[sdiy] xvive?

[Pete Hartman]

I did some testing of the XVive MN3005's not long after they came out.  I
have a Blacet Time Machine that I like a lot, and I put in original
MN3005's and some sample XVive MN3005's and did a frequency sweep at
different delay settings to see what kind of response they had.  I did this
because my first couple of "by ear" tests seemed to indicate that they did
sound different.  Below is a rehash of a writeup I did at the time and
shared on google plus.

For each chip I took measurements at 6 settings. The TM was set with delay
at 0 (minimum filtering of the signal) and output all the way wet. All
modulations were off, and regen was set to 0.  For each subsequent graph,
the delay was increased by 2, so the sequence is 0, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10.  Note
that the high end cutoff is expected to drop as you go up, this is actually
done by filter chips on the module to prevent overloading the BBD chip.
What I found interesting was the overall "steady state" response level.

Ignore the yellow noise on the graphs, that's supposed to be phase
information and I couldn't figure out a way to omit it from the graphs.

Genuine MN3005s:

https://plus.google.com/102657837209811792502/posts/P9LqLVizEGt
https://plus.google.com/102657837209811792502/posts/SWY1qhit7FX

XVive Clones:

https://plus.google.com/102657837209811792502/posts/DUWs2ZsTLji
https://plus.google.com/102657837209811792502/posts/2DgGxP6aeEg
https://plus.google.com/102657837209811792502/posts/BQm8eL7NbtG


What I find most interesting is that MN3005 #1 and XVive #3 are very
similar in response.   BUT all three XVive clones at the longest delays
have nearly 10dB less response overall than the originals.  All of them are
about 20dB down from the input signal at the minimum delay, but only the
XVives decay further at the longer delay times.

Also interesting is that MN3005 #2 has a low end rolloff at minimum delay
more similar to the other XVive clones.  So at least some of what I saw as
differences is likely due to "normal" variation among chips more than
original vs clone.

I think the biggest part of "will the clone sound like the original" is
dependent on how the chip is being used.  The Time Machine pushes the
original outside of its official specification, so I don't think I'm
terribly surprised that it sounds different at the extremes.  If you're
doing more typical chorus/flanging/phasing, well within the original spec,
they should sound pretty similar if not identical.

I don't know that any of this is truly objective, but it was my attempt to
give more than just an ears-only analysis.

Thanks

Pete



On Sun, Jul 2, 2017 at 9:59 AM, <info at synthcube.com> wrote:

> We offer both the original NOS as well as the Xvive version. Most of our
> customers report good success with the Xvive although we have not seen any
> objective comparison data. A few customers report that they are
> dissatisfied with the Xvivie vs the original, but again no objective
> measures against which to compare... so to our experience, its anecdotal, a
> majority of customers find no difference, a few do and prefer to stay with
> the originals even given the price difference.
>
> synthCube
>
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: [sdiy] xvive?
> From: Michael Zacherl <sdiy-mz01 at blauwurf.info>
> Date: Sun, July 02, 2017 8:01 am
> To: "synth-diy at synth-diy.org List" <synth-diy at synth-diy.org>
>
> Hi, anyone with experience with XVIVE BBDs?
> thanks, Michael.
>
>
> On 10.Nov 2016, at 4:45 , AlanP <alan.p at orcon.net.nz> wrote:
>
> > I've used a pair of the CoolAudio v3205d chips in a Memory Man clone a
> couple years ago. Very noisy, compared to vintage MN3005 or modern
> XVIVE3005 reproductions. (This could be partly due to a 9v vs 15v
> difference.)
>
>
> --
> http://mz.klingt.org
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Synth-diy mailing list
> Synth-diy at synth-diy.org
> http://synth-diy.org/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Synth-diy mailing list
> Synth-diy at synth-diy.org
> http://synth-diy.org/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://synth-diy.org/pipermail/synth-diy/attachments/20170702/a64776aa/attachment.htm>