Behringer ARP 2600 Clone Teaser (BARP 2600)

Behringer today share this teaser of their plans for an ARP 2600 clone.

The first Behringer 2600 teaser, above, features AMSynths’ Rob Keeble sharing discussing his background and how he’s involved in creating the Behringer 2600 clone. It also features sounds and footage of a vintage ARP 2600, but no details on the ‘BARP 2600’.

The second teaser video, below, features video and sounds from a prototype of the Behringer 2600:

The Behringer 2600 is a more compact design that dispenses with the built-in speakers. Keeble notes that the electronics are surface-mount instead of through-hole. It looks like the Behringer 2600 also eliminates the original’s case and keyboard, which should allow it to be much more affordable.

Details on pricing and availability are to be announced, but Keeble says that they are aiming to have the production version to show at Superboth 2020.

Update: Behringer’s third teaser for their 2600 offers more audio demos:

75 thoughts on “Behringer ARP 2600 Clone Teaser (BARP 2600)

  1. It’s a bad look for Behringer to ride on Korg’s coat tails and then try to pass off a vintage 2600 as their own synth.

    Just show us the BARP 2600 when it’s ready and give us a price and ship date!

    1. I get we’re all drunk to get more stuff and the cheaper the better, but to heck in a bucket with these no-original-design ripoff artists cranking out clones from an almost-slave factory.

  2. One clone made under supervision of David Friend at Korg, another under supervision of Rob Keeble at Behringer.

    It is probably considered blasphemous to write, but I actually think that Rob Keeble´s clone is going to be a better product as I don’t think he would approve a bad product associated with his name and due to his deep expertise of not only copying filter designs but also improving them.

      1. Yes, just because that you are the original designer does not mean that you are the best and if you think so, then it is a misconception 🙂

        1. Just because you are one of the original designers does not mean you are 2nd best and if you think so, having not made a direct comparison between the two, then it is a misconception. ?

            1. Most successful folks that get this kind of gig in engineering enjoy the work for what it is. I suspect they will both do justice to their respective projects. Too bad a Fairlight or Synclavier clone are out of the question, but a PPG/Waveterm would be cool. Analog’s get reissues and clones, Digital’s* get apps 🙁

              Except what, DX7 and D50?

  3. Evidently the 2600 he’s seen operating in this video is an original – its not the Behringer version. Looking forward to that, along with the System 100 modules.

    1. The Behringer version will likely be a keyless, desktop version with a large angled panel. That is based on the photo of the panel that Behringer shared 6+ months ago. But who knows; it could be entirely different.

  4. This looks like a completely sensible take on the 2600 – much more appealing to me than a full size, and I just saw played the Korg version this weekend at NAMM. There’s a market for both, and I hope this project makes it to production as soon as possible.

  5. I am in favor Behringer Clones.

    Yes, there is no creatvity.

    But are any of these synths available to normal markets?
    No.

    Do i want to spend 800 on a ‘vintage mono synth’?
    No.

    Behringer is also modernizing a lot of the old instruments and making them affordable and reachable in todays market.

  6. okay, looks ugly…
    colors scheme and leds are laughable.
    choosing a lame digital reverb over the original spring is a dull decision too, but hopefully they didnt sacrified something more in order to make it affordable… /no speakers is actually something i applaud here/
    their moog model d clone is the most accurate one to date and if this one is a close second or better i am getting one.

  7. A note on putting memory in vintage clones: It’s not possible without compromising on the sound. You can get very close, but not accurate. This is one of the reasons why the midi-implementation in Moogs remake of the minimoog was pretty rudimentary. Also worth noting is that the Behringer clone of the mimimoog more or less is a clone of the remaked mini.

    1. How important is ultimate accuracy in the replication anyway? “Very Close” is just fine for me, as long as it’s quality. I’ve never heard a tune where I thought, “wow that’s obviously a clone synth being used.” I think what Behringer’s doing is good, and they’re doing it well.

      1. I sort of agree with you, but then Youtube will be filled up with videos comparing sound… The debate continues – with the result that nobody gets any music done. 😀 ( it will continue anyway – there’s no stopping it)

  8. just more poorly built crap being sold to people that care more about saving money up front than having an instrument that is made to last. do any behringer apologists really believe these things will be working in 50 years? these are semi-desposible wastes of money. no one would go out and buy a $300 strat knockoff and tell themselves it’s just as good as a gibson.

    1. “no one would go out and buy a $300 strat knockoff and tell themselves it’s just as good as a gibson”

      you are definitely right about that!
      but someone might mistake it for a Fender.

      1. Both Gibson and Fender make guitars for €300. There would be no need to be mistaken. If you want a fencer for €300, you can have it

    2. Behringer is not even pretending to build a 50-year instrument that is an exact replica. Buyers can decide if they’re wasting their money, they don’t need you to decide for them. I grew up around ARP 2600’s, I’ve always wanted one, but I really don’t want an original – I’d prefer one with modernized electronics and functionality where appropriate, a more practical form factor and a reasonably similar sound. There were LOTS of dodgy electronics in 1970, not everything needs to live forever. If you’re a purist, buy the Korg, that’s been built just for you. There’s a huge number of people that will enjoy the Behringer, without being ripped off, and without anything to apologize for.

      1. @bark27, There are no 50 year old instruments that didn’t require repair. This is a false argument.
        If anything component reliability and manufacturing techniques has advanced enormously in 50 years.

  9. Aren’t all of these past the 20 year patent protection window? I’m not a fan of small guys getting ripped off, but I sometimes feel like people hating on Behringer is like say, “I can’t believe you’re making generic Ibuprofen. You’re just ripping off Advil.”

    1. “Aren’t all of these past the 20 year patent protection window?”

      Don’t perpetuate the ignorant confusion of patent, copyright, trademark, trade dress, etc.

      Patents expire quickly, but the others can last until long after we’re dead.

      Behringer can’t do a TR-909 clone, for example, because they can’t use Roland’s actual sampled sounds without getting their ass sued for copyright infringement. They’ll have to do something that sounds similar to a 909.

      It’s also why Behringer has to make random changes to the look of their ‘off-brand’ clones. It’s like making Mr Pibb instead of Dr Pepper.

      Beyond that though, expired patents don’t excuse ripping off living people like Dave Smith, Tom Oberheim, Tom Friend, etc by copying their work in non-creative, non-transformative ways, simply because you can.

      Every Behringer synth so far has simply been douchie, except for the Deepmind and the Neutron. The company can get away with a lot, but they can’t escape the sleazy reputation that they’ve worked hard to create for themselves.

      1. Wrong. I used the Behringer 909 at superbooth last year. It sounds the same as a 909. And how has that stopped every other 909 clone or sample pack producer up until now? It hasn’t

  10. The article has now been updated to show the actual unit and the new part 2 clip for the Behringer 2600. To quote The Brain from Pinky and the Brain, “Yes!” I am definitely interested.

    I’m wondering if this can be used as a flat, angled desktop unit without the rack, which would be my preference. But I am seeing vents on the back. Are those cooling vents?

  11. Love the design. Very clean and modern. Sounds good from the limited audio. I just hope it doesn’t loose the original character by making all the oscillators squeaky clean and drift free

    1. Agreed – since that’s one of the major appeals of vintage analog gear, my guess is they won’t overlook that. However, oscillator (short) warm-up and and long term stability would be very welcome for me.

    2. I thought that was the appeal of the Arp oscillators over the Moog were that they were way more stable and didn’t drift as much as the Moogs did.

    3. The 2600 oscillators have a wide and precise range with temperature stability, which is the original design objective of Tonus Inc., its partly down to using SMD components with less thermal mass. Oscillator detuning is easy to achieve with the characteristic beating. Or dial in the on board LFO for more. The important objective is to make a synth that is involving and you cant stop playing..

  12. Okay – have to say I’m a bit let down by it being an old-school rack design. Black metal racks are ugly in the studio, and I would have preferred something closer to the original ARP design. This is a second prototype, so maybe Behringer will deliver a new case for it, or something a bit more…elegant.

    But… with that gripe out of the way, its great that its a functional and sonic replica of the original, and let’s hope the price is less ridiculous than the Korg ARP 2600FS. If Korg are sensible, they will do two things in response to the Behringer move – begin a second, longer production run of the 2600FS and secondly, develop within twelve months, a 2600 Mini that is more affordably priced and has a regular production run. That would then enable them to compete with the Behringer 2600 rather than let Behringer grab all the sales. At the moment, there is a broad sense of disappointment with Korg (apart from those lucky few who managed to get the 2600 FS) about the 2600 re-issue. We’ve been waiting so long for this…

  13. Never mind the 2600. I’m a slab synth player, so I want to see a new QUADRA, with each section beefed up to the max. I don’t care if it sounds like that car Homer Simpson designed. I want it all in a control center so deco, it looks like a drag queen’s birthday cake. Make this thing I want be here now!

    1. I’d love to see an Arp Quadra clone or re-issue too! I had one – and bloody stupidly sold it when I needed some cash. It’s an odd beast if you haven’t used one – the patch memory only stores which parameters work – not the settings! Its a glorious sounding thing though. Very John Carpenter Hallowwen sounding.

  14. This looks like a 2600 “for the rest of us”. Who has the space for the FS anyway?

    If you install this into a classy artisanal tabletop rack with some nice wooden panels, it should look pretty decent.

  15. Would like to see a different color for the labels some thing that looks more high end and dimmable leds would be nice to. Good it can be used a desktop and rack mound and its not to deep.

  16. I am bored by all this “clone” and “vintage” stuff. I thought that electronic music was about being innovative and progressive, not backward and nostalgia.

    1. What do you recommend? What is your idea of innovative and progressive?

      Synth companies seem to shy away from “…innovative and progressive…” This most likely due to them wanting to go with what people know so they can better increase the likelihood of making money. It’s the same way with movie studios. They want to do sequels and animated movies because they tend to make more money. They tend to shy away from more financially risky artsy films.

  17. Who has room for a full sized 2600? I’m making room. In between all of my “ugly” black racks, which I happen to think look professional. But see? Everyone has their opinions.

    For example, I think the multi-colored LED sliders look tacky. Especially when they are combined with the colored stenciling on the front panel. Together it gives it a Rainbow Sparkle Princess vibe that does not honor the history of the instrument. Make no mistake, the ARP 2600 was a serious instrument. It still is. But that is my opinion.

    Others will disagree. But I have just named the Behringer version the RSP 2600.

    1. I completely agree. Most of Behringer’s synths are produced with the idea of quantity over quality. Just a year down the road and this will lose a ton of value, meanwhile the Korg reissue will go up in value. Maybe I’m biased because I got my preorder in for the Korg ARP 2600, but even if I didn’t, I wouldn’t spend my money on the Behringer because it just looks like a candy shop.

      1. “Quantity over quality”… Yeah sure, that’s why they got the AMS guy in. You just sound willfully ignorant.

        People who worry about the value of a synth instead of thinking about the music they can make with it, are a big part of the problem. I bought a Kurzweil K2000 for €10000 in 1994, and right now I could get €200 for it. I couldn’t care less, because of the countless hours of joy it has given me.

    2. The rack thing is growing on me the more I look at it. The Behringer 2600 (at least this pre-production version) is clearly smaller than the original or the Korg ARP 2600FS.. I will probably get one, and a Korg ARP 2600 Mini if they make one. But I am more excited by the Behringer System 100 modules than their 2600 at this stage.

  18. The good news is there’s a lot of passion in this hobby, at least judging by this thread, and any thread where the name Behringer pops up!

    Behringer has a place in the market, and I think they’re actually doing a pretty good job – providing entry-level synths to all kinds of people who couldn’t afford one otherwise. They’re pretty good quality, make some smart compromises, and I can’t see how anyone one could see them as “passing off” – the Minimoog clone is an obvious, intentional and acknowledged homage, but no one would mistake it for a genuine or even counterfeit Minimoog.

    I also think Behringer gets the sound pretty close (probably indistinguishable once it’s in the mix for most listeners) to sometimes amazingly close, in the imitations it makes. Where they make the compromises is in the user interface, and the look and feel, the whole experience of the instrument – and there the differences are huge IMO. I agree with Arp’s David Friend when he said in a recent interview that he felt the sound differences between most synths are not that big, it’s the playing experience differences that are huge.

    With that in mind, the new Korg 2600 FS is fantastic in my view, only equalled by the Minimoog reissue and the Odyssey FS reissue, at least for authenticity. And in some senses it’s actually cheap – I know it’s expensive, but not for what it is physically, and the original cost as much as a car in the 70s – certainly more than $20,000 today in inflation-adjusted dollars. (I had one in the mid 80s I bought second hand for a song but got fed up with service issues and sold it – d’oh).

    I hope there’s a more affordable 2600 from Korg as well as Behringer, both will make a good part of the original experience and much of the original sound accessible to many more musicians – but I love that Korg made a real statement, involved the original designers, and recreated the whole experience of the original so faithfully, despite the cost.

    It’s not like any of these companies have a monopoly – people have more choice than ever before, and the new and especially the used markets are brimming with more affordable instruments than ever before.

    1. >in the mix for most listeners
      Sir, 90% of listeners can’t tell VST violins from the real thing, when it’s in a mix, which is kind of LOL, but also kind of sad. But it also means that the only ones you’re trying to please are the still existing, but pointless, reviewers (reviewers of music made sense when you couldn’t listen for free to make up your own mind, back in yeolde days of LP/cassette/CD). Otherwise, for mass production, just use whatever you want. From what I’ve heard, lately, you really don’t even need to bother to tune up the vocals…

  19. Moog and Sequential and their likes are making instruments for a smaller market of professionals and others who can afford their products. Which is nice. Uli Behringer is not attacking them in any way. Instead he’s attacking silly eBay-prices on vintage gear that may or may not work properly when finally you get them into your hands. What Behringer really is doing – is making shitloads of classic synthesizers available for everyone. Young aspiring musicians whos dreams include laying their hands on those icons of yesterday. Which is nice.

    Personally I have owned quite a number of those classics over the years. At 62 (!) I like what I see in the market of synthesizers today.

    I’m not in the market for the Behringer 2600 though. Even if I like the 2600 sound and stuff – I never got over the lack of two full envelopes in the original one. But once the System 55 is here – I will deffo start building a nice case for it.. 🙂

Leave a Reply