UD-Xa

Pros

• I listened to a video companion between a real OB-Xa and the UB-Xa and thought for the most part Behringer nailed the sound
• go with the UB-Xa if you want a more vintage sounding synth (the atrophy profiles can really add a lot, and are editable!)
• I went for the UB-Xa because, at its price, I couldn’t pass it up—and I have no regrets. It’s a solid analog synth with plenty of sweet spots, and I really enjoy it.
• UB-Xa's 5 octaves, poly aftertouch, 16 voices seem like such quality-of-life features

Cons

• The UBXA does sound great as well but I found it more menu divey than the aforementioned, I also think it can start to sound more of the same and less versitile IMO. Excels at strings and leads but doesn't have the lowend grit I like to...
• Parent context: I listened to a video companion between a real OB-Xa and the UB-Xa and thought for the most part Behringer nailed the sound, where it differed, I think, was in left/right … Reply: I guess seeing the UB-Xa going for as low...
• Playing them side by side, the TEO 5 sounds orders of magnitude better, even when played completely dry. I sent the UBXA back.
• The poly AT keyboard isn’t the best either. I find the Hydrasynth much easier to control, as the UB-Xa’s keybed feels a bit spongy, making it harder to precisely manage velocity and pressure.
• The screen was a definite weak point (I replaced mine), and while programming isn’t the most complex, it’s not particularly intuitive either. The use of a shift function is always debatable, but long-pressing buttons? Even worse.