties? Can be done with just one kind of wire or you need different gauges?
Fun question, Spherical! - Here's the best DIY resource for making a 914: http://analoguerealities.com/projects/f ... -bank-914/

They mention this supplier for inductors, perhaps you could ask them about the process: http://www.analog-monster.de/shop_en.html (beautiful photos of the components there)

And here's some additional reading: http://www.analog-monster.de/mmt914_en.html
The rabbit hole get tastier as you go deepeer into. Thanks for that crunchy links, EPTC :guinness:

polyroy
Ambient Wiggler
Posts: 3823
Joined: Wed Mar 31, 2010 6:01 pm

Re: Behringer System 55

Post by polyroy » Mon Jan 20, 2020 5:37 am

Is anyone making a fixed filter bank using inductors? In any format?
This isn't a loaded question (not touching the Behringer discussion with a barge pole), just general interest.

User avatar
warnton
Wiggling with Experience
Posts: 410
Joined: Thu May 10, 2012 9:49 am
Location: Austria

Re: Behringer System 55

Post by warnton » Mon Jan 20, 2020 6:01 am

yes, they do and it sounds awesome

https://ajhsynth.com/FFB914.html

vrfats
Common Wiggler
Posts: 200
Joined: Wed Dec 22, 2010 4:30 am

Re: Behringer System 55

Post by vrfats » Mon Jan 20, 2020 6:16 am

Yeah, uhhh why isn't anyone talking about the S-trig stuff here? I'm indifferent to some of the strong feelings surrounding Behringer, the model d remake seemed acceptable, the politics and business model are questionable, the affordability is commendable, (who cares etc) the sequencer looks like something interesting and if I found some of these other modules used and extremely cheap at some point, had a lot of rack space (which I don't) I'd probably have fun with them or might buy them but am unlikely to do so if I need a some kind of S-trig to gate convertor to make them work properly... anyways what is the story with that? Might make sense to update the gate stuff to work with the format they are issuing it in.

User avatar
Funky40
Super Deluxe Wiggler
Posts: 6039
Joined: Mon Nov 17, 2008 7:08 pm
Location: on a big voyage

Re: Behringer System 55

Post by Funky40 » Mon Jan 20, 2020 6:51 am

polyroy wrote:
Mon Jan 20, 2020 5:37 am
Is anyone making a fixed filter bank using inductors? In any format?
warnton wrote:
Mon Jan 20, 2020 6:01 am
yes, they do and it sounds awesome
https://ajhsynth.com/FFB914.html
hmm, so i understand this different than you ;)

from AJHs page:
There are many fixed filter offerings currently available in Eurorack, but generally they use single pole Sallen Key R/C active bandpass filters for the individual bands. These are often single pole, which gives a shallow 6dB slope and fairly low Q factor to the passbands, so that the overall comb filtering of the fixed filter bank at higher settings is fairly gentle, and less defined than filters with more poles and higher Q factors.

For the FFB 914 we have used Gyrator based active inductor circuitry which exactly replicates the vintage passive inductor / capacitor based filter design - this is an important design element, because a major difference between the two topologies is that the phase change versus frequency is lower with L/C filters compared to Sallen Key R/C filters. We have found that this does slightly affect the overall sound and character of the Fixed Filter Bank. Also, just like its vintage predecessor, we have fitted two cascaded L/C filters for each bank, so that we obtain a steeper 12dB passband slope and higher Q factor for the individual filter banks - and to further emulate the vintage behaviour the centre frequency of these cascaded filters is slightly offset against one another, which slightly rounds off the filter peak and give a wider spread.
they *emulate* vintage behaviour.
which, as such, has been disucssed a few posts above.......



Allways good to know whats in real inside ;)
personally, not beeing a purist.
I see uses for many things.
Rack espace as such is then another topic

Richjk7
Common Wiggler
Posts: 54
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2016 11:57 pm
Location: Greensburg, PA

Re: Behringer System 55

Post by Richjk7 » Mon Jan 20, 2020 7:29 am

Some of these modules, 992, 921A, 961 are for external controllers right?

Tried to find a site that had an explaination of how these modules work but couldn't find one.

User avatar
EATyourGUITAR
has no life
Posts: 5798
Joined: Tue Aug 31, 2010 12:24 am
Location: Providence, RI, USA

Re: Behringer System 55

Post by EATyourGUITAR » Mon Jan 20, 2020 9:05 am

there was a DIY group buy for inductors 5 years ago to build the moog format moog clone. as mentioned earlier in this thread. club of the knobs, moon modular, synth werk are the companies that may or may not build you one. you can also shop for used FFB via ebay or reverb. the real moog FFB should be about $6,000 to $10,000. unlikely that you will find a recent clone with inductors on the used market. that only happens when people eventually die. the surviving family either keeps it or sells it off. Larry Hendry for example. there was a $30K system for $10K on ebay. must buy the whole thing.
WWW.EATYOURGUITAR.COM <---- MY DIY STUFF

User avatar
blw
Wiggling with Experience
Posts: 277
Joined: Fri Feb 06, 2015 8:30 pm

Re: Behringer System 55

Post by blw » Mon Jan 20, 2020 10:37 am

Richjk7 wrote:
Mon Jan 20, 2020 7:29 am
Some of these modules, 992, 921A, 961 are for external controllers right?

Tried to find a site that had an explaination of how these modules work but couldn't find one.
921A is the oscillator driver. It supplies the pitch cv and pulse width for one or more 921B oscillators. What originally was a behind the panel connection between the A driver and B oscillators appears to be done here with front panel daisy-chaining with patch cables (looks like a two-jack mult on each module?).

961 is a sequencer interface for the 960. It assigns stage gate outputs to be sent to the EG's. And can be used for some s-trig to v-trig conversion. I maintain this is kludgy system to maintain for interfacing with other Euro and still seems stupid even within the set itself in 2020. There is no advantage to triggering the the EG's with s-trig within the system.

992 distributes cv to the filter modules. The implementation here is also a little strange. Originally the module was one of a series with signals normalled behind the panel. Here, the i/o are front panel jacks, lessening the utility of their purpose. Still, kind of a mult for cv with switchable inputs.

I think you happened to highlight some cases where Behringer made some modifications to attempt to make the modules more plug and play without rear-panel considerations. The effect that might have on patching with these day to day unfortunately seems rather inelegant.

User avatar
galanter2
Common Wiggler
Posts: 249
Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2014 8:32 pm
Location: Texas A&M University
Contact:

Re: Behringer System 55

Post by galanter2 » Mon Jan 20, 2020 12:12 pm

Just a quick thank you to those who posted all the tech stuff about inductors and the original Moog FFB. This is clearly a complicated challenge.

Also this idea from way back when I had access to a Moog modular. It’s a weird quasi waveshaper for control voltages.

CV in > sine (fm) > ffb > env follower > CV out

So if CV in is a ramp, cv out will follow the ffb levels from one knob to the next. For more complex CV in you get weird outputs vaguely like a wave folder.

You can also patch CV out back into CV in. CV out can then be played by using the ffb knobs. Rather than being driven by a VCO, CV out will seek the local maximum of the ffb. It makes for some strange instabilities as one twiddles the ffb knobs.

(Apologies to anyone who finds this sub-patch less than novel.)

User avatar
Bob Borries
Veteran Wiggler
Posts: 722
Joined: Sun Jul 11, 2010 11:41 pm
Location: L.A.

Re: Behringer System 55

Post by Bob Borries » Mon Jan 20, 2020 1:30 pm

blw wrote:
Mon Jan 20, 2020 10:37 am
921A is the oscillator driver. It supplies the pitch cv and pulse width for one or more 921B oscillators.
Image

I've never patched a System 55, from photos of many Modular 55's, I see a common oscillator configuration with a driver (921A) and a bank of three slaves (921B) can Behringer's driver control 3 sub-modules or just 2?
blw wrote:
Mon Jan 20, 2020 10:37 am
992 distributes cv to the filter modules. The implementation here is also a little strange.
On Moog's 55 Iv'e seen a coupler module between the Highpass and Lowpass filter modules, I imagine it creates Bandpass variations with serial and/or parallel routings, I don't see that much-needed module in Behringer's line up.

User avatar
KSS
Super Deluxe Wiggler
Posts: 4173
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2016 7:28 am

Re: Behringer System 55

Post by KSS » Mon Jan 20, 2020 2:04 pm

Just read the entire thread, and since there's no easy way to quotes the many posts with inaccurate or misleading information, this will surely miss some of them. Am here to discuss the technical and performance aspects, my feeling about B otherwise is documented in other posts and threads. Am old enough to remember when all this was new technology, and am writing from direct experience.

The very first thing that needs to be accepted is that this is a limited system, and was from its inception. From the viewpoint now nearly 60 years later it is an *extremely* limited system. Trying to compare it with how one would patch it today, or what's missing, is in itself rather missing the point.
You choose moog modular for only two reasons. You want the sound, and/or you want the experience. I have written before about how much of the sound and experience are a result of the panel layouts, and what's easy or not easy to achieve as a result. It's no differnt than the often seen conversations about the value of any single designer's system. People choose Makenoise, Intellijel, Cwejman, Serge, Pittsburgh and others because they *want* this set of choices and overall ethos built into the design. The moog modular is no different.

Based on this, I would tend to agree that it doesn't make much sense to think of adding a module or two from these offerings, and would instead suggest either going whole hog, or at least the well-known sub-systems, as you can find in the AION and 5U moog clone offerings. Things like an 4 module oscillator *bank*, or a sequencer *complement*. Username Monopoly's 8 module moog *voice* is another similar sensible sub-grouping.

Limited does not mean you cannot still create amazing output, and learn things about synthesis more complex and perhaps modern synths cannot achieve!

On to some potentially important details

S-triggers
These are accounted for in the original design by the converter module which Behringer has included, so there's no real reason to feel like it was a mistake. What could be a mistake on B's part is using a standard jack for the S-trig inputs. Others who have cloned these circuits have discovered that unless the inputs are "hardened" with additional components, they can and do fail when patched with something carrying voltage. So that's a potentially bad thing that they will surely need to address.

Another is the fact that during every normal TS jack insertion and removal the tip is temporarily shorted to ground. In an S-trig setup, this is a valid input! So no patching-unpatching without getting a trigger(gate) with every insert or removal. Obviously this could be a very big deal.

However, it is incredibly simple to make S-to-Vtrig conversion patchcords, as only a single transistor and resistor are needed. This can easily fit in one endshell of a patchcord and a female to male cylinder adapter -like that of the stackcables- could be made to clip onto the end of any given patchcord. it's equally simple to make more bare-bones and simple conversion modules, if the extras in the 55 based converter module don't meet your needs. But this gets back to whether you're using this for the experience, sound, or both. And whethr you dismiss my claim that the sound *is* ALSO *on* the panel and *not* only behind it.

I would not avoid this B55 for any reason relating to S-trig, but would probably mark and dedicate a specific color to cords using the STrig connections.
For what it's worth, some who have thought S-trigs were inferior to V-trig have discovered there is value in the difference which can be musically and work flow useful.

FFB's inductors and options
There is no way, zero, that this B55 914 FFB will sound as good as an original. But that does not mean it inherently has to sound bad.
One post replied that an inductor could be simulated with a capacitor and an OpAmp. Didn't see anyone mention FDNR's which are a more complex method. And there are other topologies of increasing complexity and cost which can bring one closer to the ideal that the inductor based FFB's represent. All of these have higher costs, and only your ears can tell you if a given one is good enough for you.

I'm not holding my breath for this B914 -or907, 907A, should Behringer decide to go there- to be an especially great version. The B-FFB certainly is *not* a GAS driver from where I stand.

But what if I really want an inductors based FFB?
As was pointed out in an earlier reply, it's not simply a case of getting some off the shelf inductors. And FWIW, the original were *NOT* hand wound.
The winding machines and cores from the original production were Allen Organ products. The machines and cores were lase seen -to my knowledge- in the hands of a cloner (Mike Bucki) with at best a spotty reputation, and who has not been heard from with regard to moog clones for many years now. What's important is that the E value of the cores is part of the equation, as are wire thickness and winding count. Cores are made with different E values and also diameter, etc. There are a lot of details! In short, no one is going to be able to accurately clone an original moog FFB without access to, and at least partial destruction/reconstruction of an original. The schematic is incomplete besides, so any who have not access to an original are making -hopefully- educated guesses at best.

For the re-issues moog released , they did use a known small run coil winding company, and you can find that company's name on photos of the moog re-issue alive on the net. An alternative option os to get in touch with Carsten of Analog Monster, who has made a project of cloning a full size moog modular and has published much of his work on his website. He has sold coil sets to others for awhile now, and the last I heard these were about 200USD-ish. Have only read good things about these transactions and results.

Power supply and system voltages
The moog modular uses an asymmetric power supply. Fortunately it's 12+, and -6V, so it's quite easy to adapt to Euro. But that's not the problem area in a moog modular reproduction. The Oscillators of the originals are 1-2V P-P.
We're used to 10V waveform amplitudes, usually biased to +/-5V. So when a 55 is cloned for eurorack use, you have make another decision. One which has implication that may compound like dominoes through the rest of the setup. Since the CP3 and 3A mixers are known to be a large factor is the "moog" sound, the fact these may be hit with *much* larger voltages means you've lost some of the 'truth' behind the original sound. Your gain staging will be vastly different than the original.

How modular was moog, really?
Those without direct experience might find it surprising how much more semi-modular a 55 was/is than what we now accept as modular. If you're looking for the moog experience -and, IMO, the sound- you will need to recreate these inner connection. One positive aspect in the Behringer offering is the inclusion of the System switch modules. How these actually interact behind the panel -if they do at all?- is yet to be seen, and will be an important item to have sorted before purchase.

Components, and SMD v TH
This debate will go on long after this post, and I will put it his way: You *can* make an SMD unit sound the same as a tH unit, BUT you *must* take into account the differences between the two technologies. It's not a case of possibility, nor is it a case of better-worse. IT IS A CASE OF DIFFERENCE.
(shouting on purpose)

One of which is absolutely the size issue. Physics says that levels and proximity have a definite and defined relationship. You can't ignore this or fake your way out of it. I can get closer using SMD parts on the original PCBs than I will if I only use the schematic to lay SMD parts down in a compressed size layout. it's both art *and* science, and while Behringer certainly has the people with experience to address this, they also are likely to have a greater number of workers who have not yet developed the art of this deal. And it's a very big deal. This is why you cannot simply say "SMD and TH are the same"; doing so takes you out of the necessary things to address to get what you're really after in the result. We want the same sound and experience. That may or may not use the same circuit or the same parts when one moves between TH and SMD.

A second area which is not addressed in these older design clones is the Johnson noise and adaptive characteristics of old carbon comp resistors. They were noisier, plain and simple. My research shows that this has a much larger effect than is generally thought or allowed for. Ken Macbeth, Bubblesound and some others seem to agree. While cognitive bias's *must* be considered, as they and psychoacoustics are far too real to be ignored!- there is still something to the way low level noise interacts in circuits which I believe may be at least part of the missing link. I strongly suggest others take this up with scientific scrutiny. While again stating that one shouldn't use this to discredit SMD sound. Not better/worse, but different.

Much like the discussion of FFB inductors, there are some realities here which don't take golden ears to hear. It's real, and you don't get it with modern metal film resistors in the same way. It's also true that the old carbon comp resistors changed values over time. Often they will settle into a symbiotic relationship with other parts in their circuit.

Panels and the parts you touch and interact with.
Jacks- The Behringer jacks may be a weak point. They do not fasten to the panel, and this means they *will* put extra stress on the PCB as systems and modules are patched. A tight fitting ring hole in the panel will help the angular forces, but will do nothing for the insert and removal axial direction. I also worry about the quality of the contacts themselves,having seen the effects of poor material choice or dimensions lead to intermittent or full failure of other chinese sourced jacks. (I do not have enough direct experience with the specific jacks used by Behringer in these new products to make a claim beyond this comparison with other similar jacks and past results.

The same material type and dimension concerns may apply to other parts used, like switches and pots. Only time will really tell, and we'll just have to see. More importantly, what I have not seen discussed much is how one goes about making a claim on a failure or repair with Behringer? Is it a good user experience? I don't know, and suggest that's something to take up with them as part of an informed buying process. While one might say it's only a few bucks, don't worry about it, just replace it..

One last thing that seems seldom discussed is the output response relationship to the pot input turning. We do hear it sometimes -mostly about filters- and we can infer it some comments about EGs and their 'snappy' rating, but it never really gets the attention it needs or deserves. Specific to the moog55 and its brethren are the 911 pot curves. They are *not* standard. This is fact. There are many other input-output relationships besides these in not only the moogs, but in *every* synth one might want to clone. It's probably the single biggest reason -besides cognitive bias- that we hear some clone or another is not right, or as good.
When someone clones and doesn't take the overall tactile input-to-sound response as something to be *carefully* recreated, we will read about it, but it won't read that way. We'll get things like doesn't feel right, or isn't the same.


When perhaps the only true issue is that the Osc, Filter, VCA, etc is operating on the wrong part of a curve, or range. The cloner might have the curve right, but missed its start and end points. This is another area where TH to SMD conversions can bite you.

There's so much more, but I'll leave with this this public exchange between Synthfool super Tech Kevin Lightner (RIP, you are missed!) and another member on the moogmusic forum some years back. I saved it immediately upon reading,, and it has lived on my desktop to be occasionally re-read, as what he says I believe has a lot of merit. And since it relates directly to the product of this thread, hope others may find it useful too.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Re: Can really an moog modular be cloned today?

Postby Kevin Lightner » Sat Jan 07, 2012 2:56 pm
Since I was asked, I have to reply with a question: What is the point?
Seriously.
Does owning a real or cloned Moog modular somehow fulfill something you feel is missing in your life?
Will it make it you money? Fame? Improve your music or musical skills?
If I had an absolutely perfect Moog 55 and gave it to you, what would be the outcome?
Pride of ownership? The secret key to somehow making great music? An ego boost to show off to friends?
Truly... what is the point of copying something like a Moog?
I doubt most people could even tell the difference between between a Moog and many other synths and even if they could, so what? Again, what is it about a Moog that's somehow better or more desirable than owning other synths?

In fact, here's an example: with many old Moogs, one cannot even trigger an envelope generator directly from a VCO.
That's a limitation, amongst many, that stock Moogs have.
It's like owning the original Mona Lisa painting. What's the point?
It's a painting. Does it bring you some innate pleasure in owning something rare and valuable?
And if someone painted an exact duplicate of the Mona Lisa, would you feel less pleasure simply because it's not the original?
I personally don't understand people that collect things or own things they don't put to some practical use.
I've seen people with rooms full of electronic musical gear that simply can't make music and I've seen people with guitars missing half the strings that can cause an audience to experience deep emotional responses like joy or sorrow.

So my question is, again, what is it about a Moog- in fact a Moog clone - that somehow makes one feel better?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Re: Can really an moog modular be cloned today?

Sat Jan 07, 2012 6:19 pm
Ronny_Pudding wrote:
I collect things. Are you saying I have a character flaw Kevin? You don't get to understand everybody and everything. Collectors have made you a nice living with all the services you've done for them over the years. A lot of people have things missing in their lives and struggle everyday to fill the void. I guess I'm just not an enlightened guru like you. You sound like a real arrogant, insensitive jerk man.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Re: Can really an moog modular be cloned today?

Kevin Lightner replied:
First off, no malice or anger was used when writing that post.
If you're interpreting it, I feel it must be subjective.
I didn't mean to offend you, but remain that you're reading a bit deep into this personally.

I simply see people that covet old Moogs more than just about anything.
I've seen divorces and huge relationship arguments over synths.
Is that not a terrible outcome for one's lust over a synth?

Collecting is fine, if you have the money. Kudos to you for having enough.
But collecting vintage instruments drives prices up.
It removes them from the marketplace.
Then basic economics of supply vs demand take place: less supply, more demand, higher prices.

Since you're placing yourself into this with the statement "I guess I'm just not an enlightened guru like you", it would appear reasonable you're taking this personally and unnecessarily defensively.
Try empathy: consider a 19 year old who'd like to own a vintage Moog but can't afford it.
Or perhaps consider, as your writing suggests, a tech who *has* seen a bunch of varied synths over decades.
Do you truly think I didn't once find synths magical and awesome to play with?
Of course I did.
But one thing I've learned over the years is that it's not the synth that makes the music, it's the person.
With that, I find it odd how many people believe the inverse: if they only had a Moog, their music would suddenly be sprout wings or their lives would somehow be complete.

With all this said, I wonder where one draws the line... in their own mind.. between owning a clone and owning an original.
There are people that believe if they draw on a CD with a green marker, the CD sounds better.
Or those that believe in $10K speaker cables.
They will all defend them with great vigor because they want to believe.
Here I'm simply wondering if knowing something is truly a Moog or cloned to exact specs somehow makes it better than other synths.
And with that, I agree with the post before yours.. who didn't take any offense and offered an alternative.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This was not the full exchange, best go to the moogmusic forum if that's an interest. Portion quoted here covered under 'fair use'

User avatar
bemushroomed
Super Deluxe Wiggler
Posts: 2645
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2014 10:30 am
Location: Sweden

Re: Behringer System 55

Post by bemushroomed » Mon Jan 20, 2020 2:17 pm

KSS wrote:
Mon Jan 20, 2020 2:04 pm

snip
Really great and insightful post, I appreciated the quotes too.

User avatar
KSS
Super Deluxe Wiggler
Posts: 4173
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2016 7:28 am

Re: Behringer System 55

Post by KSS » Mon Jan 20, 2020 2:19 pm

Bob Borries wrote:
Mon Jan 20, 2020 1:30 pm
I've never patched a System 55, from photos of many Modular 55's, I see a common oscillator configuration with a driver (921A) and a bank of three slaves (921B) can Behringer's driver control 3 sub-modules or just 2?
The 921A is a really simple module. It has a opamp output, and should easily drive at least 6 921's. Not much inthere for anyone to muck up.

But it does bring up a *very* important difference between the 921s and the earlier 901's. That is, that the 921 *each* have an expo converter, while the 901's have only *one* expo converter per oscillator bank, which is located in the 901A module. This 901A module is the source of most of the early moogs drift impossibly reputation, as it uses two CA3019 matched diode arrays -in later versions, the originals used discrete diodes! Metal cased, large and nowhere near each other. One should not be the least surprised these first units drifted so horribly. edit(fixed 3029 typo.

The use of the single expo per bank is what is most likely behind the claims for the 901's being superior sound wise, as they allow a linear de-tuning you simply cannot do with an unmodified 921 Osc Bank. Jurgen Haible recreated this with his Living VCOs project.

Like the mini, the quirks of the 910 Power Supply also added to the variability we hear as good sounding in the 901s.
On Moog's 55 Iv'e seen a coupler module between the Highpass and Lowpass filter modules, I imagine it creates Bandpass variations with serial and/or parallel routings, I don't see that much-needed module in Behringer's line up.
Yes. That one's a glaring miss by behringer. They will definitely need to correct this omission.
Last edited by KSS on Fri Jan 24, 2020 10:39 am, edited 3 times in total.

User avatar
SynthBaron
Super Deluxe Wiggler
Posts: 3431
Joined: Tue Jan 27, 2009 2:43 am

Re: Behringer System 55

Post by SynthBaron » Mon Jan 20, 2020 2:28 pm

The 921B's have their own expo converters, but they respond to 0.5v/oct that the 921A puts out. Yes, 1/2 volt per octave.

User avatar
KSS
Super Deluxe Wiggler
Posts: 4173
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2016 7:28 am

Re: Behringer System 55

Post by KSS » Mon Jan 20, 2020 2:43 pm

Richjk7 wrote:
Mon Jan 20, 2020 7:29 am
Tried to find a site that had an explaination of how these modules work but couldn't find one.
Some of the best resources were the manuals put together by colleges for their in-house moogs. Try a search of moog modular user guide or owners manual. Which brings up the possibility that moog has something on their site for the re-issues.

User avatar
SynthBaron
Super Deluxe Wiggler
Posts: 3431
Joined: Tue Jan 27, 2009 2:43 am

Re: Behringer System 55

Post by SynthBaron » Mon Jan 20, 2020 3:26 pm

KSS wrote:
Mon Jan 20, 2020 2:19 pm
Bob Borries wrote:
Mon Jan 20, 2020 1:30 pm
On Moog's 55 Iv'e seen a coupler module between the Highpass and Lowpass filter modules, I imagine it creates Bandpass variations with serial and/or parallel routings, I don't see that much-needed module in Behringer's line up.
Yes. That one's a glaring miss by behringer. They will definitely need to correct this omission.
You'd probably have to have the rotary switch custom made for a product run. Whether that's worth it for Behringer or not remains to be seen. I think Mos-lab discontinued their 904C due to not being able to find a suitable replacement part once they ran out of stock:

Image

User avatar
EPTC
Super Deluxe Wiggler
Posts: 1379
Joined: Thu May 14, 2015 9:01 am
Location: Austin TX
Contact:

Re: Behringer System 55

Post by EPTC » Mon Jan 20, 2020 6:20 pm

polyroy wrote:
Mon Jan 20, 2020 5:37 am
Is anyone making a fixed filter bank using inductors? In any format?
two great ones in 5U:

https://www.synth-werk.com/content/modules
http://www.cluboftheknobs.com/modules.html

Post Reply

Return to “Eurorack Modules”