From x  Wed Jan 1 00:00:00 1970
From: paul hartfree <zbp+rresgenu=yhnc>
To: gra+gfnpzbp=ahqnwQ, es+erfnrg=yrebwnzn
Date: Tue,  4 Nov 2003 22:07:08 +0000
Subject: Re: [AH] MAM MB-33 mk2 VS  Roland TB-303

I did not spend too much time on this so the MB33II is not really shown
at its best - it really struggles at full Res so I should have not gone
to 100%.  I have also included a version with 50%distortion on the MB33.
The test is based on Djadun example.

Good luck with the hosting - let me know if you need further tests.

tb303.wav        TB-303

mb33.wav         MB-33

mb33-dist.wav    MB-33 + 50% dist.

                                  ***

What follows is the thread on Analogue Heaven that led to this. To
demangle email addresses, spell backwards, apply rot13 (a <=> n, b <=>
o, etc), replace "=" by "@" and replace "+" by "." in the domain name.

This entire file is in mbox format. You can view it with a mail client.

-- AYM 2003-11-16

                                  ***

From x  Wed Oct 22 01:23:28 2003
From: Jonodo <np+jnuf=bqbabw>
To: teb+ynreerclu=rhtbynan
Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2003 17:17:17 -0700
Subject: [AH] MAM MB-33 mk2 VS  Roland TB-303
Message-id: <000e01c39831$da1ae140$7faf9244@triplextech>

How does the MB-33 MK 2 hold up against the acid machine? Anyone own or
have owned both?

-- 
Jon

From x  Wed Oct 22 01:23:30 2003
From: mssngr <zbp+ervsvpnc=etaffz>
To: Jonodo <np+jnuf=bqbabw>
Cc: teb+ynreerclu=rhtbynan
Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2003 16:20:22 -0700
Subject: Re: [AH] MAM MB-33 mk2 VS  Roland TB-303
Message-ID: <3F95BF36.DE5FCBDC@pacifier.com>
References: <000e01c39831$da1ae140$7faf9244@triplextech>

> How does the MB-33 MK 2 hold up against the acid machine? Anyone own or
> have owned both

At around 1/4 the current cost it comes close enough for me..

-- 
D.

From x  Wed Oct 22 14:30:29 2003
From: "unknownfreak" <zbp+ee+pla=srnetp>
To: "Jonodo" <np+jnuf=bqbabw>, <teb+ynreerclu=rhtbynan>
Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2003 19:38:33 -0400
Subject: Re: [AH] MAM MB-33 mk2 VS  Roland TB-303
Message-ID: <002b01c3982c$70e03270$cffc5a18@charlesj9zqn19>
References: <000e01c39831$da1ae140$7faf9244@triplextech>

Jonodo wrote:

> How does the MB-33 MK 2 hold up against the acid machine? Anyone own
> or have owned both?

It's a verrry nice-sounding machine with unmistakeably the 303 mood.  I
haven't done an A/B with a TB-303 -- I understand ReBirth gets excellent
marks for that -- but in some comparisons I've seen online it's rated at
the top.  And it's new and inexpensive.

From x  Wed Oct 22 14:30:50 2003
From: "Djadun" <gra+gfnpzbp=ahqnwD>
To: <teb+ynreerclu=rhtbynan>
Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2003 05:24:16 -0700
Subject: Re: [AH] MAM MB-33 mk2 VS  Roland TB-303
Message-ID: <003601c39897$69bbb9e0$0300a8c0@attbi.com>
References: <000e01c39831$da1ae140$7faf9244@triplextech> <002b01c3982c$70e03270$cffc5a18@charlesj9zqn19>

"unknownfreak" <zbp+ee+pla=srnetp> wrote:

> It's a verrry nice-sounding machine with unmistakeably the 303 mood.  I
> haven't done an A/B with a TB-303 -- I understand ReBirth gets excellent
> marks for that -- but in some comparisons I've seen online it's rated at
> the top.  And it's new and inexpensive.

Im trying to get a test together that a/b's all of these clones and helps
shed some light on this subject once and for all. Anyone with any 303 clones
please contact me. There are a lot of people willing to help and a lot of
clones are represented, and there are also a lot of clones that dont have
anyone speaking for them, so if youve got something that you can do a demo
with, please contact me.

-- 
Djadun

From x  Wed Oct 22 14:33:41 2003
From: "Guy Taylor" <hn+zbp+bbunl=un_gcjt>
To: "'Djadun'" <gra+gfnpzbp=ahqnwD>, <teb+ynreerclu=rhtbynan>
Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2003 21:19:02 +1000
Subject: RE: [AH] MAM MB-33 mk2 VS  Roland TB-303
Message-ID: <000901c3988e$50643bb0$0300a8c0@lynxguy>
In-Reply-To: <003601c39897$69bbb9e0$0300a8c0@attbi.com>

Djadun wrote:

> Im trying to get a test together that a/b's all of these clones and
> helps shed some light on this subject once and for all. Anyone with
> any 303 clones please contact me. There are a lot of people willing to
> help and a lot of clones are represented, and there are also a lot of
> clones that dont have anyone speaking for them, so if youve got
> something that you can do a demo with, please contact me.

I've got a Syntecno TeeBee Mk I... Happy to help
:)

-- 
Djadun

From x  Wed Oct 22 21:20:22 2003
From: "Paul Hartfree" <zbp+yvnzgbu=rresgenu_yhnc>
To: <teb+ynreerclu=rhtbynan>
Cc: <np+jnuf=bqbabw>, <gra+gfnpzbp=ahqnwD>
Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2003 20:11:51 +0100
Message-ID: <Sea2-DAV15ozI9Wbbjy000016ce@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: [AH] MAM MB-33 mk2 VS  Roland TB-303
In-Reply-To: <000e01c39831$da1ae140$7faf9244@triplextech> 

Jon wrote:

> How does the MB-33 MK 2 hold up against the acid machine? Anyone own
> or have owned both?

Hi Jon

I have both and will be happy to compare the two.  I have actually never
done an A/B comparison for some reason but I will tonight and then post
the results (if someone can host them as I don't have any hosting).

Djadun - if you are the guy that has been trying to organise the 303
reviews, pls can you forward me the sequences you posted recently as I
kept the mail but promptly lost it..

thx

-- 
Paul
London

From x  Wed Oct 22 23:13:45 2003
From: "Paul Hartfree" <zbp+yvnzgbu=rresgenu_yhnc>
To: <teb+ynreerclu=rhtbynan>
Cc: <np+jnuf=bqbabw>, <gra+gfnpzbp=ahqnwD>
Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2003 22:08:16 +0100
Subject: Re: [AH] MAM MB-33 mk2 VS  Roland TB-303
Message-ID: <SEA2-DAV73tXsL1c00g00007bf8@hotmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <000e01c39831$da1ae140$7faf9244@triplextech> 

Hi again

Just done some A/B comparisons and was quite interesting.  The 303 is
definitely fuller/smoother and seems to handle higher resonance a lot
better.  The MB33 sounds a bit more raw and loses it when you push the
resonance too high.

I based my test on Djadun's suggested settings (found the email) for
test 4 (everything on 50%, Res on 100% and sweep the cutoff from zero to
100% using a square wave).  The 303 handles this fine and sounds as you
would expect, fantastic, but the MB33II pretty much gives up after about
70% on the cutoff as the resonance is too high.

This is not really a fare test as clearly the MB33 can't cope with this
setting.  Also the MB33 has more to offer in the way of a sub oscillator
and distortion which are both turned off for this test.

So, my conclusion after only 45 minutes is that I prefer the 303 by a
long way BUT the MB33 has other benefits.  I actually got the MB33II
when my 303 was being serviced/modified by OakleySounds and I was having
303 withdraws.  I thought I would play with the MB33 until my 303 was
returned and then sell it.  Tonight I have decided to keep the MB33..

I am happy to continue this testing and answer more questions.

Good luck

PS:
I can send in tonight's files if someone wants to host them..

-- 
Paul
London

From x  Thu Oct 23 01:17:22 2003
From: "Fierce Fish" <xh+bp+erqablrhyo=ufvsrpervs>
To: <teb+ynreerclu=rhtbynan>
Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2003 23:30:29 +0100
Subject: Re: [AH] MAM MB-33 mk2 VS  Roland TB-303
Message-ID: <00dc01c398ec$1946f3d0$a701a8c0@SHUTTLESV24>
References: <SEA2-DAV73tXsL1c00g00007bf8@hotmail.com> 

Having long been a TB-303 fanatic I have tried most of the "clones",
some of which are great in their own right, but NOTHING can emulate a
TB-303 totally, most at best can get a close approximation of certain
settings. If you want the 303 sound then anything other than a 303 is
going to disappoint in some way, the MB33 is a great synth and can do
some aspects convincingly but it just does not have the essential
x-factor. I know some people hate 303's but no-one can deny that due to
its quirkyness it does have a very distinctive sound. Even the mighty
FR-777, which in many ways is far superior to a 303 cannot match it's
fluidity and organic nature, the 303 I think will always remain
untouchable, which is probably why after all these years it is still
commanding high prices. Having said all of this though the MB-33 (both
mk1 and mkII) is a very worthwhile device to have in the studio.

-- 
FF

From x  Thu Oct 23 13:33:14 2003
From: "Paul Hartfree" <zbp+yvnzgbu=rresgenu_yhnc>
To: teb+ynreerclu=rhtbynan
Cc: xh+bp+erqablrhyo=ufvsrpervs
Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2003 11:31:47 +0100
Subject: Re: [AH] MAM MB-33 mk2 VS  Roland TB-303
Message-ID: <Sea2-F288wZ1qdVoTgr00015345@hotmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <00dc01c398ec$1946f3d0$a701a8c0@SHUTTLESV24> 

FF wrote:

> Having long been a TB-303 fanatic I have tried most of the "clones",
> some of which are great in their own right, but NOTHING can emulate a
> TB-303 totally...

Yep, I love the 303 for its uniqueness and shear power.  When people
criticise it I think they are usually overlooking (or dont know) that
303s are very capable of doing non-303 sounds and these are as powerful
and ripping as any mono.

My latest track is 2 303s lines, one doing a bass that sounds nothing
like a 303 and then the usual 303 stuff on top of that. It never stops
amazing me just how full and complete these 2 mono lines can make a
track. I mentioned this point on the Access Virus list recently in one
of the usual "VAs are as good as Analogue" threads - I mentioned that
you could not create a track with any VA, using only 2 mono lines
without it sounding empty, weak and hollow, especially with only single
oscillators. I was kind of hoping someone would respond to this but
there were no responses to my comment (I wonder why?!).

> Having said all of this though the MB-33 (both mk1 and mkII) is a very
> worthwhile device to have in the studio.

I don't totally agree with this.  The original mb33 does not have
distortion and this this the main reason I keep mine.  Without this I
would definitely sell it.  The original also does not have a sub-osc
which I use a lot.  Finally the original has a 24dB filter whilst the
mb33II has a 18 dB filter like the 303 - I am not sure how if this is a
big deal but worth noting.

As for all your other comments, you are spot on. The 303 is unique and I
will never be without mine..

-- 
Paul
London

     10_134  2003-11-16  README
    670_036  2003-11-16  mb33-dist.wav
    670_036  2003-11-16  mb33.wav
    670_036  2003-11-16  tb303.wav