ARP 2600 Clone?

VST, AU, AAX, CLAP, etc. Plugin Virtual Instruments Discussion
Post Reply New Topic
RELATED
PRODUCTS
ACE (Any Cable Everywhere) ARP 2600 V3 TimewARP 2600

Post

pdxindy wrote:
IncarnateX wrote:How much I like to believe you, I can't from a scientific perspective. You cannot just refer to your own auditory perception as being the objective authority and your opponents' the subjective. They may reproduce your patch to an extent where they cannot hear any differences or though you claim you can. I already covered the training argument and though it may likely be valid, an outsider can only measure the question by his own perceptions and we are back to the beginning
Only in intellectual wankery...
He's overstating his case, we are not "back to the beginning." The fundamental point about perception not being something you can compare is fine, but, it's simply not true here that an outsider "can only measure the question by his own perceptions", he can measure the question any number of ways, he can dive into and analyze his perception, he can discuss what he's hearing, he can measure the results with instruments.

The bottom line is that it's all talk.
sit in a room with both live, and you would talk very different because the differences would be obvious to your ears. :lol:
If you can't hear it in the video, then I'm not sure that there's any hope. Seriously, I understand bias, in fact, it's a bit funny, but I'd have to talk too much about my real life to demonstrate that. In any case, perception bias generally goes away when we remove the source of the bias. It's immediate, it's not something that you have to work hard to see. Watch the McGurk effect video to see it for yourself. This is why the audiophile industry doesn't like blind tests.

I've noticed this myself. Just record two synths and then listen to the recording in such a way that you don't know a priori which synth you're listening too. You can see these kinds of effects for yourself in real time.

Post

What can I say other than: Good luck providing the evidence, which cannot be refuted by your opponents one way or the other (by other means than pure ignorance of course). Plz report to whch extent you are able to convince people under the premises we have discussed here :D

Edit: Let's start out with a thought experiment based on your evidence as quoted from before:
IncarnateX wrote:Sorry but your evidence goes as far as saying, hear, I have created a patch as closely as possible on both the emu and the real thing and you can hear the differences. Well your evidence depends on 1) people actually agree that they can hear differences and 2) that your claim that you have created it as close as possible actually is true.
Now one of your opponents says: True there are differences but they are induced by your own bias thus your match is not honest and close enough (ad 2)

Another say: I do not hear any significant difference, you and others must be deluding yourself due to bias (ad 1)

Now how are you going to convince them that they are wrong and you are right based on the claim that you or others can hear the difference?

Besides: Since we are talking about emulations, no one expect a perfect match anyway, so how are we going to eliminate the subjective views on how different a match should be to be signficant? Too many problems here already.

However, since you think that it is okay to eliminate any visual bias, shouldn't you be able to pass a simple blind test? According to your own criterions that should do it, shouldn't it? Such a pass would be hard to reject from your opponents.

Post

trimph1 wrote:
EnGee wrote:
IncarnateX wrote:
Well, that doesn't change the fact that a software emu currently won't give you the same feeling and visions of sitting in front of the real thing.
Whether a close sound is enough to satisfy some people is beyond that point ...
So what's your point?
That you need to smell filthy odour from wood that stinks with smoke and beers and touch these yellow keys while a wh*re s*cking your d*ck to be able to feel the real thing and begin to compose "light my fire"?
:lol: :lol: Wow!! What a response! My Arp2600 has no stinks from beers and smoking for petesakes! I restore mine every few years and we are non-smokers here, lol!! :lol:
This must be why I don't like the sound of my Audity 2000. The thing wreaked when I got it, ebay special. I've cleaned it two or three times but it still has an odor after it warms up.

Post

Hi hi. I see that you are doing the three monkeys and speaks over my head desperately trying to find allies and turning it into satire. Well, that is the scientists cue to leave the scene, knowing that the opponent has given up. Thank you for the dispute ghettosynth. It's been a pleasure.

Post

...hate this edit tap being so close to quote...why made that design? Grrrrrr!
Last edited by IncarnateX on Mon Feb 08, 2016 4:16 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Post

This is a fun video, a bit noisy but a great example of how real hardware sounds with fast modulation.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qR4VxXfDxp8

Bazille will get you much closer to this than 2600v. Obviously, this next video is not identical, but, there are some moments where I think that the characteristic difference between the real thing and the 2600v should be fairly clear.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Pa92Lod50g

Also not identical, but should give some understanding of the character of Bazille as compared to 2600v.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pg-z35jHcUM


Finally here's an example of the 2600v and an odyssey at the same time. Throughout, the 2600v is playing the sequenced line. This is the kind of thing where it sounds passable in the mix and the sequencer makes it fun.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AmNh_WODj3I

Post

ghettosynth wrote:Indeed, I own an Arp 1613, it was a key component in my live rig for a while. I've also built several hardware analog sequencers for my modular.
Do you find it any usable in 2016?
Murderous duck!

Post

david.beholder wrote:
ghettosynth wrote:Indeed, I own an Arp 1613, it was a key component in my live rig for a while. I've also built several hardware analog sequencers for my modular.
Do you find it any usable in 2016?
I still do here.
Barry
If a billion people believe a stupid thing it is still a stupid thing

Post

david.beholder wrote:
ghettosynth wrote:Indeed, I own an Arp 1613, it was a key component in my live rig for a while. I've also built several hardware analog sequencers for my modular.
Do you find it any usable in 2016?
Yes, but there's no way I would recommend buying an Arp. In fact, it just occurred to me that I could sell the arp and buy one of the 2600 clones as well as the sequencer kit, if the guy who did it bothered to do another run. I should just look into that.

Post

I believe a mix of Bazille and Arp2600V would do it nicely. Bazille can lead in the overall sound and Arp2600V as a helper to give a feeling of the vintage sound. I still believe if u-he design the GUI (a copy of the original) with the same audio engine as Bazille would do it especially if there is a modified version of the filter of the ARP 2600. Bazille has all the punch and aggressiveness that are missing in Arp2600V but it is very deep synth and needs serious understanding to every small detail.

Anyway, for Bazille, I still believe it is the best synth of u-he (even it is much more valuable than Diva or Zebra for me). It is also much cheaper than all (except ACE!!!). It is just a no brainer with its current price and its wonderful GUI. It is a pleasure to look at and work with (which I can't say the same about the two Arp 2600 emulations).

Post

EnGee wrote:I believe a mix of Bazille and Arp2600V would do it nicely. Bazille can lead in the overall sound and Arp2600V as a helper to give a feeling of the vintage sound. I still believe if u-he design the GUI (a copy of the original) with the same audio engine as Bazille would do it especially if there is a modified version of the filter of the ARP 2600. Bazille has all the punch and aggressiveness that are missing in Arp2600V but it is very deep synth and needs serious understanding to every small detail.
I agree, I think that's a fairly nice assessment. To my ears Timewarp isn't anywhere near close enough to do better than Bazille and it's lacking the sequencer. It's also expensive. Bazille+V Collection, if you get the V on sale, is about the same price. Certainly, if you consider the cost per plugin, the 2600v is really cheap.

In the ody+2600v video I think that you could do a really passable version of that with Bazille doing the ody parts.
Anyway, for Bazille, I still believe it is the best synth of u-he (even it is much more valuable than Diva or Zebra for me). It is also much cheaper than all (except ACE!!!). It is just a no brainer with its current price and its wonderful GUI. It is a pleasure to look at and work with (which I can't say the same about the two Arp 2600 emulations).
It is an awesome synth, fantastically detailed and nuanced, and I agree that the modular gui is pleasant.

Post

memyselfandus wrote:Where can we find the best vst version of the ARP 2600?
I'd point you in a slightly different direction, memyselfandus:

IMHO, my recommendation would be to settle on a free (or cheap) e-mu (pick one: whichever sounds best to you), & buy one of the very up-to-date software synths with it's own personality - I tend to see either WOW's or Arturia's as having a place, but their overall range is just too limited by 2016 standards (just my opinion) if they both cost: $30, that's one thing, but they don't - you'd get *a lot* more mileage out of something like: Dune 2 or Serum or Spire (my fave) or Sylenth1 or the new synth that our friend Ingo has been talking about now for a while (Tone2's Icarus - maybe out next month(?) -

I'd wind up using (2) - the cheap/free one that'll get me into the ballpark; and I'd concurrently also try to emulate the sounds of the 2600 that I like by ear, using one of the current, really excellent soft synths -

Edit: I mention Sylenth1 because apparently it's going through some updating; and to my ears it has always sounded excellent.

Post

Personally, if you want something with the power of an ARP 2600, forgetting about emulations, I'd go with U-he Bazille. I'm sure you can probably get anything out of that close enough to a 2600 with a little work.

Post

Not an emulation of the parameters themselves, but for the character, Bazille would be my 2600 substitute in VST land as well. ACE would be except Bazille just has more modules like the looping envelopes, quantizer, lag generators etc. Bazille also has the 4 multiples and 2 filter inputs. It is enough flexibility added with all the feedback possibilities to get a beautiful organic instability to the sound that is different than just putting a random generator on a parameter. It is still not as loose as a real 2600, and you have to work at it a bit more, but it is in that direction.

Another thing... in lots of soft synths, noise is kind of an add-on thing. It often just sounds like a noise knob turned up (which it usually is). With Bazille, you can get this lovely noise that is part of the sound due to audio rate modulation and filter feedback and resonance. Like this first sound.

http://draigathar.org/sounds/B90.mp3

The second is one of my vocalish sounds that Bazille is fun for. :) No FX at all.

http://draigathar.org/sounds/B91.mp3

Post

ghettosynth wrote:
pdxindy wrote:
IncarnateX wrote:How much I like to believe you, I can't from a scientific perspective. You cannot just refer to your own auditory perception as being the objective authority and your opponents' the subjective. They may reproduce your patch to an extent where they cannot hear any differences or though you claim you can. I already covered the training argument and though it may likely be valid, an outsider can only measure the question by his own perceptions and we are back to the beginning
Only in intellectual wankery...
He's overstating his case, we are not "back to the beginning." The fundamental point about perception not being something you can compare is fine, but, it's simply not true here that an outsider "can only measure the question by his own perceptions", he can measure the question any number of ways, he can dive into and analyze his perception, he can discuss what he's hearing, he can measure the results with instruments.

The bottom line is that it's all talk.
sit in a room with both live, and you would talk very different because the differences would be obvious to your ears. :lol:
If you can't hear it in the video, then I'm not sure that there's any hope. Seriously, I understand bias, in fact, it's a bit funny, but I'd have to talk too much about my real life to demonstrate that. In any case, perception bias generally goes away when we remove the source of the bias. It's immediate, it's not something that you have to work hard to see. Watch the McGurk effect video to see it for yourself. This is why the audiophile industry doesn't like blind tests.

I've noticed this myself. Just record two synths and then listen to the recording in such a way that you don't know a priori which synth you're listening too. You can see these kinds of effects for yourself in real time.
While I believe in bias, I'm in agreement with IncarnateX. While there are some sounds that can be nailed beyond anyone's ability to spot the difference, there are enough that can't. I'm a big fan of digital synths, in fact I made a move to digital synths in the 90s (didn't we all?! Though don't worry, I didn't sell my Minimoog for a dollar) for practicality purposes. I needed a workstation style keyboard and that became the Ensoniq TS-10. I loved it. I still G.A.S. For it a bit. From there I got more VA, you know, the usual suspects. I liked it all. From there I went to software and I love, and still love, that. When I was convinced that there was some "analog magic" I might be missing, I went to see what people were talking about. I was very skeptical. I was biased against old analogs. I hated all that crappy synth pop from the 70s and 80s. But I heard the difference. It wasn't totally obvious at first but once I knew what to look for, I could not "unhear" it.

Smash cut, we now have some amazing software VA that really does get a lot closer. I'd love to ditch my analogs, I really would. I can't though. They provide character I can't get as easily in software. So, what do you have to say to someone who was biased against analog?
Zerocrossing Media

4th Law of Robotics: When turning evil, display a red indicator light. ~[ ●_● ]~

Post Reply

Return to “Instruments”