Review: Korg MicroKorg 2

Introduced in 2002, the MicroKorg became one of the best-selling synthesizers of all time. But a lot has changed since then. In the last 22 years Korg has actually tried to update this early 21st century classic a few times, but they haven’t caught on the way the original did. The oxymoronically named MicroKorg XL, the MicroKorg S (which added speakers and not much else), and the MicroKorg XL+ (just a MicroKorg XL with a facelift) all failed to usurp the OG. But Korg is hoping the MicroKorg 2 will be the true successor to the crown.

The MicroKorg 2 is an improvement on the original in almost every way, that much is clear. What’s less clear is whether or not Korg has a winner on its hands, or if the MicroKorg 2 is an uninspired attempt to cash in on a classic. There are so many great smaller synths these days, I'm not sure that this will be the answer for everyone.

Modern Sound

One of the biggest changes from the original MicroKorg is the sound engine. At its core, the MicroKorg 2 is a virtual analog synth (it's digital but aims to sound analog), just like its predecessor. But the scope of its sound-shaping power is much broader. In addition to standard waveshapes like sine and saw, the MicroKorg 2 has a configurable noise source and access to a library of PCM samples that can be used to add a transient to the start of a patch, similar to what you might find on classic ’80s Roland synths like the D-50. The MicroKorg 2 also has three oscillators (instead of two on the original) and a continuously morphing multimode filter.

The MicroKorg 2 is also a multitimbral synth with double the number of voices (eight versus four), compared to its predecessor. This gives it the ability to create complex layered patches (say, an arpeggio and a pad simultaneously) or lush expansive chords. Add to this an expanded six-slot mod matrix with many more sources and destinations, plus a broader selection of effects, and you’ve got an instrument that clearly outclasses its namesake.

Photograph: Terrence O’Brien

What’s truly impressive is that it manages to be far more powerful, but also much easier to program than the original. While the big-knob and genre-based patch browsing remain, gone is the obtuse system where you’re forced to look up parameters on a giant table when trying to tweak presets or craft a sound from scratch. The MicroKorg 2 is nowhere near knob-per-function, but the 2.8-inch screen and contextual buttons make it much easier to find your way around.

In fact, I’d go as far as to say building patches on the MicroKorg 2 is actually fun. This is definitely not something anyone would have ever said about the original.

Not Great Navigation

The genre-based patch navigation does feel outdated, though. It was questionable in 2002 and now seems downright bizarre. The way it’s broken up—four categories with eight banks and eight programs in each bank—feels unnecessarily convoluted. Plus, of the 256 slots, only 64 are reserved for user patches, which is annoying for folks who like to customize for live shows. That being said, if there isn’t a giant knob with the words “hiphop” and “trance” around it, is it really a MicroKorg?

Photograph: Terrence O’Brien

Just like on the first MicroKorg, the factory presets are a mixed bag. Some sound great, some sound aggressively cheesy, and everything is decidedly digital. While the MicroKorg line are virtual analog instruments, they lean into the “virtual” part of that pretty hard. Even with three oscillators at its disposal and the ability to stack sounds in multitimbral mode, the MicroKorg 2 can sound thin at times. This can leave it sounding unimpressive on its own, but makes it very easy to place in a mix. None of this is to say the MicroKorg 2 sounds bad; it excels at the sort of bread-and-butter synth sounds that would be at home in almost any genre, and it’s quite a bit more versatile than the original.

The vocal processing has also received a big upgrade, but it does leave something to be desired. In addition to a vocoder, the MicroKorg 2 now features hardtune (Autotune) and harmonizer effects. When they work, and when combined, they can sound pretty decent. But the hardtune on its own isn’t great and struggles to deliver consistent results. It doesn’t help that the included gooseneck microphone is pretty terrible. While I appreciate Korg including a mic, you basically have to eat the thing for it to pick up your voice at all. You’re definitely better off just bringing your own mic to the party.

Photograph: Terrence O’Brien

It’s also worth noting that the MicroKorg 2 has an arpeggiator but no sequencer. Instead it has an audio looper. It’s an interesting choice that encourages you to approach composing on the MicroKorg 2 slightly differently than you would on most synths. Since you can record with one patch, then switch sounds and record over it, pretty much forever, you can create complex loops that just wouldn’t be possible on a standard mono-timbral synth with a sequencer. I do have one serious nit to pick: There’s no free mode. Instead you need to set the BPM and the number of bars beforehand in a menu. This can make it hard to lock something in during a quick moment of inspiration.

A Better Keybed

The original MicroKorg had its charms, but its keyboard was not one of them. Its keys were tiny, even by mini-key standards, and they were unpleasantly spongy. The new version isn’t exactly a revelation, but it’s certainly a massive improvement on the original. The keys are slightly wider and deeper, and have a pretty standard synth-action feel.

Photograph: Terrence O’Brien

Like the original, the MicroKorg 2 is surprisingly sturdy considering its price. While it’s certainly not a premium instrument, it feels like it would withstand the rigors of regular gigging. The buttons and potentiometers all feel robust, as do the pitch and mod wheels. The chassis is mostly plastic, and it’s pretty light, but there’s no alarming flexing even when you start putting some real body weight on it.

Then there's the looks: While in general I think the MicroKorg 2 is more aesthetically pleasing than the original, I will say I do miss the wooden cheeks. They would not only add a classy touch to what is a pretty utilitarian design, but it would also bring a slightly more premium feel befitting its $550 price.

Stiff Competition

Ultimately the biggest issue for the MicroKorg 2 isn't that it is bad, it's simply how much more competition it faces in the $500 to $600 range in 2024 than there was in the early oughts. The ASM Hydrasynth Explorer and Arturia MiniFreak are both $599 and offer far more robust modulation options and arguably more powerful sound engines in general. While both of them are pretty easy to program, neither are quite as approachable and friendly as the MicroKorg 2 with its colorful graphics and weird trophies celebrating your use of the instrument.

$580 would get you another Korg modern classic: the Minilogue. It’s definitely a simpler device and has only half the voices, but it gives you true analog synth sound. If you’re willing to forgo a keyboard you could also get the Minilogue XD desktop module for $550, which gives you both analog and digital voices, plus customizable effects and oscillators through the logue SDK. Plus there’s the Roland Gaia 2 and JD-Xi ($600), all the small Moog semi-modular units ($600), and more Behringer knockoffs than anyone ever asked for.

You’re spoiled for choice at this tier of the synth market. What the MicroKorg 2 delivers is a selection of pretty bread-and-butter synth sounds, plus usable vocal effects in a very fun and user-friendly package. If Korg had managed to keep the price the same ($430), it would be a no brainer. But, with so many other options at this higher price, you’ll have to decide whether you want something simple (MicroKorg 2), something deep (Hydrasynth), something weird (MiniFreak), or something warm (Minilogue). The good news is that the world is your oyster.

Updated on December 8, 2024: This review originally had the Roland listed as the makers of the MicroKorg on the site headline. The makers of the MicroKorg are Korg, as reflected throughout the article.