I preordered the D within an hour of Sweetwater posting it. $299..no brainer.
Also, having no encoders or patch memory gives me something I don't currently have in a synth, and less to go wrong down the road. It seemed to be closer to a simple approach that I was looking for. I've got other synths to program complex stuff, and sequence.

The Roland could have had me on features, but at almost twice the price I start to expect grown up "luxuries" like full size jacks and a little less cramped interface. Patch memory isn't terribly useful to me, without being able to name it. Sure, I've owned many old synths that you have to just use numbers to save...but this is what, the only analog synth with patch memory in recent history that doesn't let you name your patches??? I know, I'm picky.

Congratulations!

When I traded my Model D (in need of serious service) for a new Voyager patch memory was a main thing. Now I have a Model D as well (Reissue) and actually I'm happy it hasn't patch memory as it take away some of the magic with an analog synth: To catch the moment.

To me it's a good thing that the Behringer Model D lacks memory storage as one has to work with the knobs in real time and catch the moment instead of just hit overused presets.

Behringer D for me too, I dont want another synth with presets, I get lazy, want something that can fire my imagination exploring the sound.

This is a REALLY difficult question. Behringer's D sounds really close, and also honors the controls, with a nice addition of a dedicated LFO and highpass filter mode. On the other hand, SE-02 has a REALLY beefy sound that is very much Mini-inspired, but it adds hardsync (YAY!), x-mod (YAY!), envelope trigger mode, invertable filter envelope, a MORE COMPREHENSIVE LFO, delay and sequencer. AND patch memory.


I think patch memory might decide this one for me, if I even go there. I'm really happy with Monark and The Legend for now.


The "Filter Mode" switch:




I wonder if Roland will come out with a computer editor/librarian that supports that, actually. Wouldn't be the first synth that can only have named patches externally.

Se02 pour moi..

Patch memory.
Sequencer.
Sounds better imho, a more exciting and innovative instrument to my ears.
USB Audio. Not sure if B D has that, but its v handy for me.
Studio Electronics and roland have an excellent pedigree. I like they way they just said "here it is" without any of the... well ya know.
Sounds and features > than the difference in price imho.
Lots of quite brilliant options in software for Model D sound. Been done to death.
Ill use editors so knobs size/space not an issue for me on either synth.
Think the Se02 will chuck into a laptop bag nicely, the D not so much.
Suspect the Se02 will be of better build quality if history is anything to go by.
No idea when the B D is coming to market. The DM12 was 3 years i think from initial announcement, so could be a similar wait. Se02 is sept 2017 in UK.

Will absolutely try out a behringer for a few weeks when they flood onto the second hand market, which they inevitably will. Thats good news for the curious.

The two are connected!

use a pen and paper/notebook, and write the patch number and give it a name.unless that is too much for you....

one another note, it would be nice of Roland to include in an update the ability to overwrite the other 384 preset patches, thus giving you 512 user patches.

Thanks.

Snowball's chance in hell.

Had to reply again. High-pass??? Can I vote again for the behringer?

For my tastes:
Korg Odyssey Module> Dreadbox Medusa > Behringer D

Disqualified due to cramped layout:
Roland Boomtique & Dominion Club

Seriously amazing to have such choices these days- gotta be a tad harsh (on all these deserving candidates) to narrow the field

The Voyager has, among other things, a high pass filter (and low pass filter of course). But not the Moog Model D. I don't know if SE-1 has that - otherwise it's a little bit odd to have that in SE-2

SE-02. The whole "tinyknobsomgomg" thing is a nonissue for me, but a monosynth this mighty and complete in a tiny and easy to fit in package is hard to ignore. Note that I didn't care much for all the other Boutiques, but the features of this one somehow makes it work on its own or as a module attached to something else. It's quite versatile.

The D might have been interesting if I was into modular but that's not the case, so it would be of little use to me.

Why of course, but the voyager was quite a different monster. This thing is "honey guess what I bought today?" cheap and it sounds close to a Model D (you can always get an external hi pass filter I guess too).
A quick search didn't seem to yield that the se-02 has a high pass nor do I recall reading it anywhere but I might be wrong.

Behringer D. Patch points! Fits in a Euro case! High-quality machine ran by Chinese people technician-ship! Is going to be $100-$200 less!

And already the haters have been the motivators!

The Ulinati will take over the World, only the D can filter out the deadly frequency, bahahaha!

<removed by moderator - slander!> v.s Rowland Kakebashi dead entrepreneur of classic cut mooney out of own ideas (booring ideas but, yet own) i chose SE2. (mostly because its programmable, had Uli<removed by moderator - no insult please> been programmable i would have sold my granny for it not that there are any values on old grannys but anyway).

I wouldn't bet 100% on that, STM32 and all hell can break loose in hacker land!

I don't get it, if you prefer Behringer Model D or Roland SE-02 and maybe why.

What good is having 512 patches if you have to either guess what they sound like (by number) or, as you suggest...go through pages of scribble (or type)...which then needs updated every time you add or overwrite a patch.

Not to mention remembering your sequences/songs...


Anyway, I'm not anti SE02, but like most of Roland's recent offerings, its 80% pretty cool, but still 20% short of being irrefutably awesome.

Behringer D, as long as it's rackable, then I have space for it.

I'm struggling with comprehending how a limitation like that is somehow "liberating"?

Your knobs always line up with the sound being made. WYSIWYG.

You can dial in the right sound for the job rather than going through tons of presets.

You don't have to worry about running out of patch memories and shunting banks back and forth.

It's not ideal on a deep synth with loads of menu stuff and modulation, but on a simple synth like this it's no problem at all.

Buy an analogue with no patch memory, spend a few hours/days/weeks and you'll understand it, there's a feeling to wysiwyg and it's nice and fuzzy. Presets are great when required but I reach for my non preset machines way more often.

---------------

Of the two it's the D for me with ease, better looking, doesn't look like the knobs will break when my 6month old touches them, they're not just small they look beyond awkward, some very stiff (beyond stiff) and some made of helium or something else man made that's equally as light, oh and the D just sounds soooo much better.

CV connections are a nice addition too.

That is of course something that only people who have already worked with synths without memory can understand and appreciate.

It's not that hard to learn. And when learned it one appreciates that freedom. But of course, there are two options (at least, and who knows what to come), one with patch memory and one without. It's not that easy to decide what to chose as booth has pros and cons.

I think you're telling this to the wrong person...

Sound like SE-02 might be your choice. Not bad.

You completely miss my point but that's ok.

Looks like I did