Cherry Audio releases "Wurlybird 140B" Electric Piano - $39

[Solidos]

https://cherryaudio.com/products/wurlybird140b

$39

Wurlybird 140B is Cherry Audio's first sample-based electro-acoustic virtual instrument, modeled after the 1964 Wurlitzer 140B, considered by many to be the crown jewel of the legendary Wurlitzer electric piano family. Though the 200-series models are more widely known — and often emulated — many devoted Wurly enthusiasts believe the 140B to have superior action and tone quality. Wurlybird 140B has been crafted by Cherry Audio through deep expert sampling of a professionally restored 140B, along with subtle randomization of key release and pedal sounds, precision modeling of the original preamp, faithfully emulated vibrato/tremolo, and even adjustable background hum. Additionally, Wurlybird 140B includes a broad spectrum of tonal-enhancing stompbox-style effects, ranging from subtle to extreme.

 

[Larry Shelby]

$32.62 at EveryPlugin

https://everyplugin.com/wurlybird-140b-electric-piano.html

[user 905133]

Based on the artwork, I can't help but wonder if their line of FX plugins will be expanded soon to include stomp boxes.  

Edited July 9 by User 905133
fixed typo

[PavlovsCat]

I didn't hear any demos that demonstrated a wide range of dynamics. It's 300-something  GB [EDIT: As Doug points out below, I meant MB;  the plugin is 380 MB], so I'm guessing it's not 7 or more velocity layers. I'd be interested in learning more, even before downloading the demo,  because this didn't sound like it beats my Sky Box Hammer and Waves 140B. But I'd be open to hearing from anyone who feels otherwise. I'm always on the lookout for the ultimate Wurly library or plugin. 

Edited July 10 by PavlovsCat
Made a correction on file size to correct a small, but pretty significant error (I wrote GB instead of MB, oops)

[Doug Rintoul]

12 minutes ago, PavlovsCat said:

It's 300-something GB

Me thinks you mean 300-something MB.

[PavlovsCat]

22 minutes ago, Doug Rintoul said:

Me thinks you mean 300-something MB.

Ha! You are correct, sir! 

[PavlovsCat]

I know a lot of people wouldn't agree, but I'd be okay with a 300GB Wurly library if it was incredible.  I'd be willing to commit an entire SSD to a perfect Wurly library. I love the Wurly that much.  Dead serious. 

[Craig N]

Yeah I noticed they didn't mention anything about how many layers or the use of modelling that could explain its small size. They did mention modelling of the preamp though. 

Maybe the samples are stored in a lossy format like AAC or OGG? Haha. 

[Craig N]

Well since I'm a geek I installed it, had a look at the 305 meg .SAR file it dropped under ProgramData and found it lists the wav files used. It's 4 to 5 dynamic layers and another 4 to 5 release samples per note across 5 octaves. 

Great presets. I just wish they'd sampled a few more dynamic layers to really do it justice - you can hear where the sample layer changes distinctly at higher velocities. 

[PavlovsCat]

On 7/9/2024 at 9:59 PM, Craig N said:

Well since I'm a geek I installed it, had a look at the 305 meg .SAR file it dropped under ProgramData and found it lists the wav files used. It's 4 to 5 dynamic layers and another 4 to 5 release samples per note across 5 octaves. 

Great presets. I just wish they'd sampled a few more dynamic layers to really do it justice - you can hear where the sample layer changes distinctly at higher velocities. 

It's implied in your "4 to 5 release samples per note," but just to be sure, would you mind confirming that it means that every note was sample (not, say, every third note)? Having grown up with a Wurly in our home (my mother was a music teacher and we had a family band that used the Wurly), beyond the tone, I find the dynamics of the Wurly are an essential part of its greatness.  It's sweet when you play it soft and it has bite when you play it harder. So many Wurly sample libraries fail on adequately capturing that. I own a bunch and I'm still not totally satisfied any of them are as good as it could be.  

Edited July 11 by PavlovsCat

[Craig N]

1 hour ago, PavlovsCat said:

It's implied in your "4 to 5 release samples per note," but just to be sure, would you mind confirming that it means that every note was sample (not, say, every third note)? Having grown up with a Wurly in our home (my mother was a music teacher and we had a family band that used the Wurly), beyond the tone, I find the dynamics of the Wurly are an essential part of its greatness.  It's sweet when you play it soft and it has bite when you play it harder. So many Wurly sample libraries fail on adequately capturing that. I own a bunch and I'm still not totally satisfied It's as good as it could be in any of them. 

I may or may have not tried to persuade some developers I know to create a Wurly library. I actually pushed for Orange Tree Samples to do a Hofner library for probably 13 years before they released one! That's why Greg asked me to do a demo when they were about to release it! 

Oh yeah I had thought to mention that but forgot earlier. There are indeed samples for each key, C C# D D# E F F# G G# A A# B with more often than not 5  samples + release samples. In fact there's 8 cases with 6 samples, and only 5 cases with 4, the rest are 5 dynamic layers + 5 releases per note. 

There's also a single sample each for Pedal 1, Pedal 2, Pedal F, Pedal 4, Pedal R1, Pedal R2. 

[PavlovsCat]

9 minutes ago, Craig N said:

Oh yeah I had thought to mention that but forgot earlier. There are indeed samples for each key, C C# D D# E F F# G G# A A# B with more often than not 5  samples + release samples. In fact there's 8 cases with 6 samples, and only 5 cases with 4, the rest are 5 dynamic layers + 5 releases per note. 

There's also a single sample each for Pedal 1, Pedal 2, Pedal F, Pedal 4, Pedal R1, Pedal R2. 

Thanks for all that info!

[TheMaartian]

I have both the V2 and V3 Arturia Wurlis installed. Both sound good, with tons of presets. Have have a bunch of Cherry Audio's VIs, but I'm not sure I need another Wurli, unless someone can convince me that C.A.'s can give me something that Arturia's can't.

[TheMaartian]

22 hours ago, John Maar said:

I have both the V2 and V3 Arturia Wurlis installed. Both sound good, with tons of presets. Have have a bunch of Cherry Audio's VIs, but I'm not sure I need another Wurli, unless someone can convince me that C.A.'s can give me something that Arturia's can't.

Welp, after listening to the demos on this page (start the first one and then let the page stream them in sequence in the background), I went ahead a bought it.

Sound demos for Wurlybird

[jude77]

8 hours ago, John Maar said:

Welp, after listening to the demos on this page (start the first one and then let the page stream them in sequence in the background), I went ahead a bought it.

Sound demos for Wurlybird

I'm on the fence about this one.  What did you hear that helped you make up your mind?  Now that you've had it a few hours what do you think?

[TheMaartian]

35 minutes ago, jude77 said:

I'm on the fence about this one.  What did you hear that helped you make up your mind?  Now that you've had it a few hours what do you think?

It's kind of difficult to get different Wurli VIs to sound exactly the same. I came kind of close with this one vs Arturia's Wurli v2 and Wurli v3 and AAS' Lounge Lizard. I set up a Gig Performer rackspace and drove all 4 with the same EZKeys song I put together. Sound-wise, it didn't stand out as obviously better. When I played each, none beat Lounge Lizard for playability if you can get the tone you want from it. One area where I really prefer Wurlybird is the user interface. It's terrific. When you select a preset, it places the FX pedals above the keyboard where the sheet music would go. Great use of space. Arturia's Wurlis put the pedals on the floor below the keyboard. Maybe more realistic for a real world keyboard, but wastes a lot of space on my display. And one REALLY irritating thing about Arturia's Wurlis is that the VSTs scale in VST hosts (my laptop has a 4K display running at 200%), but the standalone doesn't. When I scale the Wurlis for use in Gig Performer or one of my DAWs, I have to set the scaling to about 80%. The standalone versions pick up that setting and are unusable and almost impossible to read. I have to carefully select the scaling option and reset it to 200%. A real PITA. Lounge Lizard is due for a UI update any year now. Still love it. But for a regular Wurly, I think Wurlybird will get a lot of use.

The comment above about an obvious sample change when playing with high velocity is valid for live use, but for recording, it's easy enough to use volume automation and avoid the using the highest velocity sample.

Overall, I'll say that I'm happy to have a 140B to go with my 200 and 200A Wurlis.

Edited July 11 by John Maar

[user 905133]

 

[jude77]

23 hours ago, John Maar said:

It's kind of difficult to get different Wurli VIs to sound exactly the same. I came kind of close with this one vs Arturia's Wurli v2 and Wurli v3 and AAS' Lounge Lizard. I set up a Gig Performer rackspace and drove all 4 with the same EZKeys song I put together. Sound-wise, it didn't stand out as obviously better. When I played each, none beat Lounge Lizard for playability if you can get the tone you want from it. One area where I really prefer Wurlybird is the user interface. It's terrific. When you select a preset, it places the FX pedals above the keyboard where the sheet music would go. Great use of space. Arturia's Wurlis put the pedals on the floor below the keyboard. Maybe more realistic for a real world keyboard, but wastes a lot of space on my display. And one REALLY irritating thing about Arturia's Wurlis is that the VSTs scale in VST hosts (my laptop has a 4K display running at 200%), but the standalone doesn't. When I scale the Wurlis for use in Gig Performer or one of my DAWs, I have to set the scaling to about 80%. The standalone versions pick up that setting and are unusable and almost impossible to read. I have to carefully select the scaling option and reset it to 200%. A real PITA. Lounge Lizard is due for a UI update any year now. Still love it. But for a regular Wurly, I think Wurlybird will get a lot of use.

The comment above about an obvious sample change when playing with high velocity is valid for live use, but for recording, it's easy enough to use volume automation and avoid the using the highest velocity sample.

Overall, I'll say that I'm happy to have a 140B to go with my 200 and 200A Wurlis.

Thank you for that, I really appreciate it!

[user 905133]

I forgot to add: The PSN live event featuring today's special guests from Cherry Audio is scheduled for this afternoon/evening.  Great opportunity to get inside details, ask Qs of the Cherry Audio team, etc.  

Edited July 12 by User 905133
Updated

[PavlovsCat]

I wouldn't put this in the same league as SonicCoture, SkyBox Audio, AcousticSamples or even e-instruments Wurly libraries (same with Arturia's Wurli; I love Arturia's stuff, but their Wurli doesn't hit the mark). But it's $39 US and what I do really like about it is the sound design patches. If you're looking for the best quality, most authentic Wurly that captures the dynamics of a real Wurly well, I'd say this isn't the best option. But not everyone is concerned with that, and I think for 39 bucks, this is pretty darned nice, and some of those sound design patches are very appealing to my ears.  If I were to pick this up, it would be for the sound design patches. I own several Cherry Audio synths and effects and really like everything I have from them. 

Edited July 12 by PavlovsCat