Xpantastic! group photo

Yahoo Groups archive

Xpantastic!

Index last updated: 2026-04-28 23:44 UTC

Thread

Xpander Vs. Rhodes Chroma

Xpander Vs. Rhodes Chroma

2009-02-27 by mattvrazo

Reading up about the Chroma, I was surprised to find it uses 3372s and
3374s...  

The chroma allows for serial dual filtering which is intriguing, and
has a variety of filter modes, and also seems to do ok in the way of
modulation.  It also seems to have snappier envs from the demos I've
heard (tho I realize they are still software generated).  

But I also get the impression that its VCOs are ultra-stable due to
two forms of auto-tuning...  I don't think I would want anything more
stable than what the xpander offers now...  (or is this a moot point
given they both use the same chips?)  

I only played one briefly some time ago but am now potentially being
offered one for sale or, gasp, in exchange for my xpander!  So I am
wondering if anyone's used both and able to comment?  pluses/minuses?

Re: [xpantastic] Xpander Vs. Rhodes Chroma

2009-02-27 by vco3@aol.com

HI the rhodes arp chroma does not use 3374/3372's, the chroma polaris uses these. The rhodes arp chroma is a very different voice compared to the xpander...hope this helps.. cya analog-jeff

Re: Xpander Vs. Rhodes Chroma

2009-02-27 by mattvrazo

--- In xpantastic@yahoogroups.com, vco3@... wrote:
>
> HI the rhodes arp chroma does not use 3374/3372's, the chroma
polaris uses 
> these. The rhodes arp chroma is a very different voice compared to the 
> xpander...hope this helps.. cya analog-jeff
>

ahhh... ok...  how did I miss that?!  (Doesn't help with the similar
name!)  Ok, I guess they have a discrete oscillator and different CEM
chips for VCF/VCA.  

I guess that makes it a little less xpander related at this point, but
if anyone has any comments, would still be interested to hear them.

RE: [xpantastic] Re: Xpander Vs. Rhodes Chroma

2009-02-27 by James R. Coplin

I own both and I'd probably burn to death in a fire if I had to run back in
to the house and decide between one or the other.  I actually think the
Chroma sounds better.  However, the Xpander wins hands down for reliability.
I have recently upgraded the power supply and main board for my Chroma so it
is stable now.  As wonderful as the Xpander is to program, the Chroma is
infuriating.  However, the MIDI implementation on the Chroma (through the
new MIDI interface or the KromaKult) gives you CC controls over everything
as opposed to a couple on the Xpander.

 

James R. Coplin
Show quoted textHide quoted text
From: xpantastic@yahoogroups.com [mailto:xpantastic@yahoogroups.com] On
Behalf Of mattvrazo
Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2009 9:18 PM
To: xpantastic@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [xpantastic] Re: Xpander Vs. Rhodes Chroma

 

--- In xpantastic@yahoogroups.com <mailto:xpantastic%40yahoogroups.com> ,
vco3@... wrote:
>
> HI the rhodes arp chroma does not use 3374/3372's, the chroma
polaris uses 
> these. The rhodes arp chroma is a very different voice compared to the 
> xpander...hope this helps.. cya analog-jeff
>

ahhh... ok... how did I miss that?! (Doesn't help with the similar
name!) Ok, I guess they have a discrete oscillator and different CEM
chips for VCF/VCA. 

I guess that makes it a little less xpander related at this point, but
if anyone has any comments, would still be interested to hear them.

Re: [xpantastic] Re: Xpander Vs. Rhodes Chroma

2009-02-27 by Tony Cappellini

On 2/26/09, mattvrazo <vrazomatt@...> wrote:
>
>  ahhh... ok...  how did I miss that?!  (Doesn't help with the similar
>  name!)

As they say in literature "A Rhodes by any other name is still a Rhodes" ;-)

Re: [xpantastic] Xpander Vs. Rhodes Chroma

2009-02-27 by Tony Cappellini

a bit OT, but still interesting ...

>  I only played one briefly some time ago but am now potentially being
>  offered one for sale or, gasp, in exchange for my xpander!  So I am
>  wondering if anyone's used both and able to comment?  pluses/minuses?

This is probably the best Chroma resource out there.
http://www.rhodeschroma.com/

Re: Xpander Vs. Rhodes Chroma

2009-02-27 by mattvrazo

Thanks!  Good to know.  This one has the CC+, so I imagine I would be
doing more MIDI control.  I should have the chance to have them side
by side eventually, so I'll be able to have a fair judgement.  Only
then will I know if I can depart with the Xpander!


--- In xpantastic@yahoogroups.com, "James R. Coplin" <james@...> wrote:
>
> I own both and I'd probably burn to death in a fire if I had to run
back in
> to the house and decide between one or the other.  I actually think the
> Chroma sounds better.  However, the Xpander wins hands down for
reliability.
> I have recently upgraded the power supply and main board for my
Chroma so it
> is stable now.  As wonderful as the Xpander is to program, the Chroma is
> infuriating.  However, the MIDI implementation on the Chroma
(through the
> new MIDI interface or the KromaKult) gives you CC controls over
everything
> as opposed to a couple on the Xpander.
> 
>  
> 
> James R. Coplin
> 
>  
> 
> From: xpantastic@yahoogroups.com [mailto:xpantastic@yahoogroups.com] On
> Behalf Of mattvrazo
> Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2009 9:18 PM
> To: xpantastic@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [xpantastic] Re: Xpander Vs. Rhodes Chroma
> 
>  
> 
> --- In xpantastic@yahoogroups.com
<mailto:xpantastic%40yahoogroups.com> ,
> vco3@ wrote:
> >
> > HI the rhodes arp chroma does not use 3374/3372's, the chroma
> polaris uses 
> > these. The rhodes arp chroma is a very different voice compared to
the 
Show quoted textHide quoted text
> > xpander...hope this helps.. cya analog-jeff
> >
> 
> ahhh... ok... how did I miss that?! (Doesn't help with the similar
> name!) Ok, I guess they have a discrete oscillator and different CEM
> chips for VCF/VCA. 
> 
> I guess that makes it a little less xpander related at this point, but
> if anyone has any comments, would still be interested to hear them.
>

Re: Xpander Vs. Rhodes Chroma

2009-03-01 by analogholic

I have to agree with James,

The Chroma sounds better than the Xpander/M12. 
I was suprised when I got my Chroma a couple of months ago, and
compared it to the M12 in mono (as opposed to having the voices panned
as usually) The M12 sounded a bit "boxy" and lacked low-and-highend
compared to the Chroma.
The Chroma also has a more defined 3D sound. 

Before any flame starts, I want to say that I love the M12 to death. 
It can do stuff which no other synth can do, and I´m sure as hell
ain´t getting rid of mine. And of course every synth has "its" sound.
I´m talking about the actual soundquality here, where the difference
might be explained by: 

1.Chroma has discrete oscillators

2.Xpander/Matrix-12 has inferior OP-amps in it´s signal chain.

As a matter of fact I´m in touch with a guy who changed the OP-amps in
his M12. This is what he said:

"The sound differences compared to the horrible TL072's that were in
there,are better low end and clearer top end. TL072's have the same
effect on sound that clock jitter has in digital systems; a folding of
the high frequency content into the mid bass band, in the form of ugly
grunge. Due to other design issues the Matrix-12 will never have the
huge sound of a modular Moog. There are too many compromises in the
design and CEM chips. But it can be made much better"

He also bypassed the pan-circuit which degrades the overall soundquality.

He is going to explain in detail what he did (and how) as soon as he
finds the time.

Xp/M12 is one of the greatest synths EVER, and IMHO it deserves to
sound as good as it can. 

Of course YMMV








 





-- In xpantastic@...m, "James R. Coplin" <james@...> wrote:
>
> I own both and I'd probably burn to death in a fire if I had to run
back in
> to the house and decide between one or the other.  I actually think the
> Chroma sounds better.  However, the Xpander wins hands down for
reliability.
> I have recently upgraded the power supply and main board for my
Chroma so it
> is stable now.  As wonderful as the Xpander is to program, the Chroma is
> infuriating.  However, the MIDI implementation on the Chroma
(through the
> new MIDI interface or the KromaKult) gives you CC controls over
everything
> as opposed to a couple on the Xpander.
> 
>  
> 
> James R. Coplin
> 
>  
> 
> From: xpantastic@yahoogroups.com [mailto:xpantastic@yahoogroups.com] On
> Behalf Of mattvrazo
> Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2009 9:18 PM
> To: xpantastic@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [xpantastic] Re: Xpander Vs. Rhodes Chroma
> 
>  
> 
> --- In xpantastic@yahoogroups.com
<mailto:xpantastic%40yahoogroups.com> ,
> vco3@ wrote:
> >
> > HI the rhodes arp chroma does not use 3374/3372's, the chroma
> polaris uses 
> > these. The rhodes arp chroma is a very different voice compared to
the 
Show quoted textHide quoted text
> > xpander...hope this helps.. cya analog-jeff
> >
> 
> ahhh... ok... how did I miss that?! (Doesn't help with the similar
> name!) Ok, I guess they have a discrete oscillator and different CEM
> chips for VCF/VCA. 
> 
> I guess that makes it a little less xpander related at this point, but
> if anyone has any comments, would still be interested to hear them.
>

RE: [xpantastic] Re: Xpander Vs. Rhodes Chroma

2009-03-01 by James R. Coplin

Just to weigh in on the opamp discussion, the TL072 isnR17;t that bad. I had heard this same statement and when I did a complete overhaul of my Memorymoog a few years back (which also uses TL072s). I replaced all of them with high-end Burr-Brown audiophile opamps. The results were not all that remarkable. It had a slightly (and I mean slightly) more open sound and clarity but overall it was a minor improvement. Considering the TL072 is like $.40 and the Burr-Brown OPA2604 is like $4.50 each, I hardly think it is worth the expense and effort. Others obviously think it is, your opinion may vary.

Also, a couple of other things to consider, do you really want to change the sound of the instrument? Even if the Burr-Brown is somehow \u201c;better\u201d, it *will* sound different. Also, keep in mind that the power consumption for other precision opamps like the Burr-Brown are typically greater. While we are talking about a fairly small change, if you are changing out a large number, it adds up. Does your power supply have enough overhead to handle the increased load? The supply is designed to go with the instrument as designed and a typically a little extra but not necessarily a bunch extra.

James R. Coplin

From: xpantastic@yahoogroups.com [mailto:xpantastic@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of analogholic
Sent: Sunday, March 01, 2009 12:34 PM
To: xpantastic@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [xpantastic] Re: Xpander Vs. Rhodes Chroma

I have to agree with James,

The Chroma sounds better than the Xpander/M12.
I was suprised when I got my Chroma a couple of months ago, and
compared it to the M12 in mono (as opposed to having the voices panned
as usually) The M12 sounded a bit "boxy" and lacked low-and-highend
compared to the Chroma.
The Chroma also has a more defined 3D sound.

Before any flame starts, I want to say that I love the M12 to death.
It can do stuff which no other synth can do, and I´m sure as hell
ain´t getting rid of mine. And of course every synth has "its" sound.
I´m talking about the actual soundquality here, where the difference
might be explained by:

1.Chroma has discrete oscillators

2.Xpander/Matrix-12 has inferior OP-amps in it´s signal chain.

As a matter of fact I´m in touch with a guy who changed the OP-amps in
his M12. This is what he said:

"The sound differences compared to the horrible TL072's that were in
there,are better low end and clearer top end. TL072's have the same
effect on sound that clock jitter has in digital systems; a folding of
the high frequency content into the mid bass band, in the form of ugly
grunge. Due to other design issues the Matrix-12 will never have the
huge sound of a modular Moog. There are too many compromises in the
design and CEM chips. But it can be made much better"

He also bypassed the pan-circuit which degrades the overall soundquality.

He is going to explain in detail what he did (and how) as soon as he
finds the time.

Xp/M12 is one of the greatest synths EVER, and IMHO it deserves to
sound as good as it can.

Of course YMMV

-- In xpantastic@yahoogroups.com, "James R. Coplin" wrote:
>
> I own both and I'd probably burn to death in a fire if I had to run
back in
> to the house and decide between one or the other. I actually think the
> Chroma sounds better. However, the Xpander wins hands down for
reliability.
> I have recently upgraded the power supply and main board for my
Chroma so it
> is stable now. As wonderful as the Xpander is to program, the Chroma is
> infuriating. However, the MIDI implementation on the Chroma
(through the
> new MIDI interface or the KromaKult) gives you CC controls over
everything
> as opposed to a couple on the Xpander.
>
>
>
> James R. Coplin
>
>
>
> From: xpantastic@yahoogroups.com [mailto:xpantastic@yahoogroups.com] On
> Behalf Of mattvrazo
> Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2009 9:18 PM
> To: xpantastic@...m
> Subject: [xpantastic] Re: Xpander Vs. Rhodes Chroma
>
>
>
> --- In xpantastic@yahoogroups.com
,
> vco3@ wrote:
> >
> > HI the rhodes arp chroma does not use 3374/3372's, the chroma
> polaris uses
> > these. The rhodes arp chroma is a very different voice compared to
the
> > xpander...hope this helps.. cya analog-jeff
> >
>
> ahhh... ok... how did I miss that?! (Doesn't help with the similar
> name!) Ok, I guess they have a discrete oscillator and different CEM
> chips for VCF/VCA.
>
> I guess that makes it a little less xpander related at this point, but
> if anyone has any comments, would still be interested to hear them.
>

Move to quarantaine

This moves the raw source file on disk only. The archive index is not changed automatically, so you still need to run a manual refresh afterward.