Korg ARP 2600M

[Sacred Synthesis]

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. 

[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?

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.

[Sacred Synthesis]

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.

[LPF83]

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.

[Sacred Synthesis]

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.

[LPF83]

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.

[LPF83]

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/

[Sacred Synthesis]

I suppose, but wouldn't you want all you patch cords to be long enough to make the longest connection possible?

[Sacred Synthesis]

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?

[LPF83]

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  

[chysn]

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.

[Sacred Synthesis]

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.

[Sacred Synthesis]

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. 

[LPF83]

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.