by IkUser09 » Fri Dec 06, 2024 10:47 pm
Thanks to recent black friday deals, I had the occasion to compare both machines side by side. Frankly, I do not see any reason to swap the machines. My impressions so far:
* The x obviously is different from the Pro. E.g. obvious things like its UI, FX engine or the third envelope. The updated UI is a progress. Having used Waldorf Microwave I and microQ, however, I do not understand why the X still used pots instead of rotaries. E.g. this makes it impossible to do standard sound design stuff like finetuning the attack times of amp, filter, and pitch envelopes reasonably.
* The x is different to the Pro in less obvious regards, e.g. the filters and envelopes behave slightly different.
* I was able to replicate X patches on the Pro. For some patches, I didn't manage to get the result replicated 1:1, but close enough to get pleasing results.
* The 3rd envelope is a plus, but remember that the Pro offers LFO fade times as modulation source which also can be used as a rudimentary envelope.
* One of the X patches I recreated on the Pro this very eve was »On the road«. It took me a couple of minutes to get it right on the Pro (and the result is not a perfect copy to the X), but I had a lot of fun with this patch on the Pro. To crank the filter cutoff by the mod wheel immediately kicks in the Zawinul feeling when soloing.
So my verdict is, you do not necessarily need an X, but you need the patience to create the right patches on the Pro by our own. I really wonder why there aren't any classic 3rd party patches e.g. by Matt Johnson, Luke Neptune, Nicholas Semrad, Ultimate Patches and the like. IMO the Uno Synths easily outperform much more expensive engines like the Pro 3, but the patches provided for Pro and Pro X simply do not unveil the capabilities of those synths.