Page 1 of 1

Emulator X or Ultra?

PostPosted: Sat Oct 23, 2004 10:56 pm
by om
I've got Emulator X and I have an E-Synth Ultra. The truth is.... I think I like the Ultra better than the X. Am I alone here?

PostPosted: Wed Mar 30, 2005 1:26 pm
by aeser
no, i have emulator x and an e4xt ultra and i vastly prefer the e4xt

PostPosted: Wed Mar 30, 2005 7:25 pm
by drayon
please provide details of what u like about the E4 better than the EmuX an your opinions.

I just ordered an EmuX studio for testing. i briefly messed about with an EmuX, i actually thought working in the hardware is actually faster. I will need to spend alot of time with EmuX to form a well grounded opinion tho.

PostPosted: Thu Mar 31, 2005 12:00 pm
by aeser
drayon wrote:please provide details of what u like about the E4 better than the EmuX an your opinions.

I just ordered an EmuX studio for testing. i briefly messed about with an EmuX, i actually thought working in the hardware is actually faster. I will need to spend alot of time with EmuX to form a well grounded opinion tho.

the e4xt sounds much much fatter/warmer, has more depth, is faster to work in, can use the 8 outputs as mono outputs not just stereo, the filters are much better, etc.

i like emulator X as a softsynth but i think they got a lot of things wrong, i use kontakt much more than i use emulator X in strictly software simply because emu did not make it easy to organize sounds into a bank to work on, in kontakt you just drag whatever you want to where you're working and create presets and "banks" on the fly very very quickly and easily, very condusive to working on music. i hate having to do all sorts of administrative shit to organize sounds when i'm feeling creative and just want to compose music, takes way too long and by the time i'm done organizing the sounds i don't feel nearly as creative anymore. this is my one gripe about the e4xt, it is a bitch to get all the sounds you want into a place you can use them all together and compose a track. but the sound quality on the e4xt is better than anything i've heard.

PostPosted: Sun Jun 05, 2005 3:00 am
by WhyBe
I have the EmuX and the E4 Platinum. I prefer the Platinum even though to me, the EmuX sounds the same.

The Platinum is much easier to navigate (read quicker), much easier sample management (in EmuX you have to search samples in a long list). The RFX32 is much more powerful than the EmuX FX card.

What the EmuX needs is a revamped user interface, then maybe, it'll outdo the hardware.

Oh yeah, no latency issues with the hardware.

PostPosted: Wed Jun 08, 2005 9:22 am
by Samplecraze
Mmm, hard one this.

The X does provide more filters, more patchcord source/destinations, a converter for multi format support, more efx and downloadable plugins, better A/D D/A (THD, SNR, LNF etc.), better midi cc implementation, user defined patchcord template saves and copy and a few other choice bits n pieces.

The E4XT Ultra sounds better (as it is not constricted to a soundcard's environment, better file management system, RFX has better efx than X, better interface and easier to use as it is not as complex as the X.

The X is very potenet and the more patch fixes that come along, the better it gets. The latest fix has saved some of us designers a world of hassle. It allows us to autolocate a sample or voice as we have on the hardware samplers with the standard enter and play facility. Now we have a similar facility on the X.

However, I love the simplicity of the Eos systems, and they have their own sound.

I won't be ditching my hardware for a long time.

PostPosted: Mon Jun 27, 2005 2:56 pm
by aeser
actually the ultras have way way better A/D and D/A converters than the 1820m/emulator x. like WAY better. the 1820m goes to 192khz but the quality of the converters pales in comparrison to the ultra sampler converters. that's WHY the ultras sound so friggin good.

PostPosted: Mon Jun 27, 2005 3:50 pm
by Samplecraze
Hi aeser

Do you have any test results to show that?

Because I have tested both sets of converters and the Ultra may sound good but soinically the X wins.

PostPosted: Sun Sep 18, 2005 7:29 pm
by Mr.Nasty
The X is being constantly updated and will only get better

PostPosted: Mon Sep 19, 2005 1:25 pm
by om
I've just been doing some subjective comparative testing on my Ultra (with RFX) and my X. I loaded a piano preset from the East West Steinway into both. (Note: I loaded the 256 meg piano into the X and the upper half of the 128 meg piano into the ultra - i only have 64m of mem.)

I know this sounds ridiculous but I still think the Ultra slays the X when I compare the same note in the same preset struck with the same velocity.

I tried this with effects and without and in both cases the Ultra sounded better "to me".

I understand this isnt very scientific. If anyone wants to come up with a scientific measure, I'll do it.

One of the things I've come to realise is how good the RFX actually is. man the effects of the RFX blow the X effects away. To my ear the X sounds "flat" as in dull compared to the Ultra.

PostPosted: Tue Sep 20, 2005 1:25 am
by om
Sorry to reply to my own previous post but I should point out that I dont have the 1818m which has the better DA converters, I have the cheaper one.

PostPosted: Tue Sep 20, 2005 7:51 am
by Samplecraze
If you are talking about how a converter sounds to the ear, then that is totally subjective.

If you want to test the converters, that is scientific and easily done.

We test all soundcards using tone testers like RMAA. These are the benchmark tests we conduct when testing for THD, noise floor, dynamic range etc...

Go to their site, download the software and test your own cards.
Be aware that the test conditions must be stringent.

PostPosted: Sun Aug 19, 2007 12:40 am
by filterfreq
check my new topic in this emu x forum "emuX and ultra comparison competition"

hoping someone might post 2 recordings of an identical sample with identical freq modulation so people can hear and decide.

i have an emu e6400 the filters sound so amazing ...i cant imagine a soft sampler touching it.

hence my hope of a competition thingy. :loveit:



Re: Emulator X or Ultra?

PostPosted: Mon Oct 18, 2010 1:29 pm
by Niklas
Emulator X/X2 and Proteus X/X2 sucks!
That is due to that they don’t work proper on x64 systems, if at all.

I have always loved E-mu since I bought my Emax SE keyboard, Brand new in 1989.
But I’m fairly desiponted on there gears after I have starting use theirs soft synths, samples and soundcard.

I think the best stuff they did was Emulator 2 and 3, and emax 1 and 2.

I got an ESi-32 in 1993, and have also both an e6400 and an e5000 Ultra. Neither one of them stands up to the workflow or sound if you compared them to Emax.

Comparison of Emu-X and any of EIV line so I would say that EIV series is much better.

Emu themselves say that Emlator X and X2 works only on 32 bit OS. Emulator and Proteus X is therefore totally useless today, when almost all computers come with x64 today.
My Emu-X does not work in my new computer, but my E-max and e5000 still works...

I would probaly not by any more Emu gears...