![]() ![]() It took him a little time to pick up on some of its features. “Powell remembers Joe Zawinul’s early experience: “Joe came up to Boston to play at the Jazz Workshop. Joe Zawinul (an Austrian jazz musician who emigrated to the USA in the 1950s) was one of ARP’s prominent artist endorsers. However, ARP and Moog were lucky, because their synthesizers were also intensively used by famous musicians. (Mark Vail / Bob Moog in “ARP 2600 Most Popular Modular Synth” in: Vintage Synthesizers, page 124) They gave us credibility among retailers, and exposed our instruments to all the musicians in New York.” The turning point was when Sam Ash decided to take on the 2600, late in 1971. For most musicians of that time, the instrument was hard to use. We tried to sell the 2600 in hi-fi outlets as well as music stores. Powell (who left ARP to become a synthesist with Todd Rundgren ) recalls, “David and I travelled all over the place in a red Chevy van. David Friend and Roger Powell toured the United States, putting on demos and talking to musicians and dealers. “… the key to promoting the 2600 was to show musicians and retailers what could be done with the instrument. These new, weird and strange instruments necessitated Bob Moog and other company representatives travelling straight through the USA to gain popularity for their instruments among the general public). (In the early 1970s, music shops often had very little interest in synthesizers. The instrument’s target group was “schools” and “synthesizer beginners” … Pearlman believed that especially schools with small or medium-sized music departments would be the main market for the ARP 2600. It was intended to be an “educational instrument” – hence the clear layout, the graphics on the front panel and the self-sufficient concept (with loudspeakers and spring reverb). The ARP 2600 was presented for the first time in the autumn of 1970 as the successor to the huge studio-system 2500. These considerations are all the more important since KORG has just released the “new” ARP Odyssey, and the “new” ARP 2600 … and since the booming Eurorack modular market has reached a remarkable peak. What about the original ARP Odyssey, and the new 2600? What about the TTSH (Two Thousand Six Hundred) 2600-clone or a small Eurorack’s modular system with the possibilities of an ARP 2600? Wouldn’t these instruments be great-sounding, cost-effective substitutes for the “Holy Grail of Analog”? Finally we’ll debate about whether an ARP 2600 is worth its currently astronomically high price or not, leading to the question of whether other instruments might serve as adequate substitutes. ![]() However, one ARP 2600 is by no means like another ARP 2600 …īesides taking a closer look at the different ARP 2600 versions, we will also discuss their individual musical strengths. Only a few synthesizers exude this sense of exclusivity and magic, only a few instruments generate such a desire for doing spontaneous musical performance and sound design. Relatively few were made, and with secondhand units now commanding top dollar, virtual realisations are as close as many of us will get to this astonishing analogue.The ARP 2600 has fascinated the electronic music world for 50 years. Synthetic historyĮverything that made the 2600 a brilliant instrument in 1970 still stands today: good sound, comprehensive features, and flexility that educates rather than overwhelms the user. Later, the 2600 would sport a different filter, adding yet another variable to please and perturb modern collectors. Moog got wind of the similarity and soon put a stop to it. Its oscillators were rich and precise, while its filter could hold its own with Moog's famous 24dB model - and for good reason, as it turned out, for the ARP 4012 filter design was pretty much a 1:1 copy! With both ADSR and AR envelopes and a built-in reverb tank, the 2600 was beautifully outfitted, even by today's standards. For instance, though all three debuting synths provided noise generators, the 2600 offered sample-and-hold circuitry, making it terrific for space-age bleeps and bloops. The new ARP instrument trumped the competition in other ways, too. ARP knew this, and its advertisements took pot shots at the competition. There was a distinct difference here, though, in that the 2600's oscillators were relatively stable in pitch - something that Moog and EMS simply couldn't match. Like the other soon-to-be-classics on show, the 2600 offered three oscillators with various typical waveforms on tap. The 2600 came down in the middle: there was a fixed path under the hood, but the signal could be rerouted by plugging cables into the vast array of 1/8" jacks that peppered the instrument's front panel. ![]() EMS used a pin matrix to make patch connections, while Moog eschewed patchability entirely for a fixed signal path. Each manufacturer took a different approach to the question of patching on its new portable powerhouses. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |