Yep. The CPU doesn’t control the front panel values. As others have said, it’s analogue and set up like the original synth. This keeps costs down, makes it more authentic, and has other advantages. This is pretty typical for analogue mono synths.

I'm impressed. That comparison video from a few months ago* was indeed made with wrong gain staging and when properly recorded the synths sound indistinguishably close in the provided examples. That difference in the volume - did anyone provide any reasoning or logic behind that? Seems like something too annoying and too obvious to haven't been spotted during the development, so there must be some reason behind the synth acting this way and not like original.

Also shows what can be done. If Behringer can recreate such complex synth for such price, then Roland could remake their simpler cult synths at the price not much more than their own digital recreations.

* Behringer SH-5 Clone (MS-5)
Or maybe it was properly recorded but author of the video got a faulty unit? Or perhaps all early units sound like that?

The volume difference, the weird LfO speed scaling makes me want to wait on this for a v2. Behringer synths. They’re awesome, I love them! But they always fumble something obvious that any experienced user would spot within minutes. Baffling.

The LFO scaling is IMO an improvement since you get a wider range. You could likely (I suppose) have a similar thing going on the OG depending on how it was calibrated.

The top speed is faster but there’s almost no change in speed until the final third of the slider. That feels like a mistake. Should be a linear pot?

At 4:35 in this video, these issues are covered. At the same slider rate position, LFO 2 is 4x speed of LFO 1. The S/H rate is described as logarithmic and feeling wrong, with all the change in the top 1/4 of movement range.

Are Behringer randomly using log slider pots instead of linear? Or are these quirks of the Roland original being faithfully replicated?

From the Roland-to-Behringer comparison videos I’ve seen, this LFO slider scaling behavior is not a quirk of the original.

No one wants all the action crammed into the final few millimeters of slider travel - so it can’t be a choice, right?

I’d guess the early prototypes were not like this.

Low output is always a sign of a certain economy in the choice of components. Sometimes it is a marketing choice by the company to make you choose the most expensive models.

In this comparison video, from 49:18 onwards, the differences are shown. LFO's 1&2 have different rate scaling to the Roland, but it is not a massive difference. The S/H rate has a much bigger difference compared to the original, and is not really acceptable, IMO. All the change being in the top 15% of movement.

I wonder if different revisions have different slider pots?

The rate slider for LFO-2 is totally normal (at least on mine), it's glossed over in this video and not demonstrated. It's the LFO-1 rate and S+H sample time sliders where the speed change accelerates mostly (not all) at the top end of the range. An SH-5 owner earlier in the thread noted that this is abnormal after calibration, but in Starsky Carr's video the S+H sample time seems kind of similar at similar slider positions but he doesn't do a detailed comparison. There are calibration options on the back of the MS-5 for LFO-1 and S+H, but not LFO-2 - I don't think anyone's tried to figure out what those options do though.

Hasn't affected doing sound design on the synth in any material way for me.

Roland sometimes specified log sliders but flipped the other way round to get a reverse log taper.

I've spotted this on the HPF and resonance sliders on the System 100, and I suspect the 100M 121 VCF res pot (and the SH-5 S&H clock rate) is the same as well.

If this is the case, then I'm surprised that Behringer didn't spot it. I could open my SH-5 up and check but it's Christmas and I'll mostly be drunk/trying to get drunk for the next few days.

We wish you luck during this holiday season.

Sounds pretty sweet to me

Now just £389 from Andertons...

They'll be giving them away next.

Never thought i'd say it , but Behringer have to be commended for doing these products at such reasonable pricing.

Why is this synth so rare in Canada?

Has anyone taken a closer look at the LFO-1 and S&H faders to see if there is a suitable replacement that would give the correct taper to more closely match the original?

What do you mean man? They have been sitting in stock at Long and Mcquade for over a month.