MOTM

My first real encounter with modular synthesis was couple of 
hours with an ARP2600 (an earlier grey model), and it 
changed my life. 

I wonder, what is so typical of the 2600's sound (which I 
love)? Is it the filter? The oscillators?

What would I need (if possible at all) to get that sound 
with a MOTM system?

Thanks,
Robert (counting down the weeks for his first MOTM shipment)

Robert,

The ARP 2600 is one of those great "packages" that works very well.  The 
oscillators and filters are great but so is the wide variety of modules in 
a flexible, pre-patched package.  I know some folks who consider the 2600 
their "desert island" synth.  I don't know if I would go that far but it is 
a very nice package.  The one piece I don't care much for is the 
keyboard.  The ones that I have played have had very stiff and clunky 
keyboards.

         Eric

At 08:01 AM 4/12/2003 +0200, Robert van der Kamp wrote:

>My first real encounter with modular synthesis was couple of
>hours with an ARP2600 (an earlier grey model), and it
>changed my life.
>
>I wonder, what is so typical of the 2600's sound (which I
>love)? Is it the filter? The oscillators?
>
>What would I need (if possible at all) to get that sound
>with a MOTM system?
>
>Thanks,
>Robert (counting down the weeks for his first MOTM shipment)

The characteristic sound of the Arp2600 is mostly the filter.  Now the
question is, which filter?  The Arp2600 had several different versions,
all sounding very different from each other.  I too have played with an
early gray version with the 3604 monophonic keyboard, and I found the
filter to be nasal in quality, not really much to my liking to be
honest.  

At one point Arp did have a Moog ladder type filter in the 2600, maybe
this is what you liked?  I don't know how the filter types matched the
external appearance.  There's no reason to believe that they had to
track each other.  At one point the 2600 also had an LM3900 based filter
that I've heard less positive things about.

More information on Arp filter types is located here:
http://www.arptech.synth.net/modmain.htm . It says the Arp 4012
submodule is the ladder filter type, in the 2600 from 1970 to 1976. The
Arp 4072 submodule is the LM3900 type, in the 2600 from 1976 to 1981.
I'm wondering how accurate those dates are as the gray 2600 I tried
definitely did not have a Moog ladder type filter.

If you heard the Moog ladder type filter, then you'll want the MOTM-490
filter.  If you like the nasal sounding filter, well, I think the
MOTM-440 sounds much better.

John Loffink
jloffink@... 

The Microtonal Synthesis Web Site
http://www.microtonal-synthesis.com/

The Wavemakers Modular and Integrated Synthesizer Web Site
http://www.wavemakers-synth.com/

> My first real encounter with modular synthesis was couple of
> hours with an ARP2600 (an earlier grey model), and it
> changed my life.
> 
> I wonder, what is so typical of the 2600's sound (which I
> love)? Is it the filter? The oscillators?
> 
> What would I need (if possible at all) to get that sound
> with a MOTM system?
> 
> Thanks,
> Robert (counting down the weeks for his first MOTM shipment)
>

John is right.  As been said here before, the filter is 90% of the
sound of traditional synthesis.

<RAMBLE>

Remember that the 2600 is semi-modular and not modular at all.  In
being so, this gave ARP the flexibility to normalize almost everything.
 And this is pretty clearly denoted by the panel graphics.  This also
lends more immediacy the the instrument compared to truly modular
synths.  

This normalization helps get people into a "nice" sounding fairly
standard patch very quickly.  Just look at how many patch cords you
would have used if you didn't have the normalization.  On the other
hand, normalization also tends to stifle creativity and true
understanding of what you are creating.

Some of the parts are getting difficult to acquire and it seems that
Phil Cirocco has essentially removed himself from the ARP repair and
mod business he was once so well known for.

There are one or two things the 2600 has available that you cannot
currently reproduce on the MOTM.  The one that comes readily to mind is
the current lack of an envelope follower in the MOTM line-up.  (HINT,
HINT Paul)  Having a headphone amp, built-in powered speakers and an
analog keyboard immediately available is also nice and makes the 2600
more approachable INITIALLY compared to MOTM.  Although when
performing, I always run the signal direct and by-pass the speakers
entirely--they really do not do the 2600 the justice it deserves.

Once you get your MOTM system, you will probably loose the desire to
process the 2600 through your MOTM; you will probably want to use just
the MOTM IMO.

Another big difference is sliders vs. knobs.  It seems trivial at
first, but it does affect how you use the instrument.

</RAMBLE>

--Shemp

> The characteristic sound of the Arp2600 is mostly the filter.

> > I wonder, what is so typical of the 2600's sound (which I
> > love)? Is it the filter? The oscillators?


__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Tax Center - File online, calculators, forms, and more
http://tax.yahoo.com

The point Robert was asking is NOT is a 2600 "any good", but can a MOTM *sound* like a 2600?

The sound is indeed in the filter. The ARP Moog design is more like a MOTM-490, the later models
would be more like cascaded MOTM-420s set in lowpass.

Paul S.

I once owned 2 ARP 2600s, both with grey panels, but the two filters 
sounded different, I'd always wondered why.  I purchased one new 
sometime around 1977, the other I got used roughly 6 months later.

I would agree that 90% of the ARP sound comes from the filter, but I 
would also argue that the oscillators played a part in the sound as 
well.  If you just listened to the oscillators without the filter, 
they sounded somewhat thin as opposed to the fat Moog sound.  

The ARP definitely had a somewhat nasal quality as was pointed out 
by someone else.  Also the keyboard was a pain to use.  The feel 
wasn't good and if you tried to play it quickly sometimes an 
occasional note would sound flat, as if proper contact were not  
being made.

In a message dated 4/12/2003 10:43:05 AM Pacific Daylight Time, 
phaneber@... writes:

> I would agree that 90% of the ARP sound comes from the filter, but I 
> would also argue that the oscillators played a part in the sound as 
> well.  If you just listened to the oscillators without the filter, 
> they sounded somewhat thin as opposed to the fat Moog sound.  
> 

I agree with most of the comments that have been made so far (and was going 
to make the point about the oscillators too). I also think that the 2600 is 
probably the best assortment of modules, and I would suggest people putting a 
system together should use that as a basic framework to start with especially 
considering the more unusual modules like the S/H, lag processor, 
mixer/inverters, preamp/env follower (all though there are some notable 
problems in the design: like VCO 2 is the only source of tri/sine waves but 
is also the only one with VC PWM input).

But this is also very timely as I expect to get another MOTM 490 in the next 
few days which I hope install in my ARP 2600 (to get that "classic" ladder 
sound). When I bought my gray face ARP 20 years ago (it was built in 75), I 
found that the VCF had been replaced with a CEM 3320.

Unfortunately, it looks much more difficult than I first thought. I've 
compared the schematics of the ARP 4012 and the MOTM 490 -- I'm hoping not to 
change the VCF motherboard too much. I'd looked into one of Phil C.'s 
replacement VCFs a few years ago but thought it a bit expensive (like $250 
for the submodule).

Any input would be appreciated.
JB

> There are one or two things the 2600 has available that you cannot
> currently reproduce on the MOTM.  The one that comes readily to mind is
> the current lack of an envelope follower in the MOTM line-up.  (HINT,

It ain't MOTM, but I've had good results with the Oakley EFG.

> HINT Paul)  Having a headphone amp, built-in powered speakers and an
> analog keyboard immediately available is also nice and makes the 2600

Also not MOTM, but check out this rack-mount (!) stereo speaker unit 
from Fostex:

http://www.fostex.com/Products/rm1.html

e