December 20, 2014, 10:19:47 am
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email
News: Arturia's webmaster is glad to offer you these brand new forums ! Have fun using it and feel free to email any encountered problem at webmaster@arturia.com.

Arturia Forums



Author Topic: 2600 details  (Read 2276 times)

YESMAN

  • Apprentice
  • *
  • Posts: 47
  • Karma: 4
2600 details
« on: October 24, 2009, 12:51:53 am »

     I'd like to start-out and say that I am very pleased with the V.2 CS-80 and am posting this in hopes of a V.2 2600. After figuring out how to remove the factory presets and edit the bank/sub-bank/preset arrangements in notepad and sort of giving up on getting the midi learn feature to hold on either, I am making music.


      I was trying to patch than OSC output to the reverb, then come out of the right reverb out and go into the VCF. When I raise the right reverb attenuator, the signal is still going to the output buss. Also, when patching from the mixer outputs, the signal still goes to the output buss. When patching from these points the internal path should be disconnected - the reverb should only be on the signal to the VCF and the mixer attenuators should become floating attenuators.

    So, hoping for an update...........

YESMAN

  • Apprentice
  • *
  • Posts: 47
  • Karma: 4
Re: 2600 details
« Reply #1 on: November 25, 2009, 07:12:33 pm »
      OK, my mistake on the reverb patch points. The points work as they should. I was bringing up the attenuators, which still feed the outputs as they should. Leaving the atten. down and patching into the reverb and then coming out will give a reverb only signal.
      I have been A/B comparing to Timewarp - I find the arturia filter to be a bit grainy and I think the LP24db Q attenuator is too sensitive in the first 1/3 of it's range. I don't have a 2600 to compare with, but I have owned a 2600 and Odysseys, Minimoogs, Moog IIc, etc. and don't remember it being that sensitive. I prefer Atruria's GUI & cable scheme, the multiple cables from a single point is great, also Arturia's extended functions are nice. I like the overall sound of Timewarp better - smoother, warmer and I prefer their MIDI control implementation. Having a scaling function on the MIDI control inputs is nice. Also I have noticed that the Timewarp presets make great use of MIDI control - Velocity, Aftertouch - which lends a more dynamic quality to the sounds. I can duplicate the sounds on the 2600V and always program my own sounds anyway, but I think it is another reason the Timewarp sounds alittle better right out of the box. I have had less luck with MIDI control of Arturia products, the CS80 V2 still seems to not remember the parameter settings, I have not put much effort into the 2600Vin this respect - but it does seem to be remembering the config. so far.
 
    Just noticed - I was duplicating the Lyle patch from Timewarp on the 2600V, got it good no problem. But, I found that using a square wave from any Osc. into the filter  (all modes)produces a thump in the output, this is most noticable with low filter settings, it is not comming from the env's directly, the thump will be preset even when the env's are above 30ms. If you patch a sawtooth the thump goes away, even with the env's at 0 ms. This appears to be in stand alone only. Running as a VSTi in Cubase seems to be OK. I do not usally run in stand alone, so the problems I have encountered may be due to my config. I will limit this to Cubase only.

 
      again, hoping for a V2
« Last Edit: November 25, 2009, 10:10:22 pm by YESMAN »

Older

  • Apprentice
  • *
  • Posts: 11
  • Karma: 0
  • I listen to music, therefore I am
Re: 2600 details
« Reply #2 on: December 02, 2009, 10:07:25 pm »
Yesman, I liked your observations on the Arp2600.
Once you try the second version just made, I want to comment on your impressions.

Thanks!
Consider your origin; you were not born to live like brutes, but to follow virtue and knowledge. Dante Alighieri

YESMAN

  • Apprentice
  • *
  • Posts: 47
  • Karma: 4
Re: 2600 details
« Reply #3 on: December 03, 2009, 07:46:51 pm »
Hey Older,
   I was getting some notes together in hopes of participationg in a beta test for the V2 release, but here we are, V2 is out.
   So, the short list. This is more about functions than timbre, but I will say that when I play a note on the CS80V - I think CS80, on the MMV - I think Moog, on the 2600V - I think, sounds nice, but not ARP. When I play a note on the Timewarp 2600 - I think Arp.

1. The Q atten. in the LP24 filter seems too sensitive in the first 1/3 of travel, at the mid point of travel the atten. reads approx. 0.90 out of a range of 0.00 to 1.00. The other (4) modes read 0.08 at the mid point.
2. The VCA exponential input - still as I noted previously.
3. The Mixer input atten. outs still do not break the normaled connection.
4. The Ring Mod section shows the graphics for the Audio/DC  select but, no switch.
5. The LFO in the Seq. section - when using the mod. control input patch point -say from aftertouch - the output of the LFO is apparently normaled to all (3) VCO's. It would be nice to be able to break that connection by patching into the LFO sine wave out. Part of what I like about the ARP sound was applying vibrato to only one VCO, as oposed to the minimoog style of both VCO's. sounds alittle more subtle. Also there is the default cable thing as on the MMV. I find it distracting.
6. I'd like to have the originals Initial Gain atten. - usefull for some sounds and very usefull when tuning a VCO or a seq. step.
7. And for the moment the last item, the DC voltage available in the original voltage processor section would be nice. Just a single 10V would be great, since there are  inverters on the VP outs, you could have the + & - from a single source.

    I like the new compact interface, other than the current delay issue. I like the Seq. section alot - not just for note seq. - but as a mod. source & for the quantizing of other CV's - the ADSR through the quantizer then to a VCO pitch, fun!
    Also, just for the record you can route multiple cables from a single out on the Timewarp. The manual has the wrong info on this. I e-mailed them and they got it straight in an hour. You route the additional cables from there destination back to the output.

Older

  • Apprentice
  • *
  • Posts: 11
  • Karma: 0
  • I listen to music, therefore I am
Re: 2600 details
« Reply #4 on: December 03, 2009, 08:21:23 pm »
Wow! :o
Thank you very much!
As far as possible I tried step by step all the points to make, Yesman.

The Arp2600 from Arturia is very funny and very, very musical but I agree absolutely with you: Timewarp is considerably better that Arturia reply and should have listened more and programmed before publishing this second version.

I sincerely hope that Arturia read your honest analysis (to read it does not seem pedantic and you see that you know what you mean).

Antoine please, send this post to the technical team so you know at least take it into consideration for version 2.1! ;)
Consider your origin; you were not born to live like brutes, but to follow virtue and knowledge. Dante Alighieri

YESMAN

  • Apprentice
  • *
  • Posts: 47
  • Karma: 4
Re: 2600 details
« Reply #5 on: January 18, 2010, 09:38:38 pm »
Continuing the search for the Arp in the Arturia.
 The initial filter cutoff (lp24db) goes from 10Hz to 20Khz (+/- depending on where the fine tune atten. is at), the graphic and correct 2600 response for this control is 10Hz to 10Khz.
 The VCA audio inputs on the Arturia are not polarized, the jack at the VCF input should be (+) and the jack at the Ring Mod input should be (-), they are both (+) on the Arturia.
 The Ring Mod section does not function as a VCA correctly - this may be in part because of the missing Audio/DC switch function. If you patch an OSC into input 1 and raise it's atten. (with input 2 atten. at off) you should not get any sound. Now patch the ADSR into input 2 and raise it's atten. the level of input 1 will be controlled by the ADSR settings, thus a second VCA. The Arturia allows sound to pass with just the input 1 atten. up.
 By the way I am not spending my time looking for problems. I am comming across these issues as I am trying to create sounds based upon experience with the 2600 and reading the owners and service manuals for the original.

Antoine

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1.052
  • Karma: 36
Re: 2600 details
« Reply #6 on: January 19, 2010, 10:45:49 am »
Thanks for all these specific points, they are being investigated by our Dev Team for future evolutions.
It is always a pleasure to be stretched by connoisseurs, critics are always better when constructive, pointing these significant details is far from a negligible help. :)
ex-Arturian

YESMAN

  • Apprentice
  • *
  • Posts: 47
  • Karma: 4
Re: 2600 details
« Reply #7 on: January 19, 2010, 01:57:28 pm »
Thanks for the aknowledgement Antoine. Here's to the next!

Koshdukai

  • Beta-testers
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 444
  • Karma: 20
Re: 2600 details
« Reply #8 on: February 15, 2011, 03:56:31 pm »
I prefer Arturia's GUI & cable scheme, the multiple cables from a single point is great, also Arturia's extended functions are nice. I like the overall sound of Timewarp better

I know this is an old thread but it touches some points that are the only things I currently complain about.

GUI size & cables behavior.

I never owned or used an ARP 2600, so I can't comment on the sound emulation quality, so I can only believe what so many keep saying when comparing the ARP2600V vs Timewarp vs the ARP 2600.
One thing I'm sure of, is that clearly, the ARP2600V doesn't sound the same as Timewarp. I find them equally good, although different, and like I said elsewhere, I prefer Arturia's approach to provide an upgraded/extended version of the original ARP 2600 (although Timewarp's control animation when assigned to continuous controllers, is kinda cool and provide an extra layer of visual feedback).

Anyway, the only thing I like in Timewarp is the GUI size and the cables feel more like patch cables and not like spider wires dangling in the wind.

Speaking of expected behavior, these are examples (that I use everyday) of good virtual cables renditions (both wire physics and plug/unplug drag'n'drop behavior) that feel natural to use and their behavior don't get in the way by catching my attention for the wrong reasons when being used:
  • Propellerhead's Reason/Record,
  • Korg's MS-20,
  • Timewarp (no cable animation, but that's really a luxury I don't mind loosing)
  • KarmaFX Modular Synth (not as good an example as the above ones, because only the wire physics feels natural, the plug/unplug method is even more awkward than what's currently used in MMV and ARP2600V)

Part of the "natural behavior" I'm referring to, is the way I can just drag a connected cable on to another plug. The way multi-source (multiple cables from one source) is implemented feels so unnatural and distracts me whenever I need to move one source end of the cable to another source.

IMHO, multi-source should only be achieved either through right-click dragging or drag + modifier key (SHIFT, ALT, CTRL?) to extend the default one-to-one type of cable.

This is my typical MMV & ARP2600V patch session:
1) Click OSC Sine and drag to VCA, to connect them (as an example). Nothing weird here, it behaves as expected.

2) Play the keyboard, turn some knobs/sliders, etc... and decide to use another waveshape, so...

3) Instinctively, I simply (try to) drag the OSC Sine end of the cable to disconnect it (like I would on a real patch system) and move it to Saw. And this is when the "weirdness" happens, because it starts a 2nd, multi-source cable that fails when dropped over the OSC Saw... oops, darn it!

4) I end up making a 2nd try, always, by using the other end of the cable to avoid the multi-source behavior... dragging VCA input into OSC Saw... now the OSC Sine to VCA breaks and all is well, but... it feels weird and so fiddly and very distractive, exactly the opposite of how a virtual cable based GUI should feel like, IMHO.


This was just an example I keep stumbling and getting a bit irritated with the way MMV and ARP2600V deal with this. Whenever I want to change the source end of a cable from point A to B, I always end up making a failed multi-source A to B connection, followed by a "DOH!" and only achieving what I initially wanted at a 2nd try, as described above.

This is very unnatural, time consuming and distracting IMHO, and it could be easily fixed with the suggestion I made above, I think.

Having a little bigger GUI area, thicker cables and better wire animation would all be a bonus, of course.

...but still, can't complain about the sound, just the GUI :D


« Last Edit: February 15, 2011, 04:38:13 pm by Koshdukai »

 

Carbonate design by Bloc
SMF 2.0.8 | SMF © 2014, Simple Machines