The Official Sequential/Oberheim Forum
OTHER DISCUSSIONS => General Synthesis => Other Hardware/Software => Topic started by: Sacred Synthesis on June 01, 2021, 01:22:56 PM
-
The Korg ARP 2600M will be making its appearance in the near future. I'm definitely excited about this instrument, in spite of the "M."
https://www.synthtopia.com/content/2021/05/28/synthfest-france-coming-sunday-june-6-2021-as-a-free-online-event/
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RozMJhCgTwc
-
The size of this instrument probably makes it difficult to program, especially to fine tune, but maybe it wouldn't be much of a problem if used only in the studio.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P-LznAWO_oU
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6KdLBf8T9b0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3pCUR9hdRnI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Bj7KIzw-wQ
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fp5rs4Aiw7Y
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A2UCgsyhDM0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K4aZHtnGeHE
I'm quite impressed with the sound of this instrument. Based only on these YouTube videos, it does sound as good as, or better than, the Korg ARP Odyssey - a stronger bottom end especially. As for the diminutive size, I could live with the shrunken panel much better than the shrunken keyboard. But I would replace it with a full-size five octave keyboard anyway. Alas, this is definitely my kind of synthesizer.
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cpp3j6DBWl4
-
Marc Doty is about to release a series of videos on the 2600M:
https://youtu.be/9MvrDsoyH1c
-
https://youtu.be/iXP0-bkKzlM
-
The Limited Edition is $2,350. The Standard Edition will come out this summer and will be black, lack the little keyboard, and have a different case. I believe the price will be $2,250.
-
I know it's a silly cosmetic observation, but given that it's meant to appeal to the vintage synth enthusiast crowd I'm not sure why they went with those shiny patch inputs.
I've also heard enough differences between the FS model and the original that I don't think as a reissue it would satisfy my sense of authenticity (and I assume the M sounds like the FS). Not to say its a bad sounding synth at all, it's just if I am buying a reissue, authentic sound is very high on the list.
-
It sounds fabulous to me. I believe the build quality is at least close the the FS.
-
It sounds fabulous to me. I believe the build quality is at least close the the FS.
I agree it sounds good. I guess I just become a bit of a cork sniffer once something calls itself a reissue of an older synth, and at that point I expect the reissue to be able to fully duplicate the sounds of the original in a way that's largely undetectable. It has to capture the soul of the original. I guess what the definition of soul is when it comes to sound is subjective, so mileage may vary here. But I've seen some videos where the overall brightness range wasn't like the original, or the noise generator just sounded vastly different than the original. The tone of the noise is an important, fundamental feature to recreation of sound on a synth.
Aside from the capacitor issue on the early units of the Rev4 (filtergate etc), which Dave made right, I never heard any comparison audio where the Rev4 sounded less than authentic against a vintage Prophet 5. So to me that's kind of the baseline expectation of a reissue.
-
But I've seen some videos where the overall brightness range wasn't like the original, or the noise generator just sounded vastly different than the original. The tone of the noise is an important, fundamental feature to recreation of sound on a synth.
There aren't too many videos on the 2600M. Which one were you referring to, and how did you compare it to the original instrument?
-
But I've seen some videos where the overall brightness range wasn't like the original, or the noise generator just sounded vastly different than the original. The tone of the noise is an important, fundamental feature to recreation of sound on a synth.
There aren't too many videos on the 2600M. Which one were you referring to, and how did you compare it to the original instrument?
They weren't specifically on the 2600M, they were FS vs. the original. It's been a while since I listened to them as well, I'll try to make a note to come back and post them if I encounter them again. Granted, I am assuming that the 2600M sounds the same as the FS.
-
But I've seen some videos where the overall brightness range wasn't like the original, or the noise generator just sounded vastly different than the original. The tone of the noise is an important, fundamental feature to recreation of sound on a synth.
There aren't too many videos on the 2600M. Which one were you referring to, and how did you compare it to the original instrument?
They weren't specifically on the 2600M, they were FS vs. the original. It's been a while since I listened to them as well, I'll try to make a note to come back and post them if I encounter them again. Granted, I am assuming that the 2600M sounds the same as the FS.
These tests are only worthwhile if they are true blind tests. Otherwise your subconscious distracts you.
-
These tests are only worthwhile if they are true blind tests. Otherwise your subconscious distracts you.
Blind tests work for things like "I bet I can tell whether its analog or digital".
But never having owned an original ARP 2600, I would have no point of reference on what the original noise generator should sound like, in that case the best test is a comparison video from someone who has both old and new, side by side.
-
These tests are only worthwhile if they are true blind tests. Otherwise your subconscious distracts you.
Blind tests work for things like "I bet I can tell whether its analog or digital".
But never having owned an original ARP 2600, I would have no point of reference on what the original noise generator should sound like, in that case the best test is a comparison video from someone who has both old and new, side by side.
I always find by doing that you run the risk of getting distracted by what your eyes are seeing rather than what your ears are hearing. Case in point the S2400 vs SP1200. Almost everyone in the comments said the SP1200 sounded better but how much of that was a knee jerk reaction to the idea of “the original” as opposed to an unbiased conclusion
-
Unless you're absolutely committed to imitating the sound of a vintage ARP 2600, why does the exacting comparison matter so much? The Korg re-issues sound excellent, that's certain. My Odysseys sound gorgeous, and their build quality is solid. They've got that "Odyssey sound" as I remember it, but I say that having no point of reference other than my musical ear. Yet for all I know, they're not a 101% perfect copy of the original.
It seems as if having such a standard of impeccable identity with the original only keeps one from being happy with an excellent instrument.
-
Unless you're absolutely committed to imitating the sound of a vintage ARP 2600, why does the exacting comparison matter so much? The Korg re-issues sound excellent, that's certain. My Odysseys sound gorgeous, and their build quality is solid. They've got that "Odyssey sound" as I remember it, but I say that having no point of reference other than my musical ear. Yet for all I know, they're not a 101% perfect copy of the original.
It seems as if having such a standard of impeccable identity with the original only keeps one from being happy with an excellent instrument.
The ironic thing in that is that the originals likely had variations from unit to unit and weren't exactly 1:1 either
-
Yes, plus the differing filters, depending on the year.
-
It seems as if having such a standard of impeccable identity with the original only keeps one from being happy with an excellent instrument.
Only if the instrument doesn't match their expectations, and of course expectations vary. For me, I'm normally not too picky about things like exact knob/slider positions, because these are the types of things that could vary quite a bit from unit to unit due to manufacturing variance. Sometimes you need to nudge a knob an extra half millimeter on one synth to achieve the same sound on another of the same model. But, if the two sound no where near each other within like 25% of the total range of the knob, that would be a problem. Or if some basic fundamentals like the saw waves, noise type, filter etc just sound nothing alike then to me that's a bigger problem (for my own personal expectations) because if the fundamentals aren't there, it means it's only a "loosely inspired by" synth, which is of way less value to me than a proper reissue.
But, I do agree, at some point a synth either captures what an individual ear liked about the original synth its based on, or it doesn't. And if it does scratch all the right itches, then it probably should be obtained... as long as that criteria is satisfied, it really doesn't matter at the end of the day if sound matches identically or not.
-
But, if the two sound nowhere near each other within like 25% of the total range of the knob, that would be a problem. Or if some basic fundamentals like the saw waves, noise type, filter etc just sound nothing alike then to me that's a bigger problem (for my own personal expectations) because if the fundamentals aren't there, it means it's only a "loosely inspired by" synth, which is of way less value to me than a proper reissue.
I totally agree with that. But regarding the Korg re-issues, that's not been the case. Did you find such a vast difference between the Korg ARP 2600 and the original?
The possibility of a slight difference existing between an original and a re-issue allows that the newer instrument might be slightly better than the original, unless the only definition of good in this case means perfectly identical to another. I guess that's the presumption here. But again, it causes one to miss out on some superb old school synthesizers, which is why - even as a purist - I'm wary of the standard. It becomes an end in itself without achieving anything else.
-
But, if the two sound nowhere near each other within like 25% of the total range of the knob, that would be a problem. Or if some basic fundamentals like the saw waves, noise type, filter etc just sound nothing alike then to me that's a bigger problem (for my own personal expectations) because if the fundamentals aren't there, it means it's only a "loosely inspired by" synth, which is of way less value to me than a proper reissue.
I totally agree with that. But regarding the Korg re-issues, that's not been the case. Did you find such a vast difference between the Korg ARP 2600 and the original?
The possibility of a slight difference existing between an original and a re-issue allows that the newer instrument might be slightly better than the original, unless the only definition of good in this case means perfectly identical to another. I guess that's the presumption here. But again, it causes one to miss out on some superb old school synthesizers, which is why I'm wary of the standard. It becomes an end in itself without achieving anything else.
If I fart and the Deckard's Dream doesn't drift wildly out of tune like an original CS80....then it's not authentic enough!!! Also, how dare it include MIDI! Nope, not authentic at all.
;)
-
If I fart and the Deckard's Dream doesn't drift wildly out of tune like an original CS80....then it's not authentic enough!!!
There's no need to get philosophical about this, LoboLives.
-
But, if the two sound nowhere near each other within like 25% of the total range of the knob, that would be a problem. Or if some basic fundamentals like the saw waves, noise type, filter etc just sound nothing alike then to me that's a bigger problem (for my own personal expectations) because if the fundamentals aren't there, it means it's only a "loosely inspired by" synth, which is of way less value to me than a proper reissue.
I totally agree with that. But regarding the Korg re-issues, that's not been the case. Did you find such a vast difference between the Korg ARP 2600 and the original?
I didn't find vast differences, but I wasn't really looking for them simply because I don't have plans to get 2600. Almost accidentally I sort of stumbled upon a comparison between a 2600FS and an original, which showed a big difference in how the noise generator sounded, and this struck me as kind of a WTF because achieving a noise generator doesn't seem like something that should be vastly off. Given the price of the FS it was sort of a put off to me, but again I'm not the right judge of this particular synth.
I personally think Korg is in this period of sort of re-learning how to build great analog synths.. its kind of a lost art. But at least they are trying, Roland apparently gave up.
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zuhp2CLGqZI
As an aside, there clearly needs to be some sort of attachment on the top of the panel - perhaps several hooks - to keep the patch cords from hanging over the keyboard.
-
These tests are only worthwhile if they are true blind tests. Otherwise your subconscious distracts you.
Blind tests work for things like "I bet I can tell whether its analog or digital".
But never having owned an original ARP 2600, I would have no point of reference on what the original noise generator should sound like, in that case the best test is a comparison video from someone who has both old and new, side by side.
I always find by doing that you run the risk of getting distracted by what your eyes are seeing rather than what your ears are hearing. Case in point the S2400 vs SP1200. Almost everyone in the comments said the SP1200 sounded better but how much of that was a knee jerk reaction to the idea of “the original” as opposed to an unbiased conclusion
Sometimes, but I've found it depends on the product. I've seen a few blind tests of Roland System-8 or Jupiter-X compared to real Junos, and I took the tests and got all guesses right, then read the comments after the answers were posted to find that most other folks got it right too. And in Alex Ball's Rev4 vs Rev3 Prophet comparison, I found them indistingishable, and the audience at large didn't do any better than the probability of a coin toss.
In these tests, one never knows where bias (intentional or unintentional) may be lurking. Personally I never trust videos from the vendor showing how their own product stacks up, because usually they've selected specific sounds that highlight similarities rather than illustrate differences... as they should, they want to sell their products.
But to your and Sacred Synthesis' point, probably right now if I wanted the Juno sound (I do... I miss my old 106), I might be more inclined to buy a System-8. In fact I almost did recently. The biggest problem was that I couldn't convince myself the System-8 hardware would sound any better than the cloud plugins (I already own lifetime license for the Juno 106 plugin)... Kind of ironic, huh? I couldn't convince myself the emulation hardware sounded as good as the real thing, and couldn't convince myself the cheapo software was any less worthy than the emulation hardware.
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zuhp2CLGqZI
As an aside, there clearly needs to be some sort of attachment on the top of the panel - perhaps several hooks - to keep the patch cords from hanging over the keyboard.
You could also just get some cords of shorter lengths that are suited to specific connection lengths, so there's less slack in them...and/or slide the keyboard away from it a bit.
If you do get one, I can highly recommend adding a Keystep, its a gem of a arp/sequencer. I have the Keystep Pro black, which would be overkill for controlling a single synth of course because its 4-track, but assuming the regular Keystep has all the same functionality for a single track I'd consider nothing less.
I'm not aware of anything else like it... except for clones made by unscrupulous knock off artists.... and then clones which restore scrupulousity by knocking off the knock off artists... bada bish! https://www.gearnews.com/cme-swidi-bluetooth-enabled-keystep-clone-thats-inspired-by-behringer/
-
I suppose, but wouldn't you want all you patch cords to be long enough to make the longest connection possible?
-
I'm not aware of anything else like it... except for clones made by unscrupulous knock off artists.... and then clones which restore scrupulousity by knocking off the knock off artists... bada bish! https://www.gearnews.com/cme-swidi-bluetooth-enabled-keystep-clone-thats-inspired-by-behringer/
I wonder if Ukulele will sue SWIDI for grabbing the design that he grabbed from Arturia?
-
I'm not aware of anything else like it... except for clones made by unscrupulous knock off artists.... and then clones which restore scrupulousity by knocking off the knock off artists... bada bish! https://www.gearnews.com/cme-swidi-bluetooth-enabled-keystep-clone-thats-inspired-by-behringer/
I wonder if Ukulele will sue SWIDI for grabbing the design that he grabbed from Arturia?
It would be a real kick in Ukeys nuts if Tom Oberheim announced a re-issue of the SWIDI with his logo on it :)
-
I suppose, but wouldn't you want all you patch cords to be long enough to make the longest connection possible?
No, you want a variety of lengths to avoid a mess. I use 4 different lengths, coded by color.
-
Korg's original plan to issue the ARP 2600M seems to have included a keyboard much like that of the FS. It's unfortunate that this keyboard was replaced by the cheap miniature one they offer now. As a result, you have to patch in such fundamental functions as vibrato and even portamento. The original keyboard actually had a portamento slider as well as vibrato, speed, depth, and delay. These transform the instrument into one much more playable, and their lack is quite a problem. Also, the oscillators are less stable than those of the Odyssey. In some ways, the Odyssey is a better synthesizer.
Behringer was smart in adding the parameters from the keyboard onto the module itself at the lower left corner. I wish Korg had done the same. It would have improved the instrument immensely.
-
For anyone who's interested, Noisebug is presently selling the Korg ARP 2600M for $1,600, which is $400 less than the normal price. The reason given is that they're not selling. So, I'd expect the instrument to have a short run.
I've been considering the 2600M, but the more I study it, the more I appreciate the Odyssey as a more matured and better developed synthesizer, especially regarding modulation. With the 2600M, you often have to use the semi-modular patching aspect to make use of even basic functions. Whereas the Odyssey doesn't take the same amount of labor to arrive at a fine and musically useful patch. Even though its panel has a quirky layout, it's still accessible for making quick and substantial changes in a patch.
The 2600M, though, is still a very tempting synthesizer for its overall sound and sophistication. Considering prices these days (and putting Behringer aside), $1,600 is almost a reasonable amount. But it really needs the original keyboard to reach its potential.
-
For anyone who's interested, Noisebug is presently selling the Korg ARP 2600M for $1,600, which is $400 less than the normal price. The reason given is that they're not selling. So, I'd expect the instrument to have a short run.
I've been considering the 2600M, but the more I study it, the more I appreciate the Odyssey as a more matured and better developed synthesizer, especially regarding modulation. With the 2600M, you often have to use the semi-modular patching aspect to make use of even basic functions. Whereas the Odyssey doesn't take the same amount of labor to arrive at a fine and musically useful patch. Even though its panel has a quirky layout, it's still accessible for making quick and substantial changes in a patch.
The 2600M, though, is still a very tempting synthesizer for its overall sound and sophistication. Considering prices these days (and putting Behringer aside), $1,600 is almost a reasonable amount. But it really needs the original keyboard to reach its potential.
Sadly, Sacred Synthesis will not read this I think... but when I saw that Korg is selling the 2600M for $1,150 on their Reverb store right now I was seriously tempted to pull the trigger.
I actually do want one, but I know that it is really the kind of synth that begs to be tinkered with and explored at a very technical level. And more and more, I'm trying to get my time spent on music to be less about the technical fiddling around and more about the focus on musical output. The 2600 is I think a synth that rewards the investment in the learning curve, so it falls contrary to my goals and I'm pretty sure I've talked myself out of it... but at that price it's hard to not succumb to G.A.S.