 |
Korg Forums
A forum for Korg product users and musicians around the world.
Moderated Independently.
Owned by Irish Acts Recording Studio & hosted by KORG USA
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Which synth reigns supreme? |
| ARP 2600 FS |
|
22% |
[ 2 ] |
| Kronos HD-1 |
|
77% |
[ 7 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 9 |
|
| Author |
Message |
CharlesFerraro
Platinum Member
Joined: 06 Feb 2010
Posts: 955
Location: California
|
 Posted: Thu Jan 16, 2020 11:00 pm Post subject: ARP 2600 FS vs. Kronos HD-1 shootout |
 |
|
In on the left corner we have the reforged and coveted modular analog classic: the ARP 2600 FS
In right corner we have the high definition, low-aliasing sampler synth: the Kronos HD-1 engine
Watch the video and cast your vote for the Korg product that wins this synth showdown. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
IAA
Full Member
Joined: 10 Feb 2013
Posts: 131
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 17, 2020 7:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
That’s a cool comparison Charles! I often forget about the HD1 raw waveforms. I recently sampled some Model D basic waveforms before realising Korg had already done it! 
But saying all this, that’s a beautiful synth Korg have (Re)released. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Lightbringer
Senior Member
Joined: 07 Jan 2018
Posts: 356
Location: USA
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 17, 2020 9:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
That was a fun video, Charles! Thanks for making it. Anyone feeling the slightest bit of Kronos buyer remorse only need watch your Youtube channel for some inspiration and discovery!
I'm not sure I can vote here due to the apples and oranges syndrome. Feature wise, and in terms of the spectrum of sounds it can create, the Kronos will run circles around the ARP all day long.
But there is a real charm to an analog, one-knob-per-function synth you won't get from the Kronos. For the people that bought the ARP 2600, I know why they did it. And I think they got an outstanding value on a brand new, iconic analog monosynth. I am probably a little envious but I couldn't self-justify this one.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Broadwave
Platinum Member
Joined: 25 May 2011
Posts: 1118
Location: Manchester UK
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 18, 2020 9:10 am Post subject: |
|
|
The problem is that, as soon as you start to layer waveforms to emulate multiple VCOs, you'll soon realise how badly the HD-1 handles samples.
VCOs on practically all analogue synths are free running - there is no start point, but as soon as you play back a sample, it'll always start from the beginning, and when you start layering you'll notice a very unnatural phasing as the samples are played.
The HD-1 doesn't allow for a random user sample start point, which is a shame as it would go a long way towards a decent analogue emulation.
_________________
Synth DIY Projects |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CharlesFerraro
Platinum Member
Joined: 06 Feb 2010
Posts: 955
Location: California
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 22, 2020 5:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
| IAA wrote: | That’s a cool comparison Charles! I often forget about the HD1 raw waveforms. I recently sampled some Model D basic waveforms before realising Korg had already done it!
But saying all this, that’s a beautiful synth Korg have (Re)released. |
The ARP 2600 FS is pretty darn cool, I agree. Even though a synthesizer like the Kronos can replicate almost any synth of yesteryear, you have to admit that the way a synth inspires you to work differs from model to model. For example if you sit down with an MS-20 vs an ARP 2600 FS, you're going to gravitate towards certain knobs on aesthetic alone. The MS-20 has specific control sources normalled into it's oscillators that the layout is essentially asking you to use, so which control sources do you think you'll end up using the most? Similarly the ARP 2600 FS has it's own normalled controls along with a giant panel that's begging to be rewired. Instrument inspiration is a big part of how a synth guides you and I think it's something manufacturers put a lot of thought and effort into while designing their layout.
The point I'm trying to make here is that even if you have a similar set of tools between two synths, you're probably not going to use them the same way if their layouts are completely different.
| Lightbringer wrote: | That was a fun video, Charles! Thanks for making it. Anyone feeling the slightest bit of Kronos buyer remorse only need watch your Youtube channel for some inspiration and discovery!
I'm not sure I can vote here due to the apples and oranges syndrome. Feature wise, and in terms of the spectrum of sounds it can create, the Kronos will run circles around the ARP all day long.
But there is a real charm to an analog, one-knob-per-function synth you won't get from the Kronos. For the people that bought the ARP 2600, I know why they did it. And I think they got an outstanding value on a brand new, iconic analog monosynth. I am probably a little envious but I couldn't self-justify this one. |
This is exactly what I'm talking about in the reply to IAA! One knob per function is going to inspire a different kind of creativity than limitless possibilities on a touch screen. Plus the ARP 2600 FS ships with that flight case! Talk about a motivator to get that thing on stage.
| Broadwave wrote: | The problem is that, as soon as you start to layer waveforms to emulate multiple VCOs, you'll soon realise how badly the HD-1 handles samples.
VCOs on practically all analogue synths are free running - there is no start point, but as soon as you play back a sample, it'll always start from the beginning, and when you start layering you'll notice a very unnatural phasing as the samples are played.
The HD-1 doesn't allow for a random user sample start point, which is a shame as it would go a long way towards a decent analogue emulation. |
Yup, you're right. In fact when replicating the 2600 for the melodic section, I had to restart the samples by not playing legato for some notes. If I didn't, the extreme pitch shifting didn't sit well with HD-1. Korg was cool enough to include a start offset and you can also try layering the program and delaying a layer by a few milliseconds for a different phase start position but you're still locked to that position at note-on unlike a free running VCO. I agree it can sound a little weird. Oh another thing that would go a loooong way to helping is to just plug a random per-voice LFO subtly into Pitch for each oscillator. But yeah random sample start point would've helped for sure, especially for someone like IAA who is loading in their own user single cycles.
I think I'll reference this comment in my next video. Makes me think of the sound design of James Wiltshire: https://youtu.be/iCdD7SabVb8 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Liviou2004
Platinum Member
Joined: 20 Feb 2017
Posts: 1150
Location: France
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 22, 2020 7:50 am Post subject: SE |
|
|
| CharlesFerraro wrote: | In fact when replicating the 2600 for the melodic section, I had to restart the samples by not playing legato for some notes. If I didn't, the extreme pitch shifting didn't sit well with HD-1. Korg was cool enough to include a start offset and you can also try layering the program and delaying a layer by a few milliseconds for a different phase start position but you're still locked to that position at note-on unlike a free running VCO. I agree it can sound a little weird. Oh another thing that would go a loooong way to helping is to just plug a random per-voice LFO subtly into Pitch for each oscillator. But yeah random sample start point would've helped for sure, especially for someone like IAA who is loading in their own user single cycles.
I think I'll reference this comment in my next video. Makes me think of the sound design of James Wiltshire: https://youtu.be/iCdD7SabVb8 |
I wondered if it wouldn't be possible to create a sample random phase modulation inside MOD-7, by using PCM Input (and so a basic waveform) on one operator whose phase will be modulated by another operator ?
(MOD-7 is not a Frequency Modulation engine but a PHASE modulation engine). If it worked, as we get six operator, we could stack 3 oscillators randomly phase modulated. And so, stacking two MOD-7 Osc in one prog, we could get 6 oscilators.
It is just a theorical idea, I've never test it yet. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CharlesFerraro
Platinum Member
Joined: 06 Feb 2010
Posts: 955
Location: California
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 22, 2020 11:53 am Post subject: Re: SE |
|
|
| Liviou2004 wrote: | I wondered if it wouldn't be possible to create a sample random phase modulation inside MOD-7, by using PCM Input (and so a basic waveform) on one operator whose phase will be modulated by another operator ?
(MOD-7 is not a Frequency Modulation engine but a PHASE modulation engine). If it worked, as we get six operator, we could stack 3 oscillators randomly phase modulated. And so, stacking two MOD-7 Osc in one prog, we could get 6 oscilators.
It is just a theorical idea, I've never test it yet. |
Well to start, I don’t think you can use a PCM oscillator as a carrier. Even if you fed the PCM waveform into an operator, it itself will not be frequency modulated (or phase modulated as you pointed out).
As far as creating random phase start within MOD-7, that option is already built in! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Synthee
Senior Member
Joined: 21 Apr 2013
Posts: 298
Location: Sweden
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 22, 2020 4:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
This was fun to see and hear, thanks for this video.
I didn't even know that Kronos had those 2600 samples.
_________________
Korg Kronos 2 88 ; The River ; Cubase 10.5 Pro ; PC Win 10 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Liviou2004
Platinum Member
Joined: 20 Feb 2017
Posts: 1150
Location: France
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 22, 2020 5:16 pm Post subject: Re: SE |
|
|
| CharlesFerraro wrote: | | Liviou2004 wrote: | I wondered if it wouldn't be possible to create a sample random phase modulation inside MOD-7, by using PCM Input (and so a basic waveform) on one operator whose phase will be modulated by another operator ?
(MOD-7 is not a Frequency Modulation engine but a PHASE modulation engine). If it worked, as we get six operator, we could stack 3 oscillators randomly phase modulated. And so, stacking two MOD-7 Osc in one prog, we could get 6 oscilators.
It is just a theorical idea, I've never test it yet. |
Well to start, I don’t think you can use a PCM oscillator as a carrier. Even if you fed the PCM waveform into an operator, it itself will not be frequency modulated (or phase modulated as you pointed out).
As far as creating random phase start within MOD-7, that option is already built in! |
Yes, you're right, I've realized that after writing ! PCM Osc can only be modulator, not carrier. In MOD-7, I didn't remember the "Phase Sync" to Random parameter, you're right. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
