SE Boomstars

[chysn]

The release of DSM03 was pushed back by a couple months, so I'm going to finish off my modular filter section. I'm considering the Studio Electronics 4075 and 5089, which are the filters from the Boomstar synths of the same names.

I'm wondering if anyone has experience with either of these synths, and whether you have any thoughts on the filters? I'm kind of leaning toward the 4075, which is based on the 4072 filter that ARP made for the 2600 when Moog threatened to sue over for 4012.

[Sacred Synthesis]

I've had my eyes on the 4075 as well, being an ARP 2600 fan.  But I've never found satisfactory or even useful demonstrations of it, so I'm practically going on faith.

I don't mean to get you off track if your mind is set on the Boomstar, but have you considered the Hypersynth Xenophone?  It is the most impressive mono/duo module of all that I've researched.

https://www.perfectcircuitaudio.com/catalog/product/view/id/18225/s/xenophone-advanced-analog-mono-synth/category/160/

[chysn]

I saw the discussion of Xenophone on your Perfect Monosynth topic. It's pretty impressive. If I were in the market for a desktop synth, it would certainly be in the running. As it stands, I just need a eurorack filter module.

There are some 4075 demos on both the Sweetwater page for the 4075 desktop synth (http://www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/Boomstar4075), and some different ones on a greathsynthesizers.com review (http://greatsynthesizers.com/en/test/studio-electronics-boomstar-4075-the-arp-substitute/). These are the best clips I've found for getting a sense of the filter sound and behavior (without too much resonance  ).

For the 5089 it's a little harder to find demos. I don't know who. Forum member Exode has some nice 5089 music on Soundcloud, and Sweetwater has a page for the desktop synth.

But speaking of the 2600: as a 2600 fan, do you care whether it's got the old (ladder) filter or the new filter? Is it really obvious? There's a philosophical reason for this question. The older 2600 seems to be more highly-valued for its ladder filter, and the general perception is that the replacement was a somewhat poorer substitute. So the big question is, why would a synth maker duplicate the newer filter, especially now that patent is no longer an issue? I do realize that the SE 4075 is only based on the ARP filter, and that they supposedly fixed some of its deficiencies.

[Sacred Synthesis]

Thanks for the Great Synthesizers reminder.  I had forgotten about that site.  It's where I learned the Vermona modules sounded quite nice.

I've always been a fan of the general Odyssey/Solus/2600/Quadra sound.  I owned all three Odyssey models years ago and liked each one, but I never compared their filters side-by-side.  Perhaps I once had a preference, but I can't now remember.  Generally, I'm not that fickle about these things. 

As for the Boomstar 4075 - again, I haven't yet heard a demo that gave me a satisfactory sense of its tone.  I simply see the advertised "2600 filter" and presume that's the Boomstar I'd most like.  But it does make sense that Boomstar should have chosen the earlier 2600 filter.

[chysn]

But it does make sense that Boomstar should have chosen the earlier 2600 filter.

Except that they didn't. The 4075 is based on the newer filter design.

[Sacred Synthesis]

Right.  Perhaps they should have offered a two-filter option, as Korg did on the new MS 20.

[chysn]

Right.  Perhaps they should have offered a two-filter option, as Korg did on the new MS 20.

Seems like they're content charging $1000 for a whole other synth!

Did you listen to any of the Sweetwater demos? The "Boomstar 4075 Soft Sounding Demo" makes me think that I might love it.

[Sacred Synthesis]

No.  I'll give a listen later, perhaps tonight, and let you know what I think.

[eXode]

4075 is actually a typo according to Studio Electronics. The design used in the Boomstar is based on the 4072, which was used in the late ARP 2600 as far as I know. But it's still the same filter as I understand it. 4075 was used in the Odyssey, etc and 4072 in the 2600. I doubt that they kept the 12 kHz cutoff frequency limit design flaw that the original suffered from.

[eXode]

I owned the Boomstar 5089. I loved it, with no regards taken to how close (or not) it sounds to a real Moog.

One of the best sounding modern mono's in my opinion. It got presence, girth, and that larger than life character that I like!

This was my style with it:
https://soundcloud.com/exodesound/monumental-5089
https://soundcloud.com/exodesound/lparkling-5089
https://soundcloud.com/exodesound/nova-5089

[chysn]

SE does say that they fixed the 12kHz issue. So, it's clearly not an absolutely faithful reproduction of the 2600 filter.

I like your 5089 tracks, thank you for sharing them. It's clearly a very nice filter.

I pulled the trigger on the 4075, and I'll probably have it tomorrow morning. My thinking here is, I already have a Moog filter, and Detroit Modular has a nice return policy, in which I can make a swap if I don't love the 4075. There's nothing to lose, as long as I don't screw it into the rails too tightly and mark it up.

Also, eXode, are you aware that all three of your tracks are on the Sweetwater website and credited to Studio Electronics? (http://www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/Boomstar5089) Perhaps you gave them permission, but I thought you should at least know.

[eXode]

Also, eXode, are you aware that all three of your tracks are on the Sweetwater website and credited to Studio Electronics? (http://www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/Boomstar5089) Perhaps you gave them permission, but I thought you should at least know.

I did not know that, thanks for the head's up. I'm guessing that they have posted a playlist from Studio Electronics, who included my songs on their sound cloud. I actually found that they've done it with my SE80 tracks as well.

While I don't mind that in itself, I do mind that I'm not getting credit for my own work.

[chysn]

Right, you should get credit! Sweetwater is kind of a big deal.

I do love the 4075. The rail screws mean I'm keeping it!

Mostly, I like it because it's radically different from the DSM01. The Curtis filter is precise, dry, and clinical, and the 4075 is kind of wet and unruly, so I'll enjoy having them both around.

Features of note: The input knob lets you overdrive it a bit and really change the sound a lot. Each CV In has a bi-polar attenuator, which is a beautiful feature. Two audio outputs. Some of the solidest knobs in my system; I think Pittsburgh Modular handles their euro manufacturing, so it's built well.

[Sacred Synthesis]

Also, eXode, are you aware that all three of your tracks are on the Sweetwater website and credited to Studio Electronics? (http://www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/Boomstar5089) Perhaps you gave them permission, but I thought you should at least know.

I did not know that, thanks for the head's up. I'm guessing that they have posted a playlist from Studio Electronics, who included my songs on their sound cloud. I actually found that they've done it with my SE80 tracks as well.

While I don't mind that in itself, I do mind that I'm not getting credit for my own work.

You should definitely get credit.  They're benefitting from your work, and it's perfectly fair and just that you should receive recognition for it.

This is an ongoing issue on the Internet.  I've loosely followed where my own videos get posted, and it's unbelievable how far they go.  I've thus far found one site that posted one of my videos under some one else's name. 

We shouldn't hesitate to insist on credit where credit is due.