KORG Collection 5 with ARP 2600 Emulation coming Summer 2024

[Sound Author]

Is it really necessary to make us double-click each preset in the browser? I can't be alone here. That is a real pain. Please implement single-click preset changes in the "Librarian". You even have to press "Enter" when using arrow keys to change to a different preset. That's annoying.

[abernathy]

The 2600 is fantastic. I am so excited to finally have this done right - and really beyond my expectations! The sound, wonderful quirks and all, is thrilling to me. The GUI is a work of art - inspiring and fun to use. This was the one dream synth missing from my plugins folder. Just awesome!

[danatkorg]

Is it really necessary to make us double-click each preset in the browser? I can't be alone here. That is a real pain. Please implement single-click preset changes in the "Librarian". You even have to press "Enter" when using arrow keys to change to a different preset. That's annoying.

This sounds like a misunderstanding to me.

The Sound Browser is the modal dialog that appears for selecting Performances and Effect Presets; for more info, see "Sound Browser" page 8 of the manual. In the Sound Browser, single-clicks select sounds, and arrow up/down don't require pressing Enter. You also don't have to exit the dialog to hear your selection.

The Librarian is a different thing altogether. In the manual, the Librarian section starts on page 72. This is the first paragraph:

* * *

What’s the Librarian for?
The Librarian page shows all of the contents of the ARP 2600. It’s most useful for editing metadata for your own sounds, and for importing and exporting data. For selecting sounds, use the pop-up sound browser instead.

* * *

Since the Librarian is for editing metadata, including editing multiple items at once, single-click Performance changes would often be problematic. So, it works differently from the Sound Browser.

[Sound Author]

Is it really necessary to make us double-click each preset in the browser? I can't be alone here. That is a real pain. Please implement single-click preset changes in the "Librarian". You even have to press "Enter" when using arrow keys to change to a different preset. That's annoying.

This sounds like a misunderstanding to me.

The Sound Browser is the modal dialog that appears for selecting Performances and Effect Presets; for more info, see "Sound Browser" page 8 of the manual. In the Sound Browser, single-clicks select sounds, and arrow up/down don't require pressing Enter. You also don't have to exit the dialog to hear your selection.

The Librarian is a different thing altogether. In the manual, the Librarian section starts on page 72. This is the first paragraph:

* * *

What’s the Librarian for?
The Librarian page shows all of the contents of the ARP 2600. It’s most useful for editing metadata for your own sounds, and for importing and exporting data. For selecting sounds, use the pop-up sound browser instead.

* * *

Since the Librarian is for editing metadata, including editing multiple items at once, single-click Performance changes would often be problematic. So, it works differently from the Sound Browser.

Oh, my mistake. I assumed the Librarian was the main browser.

[BONES]

The 2600 is fantastic. I am so excited to finally have this done right - and really beyond my expectations! The sound, wonderful quirks and all, is thrilling to me. The GUI is a work of art - inspiring and fun to use. This was the one dream synth missing from my plugins folder. Just awesome!

Really? The first thing I thought when I saw it was that I will never want to have to patch it so I hope the factory patches are awesome. Then I went through the factory patches and discovered they weren't, really. It sounds a bit thin to me, especially compared to Korg's Odyssey VSTi. I was hoping for something even better but that's not what it seems to me. I'd definitely like it a lot more if it had unison. I did have a bit of fun putting the lead guitar patch into a couple of songs, though. Very nice.

[abernathy]

The 2600 is fantastic. I am so excited to finally have this done right - and really beyond my expectations! The sound, wonderful quirks and all, is thrilling to me. The GUI is a work of art - inspiring and fun to use. This was the one dream synth missing from my plugins folder. Just awesome!

Really? The first thing I thought when I saw it was that I will never want to have to patch it so I hope the factory patches are awesome. Then I went through the factory patches and discovered they weren't, really. It sounds a bit thin to me, especially compared to Korg's Odyssey VSTi. I was hoping for something even better but that's not what it seems to me. I'd definitely like it a lot more if it had unison. I did have a bit of fun putting the lead guitar patch into a couple of songs, though. Very nice.

I wasn't initially thrilled with the factory patches - too much modern effects added for my taste - loses the 2600 character. But when I started turning off the external effects and just using the built in spring reverb, it came to life for me. I've always thought of the 2600 as the "thin" vintage synth, while Moogs were the fat ones. But not thin in a bad way. More acoustic sounding: rosiny string sounds (Who's Quadrophenia), crazy alive effects (Edgar Winter Frankenstein), brighter bass sounds (Zawinal Birdland), breathy woodwinds. But it can certainly sound fat!

[BONES]

Not in the same effortless way that Odyssey can. But, realistically, it's the UI that puts me off more. I want to make music, not f**k about with virtual patch cables. I'm sure if I started with a blank canvas, it wouldn't be so bad but I don't often want to start from a blank canvas, and never when it comes to something as complex as this. I'm sure I could get used to it if I could hear anything in it worth making the effort for but, as it stands, nah, I'm good, bro'.

[abernathy]

Not in the same effortless way that Odyssey can. But, realistically, it's the UI that puts me off more. I want to make music, not f**k about with virtual patch cables. I'm sure if I started with a blank canvas, it wouldn't be so bad but I don't often want to start from a blank canvas, and never when it comes to something as complex as this. I'm sure I could get used to it if I could hear anything in it worth making the effort for but, as it stands, nah, I'm good, bro'.

You’re in good company. When GForce first released the Oddity, Dave Spiers said they didn’t do the 2600 because people wouldn’t even know how to get a sound out of it. But there is a reason people like Lisa Bella Donna are obsessed with the 2600 - it’s really something special. And a big part of it for me is the nostalgia… my first concert was Edgar Winter and one of my first synth obsession albums was Quadrophenia.

[danatkorg]

Actually, getting sound out of a 2600 is as easy to do as getting sound out of an odyssey. Unlike a fully modular system, you don’t need to use any patch-cords at all; the normalled connections will take you pretty far! The patch cords let you break out of the predefined structure, if and when you want to.

[BONES]

Dan, I can't tell you how long it took me to get comfortable with Odyssey's layout (but I'd measure it in years). I appreciate the thought behind it but it still did my head in for a very long time. The 2600 looks like an even bigger mind-bender but I don't like the sound as much, so I can't see myself bothering. I have had a play around without using any patch cables but it feels like 40 years ago, when I was new to synths and they all did my head in - basic sounds seem easy enough but getting it to do what I want it to feels a long way off.

You’re in good company. When GForce first released the Oddity, Dave Spiers said they didn’t do the 2600 because people wouldn’t even know how to get a sound out of it. But there is a reason people like Lisa Bella Donna are obsessed with the 2600 - it’s really something special.

I have no idea who that is, hardly a ringing endorsement.

And a big part of it for me is the nostalgia… my first concert was Edgar Winter and one of my first synth obsession albums was Quadrophenia.

I did that with Axxess but at least it was because I used to own one. It mostly turned out to be a waste of 20 quid, nostalgia is not a useful thing.

[N 4 LIFE]

Just got the 2600 and lemme tell you: if you love what Zawinul did with it in Weather Report you are GONNA LOVE
the factory presets. Recognized them instantly. GREAT JOB KORG.

[kritikon]

Regarding thin-sounding - I have the Behringer 2600 and TBH I think that sounds a bit thin. I have a hard time getting into doing anything with it, which is admittedly partly down to the modular thing. I think you either love or hate modular, and I found I verge on hating it. I know it's capable of getting big sounds, but the starting point is decidedly hohum to my ears. So a plugin is going to sound even thinner.

I'm with Bones re the Odyssey. I know it's based on a lot of the guts of a 2600 but I also find it quite instantaneous to get good sounds from it - not particularly intuitive but it generally always gives me useful sounds. I really quite like the Korg Odyssey plugin and still use it a fair bit. But if I can't get into a hw 2600, I doubt I'll like a sw 2600 any better. If I like Odyssey, I should love a 2600, but just don't. Weird, huh?

[N 4 LIFE]

PS...
just loaded the 3 new instruments I got EP 1, 2600, Vox Continental. The only one using much CPU is the VOX. and even then not bad at all. running on MBP 2019 32 gig ram OSX Ventua 13.5.2

[indigo76]

The 2600 is fantastic. I am so excited to finally have this done right - and really beyond my expectations! The sound, wonderful quirks and all, is thrilling to me. The GUI is a work of art - inspiring and fun to use. This was the one dream synth missing from my plugins folder. Just awesome!

Really? The first thing I thought when I saw it was that I will never want to have to patch it so I hope the factory patches are awesome. Then I went through the factory patches and discovered they weren't, really. It sounds a bit thin to me, especially compared to Korg's Odyssey VSTi. I was hoping for something even better but that's not what it seems to me. I'd definitely like it a lot more if it had unison. I did have a bit of fun putting the lead guitar patch into a couple of songs, though. Very nice.

I wasn't initially thrilled with the factory patches - too much modern effects added for my taste - loses the 2600 character. But when I started turning off the external effects and just using the built in spring reverb, it came to life for me. I've always thought of the 2600 as the "thin" vintage synth, while Moogs were the fat ones. But not thin in a bad way. More acoustic sounding: rosiny string sounds (Who's Quadrophenia), crazy alive effects (Edgar Winter Frankenstein), brighter bass sounds (Zawinal Birdland), breathy woodwinds. But it can certainly sound fat!

Exactly. This is a synth that rewards experimentation and is surely not for everyone. It is my go-to for glitchy, weird and experimental sounds and when I'm in the mood for some hands-on patching. It also does basses and leads really well. Basically everything the original was/is good at.

The preamp and drive are well done and give the sounds some oomph if needed. As recommended, make sure turn off the effects to hear the raw sound.

I'm surprised how easy it is to recreate ARP 2600 sounds found on YouTube. Recently I recreated Loopop's Dune Duduk (which itself is a recreation of a Hans Zimmer sound for the ARP) and it sounds very close to the original 2600 M with minimal effort.

[bmanic]

Hmm.. been test driving this for a day now and I'm a bit torn about it. It's got "the authenticity" on point, in terms of how it behaves. It's by far the most "accurate" emulation in the way it lets you explore what could be done with the ARP 2600. However, in terms of "sound reproduction", the actual sound itself, it's quite lackluster in my opinion. It unfortunately falls under the category "sounds like a plugin" to my ears. So what you end up with is the overall macro sound of what you'd end up with on the real deal but the actual sound itself doesn't have the nuances of the original. It's a bit hard to explain.. but basically it's got the overall sound but misses the actual sound by a mile.

In my opinion, it doesn't "sound" analogue. It sounds digital but it's very accurate to the original in what it can do. Sort of like some analogue emulations of the past where they can sort of do the same sound, on a macro level, but don't capture any of the nuance.

Ugh.. I just can't find the correct way to describe what I'm trying to say here. Will try again later.