This is a thread from the Synthesizers.com forum which compares an ARP 2600 to a Synthesizers.com system. Forum: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/synthesizerscomgroup ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ From: "jeffsprngr" Date: Tue Nov 9, 2004 10:22 am Subject: considering purchase of modular system I have recently stumbled across www.synthesizers.com and this forum...It was recommended to me that I join this forum and post my questions...I have been trying to find an ARP 2600 for a few months now, but cant seem to find one that is within my price range...Ever since I heard Eliane Radrigue (probably spelled wrong) perform on an ARP, I have felt the need to find one for myself...Can someone out there give me their opinion on how synthesizers.com systems compare to an ARP?? Probably a very broad question, but since I do not know much about modular synths, I can not be specific...I have a Moog Opus 3 and really like the tone of this synth...I mostly like playing with the Voltage Controlled Filter and the Modulation, but it does appear that I am just scratching the surface with this Moog...I listened to many of the samples on your site, but cant wrap my head around a decision with this type of listening...Any advice??? Thanks Jeff ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Hi Jeff! I am but a wee junior here, but I will be more than glad to share my opinions with you. I actually sold my 2600 for my first Synth.com system, and I am not at all regretful in my decision. I love the sound and flexability of the .com system. I think the bass response and overall clarity of the .com is excellent! I have recently added another cabinet of .com goodies, and I have been totally going banana-monkey-bonkers with it! I would honestly buy another .com before I would shell out the dough for anything of a lesser nature (don't haze me for that) but that is my opinion. You really can't go wrong with .com modulars. AND you will not be worried about the fear of it failing due to it's age. I like to feel confident in my gear and it's dependability. I know none of this is really technical in opinion, I am just telling you what I have gathered from my experience. Hope it may help you to make a great chioce. 2600s sound great, but go for AMAZING! Cheers! Chad ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Hi Jeff I would go for the synthesizers.com modular. You don't have the problems that come with old synths ( bad pots, obscure parts, extreme high prices). You can buy some modules and a powersupply and expand when you get more cash. Soon you will have a system with more possibilitys than the Arp 2600. ARP 2600: 3 oscillators, 2 egs, ring modulator, noise generator, voltage processor, sample and hold, instrument interface, 24db lowpass filter and springreverb. ATOM :) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Hi y'all, I just wanted to put my 2 cents in on the arrick v. 2600 case... First off, in defense of the 2600: it is perhaps the coolest little (semi) modular synth ever created (and I have owned a synthi A). It doesn't sound like a arrick or a moog, it's not supposed to. I've had mine for about 10 years or so now and it's been "upgraded" to stunning by CMS (no mods) and still retains its original glory (it IS Edgar Winter's beloved "frankenstein" complete with gaudy strap and 20 yard cord to the case, picked up for a song from his road manager). Its oscillators have more 'grit' than the arrick (much more moog-like) and its low pass filter (at least after Phil Cirocco tweaked it) is, in my humble opinion, a bit better than either of the arricks (sorry Roger!). OK, that being said, second of all the ARP is a semi-modular. You have ARP's configuration, not your own. No option of the numerous KILLER modules available on the Arrick. Also, the ARP is an OLD instrument and unless you have the unit refurbed (like via CMS), you better have your own technician before plunging into these waters. I've been lucky enough (and perhaps foolish enough to have sold), and have owned a small Moog modular (11), EMS synthi A, arp 2600 and a small polyfusion modular. I sold my polyfusion to buy the Arrick and PROBABLY would have done the same for my 2600 if I hadn't had it tweaked. Unless you're good with a solder iron (I wasn't), you'll be paying top dollar for half-assed repairs (I did) from your local synth guy if you go with ANYTHING vintage, let alone a sealed sub-moduled 2600. Now, onto the Arrick. It is the ONLY choice for a new synthesizer. It has the soul of the old Moog modulars, has the BEST cabinets available, the BEST keyboard available, a MUCH better EG than the arp, FAR more options on the oscillators, etc. and most importantly the BEST QUALITY MODULES for an amazingly low price. Big, beefy knobs...1/4" jacks...I can go on forever and I only have a small system. Oh yeah, I put an order in this morning for another oscillator w/mixer, foot pedal module w/both pedals, and a multiple. I'm even waiting (with baited breath!) for Roger's sequencer aids rather than picking up a ARP sequencer. The dot com stuff is worth the wait. Hey, I'm lucky; I have the best of both worlds with a 2600 and an Arrick. But in this hacks honest opinion: BUY THE DOT COM! Red Root Vegetable ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ I've got to aggree with just about everything I've heard so far. I grew up with ARP & Moog, and the ARP-2600 & ARP-2500 hold a very special place in my shrine. The 2600 is a wonderous machine for the buck. The really big pluses... the particular features, the portability, and the onboard speakers. My good and dear friend Guido has, or had a couple of 2600's... and I think they've been refurbished. The value of the 2600 has held quite well through the years. The only thing that I didn't like (although I know the reasoning), is the mini jacks and patchcords. I always found them to be 'iffy'. Now, I know that a great many people would say that they've had no trouble with mini's... ok, fine. Actually, back in the late 70's, I bought a MiniMoog... in retrospect, I should have gone with the 2600. I feel that the 2600 give you a great deal more sound potential than the Mini... and it's patchable, while still having 'normalled' patches. I would like to have a 2600... and a 2500... but I would still have my dotcom... soon to be dotcoms (adding two portable cabinets). ~Morbius~ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ IMHO, you'll get a lot more functionality and reliability from a Synthesizers.com system than trying to find an ARP 2600. I wouldn't recommend getting an old, complex synth such as the 2600 unless you've been involved with old analogue synths for a while, and you're ready to confront the maintenance and repair issues on a regular basis. For a relative newbie, and for someone who wants to explore truly modular synthesis, as opposed to the semi-modularity that the 2600 gives you, I would definitely go the synth.com route. As I have... Mark G ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ My question would be "Why??" Unless you absolutely *have* to have vintage, and are prepared to deal with the maintenance issues, you can get a shiny brand new modular with: 1. more functions 2. no maintenance issues 3. *less* money than a 2600 would set you back. Let's see, to approximate a 2600 you'd want: Q106 Oscillator X 3 Q109 Envelope Generator X 2 Q107 Filter Q113 8-Channel Mixer Q105 Slew Limiter Q108 Amplifier X 2 (at least) Q116 Ring Modulator Q117 Sample and Hold Q118 Instrument Interface Q125 Signal Processor This covers almost every single function the 2600 has - and actually puts you way ahead in many cases. You could also add the reverb module if you had to have that. The above would be a rather nice system, and you'd have far less problems with it and it isn't going to costs you any more either. Les ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ The QSP22 22-Space Portable System comes pretty close to the 2600's features. Coincidence? Imagine a factory new 2600 for $2,237. http://www.synthesizers.com/qsp22.html > ...don't forget the noise, the multi, ... Right. > ... an electronic switch Substitute a Q128 Switch for one of the Q125s in the QSP22. > and a keyboard! Or a MIDI interface, as on the QSP22. > And, of course, the new speaker module when it's introduced. Really? (Or are you toying with us?) john ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jeff wrote: Thank you all for your responses to my post regarding the ARP 2600 and how synthesizers.com systems compare...I received a ton of helpful detail in regards to function, form, expandability and lack of maintenance when it comes to the synthesizers.com gear...I am now sold on the idea that I need a new system rather than a collectors piece (for practicality purposes)...However, I did not hear anyone really speak to the question of comparison in terms of tone...and that is ultimately what I am after...for a reference point, the closest thing that I identified with on the synthesizers.com site, in terms of sound, was the piece: Adam Scramstad Aleatoric II Submission FreewayOfTimeTravelAdamScramstad.mp3 (5.3M) any comments much appreciated... ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ I went through a similar dilemma - would my money be better spent on a vintage modular (I'd just lost an auction for a mint Roland System 100) or on a new modular with more features and the same price (or less!)? I decided to start with the synth.com system. - they're hard to beat - the price/quality ratio is very very high. got mine about a month ago. I'm a vintage synth fanatic and am very particular about tone/character - i've never met an arp in person but from what i've read about them I imagine they sound like the sonic equivalent of full-fat butter. my moog prodigy has that buttery quality. my experience with my synth.com has been pretty limited so far (have a show this friday that i had to finish some tracks for - i've hardly been able to spend any quality time with my new baby!), but my first impressions are that it's slightly less creamy than my prodigy. more like my SE1X, which was studio electroic's answer to the minimoog - the sound is top quality and super versatile, but lacks a bit of the grit of the vintage classics. maybe 25 years of aging is all it needs. ;) If you are really after that arp tone, what about an odyssey? its got one less oscillator than the 2600, but a very flexible fixed signal path. would their sonic character be similar? if so, how about a synth.com modular now, odyssey later? I dunno, my problem is i want everything. my studio is stuffed to the gills right now. any more and my wife will throw me and my synths out on the street! ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Gotta throw my 2 cents in here.... What has been said is basically true. With the basic building blocks of the s.com, it's possible to recreate the quirks of the Arp. However, the Arp has it's own peculiar parameters, and they're naturally built into the design. Those peculiarities give it it's own unique sound - just a LITTLE different from the Moog, Dotcom, etc. I don't own a 2600, but I've been lusting over the idea of one for quite some time. My Ebay bookmarks will back me up on this! Something else to consider is the speed of which one can throw together an ARP patch with the 2600, via it's matrix system. Of course, that doesn't affect the sound, but is a definite attribute when considering collecting such an instrument. HOWEVER, (and this is pretty big "however"), as has been mentioned, you've also got to consider repair costs and maintenance factors on a piece of 30-year+ equipment. I've already shelled out close to $4000 in restoration and repair costs on my Ondioline, and the dang thing STILL doesn't work right. So factor in the aggravation factor, when dealing with antiques. After all is said and done, I'd throw my vote back to the s.com. I really appreciate the fact that the modules are NEW and are backed up by Roger. I use my dotcom all the time, and so far, I've NEVER had to send any modules in for repair -- something that I really appreciate. (Now watch, as my synth sputters into silence...) It's totally possible to recreate the classic ARP sounds with Roger's technology -- it's just a matter of will, creativity and patience. That's what I plan to do.... Cheers, Dana ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ The Arp2600 definitely got his/her? own character and imo is not like the .com. My friend and music-pal Ruud Heij had an Arp2600 for years and he used it quite a lot, but he sold his to finance his big .com system. I believe he hasn't regretted it one single day. I never owned an Arp but I would not hesitate if I had to choose between an Arp or a .com...it would definitely be the .com as you have so much more possibilities and it is stable and new and got a beautiful sound of its own. Marcel ------------------------------------------------------------------------------