It definitely has the ARP character. The old ARP Pro Soloist nasal 'Fuzz Guitar 1' that I often program into other synths, and can be very tricky to conjure, here is a doddle to find. Similarly I can rustle up my other 'signature' Pro Soloist and Odyssey patches pretty swiftly.
I've had no problem creating any of the typical lead, bass and typical daily driver patches I need, but the amount of additional weirdness on offer here is immense - and a big reason for me making the purchase. As one who has eschewed modular synthesis this machine represents a good compromise for the limits of my patience. There are areas of this synth the need for which will be rare, and others that I really don't understand ('Elec Switch'?), but it's nice to know they're there.
The difference between the filters is subtle - much more subtle than the Odyssey variations. If anything I'm finding myself on the 4012 filter most often. Resonance seems to be pitched down slightly on the 4012, but beyond that I wouldn't say I could pick out one from the other.
If I have significant criticisms they are pretty much down to the original design of the 2600. I still hate not having octave switches for the oscillators - this more than anything has me grinding my teeth over and over. When all I want to do is drop one of the oscillators an octave it's a pain having to tune it every damned time. I also find some of the hard-patched routings oddly chosen. For example, I'd prefer the sawtooth waves of osc 1/2 be hard-patched, rather than the square waves, and, to me, AR to pitch would be more frequently useful than ADSR. Behringer have at least given us a hard-patched sawtooth from osc 3, which is an improvement on the original. The scaling of the envelope times is a bit strange. As I said, all of these points are about the original 2600 design, not this recreation.
In fact the improvements that Behringer have made from the original design are to be applauded. Behringer haven't broken anything here, but simply added features and flexibility. I have no complaints at all in this regard.
I really wish that at the least a delay had been added, rather than the reverb - I know many might complain about this overstepping the concept of a recreation, and an external FX processor is simple to attach, but a true stereo effects engine would have been the sweetest icing on the cake.
Obviously I'm going to bemoan the external PSU, but I have my own cure for that...
The reverb... Sure it sounds like a spring, of sorts. It's mono with the opposite polarity trick to create a (mono incompatible) pseudo-stereo effect. The best I can say about it is that it can be bypassed - and for me that's how it will remain.
The blue and grey 2600 models are on their way - with a reputedly 'improved' component choice in the filter and... a real spring reverb.
It does make me wonder what the component 'improvement' might mean. Unless it's about longevity, it's purely of academic interest to me - I like well enough what I'm hearing here.For me it's the 'Christmas Tree', black and orange 2600, or nothing. I don't find the other versions visually, or functionally, appealing. The coloured LEDs on this version are genuinely useful - the blue/green/blue for oscillators 1/2/3 is enough to stop me lifting the wrong fader in the filter section, for example; there are a lot of controls here and any help is welcome. I really don't see the sense of having all the fader caps the same colour - to me that completely misses the point!
Big thumbs up here, then. This synth is already earning its keep, and that's a good sign.
