The clickiness was there but the envelopes were definitely less snappier. I might roll back to an earlier version to try again, i updated it back to the latest firmware now just because the responsiveness is a lot better.

So I'm late to the party, I just ordered one.
Is everyone happy with the latest firmware in general? I see recent talk about reverting to an earlier version, but maybe that's just one person? @ Thal Dravv

I had a Pro-One in the 90s, loved it. I remember the envelopes being a little unique, and contributing a lot to the signature sound if dialed in at certain spots.

I think its pretty darn good, though there is still room for small improvements:

Glide completes if the key is deactivated before pitch reaches the final target; this is NOT how the original responds, but I think it's an improvement, and I would not change it. Unlike the original, glide is done in code (digitally).

MIDI Pitch Bend commands are applied pre-glide; on long glides, the pitch bend is essentially swamped out. This is NOT how the original works! Of course, it's also easy to avoid this situation.

VCF sensitivity to LFO modulation is currently about 3X as great as VCO sensitivity. I'd bet this is due to hardware, not code. This really isn't noticeable in normal situations. I have no idea if the original behaves this way.

All in all, the Pro-1 is well worth the price of admission!

Quote:

Originally Posted by howardcano ➡️

Quote:

Originally Posted by soundxplorer ➡️

So I'm late to the party, I just ordered one.
Is everyone happy with the latest firmware in general? I see recent talk about reverting to an earlier version, but maybe that's just one person? @ Thal Dravv

I had a Pro-One in the 90s, loved it. I remember the envelopes being a little unique, and contributing a lot to the signature sound if dialed in at certain spots.

I think its pretty darn good, though there is still room for small improvements:

Glide completes if the key is deactivated before pitch reaches the final target; this is NOT how the original responds, but I think it's an improvement, and I would not change this. Unlike the original, glide is done in code (digitally).

MIDI Pitch Bend commands are applied pre-glide; on long glides, the pitch bend is essentially swamped out. This is NOT how the original works! Of course, it's also easy to avoid this situation.

VCF sensitivity to LFO modulation is currently about 3X as great as VCO sensitivity. I'd bet this is due to hardware, not code. This really isn't noticeable in normal situations. I have no idea if the original behaves this way.

All in all, the Pro-1 is well worth the price of admission!

The Behringer Pro-1 I have seems to have a problem with glide. It's always there and you can't turn it off completely! It lasts only a fraction of a second, but it's noticeable if playing notes that are two or more octaves apart quickly. Not sure if the original sequential one was like this or if my Behringer one is just faulty. Does anyone know of a way to mod the glide to turn it down to an even lower rate? :/

Also, the Behringer Pro-1 I have the Square wave is at 6 instead of at the "12 o'clock" middle (5) position like in the original. A very odd choice.

I had 2 vintage Pro Ones and use my Behringer Pro-1 almost every day. It's really good but some differences I found with the original are..

-Envelopes behave differently. I've never learned exactly what is going on with the retriggering of digital envelopes compared to analog but I'm able to get certain behavior on analog envelopes that I don't get from the Pro-1.

-Glide is weird. On mine with knob all the way down the glide is off unlike what the poster above me describes. The problem is there is no noticeable glide effect until the knob reaches about 10 o'clock at which point it quickly becomes too much glide. The sweet spot for glide is very small so it's difficult to set it exactly when tweaking live or in a recording. The original was also sort of weird in this regard if I'm remembering correctly but was way more forgiving than the Behringer.

-OSC 2 Triangle mixes differently. On the original I would usually use saw + tri on oscillator 2 because it gave a thick sound with extra bass but it doesn't seem to blend as well on the Behringer. However mixing the tri with square on the Behringer sounds better than I remember it sounding on the original. Not sure what's going on here if it's a phase difference or something but I don't have an original on hand to compare against so not sure.

-High Resonance sounds are more crisp on the original. This is based mostly on a video I saw comparing an original to the Behringer and at high resonance the original sounded better. For my own personal use I don't find it to be an issue and think the Behringer sounds "good enough".

Overall I like the Behringer more because of the patch points. The keyboard on the original sucked and the case overall felt plasticy anyways. Not a super expensive feeling instrument.

Are you sure the glide isn't always "on" on yours? Not sure if the Pro-1 is right in front of you or whatever, but try this:

1.Hold a note constantly with the left hand

2.Follow up with this by playing notes three octaves higher- in very quick succession. (the notes on mine slur a bit when this is done)

Let me know if there is any slurring/gliding the lasts a fraction of a second on yours when this is done.

Do you experience this with MIDI? Or CV? What controller?
Just wondering...I had the original Keystep and it would do this to any analog synth when using CV so I got rid of it.

This was with USB MIDI from a DAW/MIDI sequencer. Never tried the Pro-1 with standard 5 pin MIDI. I doubt the keyboard is at fault, though. The Pro-1 reacts the same with sequenced stuff as well.

If it's not the Pro- 1, then the DAW might be the culprit (it's Acid Pro). I'll see if the problem happens with another DAW.

Quote:

Originally Posted by soundxplorer ➡️

Do you experience this with MIDI? Or CV? What controller?
Just wondering...I had the original Keystep and it would do this to any analog synth when using CV so I got rid of it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by tmel ➡️

This was with USB MIDI from a DAW/MIDI sequencer. Never tried the Pro-1 with standard 5 pin MIDI. I doubt the keyboard is at fault, though. The Pro-1 reacts the same with sequenced stuff as well.

If it's not the Pro- 1, then the DAW might be the culprit (it's Acid Pro). I'll see if the problem happens with another DAW.

I found the culprit- the USB cable was at fault! I switched it for a better USB cable and it fixed the 'glide' problem of the Pro-1. I have an SH-101 and it also slurs a bit if you play notes in very quick succession (like if you were to "roll" your hand quickly on the keys), so it seems to be just the nature of monosynths. Sorry, for any confusion. The Pro-1 is still very good.

It's not true for all monophonic sytnthesizers. There are a few notable exceptions, where slewing of pitch between notes IS inevitable. The Wasp is one of those, since the hybrid oscillators use PLLs to create the glide, and these PLLs can't react instantly. Even then, it can be fixed with a little time and a hot soldering iron.

Had one of these a couple of weeks now. Absolutely loving it. Goes from sweet and dreamy to funky to full on sonic terrorism.

Only gripes (already well moaned about but this is GS): I wish the gate would allow me to play below C1. CV can do it, so why not midi? And that annoying phase cancelation that kicks in when you run both saw and square waves on either osc. Several dB of level lost. Neither are the end of the world but maybe an easy fix?

One other thing, not really a gripe, more of a quirk I haven't seen mentioned anywhere else. On osc A, say you have the saw running and you push the square half way, in the center between it's on and off positions, a fairly large level boost occurs. What's weird is that this doesn't seem to engage the square because it doesn't sound like a mix of both waves, it just sounds like a louder saw, and the PW knob doesn't do anything if you start with the saw first. If you do it the other way around it's the same, not a blend of waves, just a louder square, but the PW works. I haven't been able to figure out if this is anything more than a level boost because it does sound fatter, but that could just be psychological.

This trick doesn't work on osc B, but you do get a similar boost when engaging the triangle in combo with the other waves. Is there any relation between this and the osc A thing?

Even if the gripes don't get fixed this is still a great little synth. Really loving the audio in to process vsts. Digital synths through the analog filter is a lot of fun. And the mod matrix is so well thought out. Deceptively simple looking thing, this Pro 1

One week with the Pro one and i'm loving it. I didnt expect to get so many range of sounds with it tbh. One of the best purchases for the studio!!!

Feedback patch on the pro-1 just by itself.

Added a Pro-1 to the MonoStation

Has anyone noticed that when both oscillators are tuned very close to one another, the natural beating that is usually heard stops after a short while and the two oscillators lock together? Like a very soft sync with the result that it sounds like a single oscillator. On mine this only happens when the sawtooth is turned on the second oscillator. Turn off the sawtooth on VCO2 and two oscillators run freely again.

Warning: Long technical post.

I found out what is causing the weak phase locking between the oscillators. The copper track on the circuit board that carries the second oscillator's sawtooth output from the waveform switch runs too close to the sensitive parts of the first oscillator. The 10V sawtooth (actually it's a ramp) has a very fast falling edge. This generates a lot of high frequencies and these couple into the circuitry of the first oscillator. This causes a very weak synchronisation between the second oscillator and the first. That is, the first VCO becomes a 'slave' to the second VCO but only when their frequencies are closely matched.

The reason it takes a short time for the locking to occur is that the falling edge of oscillator two has to coincide with certain point in the triangle waveform of oscillator one. The slower the beat frequency, the longer the locking takes to occur. If you play lots of short differently pitched notes you'll not notice it. Put it into drone mode and you may hear it.

I think the best option, other than redesigning the circuit board, would be to isolate the offending track and re-route the switched sawtooth output directly to the summing amplifier via screened cable on the top side of the board. This doesn't seem to be as easy as it should be as the switch contacts are only available to tap from the bottom of the board and we need to get the cable to the top surface.

However, I managed a cable free modification but it's a bit of a fiddle to do. What I did was reduce the size of the signal going along that track and slew it with a capacitor. See photos. It's not the neatest of jobs but it works.

If you need to know the details, grab a copy of the original SCi Pro One schematics. Find the TL082 (U105) that sums the three outputs of the second CEM3340. The Behringer is identical at this point. What I have done is firstly cut the track right by the switch. Then I split R180 (R141 on the Behringer) into a 91K situated next to the switch wiper and over a cut in the track, and added a 8K87 in series with it but right by the op-amp. The 8K87, a 10K or 9K1 will be fine, can be soldered in the space of R141. This reduces the signal to around a third along the track. I then added a 220pF 2.5mm C0G through hole capacitor on the top side of the board from 0V (right hand end of R133) to the track (on the right hand of the newly added R141) which slews the now reduced ramp signal.

So a combination of reducing the signal and slewing the falling edge fixed the problem. The slewing does cause some slight high frequency filtering to second VCO's sawtooth output but this is above 15kHz or so and doesn't really affect usage as the sawtooth's harmonics are rolling off significantly at that point any way. I tried a smaller capacitor (100pF) and it still locked occasionally. At some point I'll probably try the wired option and see if that can be done neatly.

The other thing that slightly annoyed me about the Pro 1 was the fact that the filter's cut off frequency doesn't actually go that low. I measured the lowest frequency to be around 60Hz. Which isn't low enough to do those 'bass drones coming out of nowhere' type of sounds.

So you can replace R127 with a 160K 0603 1% which makes the filter go nice and low without affecting the top end. If you don't have such a resistor - I didn't - you can put a standard through hole 820K 1% MF in parallel with the existing R127. Not the neatest but it does the job.

Thanks for the great work and sharing it. So, which synth is worse to work on, the Pro-One or the Pro-1?

The original's keyboard (either version) was pretty horrible and the power supply on the main board runs far too hot and the capacitors are under rated for UK mains voltages. Those pots were pretty awful too - they could be taken apart and cleaned but it's not a nice job.

The Pro 1's casing is cheaply made and I can never get the panel off without having to take off the end cheeks - which is a real problem if you need to re-calibrate and it's mounted in a rack. The paint is easy to scratch too. The trimmer pots are cheap copies of the industry standard ones made by Vishay or Bourns which doesn't make calibration as easy as it should be. They have a tendency to move once set and they don't change resistance as smoothly. That said, at least they are multiturn ones.

Most of the components are surface mount on the Pro 1 which makes mods less easy to add than the original. But at least they are 0603 which makes them just about bearable. Some of the other Behringer stuff has really small 0402 parts and they are just horrible to work with (with my eyesight and dexterity).

All in all, the Pro 1 is the easier to work on for me. It's smaller and fits on my little bench nicely. Whether they'll be around as long as the originals is another question.

BAX need to be discontinued for all products, terrible place to do business with.

A fresh and heavy Behringer Pro 1 track!

After hearing the Bro 1 on YouTube I’m seriously considering selling my og Pro-one. It’s giving me problems with the envelopes not working properly anymore. I feel like getting it fixed and selling it. I really don’t want to though but I feel like it’s the smart thing to do.

Get your hands on a Pro-1 before thinking to sell your SCI Pro One, the envelopes are NOT the same. This is my bigger complaint about the Behringer design: I tested 4 different units from different sources and all of them exhibited random ADSR times, opened a ticket to B. support and the developers replied it is so by design. Big failure on a otherwise good synth.
IMO of course (old time OG owner) :-)

You should check the firmware version on those 4 units. B changed the soft ADSR's a number of times, but I don't know if there is a reliable Release Notes document that tells what they did. I thought most people were pretty happy with one version or other. Definitely lots of discussion about it in this thread.

Obviously I checked (and updated) FW when I had the units in my hand; then measured ADSR times accurately, reported to Behringer and dismissed them after receiving their disappointing reply.
Oddly, other Behringer synths have perfectly acceptable ADSR stages. Not the Pro-1.
If you are wondering what "acceptable" is, think of time-dependent stages equally capable of times from 2ms to 20s.

Search my first post in this topic for details on the subject.

I will do just that since the bro one is so cheap

Sure, and it sounds so damn good for the price. If you don't need attack times longer than 4s just buy it and you will not regret

Love the Pro 1

Read a comment saying the resonance sounded different to the original. Well I've found that the oscillators are very hot, after 3-4 they can square off slightly. This changes the filter and resonance sound. Also read somewhere this happens on the K2.
So when people are comparing I'm sure all it would take would he backing off the B oscillator volumes

I have also noticed the envelopes and way waveforms stack (phase of say saw square combo) are different to Repro.
I've never had my hands on a real pro one so no idea which is closer

I had an OG Pro One before buying the Bro 1, and it's the same way. With the mixer maxed, the oscillators come in HOT. It's part of the fun, though. That mixer overdrives nicely and spanks the ass of the filter.