mickeyl wrote: ↑Jul 19, 2024 2:31 am
Does it sound any better than the CherryAudio 2600 variant? While they receive a lot of praise for their VSTs, in my ears all of those sound pretty much the same and usually nowhere near the emulated hardware.
I'd be surprised if it didn't get a lot of plaudits over the Cherry and Arturia. They're talking a good game:
Our engineers spent considerable time understanding every detail of the original and modern schematics, poring over the original 2600 manuals, testing with oscilloscopes, and most importantly listening.The original AR and ADSR envelopes, for example, might seem simple – but it took a lot of time and tweaking to get them just right. The oscillator waveforms are correct, including the slight imperfections that add a unique brightness (especially for the triangle and sine). We modeled both of the original VCF modules, the 4012 and the 4072, with a switch to select between them. We included all of the many saturation points on the original hardware, with subtle distortions that bring life to the sound. Extensive anti-aliasing techniques spread throughout the different modules let us deliver truly premium audio quality. KORG’s Component Modeling Technology (CMT) includes variations between analog components, just as you’d find with multiple hardware 2600s, to deliver natural richness when playing polyphonically.
Outside the patch panel, there are 20-odd Trim Pots to select between behaviors of different 2600 vintages, dial in calibration details such as square wave width and triangle wave symmetry (just like the original hardware), and more.
Even more than most vintage synths, the 2600 has a character all its own. To begin with, no two sections are alike; each has its own purpose (often more than one) and capabilities to match. Each of the three VCOs has different features.The two envelopes work very differently. There are many hidden quirks, such as different ranges for identical-looking control inputs, phase inversions, and unusual waveforms. It’s a carefully considered instrument, but it also feels like a collection of bespoke modules. The differences guide the eye, and also simply make it fun to play around with. There’s a constant sense of discovery, of “wow, I can make it do that, too!”
When adding all of the new capabilities, we were determined to preserve the spirit of the original instrument. So, we resisted the modern urge to unify and standardize. Each of the VCOs is still different. When we added an envelope and an LFO, we made sure that they were different from the originals, enabling new sounds instead of just “more.” When we added a second filter, we made it entirely different from the main VCF. Each new feature speaks with its own voice. All of the additions have sensible normalled connections, incorporating the new LFO, envelope, and sequencer.
We also kept all of the controls of the original instrument, and even with all of the additions, we preserved the basic layout. If you’re familiar with the old 2600, or KORG’s new 2600 FS and 2600 M, you’ll feel right at home – but with even more to play with. .
Sounds wonderful, doesn't it?
But I sometimes think these things do get a bit overblown in terms of sonic expectations. For pure fun I have Arturia's Jean Michel Jarre tribute bank, and stuff like the Magnetic Fields I arp sounds essentially identical to the record to my ears, and that uses their somewhat derided ARP 2600 VST.
