Everyone who is stuck with the thought that digital recreations can't sound as good as the originals are really stuck in the 80's and really missing out on the benefits. I celebrate these digital versions from Roland every single day.
I really love my Xm. I may get the full size X or the Juno X soon. There are so many positives to this synth. All that you mentioned plus the JD & vocal designer expansions, Bluetooth capabilities, audio interface features, & XLR outputs. The Roland Cloud resource and integration installs are so worth the investment and expands the Jupiter Xm. It took some time for me to understand the “scenes” approach and the step sequencer. Probably one of the best boards Roland has put out in a while. Best keyboard investment I’ve made since my Fantom X8 & X6 years ago.
I have an XM and recently picked up a Juno X when they were on sale. No regret. The Juno X is a bit smaller than the Jupiter X, which is great for my tight studio space l.
I just brought one! I'd like to say about why dies it needs a piano sound? Well very simply if you are mainly analogue like me, aka MK70 Moog source, JD08 JX08! Sold 2 x Casio CTX 5000, and suddenly realised l have no synrhs that can do piano or acoustic anything, lol. Though the electric piano on a deep mind 12 is amazing! So if anyone wonders why the Jupiter X needs a piano sound, RD piano's! Yes yes yes, lol. 😂
who gives a crap, it sounds great end of story and it has much more going for it than an analogue poly - as for the moniker of vst in a box, well in this day and age i just don't see it as an insult anymore
I don't think VST in a box is in itself an insult, it's the question of Roland charging silly money for a VST in a box. Apart from the actual computer running zenology software and a dac, are there any other specialised/bespoke circuitry which is creating and shaping the sound? If not thrn can you create the same sound of this synth with purely a laptop/PC running the zenology software as a plugin?
@@juxty3102 it's a totally fair price for a fully featured flagship synth with top notch build quality, IMO. Manufacturing isn't cheap, let alone in this economy.
The Jupiter X cannot do Osc Sync and CrossMod at the same time. This means there a whole swath of sounds that Jupiter and JX-8P can do that the X just can’t touch. The cross modulation in general is weak and has nowhere near the sonic potential of a Jupiter 8, in fact the System 8 gets it right and the Jupiter X misses the mark. Until the cram ACB in there, it’s a simulation and not an emulation.
Yes indeed, can't argue with those points - and one reason I still turn to my System 8 when I want the full Jupiter experience, which is kind of ironic. Oh how I wish they'd release an expanded System 8 in a Jupiter body!
If time travel were possible, I would like to bring one of these jewels to Mozart or Bach and tell them: "Please, try it!". Who knows what would come out...
@@JimDaneker I Just can't Imagine how they become nuts about that and then... Boom! A new kind of music will spread all over the World in a couple of days
I love my Jupiter X. The Oberheim does sound better in this single sound comparison you created, but each bring their own personality to the table. Roland Jupiter X suffered the same as the System 8 upon release. Each were misunderstood and those who didn't take the time to learn them will regret it when they finally decide to and both are discontinued.
I need to do a much more in-depth A/B between the JPX and the Oberheim & Prophet 5. My "logic" was lost in this video because most missed the point that the OB was in 8 voice unison mode - that's why it sounds so massive - while the JPX was just in single voice mode. Of course they're never going to sound the same, especially like that; I should have shown a truly 1:1 comparison. ;-)
I hate the whole "vst in a box" framing. "WhY WoUld I sPenD mY mOnEy oN tHaT?" they say, implying that it's irrational to buy hardware if you can make the same sounds in software. They don't realise what's at the end of that road = All hardware synth purchases are irrational. If your goal is cost efficient music production, you should be working 100% in the box. No hardware synth on earth makes a sound that can't be emulated in software to a degree that is good enough to make a hit record. These people imply that they buy hardware for 'sounds you can't make with software', but they're lying to themselves. They, like us, buy hardware because of how it makes you feel / inspires you when you work with it. And that inspiration comes every bit as much if you're playing a "vst in a box" or a vintage analog.
PREACH!!! And then there's the elephant in the room: even if you just use a generic controller and a computer to house all your VSTs, you are still using "VSTs in a box" and a decent computer full of good software isn't cheap. It's a dumb argument all the way around, and you couldn't be more right about the inspiration factor when it comes to hardware synths and the reasons we use them. 😁👊🏻
@@JimDaneker Also in the case of the Jupiter X specifically, they forget that it's an awfully nice box, with an audio and a midi interface in it... and controls that are higher resolution than most if not all 'midi controllers' on the market... and it's a box that boots up instantly and never had any latency or sync issues or dropouts if you have a browser window open at the same time. So even _as_ , a box to run a vst... I still see the value in it.
Tbh, I'd ignore the naysayers. So many of these people are neither musicians nor songwriters and the differences between contemporary VA synthesizers and "Real Analog" only becomes more negligible. These people are cork sniffers and when you release your next video showing damn near identical tones from these two machines, they'll still find magical differences. You could literally just copy the Jupiter X tone and say it's a classic analog synth to fool them and they will still find "differences". You can bet on it.
@@JimDaneker Glad I could be a voice of reason lol. I think the Synth community is pretty bad with this. If I listened to online commentary, I would've never gotten into Roland or hardware synths at all without getting a vintage synth. I went and purchased a SH-201, SH-01 Gaia, JDXA and a Roland D-10. I love all of my synths but per the internet none of these machines are "worth it" and worse than a Juno 6 (not even a Juno 60 or Juno 106). But in practice, the features they offer, the tonal possibilities that come from those features on top of the price easily puts all of these machines over many "vintage" pieces of hardware. Daniel Fisher and the patches he programmed on the Gaia really opened my eyes and pushed me away from lusting Vintage gear. Plus, I think many of these people aren't interested in learning to program their synths and instead judge the hardware based on their presets not the actual capabilities of the machine.
People today are so untalented it’s nauseating if you know how it used to be - they do have an ability to criticize every little thing they come across so at least they’ve got that going for them
Amazing demo! Jupiter X is a beauty. I bought mine 4 years ago and it is the most versatile synth I have, and I have a small collection of analog and digital synths (and had/tried more since I started making music in the late 80s as a teenager). I think the problem with people hating the Jupiter X (and Roland) is the digital synthesis, like if digital were something bad or impure lol Is true that the 1st versions of the firmware was a bit painful to understand, but 3.0 makes the X a completely different beast. The new Jupiter X model sounds huge and having the option to play 5 synths at the same time (4 synths and a drum part) gives you a lot and it sounds and feels like a classic Roland synth. I tried replicating sounds from my OB-6 and the Polysix, Prophet 5 and so many others, and you can get pretty close, so it can give more than just Roland sounds. Thanks for the video!
The problem with the Jupiter-X, is that it’s overly complicated for the controls given and 95% of it is behind the postage stamp display. If they had just made a 1:1 replica of the Jupiter 8 using the ACB plugout, that would have been great.
I definitely have my complaints with it too - it can be a real head-scratcher at first. But once I really grasped the architecture (the Zenology plugin was a HUGE help, ironically), that made sense of it. But yeah, what I would give for a doubled System 8 in the Jupiter-X body!
"VST in a box" is irrelevant - My problem with the Jupiter-X is that it's not designed for their Zen Core engine. Instead it's designed with a layout to pander to the Jupiter-8 ABM template (a subset restriction of Zen Core).. but then they go and use their _second best_ Jupiter-8 engine in there. This thing has the same horsepower inside as the miniscule MC-101 (single BMC).. it just seems crazy to me that you'd go to the trouble of making a huge case that looks like a Jupiter-8.. but then not use your best Jupiter-8 engine (ACB) So this is a Zen Core synth.. but stray off the beaten path from the Jupiter-8 controls and you'll quickly find yourself having fun menu diving on a tiny screen. The Juno-X has the exact same issue. Zen Core itself is not a bad engine, it's a very nice sounding oldskool style virtual analogue (with some extras) affair. Roland's idea was to try lots of polyphony and layering rather than a heavy and accurate simulation. The problem is they already released ACB in the boutiques/System-1 and System-8.. it's much more CPU intensive but also more accurate. You can't put the genie back in the bottle, Roland They're using quad core ARM chips in all their products (from about 2016 still?).. and I think the real reason they decided to use a lighter VA engine for a while.. was to extend the life of these chips, and respond to people moaning about the ACB boutiques only having 4 voices (which is only as Roland put a single chip in them.. System-8 has three) It's really time they upgraded to a new 8 core or 16 core chip If this was a big synth with all its controls _designed for_ Zen Core.. then it'd be an excellent machine. But it's neither one thing nor the other. The MC-707 has a better (higher res) screen on it for Zen Core.. let alone the Fantom An ABM template is a set of restrictions, macros and scaling parameters on the full Zen Core engine. The JX-8P template is a travesty and all JX-08 boutiques should be thrown on a pyre for having a picture of the JX-8P on the box.. not that it in of itself sounds bad.. but because it's pitched as a JX-8P and they are just nothing alike The Jupiter-X should have had 3xBMC inside like the System-8. Ran ACB.. maybe even pair it with analogue filters for something special if you're going to have a big Jupiter-8 style case (although the ACB ones sound fine). Do something similar for the Juno-X running their 106/60 ACB plugouts Then there should have been a big Zen Core synth.. crammed with all the controls you need to directly operate Zen Core with minimal menu diving. ABM templates should have been an end user community feature, so users could have fun sculpting Zen Core to sound _somewhat_ like a variety of different synths. That would have added a nice fun factor into patch design. There is no way on Earth that ABM can replace a well crafted ACB simulation Maybe none of it matters if you forget about the details.. and like hearing the sound of Zen Core everywhere. At least with Gaia 2 (which I don't like the sound of for now) or SH-4D they are trying to code fork the Zen Core engine a bit to make them a bit more unique. But to me the Jupiter-X/Juno-X was just an extremely disappointing set of choices from Roland.. and I can't get on with those things I have an MC-707 for Zen Core and love the System-8 though (which you could argue is also a "VST in a box") despite the fact it doesn't run on electricity, but Predator blood.. anyway roll on the Jupiter-6 ACB plugout! :)
Good explanation. Back when I was still confused about what Jupiter X was vs. a Fantom (and the Juno X hadn't come out yet), I completely didn't get all this. Now that I do, I am glad I bought a Fantom and not a Jupiter X (personal choice). Since Zencore is more like a VST (meaning deep feature set like a VST) the Fantom is the better hardware UI to take advantage of it all. I think Roland does a disservice to the users by not making this more clear (what Zencore is vs. ACB vs. ABM, and the hardware synths vs. the actual VSTs). That generates a lot of unnecessary backlash.
Zen is only good on powerful systems with a lot of BMC chips, it sounds good on Phantom (coz it was designed for Phantom in mind i believe) but on less powerful systems it's kinda bland... Some people believe that Zen plugin gon give them the same sound...
@@djkanyon Zen Core was actually designed for the AX-Edge keytar originally. It just found uses elsewhere as a fairly lightweight engine. More chips for Zen Core means you could have more polyphony or for layering etc.. but in general it's ACB that is too heavy (it's simulating the original analogue circuits to be very accurate to the original synth) to run on the weaker hardware synths with much in the way of polyphony. Jupiter-X running ACB would manage 4 voices like a boutique The plugin should sound the same - but in the case of the Fantom, it has an analogue filter onboard too
@@djkanyon Zencore sound quality isn't related to number of chips - that only affects how many models you can run. The patches that you can run in common on both sound identical on my Fantom.
@Wagoo you make a lot of great points, and I share many of your complaints. Several of those are the reasons I gave up on this synth initially. It does have some really vexing aspects for sure, and I'm hopeful Roland has learned from a lot of the pushback they've gotten on it. The irony is that the Jupiter X was the answer to the pushback they got on the System 8 - when I think what people really wanted was an expanded System 8 in a Jupiter body! Here's hoping 😁👍🏻
Jupiter X does exactly what i needed to do for 80's funk! And i was blessed to get it used way under what they cost today, no complaints. Ignore any hate about it. Get one, you will love it.
All I can say is thank you to Dave Smith for the Prophet 5/10 reissue, Tom Oberheim for the OB-X8 (and TEO-5), and Arturia for the Polybrute. They've delivered what we've been asking for years and not followed in Roland's footsteps.
NICE demo! Love my Jupiter X. Have not used my System 8 since getting it. Picked up an Xm which fits in very nicely in my little DAWless setup. So it is a VST in a box. A box with lots of controls and a great keyboard. People gonna hate. That makes me love it even more.
Not really ..How is that possible when the X has no OSC sync and cross mod capabilities ?? Still… the X sounds pretty good to my ears.. and I’m comparing to my analog classics.
@@electrowayne2918 Jupiter-8 model in Jupiter-X is based on zen core which has both sync and cross mod straight up the UI. Search for “Zen core Jupiter-8”
@@JimDaneker In that particular test, they are very different. I don't think many people would have any trouble picking out that they don't sound the same. Especially those that play synths anyway. Their a bit similar, but really not even close.
@@classicarcadeamusementpark4242 you mean the little Oberheim "comparison" in the video? Of course they're different… I talked about that. The point was to simply demonstrate analog-style characteristics: slight pitch variations, bottom end warmth, etc. - and in that regard, they are totally in the same ballpark. In fact, on my big PMC mastering monitors, the Roland is actually quite a bit beefier.
I own a Jupiter-X. I programmed sounds from favorite factory patches also. Rather than pay $5000-25000 for an old analog, this keyboard is even better with the new technology it offers.i really love the effects and its actually easy to program once you spend time understanding the interface. I love the sound quality. I could listen to this video all night. The sounds are strong and full. Well worth the money I spent. Just wish bands used it more. Its really all you need. I do love the keybed, not chinsy and flimsy. The keys are a joy to play on. Definitely helps people play better.
Most importantly people need to spend more time becoming better players than worrying about what keyboard sounds best. Including me. I have a Roland Fantom 8 ex, Jupiter xm, and RD2000, I have had so many keyboards over the years, they’re all good in there own way, what’s cool about the new Roland gear, loads of sounds, great work flow and easy to use, yes maybe some people find issues etc and negatives. You have to look with better eyes than that.
PS, I own several of the boutiques, and I can say for a fact, having owned the originals, that they sound just as good...Roland's ACB, ABM, and Zencore emulation technology are top notch.
Phenomenal video, as always! I am not 100% sold on it sounding analog. Even in your comparison between the OB-X8 it has a little too much of that fizzy digital character and more of an Alpha Juno character to the PWM (which I know is analog but something about the PWM doesn't hit for me.) Granted your demo song sounds SPECTACULAR but I'm pretty sure you could make even Behringer's new Vintage plugin sound good. Does it sound great? Absolutely. I played with a friend's once and was immediately impressed with the build quality. Definitely something you could take on tour. For the price? Well it can certainly do more than a Polybrute-6 or Prophet Rev2 in terms of sound design. But in terms of getting you that analog sound which the casing and marketing clearly imply, I think the Rev2, Polybrute-6 or even something like a Novation Summit will get you there for less money. What do you think? And once again, just stellar playing / video production / sounds! 👏
Thanks as always, my brother! Admittedly, I didn't flesh out the "comparison" portion of this one (if you can even call it that!) - and looking back, I picked the wrong sound on the OB. The point I was trying to make wasn't that they sound alike (which I clearly said in the preface, but that went over a lot of peoples' heads) - but more to demonstrate an overall analog-type character: random pitch instability, overall low end warmth/tone, etc. So, that's on me, and I'll definitely do a follow up at some point that does a much better job on that. As for its overall sonic signature, I've heard it next to the originals more than once, and once people close their eyes and just listen rather than assume based on visuals, things get a lot murkier. I do think the System 8 (ACB) is Roland's pinnacle modeling tech for absolute accuracy, but the JPX completely stands up in any real world context. Alex Ball did a video that is a much better comparison with the originals... I'll do one as soon as I can. Got a buddy willing to loan me his Jupiter 8... stand by! Appreciate you my friend!
I am with you! I love my Jupiter X. It continues to amaze me after a year. My suggestion to anyone is start with the first preset and wiggle all the knobs and slides for at least two weeks. You will be amazed.
For every knob-per-function Roland synth out there. PWM was enabled by a front panel button. In the Jupiter and even Juno X, it’s a menu dive. That is just infuriating.
The thing about VST in the box... i mean what box? Made by Roland and with a lot of knobs and faders? Why not? I mean if one want to have Zenology VST sound, there's got to be a computer for that purpose and it's not cheap. My old Core i5 wasn't even able to run it, so i bought an i7 and it kinda was 7 hundreds... Still think 2 grands is too much (coz you can buy new laptop, midi keys and Zen VST for way less) but hey look at new midi keyboards in the same price range...
Umm, shocker. Most all new synths are vst/daw in a box. Think of it as a single package. Laptop, screen, audio interface, and massive midi controller all in one. Personally, lean towards Fantom 6 plus EX. You get far more flexibility and a full workstation.
to my ears half the patches on the x sound digital and weak/ thin/ metallic. Half sound great. But for $1500, the new oberheim, literally EVERY PATCH is dripping with electricity and vibe. Very clean demos though,, thank you
Man, there are a ton of patches on an OB that sound extremely thin and anemic - it's all about context. The new TEO is a great entry point into the Oberheim world though - so glad they opened up that side of the market! As for the Jupiter-X, anything that people would describe as digital/weak/thin would sound exactly the same on their analog counterparts… I've had them all.
To me there's absolutely nothing wrong with having virtual analog in a hardware box. The Nord Lead was a revolutionary instrument back in the day, and things like the ASM Hydrasynth build on that with further innovations (I own the latter and I think it has some of the most gorgeous filter emulations I've ever heard). But here's the problem: the latter two as I say were innovations from new ventures and brought something brand new to the synth world. In contrast, by sticking a lot of software in a box at a price level where all-analog instruments are readily available, and slapping the Jupiter name on it, suggests Roland are leaning on their heritage to drive sales. What Gibson have become to the guitar world, so Roland are now in the world of synths. Once you realise there are better, cheaper options (or that you can step up to analog at almost the same price point) then all you're left with is that name on the back panel.
I agree with some of that, but it's not about other options for me… It's about what each synth brings to my studio, and the JPX along with the System 8 cover pretty much the entire history of Roland in two great keyboards. The JPX is far from perfect of course (I wish it were more like an expanded System 8), but it's quite the workhorse all by itself.
I agree. I am really surprised at how many players do not value “the box” anymore. “The box” is the most important part to me. I absolutely hate that most gear has max 8 knobs on it nowadays, and companies seem to think the software is the most important part.
I think the problem is that Roland has announced so much synths in the past which shall sound like the originals but the don‘t e.g. Jupiter 80. Juno-X and Jupiter-X sound like the originals and the poeple don‘t believe it. So I totally agree with you that the Jupiter-X is really underrated although Roland finally keeping the promise that a successor product sounds like a previous original. I know what I am talking about, because I have both.
Awesome breakdown. The Jupiter X is a stunning synth. A true beast and you make it shine here. I use mine all the time...... there is a sound to it you have to experience in person to really "get it".
It really is a fantastic sounding synth. It may be a "VST in a box" in some respects, but there's so much more to it than that. Not only does it sound amazing, but it FEELS great, too. That's why people still use hardware synths. It's incredibly versatile. If you're a Roland junkie like me, the fact that it shares the ZenCore engine with several other synths, along with Zenology, is a huge plus. I can design a sound on the Jupiter-X, then easily port it to my Aerophone AE-30, Fantom-06, AX-Edge, or Jupiter-Xm. The Roland Cloud Connect integration is amazing, too, and by far the easiest way to get sounds into the Jupiter. It has some cons for me; the learning curve is a bit steep (lots of menu diving sometimes). But that's partly just because Zencore is so powerful. It really is a next-gen synth.
Haters gonna hate. Truth is, I don't really care too much what's under the hood, it's the best sounding synth I have ever owned, and I've been through a couple, starting with my SH2 and Juno 60 in the '80's, through the DX7 madness, and then falling in love with the JD800 in the '90's, which I still own and adore. It took about 31 years for me to find a synth that I thought could compete with my JD. It's a matter of opinion, I guess, but as a working studio and live musician, I think it's a most excellent synthesizer.
The Jupiter X is a BEAST. The people who talk bad about this synth simply never owned one or are just frustrated they can’t afford one lol This thing can single handily create an entire album on its own. It sounds GREAT isn’t that what it all comes down to at the end? 😂 LOVE THE VIDEO! You’re the goat bro💯
I think most synth player border on snobby. But as a gtr player who augmentation and songs w synths. .. especially the juno. I think its a massive architecture driven composition tool. With top drawer sound. I just wish it had realtime recording for the sequencer. Like the juno x. If you can help me on this... a editor? Or another synth midi in while using the sequencer.... ? GREAT VID!!!!
What a seller, beginning the video by A/B-ing the Jupiter X with the OB-Xa. Not that I’ll get one, but the OB-Xa is the only better comparison I could imagine bouncing the X off of than a JP8. The inclusion of digital synth & piano emulations is probably for the same reason that Korg included DW-8000 waveforms on the MS-2000, Radias and microKorg models. There’s no escaping the fact that it’s in a digital mainframe, so why not include tones from digital instruments? Makes some sense.
Yeah, Jim, that’s what I like about my own digital Roland model, the VR-09, despite it being much more “slender” than this. It’s about accessing those ROM sounds and having them at your disposal just to play. The only time I’ve even attempted writing and saving one of my own patches on it (so far) was when I attempted to use the Dyna-My-Rhodes tone to emulate the piano sound performed by Robbie Buchanan on so many ballads during the 80s like the Laura Brannigan version of “How Am I Supposed to Live Without You”, the Sergio Mendes recording of “Never Gonna Let You Go” and the Whitney Houston versions of “The Greatest Love of All” and “Saving All My Love for You”. Then, there’s the “SA Piano” preset which is straight out of the RD-1000. That tone by itself is one of the juiciest things I’ve had access to in my adult life. I cannot underestimate how cool it is that you duplicated the THX sound bite at 19:39.
@@Shred_The_Weapon yep. As for the THX sound, I can't claim total credit for that… I stumbled on a Zenology patch that did that, but I just tweaked it a bit to more closely match that sound ;-)
Thank you Jim, you speak from my soul. I also hear this criticism of Jupiter X again and again and consider it completely unjustified. It sounds fantastic, versatile and has character and has a fantastic keyboard that I absolutely love. And OS V3.0 was really a big step. I love my JP-X. Thank you for your awesome videos!! ❤❤❤
The patch at 26:15 sounds like a perfect patch for Betty Davis Eyes by Kim Carnes. Btw Jim, great video, as usual, and analysis of one of my fav synths. I'm with you, once they updated to 3.0, it became a new synth on its own. 4 Osc etc., now it was like having two JP-8 synths under the same hood. The fact that Roland includes so many other sounds/features, I think makes people overlook the fact that the JP-X sound engine alone is something worth having, and for a lot less $ in comparison to the other synth companies out there. I've owned everything, vintage to new, by every major player, and the JP-X is one of the best for sound and potential of sound creation.
Thanks for the kind words! And 'Bette Davis Eyes' - I've gotten to be friends with Bill Cuomo who wrote that tune (among several other whopper hits) - what a gem of a human being. Between that and the intro to 'Oh Sherrie' - the guy is a wealth of knowledge and FANTASTIC stories of working in the heyday!
So, thanks for confirming. The Jupiter X IS just a bunch of VSTs in a box. Though there are exceptions, the same is true for most current hardware synths in production today. Both hardware and software synths have their place in music production. We are blessed to have so many options that bring synthesis to those of us without the $$$ or the space available for hardware synths. Use whatever works for you....
Wow. Your ability to turn this thing inside out and put together a fun track is a pleasure to watch, Jim! As a piano player turned synth-enthusiast, it's just so helpful to see. I first starting looking at synths as a way to "fill out" songs and quickly found out that the kind of expression these things offer guys who have been whacking hammers on strings through a keyboard their whole lives is kind of life changing. Thanks for the time you put into this! I always learn something new and appreciate the TH-cam synth community. Cheers!
Part of what is amazing is the fact the models are all of the ABM variety. The ACB models add a little something more in terms of authenticity, but it’s sooo close. Comparing the ACB vs ABM models on my Fantom EX, I sometimes PREFR the ABM!
Yeah, the System 8 just OOOOZES "vintage vibe" - those ACB models are the cream of the crop. What I'd give for a half-n-half ACB/Zencore monster all in one big Jupiter-style box, with the direct pure synth approach of the System 8!
So much to love about this synth, but so much to dislike for me as well. The screen position, awkward menu-diving, the poorly implemented aftertouch, and the synth action being just a bit too heavy for me. I just use Roland Cloud/Galaxias to get my Roland fix. 3rd Wave scratches my itch for sound design. Hard to have space for all these huge synths! Great demo, sounds huuuuuuge!
Yeah, it's definitely far from perfect, but I feel like now that I've really figured out its architecture, I can fly on it. And yeah, the 3rd Wave... one of my favorites of the last decade if not more. And now with the new sampling option, it takes it up another notch!
Well, people would argue (rightly) that even with some aspects under microprocessor control, you still have all the random instabilities that come from VCOs, VCFs, etc. - but yeah, I get your point. At the end of the day, what matters is whether a synth inspires you to make music 😁
Great Video! I love the sounds on the keyboard. Ver 3.0 was very great IMO. Hopefully a 4.0 sometime soon. The ARP/Drum functions are great! However, I did not see a mention of the vocal processor. The Vocal processor is a massive feature IMO. To me, Jup-X is a lot of fun to play. Either recording or live. This can be a stand-alone or with other keyboards live. Love your equipment list! Thanks for that. Roland Cloud is great as well, the App USB dongle is a great way to go through sounds IMO on the Jupiter-X . From a mechanical standpoint, Jupiter X is solid. No Issues moving it around.
Ha, very kind brother, but most of these sounds are accessible to anyone! I did create a handful of them and modified a lot of the others, but the majority started as factory content!
Heey, amazing review and video! Subscribed ✅👏 I have to disagree with you. When you make the comparison with Oberheim do you really think that Jupiter sounds as rich as Oberheim? Not to my ears. obviously the Jupiter X sounds good. but in my opinion it sounds bottomless, I can't express in words what exactly it is but it's far from the Oberheim sound for me. Anyway, thank you very much for this incredible video. Peace 🙏
As I said in the video, they are never going to sound anywhere near identical… they are vastly different. The point was to get them in the same ballpark, which I've done many times with different types of sounds - maybe I'll do another video that shows more of that at some point. The idea was to show that the JPX can indeed do a great job with analog-style patches. Listening on my large PMC mastering monitors, it is anything *but* bottomless… It has a massive, warm, fat low end like any good analog synth. Thank you for the kind words on the video! 😁👊🏻
@@JimDaneker Heey, for sure, the JPX definitely sounds warm, fat, analog. It’s very powerful. I just think the real analog just sounds better for what it was intended for (analog kind of sounds) 🙏🙏
I have the xm, and it sounds awesome. By issue is that I wish they did better with the reference manual and their education/tutorial videos. I mean, this synth is not a couple hundred bucks. They could have easily made the onboard "sequencer" as good as the jdxi. Im not selling this little synth as I got a fantastic deal on it. I just wish the documentation made it easier to understand this lovely instrument. Im probably going to get a system 8 or gaia for that knob per function UI.
Yes, it is definitely a very deep synth and takes a minute to wrap your head around it. There are also some operating system choices I wish they had done differently too. Once you learn it though, it's an absolute monster! Having said all that, the System 8 is an all-time favorite of mine. I wish the Jupiter X used all the ACB models of the System 8, and with the knob-per-function interface!
I can't say the Jupiter X doesn't sound good because it does. There was a time when I really wanted to like it and possibly consider buying one. However, everytime I walk into the music store now, where there's a Oberheim OB-X8 and a whole separate Roland section where there's a Jupiter X, I'm always always going to the OB-X8. Th3 so7nd that comes from it simply blows me away everytime I play it. I wasn't getting the same feeling with the Jupiter X. I will say one thing though. A lot of the Jupiter's patches, including the ones played in this video, are drenched in effects. Perhaps I should go back and play the Jupiter X again WITHOUT the effects to see how it really stacks up to an analog beast like the OB-X8. As you can probably tell by now, I really want the OB-X8. However, if there's something that I have yet to discover in the Jupiter X that can make it sound so convincing analog rhat it could not only rival, but surpass the OB-X8 sonically, then I'm all ears and would be happy to find out what it is. To be honest, the Jupiter X does look a lot better than the OB-X8. However, I have yet to hear it sound better than the OB-X8, especially the OB-X8 "It's an Oberheim" preset patch!!! Also, the Oberheim OB-X8 voice panning is superb too. Not only that, but I also like the sound of the detuned VCOs and VCO drift as well as the filters too. Maybe I should see if the Jupiter X can do something similar. To be fair, the Jupiter X also has very nice sounding filters.
A lot of it comes down to adjusting expectations: one doesn't sound better than the other, IMO: they are very different creatures. But I absolutely love them both for each of them brings to the table! NOTHING else sounds like an OB... it's one of the best analog poly synths ever made. But then the same could be said for the Jupiter 8 - and the X gives you a lot of that, among a whole bunch of other Roland classic engines. I tried to give a handful of clips in this demo without the effects so you can hear some of its "analog" nature, but yes, you can absolutely have it do all of the same sort of random pitch variations and other idiosyncrasies of vintage analog gear. The other thing that makes it tricky to compare is that the factory sounds in the Jupiter X really are not ideal… many of them use the I-arpeggio feature that almost sound like cheesy backing tracks. I would've much preferred if they stuck to straight up synth sounds. Thankfully, Roland Cloud is full of tons of amazing expansions...
I own a jupiter x. It’s been odd to me to see the weird assumptions some people seem to have about this synth. Let me say this. It hasn’t ceased to blow my mind. Whoever put it together was a bloody genius. ✌🏼
I agree. The Jupiter-X is hands down the best and most inspiring synths I have ever played or owned (I cannot count how many). I don't really care about the various legacy synth recreations (I already have the System-8 for that), but the native Jupiter-X engine absolutely blows everything out of the water. There is just no end to its sonic potential. The Zenology Pro software may sound identical, but it completely lacks the tactile interface which make the hardware synth into an actual instrument.
Haha, indeed... I've owned the Fantom too and especially with the EX version, it too is a monster! In fact I enjoy editing even more on the Fantom, ironically ;-)
@@alainthiry3965 correct. And like I've said a million times, every digital synth since the beginning is technically a "VST in a box" - and it doesn't matter one bit. What matters is what you do with it!
Dude honestly I've been unable to play music for quite a few years I sold my gear to raise a family and it has been a rough go without music my first keyboard as a kid was the yamanha PSR 500 and I upgraded to the SY85, I moved to the korg karma and then migrated to Roland synths with a fantomX and V synth I am a synthesis junky and love building massive patches that have velocity layers and linked matrix controls to play and tweak sounds live. I've been looking at the fantom 6 and the Jupiter xm - they are my dream studio - I literally got so excited seeing the Jupiter x played so well. I'm a fan now and will be watching all your videos I can’t wait to get a Jupiter Xm now so I can explore all the possibilities! I'm really excited about iarpeggio for building complex textures like I did on the korg karma. Thanks for the inspiring sounds brother!!
@@Jasonthebaldguy comments like yours, make my day. Thanks so much for simply enjoying it! I can't do videos as often as I would like because I'm so busy building Arcade Orchestra, but we should be starting to put out a lot more content consistently really soon ;-)
Not to be a hater, but why you only compare it to the oberheim for 30 seconds only? Since those seconds could give an insight in whether it can sound analog.
I'll do another one at some point showing it against a vintage Jupiter 8, Oberheim, and Prophet. On decent monitors, that few seconds along with all the other sounds I showcased should be enough for anyone who's familiar with analog synths in general. It absolutely does sound "analog", but more important to me, the question is whether it sounds *good*. 😁
Man I love my Jupiter and like you fell out of love didn’t sell it but kept in a case. Then the JD-800 expansion came out. I owned a JD-990 and regret selling it years ago. I pulled it out the case and loaded the expansion and WOW‼️‼️. I’ve watched your video comparing it with the System 8 I believe. I didn’t subscribe but after today I’m a subscriber. Us older vets recognize a classic. And the Jupiter is just that. I almost got a Prophet X from Sequential. I’m back in love with my Jupiter
WRT the question as to whether it can sound analogue... I have the Roland AE-30 wind synth and it is taking time to figure out how to make patches (okay, "scenes") that come close to the wind synth patches I create on my Behringer Neutron. Apart from the rather peculiar ZEN-Core architecture (multiple single-oscillator synths) it is taking a frustrating amount of time to figure out how to go beyond merely replicating the settings to making tweaks to get closer to the emotional feel of the sounds. Admittedly the Neutron responds beautifully to wind synth control so the bar is set rather high!
Thanks Jim. I always love your practical thoughts and great demonstrations on synths. The Roland software based synths do sound really good, and Roland deserves some credit for what they have done to make Zencore, ABM, and ACB available in so many various packages (hardware keyboards and software on a computer). Choices are good. Like many, I wish they would release some proper analog synths (re-issues or based on past Roland analog tech) like Korg, Moog, and Sequential/Oberheim have, but I don't consider it a requirement to get that Roland sound. I have several vintage Roland synths, but I am just as happy to use my Fantom or even my MC-707 for those sounds as they offer other benefits.
Really? Because even next to an Oberheim, Prophet, and Moog, there's nothing "thin" about this whatsoever. And in that brief comparison with the OB, the OB has more high frequency content, and both show a nearly identical low frequency curve...
Is agree, it might be my bias bc I know it’s digital, but something about the high end sounds brittle and piercing which gives the illusion of thin-ness. Some patches I’m sure are indistinguishable from a Jupiter 8, but to my ears the analog counterpart is just slightly rounder in the high end which gives it a more pleasant tone. Still haven’t heard a digital synth who’s tone I really love.
What you want to hear is the distortion that is inherent with anologue synthesizers, that “warm sound” in a real life situation, it is almost impossible to tell if it is analogue or digital.
And apart from the sound, Juno X (more or less the same engine than Jupiter X) is my Logic bestfriend when using a very light configuration : Juno X using audio over USB, makes the 3 (Logic on my laptop, including many Uhe, GForce, Synapse softsynths, a headphones and the Juno X) the only 3 pieces of hardware i need to have a very strong composition tool, with plenty of direct pots and sliders at fingertips, but a very little to carry
I appreciate your amazing skill and I don’t want to negative in any way-the patches sound great - but I can hear something in the high end that does not sit right with me. The best way to describe it is that it feels cold / fuzzy. It is not a lack or too much highs in any way. I kept hearing that on the Oberheim comparison. And I do love Vsts - GForce, Moog and the new Synapse audio Hz. On the Roland JX-8P - I have a original one and love it - again, I can hear the difference in the high end on the Jupiter-X. I really want to like it, but I can’t bring myself to do it
Thanks for the kind words! I fully expected someone to make these sorts of observations - it happens every time on threads like these. And yet I have to wonder, if it were just an audio demo with no reference to digital modeling, would someone say "man, something just doesn't sound right here - the high end is off somehow." I have extreme doubts that would be the case. I've done a LOT of comparing in the last few years between iconic analog synths and "recreations" of them, and while some are certainly better than others, our biases or preconceptions *always* inform what we hear. Always. Lots of double-blind tests have revealed that over and over again. Fascinating stuff. Hopefully the point comes across that at the end of the day, it's the music that matters, and if a synth inspires you, that's what counts. Thanks for weighing in! ;-)
Obviously it is not vst in a box since audio engine is something Roland worked on for a long time. It is also not an analogue synth, so as much as it can stack up in some cases, it cannot beat analogue in analogue domain. Also, really Roland could ve made a fortune by re-issuing Jupiter 6 and 8 with modern features and analogue engine. I have J6 and would not trade it for the Jx.
That's an all-time tough choice… I wouldn't want to be without either of them. For a straight-up time machine back to the glory days of the 80s, the System 8 is really tough to beat - it's 100% focused on all of those sounds. In fact, I love that thing so much I've seriously pondered getting a second one to have more plug out slots available!
The System 8 is much smaller - that may be a plus or a minus depending on your studio situation and key-bed preference. The System 8 is also the most intuitive synth I’ve ever used as almost every function is on the front panel. But it’s also green. The Jupiter X is so much better looking. Many say ACB of the System 8 is superior to the Zencore of the Jupiter X, but from this (amazing) demo I can’t tell.
@@dirkfierce2525 yep, it's a tough choice between the two. As much as I love the Jupiter X in lots of ways, I'd go to the System 8 first for the absolute best analog modeling - and for the straight-ahead ease of use you mentioned.
@@JimDaneker I'll probably start with the System 8, but after this video I'm very interested in the Jupiter X. It sounds huge and very analog, but super hi-fi. Reminds me of an 80s classic movie remastered in 4k, where you can make out the detail of the film grain. Really cool!
I learned my mistake with the JD XA/Xi, where menu diving became the norm. It doesn't matter how well something sounds, if you have to surf menus, count me out. One of the reasons I sold my MC707 too.
Menu surfing is not required for any of the kind of thing I showed in this video. And even if you do want to dive deeper than the surface, there are all kinds of shortcuts for getting around using the Shift key - it's really quite fast once you learn it. I do agree the screen placement off to the side is just dumb, but I hardly have to look at it now that I know how to quickly navigate.
@@JimDaneker I never watched your video because I find them uninformative. I Joke I joke. I will watch the vid, I was pressed for time. I am sure you make some seriously valid points, the $ of an X is the same as a UDO S6 desktop here so I would go for that instead, even though it has no screen.
It appears to me that it’s the (I’ve spent a bunch on Reverb and eBay acquiring vintage synths, so I know best and I don’t want the bottom to fall out of the vintage market) analogue crowd that’s hating on the new recreations… you can oscilloscope the crap outta the waveforms all you like but at the end of the day if the new stuff sounds good (and this sounds great), then so what! Democratisation for all…..
I've had an Access Virus KB and Ti since they came out, as well as a Waldorf MicroQ (among other synths). Recently installed the "Motorola DSP56300 emulator" I kept seeing videos about, which is the DSP chip used in all of the above synths, on Windows 10 and uploaded the firmware for each synth to it. I was pretty blown away at the sound quality of the emulator vs actual hardware. Literally can't tell them apart except when using obscene polyphony. The waveforms of the output even look identical. Kinda made me sad.
Absolutely stunning playing and a synth that pretty much kills all others that are available new today. Also capable of reproducing the same sounds as vintage synthesizers.
The intro and demos sound epic. I'm actually surprised if the pro's of the Jupiter-X don't, in many ways, outweigh the cons for most people. This and TEO-5 are top of my wishlist, for my needs anyway. Either one is likely more than I'll ever need and desire! Until then, I'm more than happy with Arturia Pigments! Glad to see someone with experience put some perspective on Jupiter-X
Not gonna lie, this sounds good. Over the last 3 years or so "analog" VSTs moved up in quality a lot. The first one that blew me away was Softube's Model 84 (Juno 106 emulation) In 10 years VSTs are going to sound more "analog" than analog 😄
Behind synthesizers there are not only musicians, but also lovers of electronics, from my point of view as an engineer, it is beautiful and fascinating to see schematics as complex as Roland's analog synthesizers, it saddens me to see everything now reduced to a CPU. with advanced technologies. Maybe for a phone or a computer they are great but for a synthesizer whose function is to output analog signals I don't see it appropriate, nor does it matter who says it, the X series will always be a VST in a box, in the few years they can be changed for other boxes with keys and cpu, not like the classic analog ones that are repairable and many modifications and clones can be made, as Beringer does by reviving the classic analog ones that will probably be sold, used and last longer than the current Roland synthesizers.
I get it. I too am an avid lover of electronics, and I fully understand the almost romantic nature of the old analog legends. I've owned many, and still have the Prophet 5, OB, etc. Having said all that, my over-riding priorities will ALWAYS be the end result: SOUND, and whether it inspires me. In that sense, I couldn't care less what's under the hood. And "VST in a box" is not a bad thing at all these days, IMO - there are some jaw-dropping software synths these days ;-) Thanks for your great input!
I could not agree more... A lost era of electronics engineering. Open a CS-80, or Jupiter 8, or OB-X and they are just as beautiful from an engineering and design standpoint as they sound.
@@robinsss manufacturing and shipping flagship-level hardware around the world isn't cheap; it's priced in line with any other top quality synth, if not cheaper.
The people who are mocking the synth dont have one and have the knowledge in the back of their mind this not being analog. I just purchased it. Its a dream synth for life. It blows my Korg Prologue away, and I have owned several Juno from the 80's. It does match that vibe., It has a lot of movement in sound. I think this is their best synthesizer up to date. People hating on it are mostly the people who hate Roland for not making pure VCO analog synths.
I want to love Roland Cloud but the once every 30 day authorization of lifetime keys is a deal breaker for me. Also, while I can also port zenology pro sounds into my MC-707…I was none too happy to have to pay $229 for the privilege especially considering Roland did not include a native patch editor which they always used to do for gear (like the Fantom XR). Bottom line for me is I am not buying hardware that requires buying software that used to come free anymore. Roland is the worst offender in this category.
The Jupiter X does not requirre you to buy software. There is a free editor you can use. You can perfectly use the X without buying additional software.
I absolutely agree that Roland Cloud's authorization issues can be a pain - but that's actually another point in favor of the Jupiter X: there are no authorization issues with the hardware. You can create a bunch of sounds in the software or simply download them as expansion packs, fly them into the keyboard, and from then on, zero issues. The hardware isn't tied to the internet and requires no further steps - it's permanent.
@@ghfjfghjasdfasdf except it's not. You may want to check the facts. How much energy are you going to spend bellyaching on this thread about non-issues? We get it. You don't like this synth. And your reasoning on most points is outright wrong.
@@JimDaneker that’s what brought me to the video….looking for alternatives to MC-707. I just left the comment in hopes that Roland will see it and stop doing this with the newer gear. The Jupiter X escaped this because it is one of the first Zenology capable synths Roland put out, and Roland hadn’t yet locked the software down with DRM. They have since introduced a dongle approach to loading data onto hardware that will be quite terrible if rolled out on all new synths. This seems to be an industry theme as Native Instruments is basically copying Roland’s cloud format. I learned my lesson with software when Adobe bought Cool Edit Pro and won’t go down that road again.
Thanks so much for this eye-opening video. How does it compare with the Juno-X? Would a comparison video work for you? I am attracted to the Juno-X because it is smaller and lighter. Can it perform as well as the Jupiter-X? Do they both use the same firmware? Is the Juno-X up to date with the Jupiter-X at the game-changing V3.0?
The Juno-X is very much equivalent to the Jupiter-X in many ways; they both share a lot of the same vintage models (Juno 106, SH-101, XV-5080, etc.) - but they do have a few that are exclusive to each of them: the Jupiter-X has a new 4-oscillator "expanded" version of the classic Jupiter 8 engine, while the Juno-X has a similar model of that reimagines the Juno. It also has a fantastic Juno 60 model as well. And both can take advantage of all the Zenology content on Roland Cloud. So they definitely have differences, but one's not better than the other… It's just that they focus on slightly different things ;-)
Also an important thing to know is that the Juno-X has the cheaper keybed from the Fantom-06 series and the Jupiter-X has the way better keybed from the Fantom 6. I think Jupiter-X is the better choice, unless you're really focusing on Juno sounds instead of Jupiter sounds.
Since Jupiter X came out I have much better monitoring. This video sounds fantastic, bass like an earthquake. I'm really impressed with this synth now. Lush, massive and, just wonderful.
This sounded damned good. I have the JP8 and 106 expansions in my Fantom 07 and they sound great. I own a real 106 and I’m impressed. The JP8 sounds great though I can’t compare it to a real Jupiter.
I find it that it depends on the sound when comparing to a Jupiter 8. For the kind of stuff I gravitate to (like many of the sounds I show in this video) it's essentially interchangeable with a JP8. Alex Ball did a fantastic video directly comparing the two and they are essentially identical.
I'm an audio engineer who has been interested in synths and synthesis since the 80's. I started making recordings with analog tape and analog consoles. I've used digital reel to reel decks, dedicated hard-disk recorders and DAW's, of course. Software CAN sound as good or better than hardware. BUT, if I'm working on a physical console, and it doesn't have to be an analog one, either, I will get a DIFFERENT result than thru using software; oftentimes that result will also be better. I'm not a hater; I use DAW'S daily and don't long for any hardware in my process(es). For me, there's just "something" about getting my hands on something that changes the way that I work. Software has come a LONG way! There was a time when I wouldn't use a plug-in EQ or compressor; I would even entertain it! Nowadays, I don't think about it at all. I'm always looking for a better, more "hands on" approach to manipulating software.... PS: This Jupiter X sounds spectacular to my ears! Thank-you for making this video.
Thanks for the kind words and the COMMON SENSE! ;-) And same here - for me, I love hardware purely for the tactile experience and the results that tends to inspire ;-)
Just bought a JupiterX. Not alot og videos on How to build Sounds from initialized tones on each model. Please make a video building juno106 patches from scratch ( not from an existing patch or preset).
@@JimDaneker because I want play Them as instruments in their own right and I currently find it hard to reproduce the original juno sounds from scratch. I end up with a different result… maybe and probably because of my lack of knowledge. So I’m curious to know if you guys also end up with a different result? Also to learn about how these models generate their sounds like the Jupiter-x was advertised to be able to do…. Otherwise it is a VST in a box… I bought it to design my own sounds from scratch mainly - best way to learn an instrument in my opinion. the factory sounds are nice to have also and not bad.
@@findmads as I said in the video, it absolutely *is* a "VST in a box" - but that is not a bad thing at all. Every digital synth ever made is a VST in a box, and I couldn't care less: what I care about is how they sound, and whether they inspire me. The JPX is an absolute monster synth and is endlessly inspiring. And yes, I can get it to sound completely indistinguishable from the original analog synths it models. I understand what you are saying about wanting to learn programming, so in that sense, starting from scratch is a valuable exercise. From my perspective as a working pro, I just don't have the time, so when I'm looking for a particular sound, I always start with something that's as close as possible and tweak it from there. Keep at it - it's a phenomenal instrument and full of endless potential!
@@JimDaneker thank you for taking the time to answer. I can relate to that, and they are good sounding factory patches, but they also have a lot of stuff added to the tones that can’t be seen from the surface. knowing sound design and getting to know your instrument deeply has always been my way to go, but that is actually easier said than done because of the lack of information about how to do navigate each model - there is not a lot of help from the manual. I use the editor but still. Eventually I will get there, but would have been nice to have some more resources on how to go about it. It is a good sounding synth and the updates have made it better.
@@BELLRECORDINGSTUDIO thanks for the kind words. I need to do another one that's actually a legitimate comparison with some of my other analog synths - most people misunderstood this one 😁
I bought my JPX when it was first released. I absolutely love it. I can use it for 80's cover band sounds or for digital sounds. It's a synth I will never sell. The cons: It's way too heavy. It needs the organs that are in the new Fantom series..Upper left screen is too small. I also believe it's time for a Roland system 16 or 1000 with lots of polyphony and 61 keys.
Absolutely agreed on the System 16 - LOTS of people asking for that! I don't mind the weight though - it makes it feel like a real, substantial classic Roland synth ;-)
Timely comment: currently-RIGHT NOW-Amazon and B&H have it for 2348, about 500 less than others. Is it worth it? I ordered mine just now from Amazon because of the free returns. Now is it worth it? I got the System 8 a while back and it comes with three plugins from Roland Cloud, what are called plug outs. Sheesh eyeroll. The Jupiter X comes with 2 of the same plugins and a different synth as detailed in the video. Now comes more of the eyeroll. Roland has been zen coring the F out of their old hardware, and it appears the X has a different “modeling” method than the System 8. Should you be concerned? Nope unless you’re currently sporting a pocket protector and taped glasses. What is concerning is when Roland claims in typical weasel speak that this model “reproduces “ X synth and it “includes” X synth/drum sounds. When I get my Jupiter X I’ll check how far the marketing lingo “models” reality. See what I did there Roland? But us the X worth it? Yes, even for a System 8 owner. The keybed is better quality, has another octave and THANKS FOR NOTHING ROLAND, has friggin’ aftertouch. Even the cheapest impulse buy Hydrasynth has Polyphonic Aftertouch for gawds sake. Plus I want to justify anothe G.A.S. purchase.
as far as im concerned vst's are getting just as good sound quality as hardware nowadays . so if it sounds great to which it does then who cares. is it as convenient as a vst in a daw ? heck no but people buy hardware to play and enjoy. personally im over my GAS but some prefer to collect whenever they can. great vid and beautiful synth.
19:41 THX Theme 😮😮😮 You're a genius, thank you for demonstrating the depths of this thing, it's literally all of Roland's synth greatness in one package
Nice to see you, Jim! Lived in Nashville for 28 years, surprising we never crossed paths but glad to find you here. I agree on all your comments around VSTs and the quality of this synth. I have the Juno X, and the Fantom 8 EX. It's an explosive combo. For those of us who truly used the OG keyboards back then, I think most of the players from that time agree that the obsessive addiction to analog is overblown. For those that know, they know. Analog can be problematic, especially live. Tuning was/is always an issue with analog oscillators unless you add the digital circuits to correct them, at which point the analog vs. digital debates kind of get "blurred" to me, as with the Juno 106. I remember having to let my boards warm up for at least 15-20 minutes before tuning for a show, especially if they had been in the cold truck in the winter. They sound really fat in the studio too, but sometimes can get lost in the mix live - I've found the digital versions cut through the live mix much, much better, and have felt that for years. Thanks for posting this Jim, look forward to more content!
Everyone who is stuck with the thought that digital recreations can't sound as good as the originals are really stuck in the 80's and really missing out on the benefits. I celebrate these digital versions from Roland every single day.
I really love my Xm. I may get the full size X or the Juno X soon. There are so many positives to this synth. All that you mentioned plus the JD & vocal designer expansions, Bluetooth capabilities, audio interface features, & XLR outputs. The Roland Cloud resource and integration installs are so worth the investment and expands the Jupiter Xm.
It took some time for me to understand the “scenes” approach and the step sequencer. Probably one of the best boards Roland has put out in a while. Best keyboard investment I’ve made since my Fantom X8 & X6 years ago.
I have an XM and recently picked up a Juno X when they were on sale. No regret. The Juno X is a bit smaller than the Jupiter X, which is great for my tight studio space l.
I couldn't agree more!
WHAT AN INTRO!!! ...SHOCKED!!! Thank you! Must have Synth!⬆⬆⬆⬆⬆⬆⬆
@@wernerboehnke5562 well thank you! 😁👊🏻
I just brought one! I'd like to say about why dies it needs a piano sound? Well very simply if you are mainly analogue like me, aka MK70 Moog source, JD08 JX08! Sold 2 x Casio CTX 5000, and suddenly realised l have no synrhs that can do piano or acoustic anything, lol. Though the electric piano on a deep mind 12 is amazing! So if anyone wonders why the Jupiter X needs a piano sound, RD piano's! Yes yes yes, lol. 😂
who gives a crap, it sounds great end of story and it has much more going for it than an analogue poly - as for the moniker of vst in a box, well in this day and age i just don't see it as an insult anymore
Because you're capable of rational thought and putting old preconceived biases aside 😁👍🏻
I don't think VST in a box is in itself an insult, it's the question of Roland charging silly money for a VST in a box. Apart from the actual computer running zenology software and a dac, are there any other specialised/bespoke circuitry which is creating and shaping the sound? If not thrn can you create the same sound of this synth with purely a laptop/PC running the zenology software as a plugin?
@@juxty3102 it's a totally fair price for a fully featured flagship synth with top notch build quality, IMO. Manufacturing isn't cheap, let alone in this economy.
The Jupiter X cannot do Osc Sync and CrossMod at the same time. This means there a whole swath of sounds that Jupiter and JX-8P can do that the X just can’t touch. The cross modulation in general is weak and has nowhere near the sonic potential of a Jupiter 8, in fact the System 8 gets it right and the Jupiter X misses the mark. Until the cram ACB in there, it’s a simulation and not an emulation.
If they add ACB via a firmware update then it would be 4 voice with no effects though, due to the weedy hardware (single BMC chip)
Yes indeed, can't argue with those points - and one reason I still turn to my System 8 when I want the full Jupiter experience, which is kind of ironic. Oh how I wish they'd release an expanded System 8 in a Jupiter body!
I'll take it.@@Wagoo
Roland should at the very least return the money you spent on the Jp x lol great video.
@@loudstrongmusicllc191 ha - thanks! And no worries, they've been very kind to me over the years. 😁
If time travel were possible, I would like to bring one of these jewels to Mozart or Bach and tell them: "Please, try it!". Who knows what would come out...
@@ironmaskdj man, can you imagine!!?
@@JimDaneker I Just can't Imagine how they become nuts about that and then... Boom! A new kind of music will spread all over the World in a couple of days
Would you consider this model to be the best keyboard/ controller for the ultimate cloud service?🤔🎶🎹🎶
Play On
It's certainly one of them! The Fantom and Juno-X are the other two.
I love my Jupiter X.
The Oberheim does sound better in this single sound comparison you created, but each bring their own personality to the table. Roland Jupiter X suffered the same as the System 8 upon release. Each were misunderstood and those who didn't take the time to learn them will regret it when they finally decide to and both are discontinued.
I need to do a much more in-depth A/B between the JPX and the Oberheim & Prophet 5. My "logic" was lost in this video because most missed the point that the OB was in 8 voice unison mode - that's why it sounds so massive - while the JPX was just in single voice mode. Of course they're never going to sound the same, especially like that; I should have shown a truly 1:1 comparison. ;-)
I hate the whole "vst in a box" framing. "WhY WoUld I sPenD mY mOnEy oN tHaT?" they say, implying that it's irrational to buy hardware if you can make the same sounds in software.
They don't realise what's at the end of that road = All hardware synth purchases are irrational. If your goal is cost efficient music production, you should be working 100% in the box. No hardware synth on earth makes a sound that can't be emulated in software to a degree that is good enough to make a hit record.
These people imply that they buy hardware for 'sounds you can't make with software', but they're lying to themselves. They, like us, buy hardware because of how it makes you feel / inspires you when you work with it. And that inspiration comes every bit as much if you're playing a "vst in a box" or a vintage analog.
PREACH!!! And then there's the elephant in the room: even if you just use a generic controller and a computer to house all your VSTs, you are still using "VSTs in a box" and a decent computer full of good software isn't cheap.
It's a dumb argument all the way around, and you couldn't be more right about the inspiration factor when it comes to hardware synths and the reasons we use them. 😁👊🏻
@@JimDaneker Also in the case of the Jupiter X specifically, they forget that it's an awfully nice box, with an audio and a midi interface in it... and controls that are higher resolution than most if not all 'midi controllers' on the market... and it's a box that boots up instantly and never had any latency or sync issues or dropouts if you have a browser window open at the same time. So even _as_ , a box to run a vst... I still see the value in it.
@@MakeMagic Right again, on all points ;-)
Tbh, I'd ignore the naysayers. So many of these people are neither musicians nor songwriters and the differences between contemporary VA synthesizers and "Real Analog" only becomes more negligible. These people are cork sniffers and when you release your next video showing damn near identical tones from these two machines, they'll still find magical differences.
You could literally just copy the Jupiter X tone and say it's a classic analog synth to fool them and they will still find "differences".
You can bet on it.
Ah, a voice of reason in the wilderness 😁
...you couldn't have said any of that better if you tried. 👊🏻
@@JimDaneker Glad I could be a voice of reason lol.
I think the Synth community is pretty bad with this.
If I listened to online commentary, I would've never gotten into Roland or hardware synths at all without getting a vintage synth.
I went and purchased a SH-201, SH-01 Gaia, JDXA and a Roland D-10.
I love all of my synths but per the internet none of these machines are "worth it" and worse than a Juno 6 (not even a Juno 60 or Juno 106).
But in practice, the features they offer, the tonal possibilities that come from those features on top of the price easily puts all of these machines over many "vintage" pieces of hardware.
Daniel Fisher and the patches he programmed on the Gaia really opened my eyes and pushed me away from lusting Vintage gear.
Plus, I think many of these people aren't interested in learning to program their synths and instead judge the hardware based on their presets not the actual capabilities of the machine.
Love this comment
People today are so untalented it’s nauseating if you know how it used to be - they do have an ability to criticize every little thing they come across so at least they’ve got that going for them
Amazing demo! Jupiter X is a beauty. I bought mine 4 years ago and it is the most versatile synth I have, and I have a small collection of analog and digital synths (and had/tried more since I started making music in the late 80s as a teenager).
I think the problem with people hating the Jupiter X (and Roland) is the digital synthesis, like if digital were something bad or impure lol
Is true that the 1st versions of the firmware was a bit painful to understand, but 3.0 makes the X a completely different beast. The new Jupiter X model sounds huge and having the option to play 5 synths at the same time (4 synths and a drum part) gives you a lot and it sounds and feels like a classic Roland synth. I tried replicating sounds from my OB-6 and the Polysix, Prophet 5 and so many others, and you can get pretty close, so it can give more than just Roland sounds.
Thanks for the video!
That intro was absolutely stunning!
the THX part was rad
Aw man thanks so much! Lots of little 80s nods in there 😁
Ain't no box. Thats helluva lotta controls. Proper
The problem with the Jupiter-X, is that it’s overly complicated for the controls given and 95% of it is behind the postage stamp display. If they had just made a 1:1 replica of the Jupiter 8 using the ACB plugout, that would have been great.
I definitely have my complaints with it too - it can be a real head-scratcher at first. But once I really grasped the architecture (the Zenology plugin was a HUGE help, ironically), that made sense of it. But yeah, what I would give for a doubled System 8 in the Jupiter-X body!
"VST in a box" is irrelevant - My problem with the Jupiter-X is that it's not designed for their Zen Core engine. Instead it's designed with a layout to pander to the Jupiter-8 ABM template (a subset restriction of Zen Core).. but then they go and use their _second best_ Jupiter-8 engine in there. This thing has the same horsepower inside as the miniscule MC-101 (single BMC).. it just seems crazy to me that you'd go to the trouble of making a huge case that looks like a Jupiter-8.. but then not use your best Jupiter-8 engine (ACB)
So this is a Zen Core synth.. but stray off the beaten path from the Jupiter-8 controls and you'll quickly find yourself having fun menu diving on a tiny screen. The Juno-X has the exact same issue.
Zen Core itself is not a bad engine, it's a very nice sounding oldskool style virtual analogue (with some extras) affair. Roland's idea was to try lots of polyphony and layering rather than a heavy and accurate simulation. The problem is they already released ACB in the boutiques/System-1 and System-8.. it's much more CPU intensive but also more accurate. You can't put the genie back in the bottle, Roland
They're using quad core ARM chips in all their products (from about 2016 still?).. and I think the real reason they decided to use a lighter VA engine for a while.. was to extend the life of these chips, and respond to people moaning about the ACB boutiques only having 4 voices (which is only as Roland put a single chip in them.. System-8 has three)
It's really time they upgraded to a new 8 core or 16 core chip
If this was a big synth with all its controls _designed for_ Zen Core.. then it'd be an excellent machine. But it's neither one thing nor the other. The MC-707 has a better (higher res) screen on it for Zen Core.. let alone the Fantom
An ABM template is a set of restrictions, macros and scaling parameters on the full Zen Core engine. The JX-8P template is a travesty and all JX-08 boutiques should be thrown on a pyre for having a picture of the JX-8P on the box.. not that it in of itself sounds bad.. but because it's pitched as a JX-8P and they are just nothing alike
The Jupiter-X should have had 3xBMC inside like the System-8. Ran ACB.. maybe even pair it with analogue filters for something special if you're going to have a big Jupiter-8 style case (although the ACB ones sound fine). Do something similar for the Juno-X running their 106/60 ACB plugouts
Then there should have been a big Zen Core synth.. crammed with all the controls you need to directly operate Zen Core with minimal menu diving. ABM templates should have been an end user community feature, so users could have fun sculpting Zen Core to sound _somewhat_ like a variety of different synths. That would have added a nice fun factor into patch design. There is no way on Earth that ABM can replace a well crafted ACB simulation
Maybe none of it matters if you forget about the details.. and like hearing the sound of Zen Core everywhere. At least with Gaia 2 (which I don't like the sound of for now) or SH-4D they are trying to code fork the Zen Core engine a bit to make them a bit more unique. But to me the Jupiter-X/Juno-X was just an extremely disappointing set of choices from Roland.. and I can't get on with those things
I have an MC-707 for Zen Core and love the System-8 though (which you could argue is also a "VST in a box") despite the fact it doesn't run on electricity, but Predator blood.. anyway roll on the Jupiter-6 ACB plugout! :)
Good explanation. Back when I was still confused about what Jupiter X was vs. a Fantom (and the Juno X hadn't come out yet), I completely didn't get all this. Now that I do, I am glad I bought a Fantom and not a Jupiter X (personal choice). Since Zencore is more like a VST (meaning deep feature set like a VST) the Fantom is the better hardware UI to take advantage of it all. I think Roland does a disservice to the users by not making this more clear (what Zencore is vs. ACB vs. ABM, and the hardware synths vs. the actual VSTs). That generates a lot of unnecessary backlash.
Zen is only good on powerful systems with a lot of BMC chips, it sounds good on Phantom (coz it was designed for Phantom in mind i believe) but on less powerful systems it's kinda bland... Some people believe that Zen plugin gon give them the same sound...
@@djkanyon Zen Core was actually designed for the AX-Edge keytar originally. It just found uses elsewhere as a fairly lightweight engine. More chips for Zen Core means you could have more polyphony or for layering etc.. but in general it's ACB that is too heavy (it's simulating the original analogue circuits to be very accurate to the original synth) to run on the weaker hardware synths with much in the way of polyphony. Jupiter-X running ACB would manage 4 voices like a boutique
The plugin should sound the same - but in the case of the Fantom, it has an analogue filter onboard too
@@djkanyon Zencore sound quality isn't related to number of chips - that only affects how many models you can run. The patches that you can run in common on both sound identical on my Fantom.
@Wagoo you make a lot of great points, and I share many of your complaints. Several of those are the reasons I gave up on this synth initially. It does have some really vexing aspects for sure, and I'm hopeful Roland has learned from a lot of the pushback they've gotten on it. The irony is that the Jupiter X was the answer to the pushback they got on the System 8 - when I think what people really wanted was an expanded System 8 in a Jupiter body! Here's hoping 😁👍🏻
Jupiter X does exactly what i needed to do for 80's funk! And i was blessed to get it used way under what they cost today, no complaints. Ignore any hate about it. Get one, you will love it.
All I can say is thank you to Dave Smith for the Prophet 5/10 reissue, Tom Oberheim for the OB-X8 (and TEO-5), and Arturia for the Polybrute. They've delivered what we've been asking for years and not followed in Roland's footsteps.
Definitely thankful for all of those! 😁👍🏻
It’s all good, any new gear is a good thing. Wish I could buy it all lol
NICE demo! Love my Jupiter X. Have not used my System 8 since getting it. Picked up an Xm which fits in very nicely in my little DAWless setup. So it is a VST in a box. A box with lots of controls and a great keyboard. People gonna hate. That makes me love it even more.
I am actually was planning to get both Jupiter X and Hydrasynth deluxe
Call it whatever u want. It sounds dam good to me and thousands of people, and I am glad I bought the Jupiter XM.
@@DavidChatterton-j6b BINGO! 😁👊🏻
Can the Jupiter 8 sound like the Jupiter X. Answer: No, Not even close. Can the Jupiter X sound like the Jupiter 8, Yes, close to very close.
Not really ..How is that possible when the X has no OSC sync and cross mod capabilities ?? Still… the X sounds pretty good to my ears.. and I’m comparing to my analog classics.
@@electrowayne2918 doesn’t the X have an 8 model with sync and cross mod ?!!
@@synthshoot1026 Not to my knowledge. when did this happen?
@@electrowayne2918 Jupiter-8 model in Jupiter-X is based on zen core which has both sync and cross mod straight up the UI. Search for “Zen core Jupiter-8”
There is a dedicated button for XMOD on the Jupiter-X.
Sounds flat compared to my jx-3p. It's like the sound just hits a wall and can't go anymore. That Oberheim is twice as fat
Says everyone until they take a proper blind test. I've seen it happen time and time again, and I've owned a lot of vintage synths.
@@JimDaneker In that particular test, they are very different. I don't think many people would have any trouble picking out that they don't sound the same. Especially those that play synths anyway. Their a bit similar, but really not even close.
@@classicarcadeamusementpark4242 you mean the little Oberheim "comparison" in the video? Of course they're different… I talked about that. The point was to simply demonstrate analog-style characteristics: slight pitch variations, bottom end warmth, etc. - and in that regard, they are totally in the same ballpark. In fact, on my big PMC mastering monitors, the Roland is actually quite a bit beefier.
I own a Jupiter-X. I programmed sounds from favorite factory patches also. Rather than pay $5000-25000 for an old analog, this keyboard is even better with the new technology it offers.i really love the effects and its actually easy to program once you spend time understanding the interface. I love the sound quality. I could listen to this video all night. The sounds are strong and full. Well worth the money I spent. Just wish bands used it more. Its really all you need. I do love the keybed, not chinsy and flimsy. The keys are a joy to play on. Definitely helps people play better.
Great comments! 😁👊🏻
Most importantly people need to spend more time becoming better players than worrying about what keyboard sounds best. Including me.
I have a Roland Fantom 8 ex, Jupiter xm, and RD2000, I have had so many keyboards over the years, they’re all good in there own way, what’s cool about the new Roland gear, loads of sounds, great work flow and easy to use, yes maybe some people find issues etc and negatives. You have to look with better eyes than that.
for sure !
Technically, aren’t digital synths of today basically a vst in a box? Not sure why that’s supposed to be a bad thing. It’s software and hardware. So?
Exactly. Heck, the DX7 was literally a "VST in a box" back in 1983, and it defined a decade of pop music. 😁
@@JimDaneker Seriously! I don’t get it. It’s just a different way of producing sound. And there will be more in the future.
Btw, loved your video.
@@MosEisleySpacePort1138 thanks for the kind words - glad you enjoyed it!
PS, I own several of the boutiques, and I can say for a fact, having owned the originals, that they sound just as good...Roland's ACB, ABM, and Zencore emulation technology are top notch.
Yep!
Phenomenal video, as always!
I am not 100% sold on it sounding analog. Even in your comparison between the OB-X8 it has a little too much of that fizzy digital character and more of an Alpha Juno character to the PWM (which I know is analog but something about the PWM doesn't hit for me.) Granted your demo song sounds SPECTACULAR but I'm pretty sure you could make even Behringer's new Vintage plugin sound good.
Does it sound great? Absolutely. I played with a friend's once and was immediately impressed with the build quality. Definitely something you could take on tour. For the price? Well it can certainly do more than a Polybrute-6 or Prophet Rev2 in terms of sound design. But in terms of getting you that analog sound which the casing and marketing clearly imply, I think the Rev2, Polybrute-6 or even something like a Novation Summit will get you there for less money.
What do you think? And once again, just stellar playing / video production / sounds! 👏
Thanks as always, my brother! Admittedly, I didn't flesh out the "comparison" portion of this one (if you can even call it that!) - and looking back, I picked the wrong sound on the OB. The point I was trying to make wasn't that they sound alike (which I clearly said in the preface, but that went over a lot of peoples' heads) - but more to demonstrate an overall analog-type character: random pitch instability, overall low end warmth/tone, etc. So, that's on me, and I'll definitely do a follow up at some point that does a much better job on that.
As for its overall sonic signature, I've heard it next to the originals more than once, and once people close their eyes and just listen rather than assume based on visuals, things get a lot murkier. I do think the System 8 (ACB) is Roland's pinnacle modeling tech for absolute accuracy, but the JPX completely stands up in any real world context. Alex Ball did a video that is a much better comparison with the originals... I'll do one as soon as I can. Got a buddy willing to loan me his Jupiter 8... stand by!
Appreciate you my friend!
I am with you! I love my Jupiter X. It continues to amaze me after a year. My suggestion to anyone is start with the first preset and wiggle all the knobs and slides for at least two weeks. You will be amazed.
For every knob-per-function Roland synth out there. PWM was enabled by a front panel button. In the Jupiter and even Juno X, it’s a menu dive. That is just infuriating.
Thank you for blessing our ears with that intro jam!
Thanks for blessing me by listening to it! 😁👊🏻
The thing about VST in the box... i mean what box? Made by Roland and with a lot of knobs and faders? Why not? I mean if one want to have Zenology VST sound, there's got to be a computer for that purpose and it's not cheap. My old Core i5 wasn't even able to run it, so i bought an i7 and it kinda was 7 hundreds...
Still think 2 grands is too much (coz you can buy new laptop, midi keys and Zen VST for way less) but hey look at new midi keyboards in the same price range...
Umm, shocker. Most all new synths are vst/daw in a box. Think of it as a single package. Laptop, screen, audio interface, and massive midi controller all in one. Personally, lean towards Fantom 6 plus EX. You get far more flexibility and a full workstation.
Yep. And the Fantom is killer!
to my ears half the patches on the x sound digital and weak/ thin/ metallic. Half sound great. But for $1500, the new oberheim, literally EVERY PATCH is dripping with electricity and vibe. Very clean demos though,, thank you
Man, there are a ton of patches on an OB that sound extremely thin and anemic - it's all about context. The new TEO is a great entry point into the Oberheim world though - so glad they opened up that side of the market!
As for the Jupiter-X, anything that people would describe as digital/weak/thin would sound exactly the same on their analog counterparts… I've had them all.
To me there's absolutely nothing wrong with having virtual analog in a hardware box. The Nord Lead was a revolutionary instrument back in the day, and things like the ASM Hydrasynth build on that with further innovations (I own the latter and I think it has some of the most gorgeous filter emulations I've ever heard). But here's the problem: the latter two as I say were innovations from new ventures and brought something brand new to the synth world. In contrast, by sticking a lot of software in a box at a price level where all-analog instruments are readily available, and slapping the Jupiter name on it, suggests Roland are leaning on their heritage to drive sales. What Gibson have become to the guitar world, so Roland are now in the world of synths. Once you realise there are better, cheaper options (or that you can step up to analog at almost the same price point) then all you're left with is that name on the back panel.
I agree with some of that, but it's not about other options for me… It's about what each synth brings to my studio, and the JPX along with the System 8 cover pretty much the entire history of Roland in two great keyboards. The JPX is far from perfect of course (I wish it were more like an expanded System 8), but it's quite the workhorse all by itself.
I agree. I am really surprised at how many players do not value “the box” anymore. “The box” is the most important part to me. I absolutely hate that most gear has max 8 knobs on it nowadays, and companies seem to think the software is the most important part.
@@mjrisinsd6836 YES - great point! "The box" is a huge point for many!
I think the problem is that Roland has announced so much synths in the past which shall sound like the originals but the don‘t e.g. Jupiter 80. Juno-X and Jupiter-X sound like the originals and the poeple don‘t believe it. So I totally agree with you that the Jupiter-X is really underrated although Roland finally keeping the promise that a successor product sounds like a previous original. I know what I am talking about, because I have both.
Awesome breakdown. The Jupiter X is a stunning synth. A true beast and you make it shine here. I use mine all the time...... there is a sound to it you have to experience in person to really "get it".
The shimmer reverb of the fantom in the X
It really is a fantastic sounding synth. It may be a "VST in a box" in some respects, but there's so much more to it than that. Not only does it sound amazing, but it FEELS great, too. That's why people still use hardware synths. It's incredibly versatile. If you're a Roland junkie like me, the fact that it shares the ZenCore engine with several other synths, along with Zenology, is a huge plus. I can design a sound on the Jupiter-X, then easily port it to my Aerophone AE-30, Fantom-06, AX-Edge, or Jupiter-Xm. The Roland Cloud Connect integration is amazing, too, and by far the easiest way to get sounds into the Jupiter. It has some cons for me; the learning curve is a bit steep (lots of menu diving sometimes). But that's partly just because Zencore is so powerful. It really is a next-gen synth.
Thank you - I couldn't agree more!
Haters gonna hate. Truth is, I don't really care too much what's under the hood, it's the best sounding synth I have ever owned, and I've been through a couple, starting with my SH2 and Juno 60 in the '80's, through the DX7 madness, and then falling in love with the JD800 in the '90's, which I still own and adore. It took about 31 years for me to find a synth that I thought could compete with my JD.
It's a matter of opinion, I guess, but as a working studio and live musician, I think it's a most excellent synthesizer.
The Jupiter X is a BEAST. The people who talk bad about this synth simply never owned one or are just frustrated they can’t afford one lol This thing can single handily create an entire album on its own. It sounds GREAT isn’t that what it all comes down to at the end? 😂 LOVE THE VIDEO! You’re the goat bro💯
Thank you for the kind words, my friend 👊🏻
Exactly
I think most synth player border on snobby. But as a gtr player who augmentation and songs w synths. .. especially the juno. I think its a massive architecture driven composition tool. With top drawer sound. I just wish it had realtime recording for the sequencer. Like the juno x. If you can help me on this... a editor? Or another synth midi in while using the sequencer.... ? GREAT VID!!!!
Yeah, the free Jupiter-X Editor is kinda sloppy, but it works!
What a seller, beginning the video by A/B-ing the Jupiter X with the OB-Xa. Not that I’ll get one, but the OB-Xa is the only better comparison I could imagine bouncing the X off of than a JP8.
The inclusion of digital synth & piano emulations is probably for the same reason that Korg included DW-8000 waveforms on the MS-2000, Radias and microKorg models. There’s no escaping the fact that it’s in a digital mainframe, so why not include tones from digital instruments? Makes some sense.
Yep, it certainly has tons of value and amazing capabilities for sound design with all those ROM waves!
Yeah, Jim, that’s what I like about my own digital Roland model, the VR-09, despite it being much more “slender” than this. It’s about accessing those ROM sounds and having them at your disposal just to play. The only time I’ve even attempted writing and saving one of my own patches on it (so far) was when I attempted to use the Dyna-My-Rhodes tone to emulate the piano sound performed by Robbie Buchanan on so many ballads during the 80s like the Laura Brannigan version of “How Am I Supposed to Live Without You”, the Sergio Mendes recording of “Never Gonna Let You Go” and the Whitney Houston versions of “The Greatest Love of All” and “Saving All My Love for You”. Then, there’s the “SA Piano” preset which is straight out of the RD-1000. That tone by itself is one of the juiciest things I’ve had access to in my adult life.
I cannot underestimate how cool it is that you duplicated the THX sound bite at 19:39.
@@Shred_The_Weapon yep. As for the THX sound, I can't claim total credit for that… I stumbled on a Zenology patch that did that, but I just tweaked it a bit to more closely match that sound ;-)
Thank you Jim, you speak from my soul. I also hear this criticism of Jupiter X again and again and consider it completely unjustified. It sounds fantastic, versatile and has character and has a fantastic keyboard that I absolutely love. And OS V3.0 was really a big step. I love my JP-X. Thank you for your awesome videos!! ❤❤❤
Thanks so much for the kind words & encouragement! Glad you enjoyed it ;-)
All digital synth are "VST" in a box,because all emulations.
The only difference is that OS and processors/DSPs are custom for each manufacturer.
The patch at 26:15 sounds like a perfect patch for Betty Davis Eyes by Kim Carnes. Btw Jim, great video, as usual, and analysis of one of my fav synths. I'm with you, once they updated to 3.0, it became a new synth on its own. 4 Osc etc., now it was like having two JP-8 synths under the same hood. The fact that Roland includes so many other sounds/features, I think makes people overlook the fact that the JP-X sound engine alone is something worth having, and for a lot less $ in comparison to the other synth companies out there. I've owned everything, vintage to new, by every major player, and the JP-X is one of the best for sound and potential of sound creation.
Thanks for the kind words! And 'Bette Davis Eyes' - I've gotten to be friends with Bill Cuomo who wrote that tune (among several other whopper hits) - what a gem of a human being. Between that and the intro to 'Oh Sherrie' - the guy is a wealth of knowledge and FANTASTIC stories of working in the heyday!
So, thanks for confirming. The Jupiter X IS just a bunch of VSTs in a box. Though there are exceptions, the same is true for most current hardware synths in production today. Both hardware and software synths have their place in music production. We are blessed to have so many options that bring synthesis to those of us without the $$$ or the space available for hardware synths. Use whatever works for you....
Wow. Your ability to turn this thing inside out and put together a fun track is a pleasure to watch, Jim! As a piano player turned synth-enthusiast, it's just so helpful to see. I first starting looking at synths as a way to "fill out" songs and quickly found out that the kind of expression these things offer guys who have been whacking hammers on strings through a keyboard their whole lives is kind of life changing. Thanks for the time you put into this! I always learn something new and appreciate the TH-cam synth community. Cheers!
Wow, thanks for such a kind comment! Much appreciated!
Part of what is amazing is the fact the models are all of the ABM variety. The ACB models add a little something more in terms of authenticity, but it’s sooo close.
Comparing the ACB vs ABM models on my Fantom EX, I sometimes PREFR the ABM!
Yeah, the System 8 just OOOOZES "vintage vibe" - those ACB models are the cream of the crop. What I'd give for a half-n-half ACB/Zencore monster all in one big Jupiter-style box, with the direct pure synth approach of the System 8!
So much to love about this synth, but so much to dislike for me as well. The screen position, awkward menu-diving, the poorly implemented aftertouch, and the synth action being just a bit too heavy for me. I just use Roland Cloud/Galaxias to get my Roland fix. 3rd Wave scratches my itch for sound design. Hard to have space for all these huge synths! Great demo, sounds huuuuuuge!
Yeah, it's definitely far from perfect, but I feel like now that I've really figured out its architecture, I can fly on it.
And yeah, the 3rd Wave... one of my favorites of the last decade if not more. And now with the new sampling option, it takes it up another notch!
I mean, analog synths have microcontrollers, even those vintage units were in theory, just software in a box.
Well, people would argue (rightly) that even with some aspects under microprocessor control, you still have all the random instabilities that come from VCOs, VCFs, etc. - but yeah, I get your point. At the end of the day, what matters is whether a synth inspires you to make music 😁
Great Video! I love the sounds on the keyboard. Ver 3.0 was very great IMO. Hopefully a 4.0 sometime soon. The ARP/Drum functions are great! However, I did not see a mention of the vocal processor. The Vocal processor is a massive feature IMO. To me, Jup-X is a lot of fun to play. Either recording or live. This can be a stand-alone or with other keyboards live. Love your equipment list! Thanks for that. Roland Cloud is great as well, the App USB dongle is a great way to go through sounds IMO on the Jupiter-X . From a mechanical standpoint, Jupiter X is solid. No Issues moving it around.
Yes!! The Vocal Designer Expansion has the best vocoders I've ever heard! Thanks for the kind words 😁
Of course it can...if you're as talented as Jim.
Ha, very kind brother, but most of these sounds are accessible to anyone! I did create a handful of them and modified a lot of the others, but the majority started as factory content!
Heey, amazing review and video! Subscribed ✅👏
I have to disagree with you. When you make the comparison with Oberheim do you really think that Jupiter sounds as rich as Oberheim? Not to my ears.
obviously the Jupiter X sounds good. but in my opinion it sounds bottomless, I can't express in words what exactly it is but it's far from the Oberheim sound for me.
Anyway, thank you very much for this incredible video. Peace 🙏
As I said in the video, they are never going to sound anywhere near identical… they are vastly different. The point was to get them in the same ballpark, which I've done many times with different types of sounds - maybe I'll do another video that shows more of that at some point. The idea was to show that the JPX can indeed do a great job with analog-style patches. Listening on my large PMC mastering monitors, it is anything *but* bottomless… It has a massive, warm, fat low end like any good analog synth. Thank you for the kind words on the video! 😁👊🏻
@@JimDaneker Heey, for sure, the JPX definitely sounds warm, fat, analog. It’s very powerful. I just think the real analog just sounds better for what it was intended for (analog kind of sounds)
🙏🙏
The build and just having those presets in one package with such a high end keyboard is worth the 2,5K.
That intro was a beast Jim, I wish I had the talent of just your pinky finger then I would be a happy man! Awesome demo!
Naughty!!! 🤣
Very kind of you to say, thank you!
I have the xm, and it sounds awesome. By issue is that I wish they did better with the reference manual and their education/tutorial videos. I mean, this synth is not a couple hundred bucks. They could have easily made the onboard "sequencer" as good as the jdxi. Im not selling this little synth as I got a fantastic deal on it. I just wish the documentation made it easier to understand this lovely instrument. Im probably going to get a system 8 or gaia for that knob per function UI.
Yes, it is definitely a very deep synth and takes a minute to wrap your head around it. There are also some operating system choices I wish they had done differently too. Once you learn it though, it's an absolute monster!
Having said all that, the System 8 is an all-time favorite of mine. I wish the Jupiter X used all the ACB models of the System 8, and with the knob-per-function interface!
I can't say the Jupiter X doesn't sound good because it does. There was a time when I really wanted to like it and possibly consider buying one. However, everytime I walk into the music store now, where there's a Oberheim OB-X8 and a whole separate Roland section where there's a Jupiter X, I'm always always going to the OB-X8. Th3 so7nd that comes from it simply blows me away everytime I play it. I wasn't getting the same feeling with the Jupiter X. I will say one thing though. A lot of the Jupiter's patches, including the ones played in this video, are drenched in effects. Perhaps I should go back and play the Jupiter X again WITHOUT the effects to see how it really stacks up to an analog beast like the OB-X8.
As you can probably tell by now, I really want the OB-X8. However, if there's something that I have yet to discover in the Jupiter X that can make it sound so convincing analog rhat it could not only rival, but surpass the OB-X8 sonically, then I'm all ears and would be happy to find out what it is. To be honest, the Jupiter X does look a lot better than the OB-X8. However, I have yet to hear it sound better than the OB-X8, especially the OB-X8 "It's an Oberheim" preset patch!!! Also, the Oberheim OB-X8 voice panning is superb too. Not only that, but I also like the sound of the detuned VCOs and VCO drift as well as the filters too. Maybe I should see if the Jupiter X can do something similar. To be fair, the Jupiter X also has very nice sounding filters.
A lot of it comes down to adjusting expectations: one doesn't sound better than the other, IMO: they are very different creatures. But I absolutely love them both for each of them brings to the table! NOTHING else sounds like an OB... it's one of the best analog poly synths ever made. But then the same could be said for the Jupiter 8 - and the X gives you a lot of that, among a whole bunch of other Roland classic engines.
I tried to give a handful of clips in this demo without the effects so you can hear some of its "analog" nature, but yes, you can absolutely have it do all of the same sort of random pitch variations and other idiosyncrasies of vintage analog gear.
The other thing that makes it tricky to compare is that the factory sounds in the Jupiter X really are not ideal… many of them use the I-arpeggio feature that almost sound like cheesy backing tracks. I would've much preferred if they stuck to straight up synth sounds. Thankfully, Roland Cloud is full of tons of amazing expansions...
@@JimDaneker I agree!
I own a jupiter x. It’s been odd to me to see the weird assumptions some people seem to have about this synth. Let me say this. It hasn’t ceased to blow my mind. Whoever put it together was a bloody genius. ✌🏼
Agreed!!
@@JimDaneker 👌🏼✌🏼
I agree. The Jupiter-X is hands down the best and most inspiring synths I have ever played or owned (I cannot count how many). I don't really care about the various legacy synth recreations (I already have the System-8 for that), but the native Jupiter-X engine absolutely blows everything out of the water. There is just no end to its sonic potential. The Zenology Pro software may sound identical, but it completely lacks the tactile interface which make the hardware synth into an actual instrument.
@@thomaskolb8785 so true - I only recently started digging into the native Zenology engine and have been blown away by how good it is!
What a tune at the beginning. Amazing
Great demo of a great synth.... But, here it comes...my Fantom EX kicks A!
Haha, indeed... I've owned the Fantom too and especially with the EX version, it too is a monster! In fact I enjoy editing even more on the Fantom, ironically ;-)
saying 'just a vst ' is ridiculous. there is no difference between technologies in PC/mac and synth.
@@alainthiry3965 correct. And like I've said a million times, every digital synth since the beginning is technically a "VST in a box" - and it doesn't matter one bit. What matters is what you do with it!
Jim, if your into loaning out keyboards and then just buying a new one when you want it back, I'm your guy.
PS. Still lovin' on my BSP for Kontact!
Great to hear! 😁👊🏻
Man your intro was amazing!! I finally feel like I heard someone really play it like its built to be played.
Thanks so much for the kind words! That was definitely the intent - to show what this thing can really do!
Dude honestly I've been unable to play music for quite a few years I sold my gear to raise a family and it has been a rough go without music my first keyboard as a kid was the yamanha PSR 500 and I upgraded to the SY85, I moved to the korg karma and then migrated to Roland synths with a fantomX and V synth I am a synthesis junky and love building massive patches that have velocity layers and linked matrix controls to play and tweak sounds live. I've been looking at the fantom 6 and the Jupiter xm - they are my dream studio - I literally got so excited seeing the Jupiter x played so well. I'm a fan now and will be watching all your videos I can’t wait to get a Jupiter Xm now so I can explore all the possibilities! I'm really excited about iarpeggio for building complex textures like I did on the korg karma. Thanks for the inspiring sounds brother!!
@@Jasonthebaldguy comments like yours, make my day. Thanks so much for simply enjoying it! I can't do videos as often as I would like because I'm so busy building Arcade Orchestra, but we should be starting to put out a lot more content consistently really soon ;-)
Not to be a hater, but why you only compare it to the oberheim for 30 seconds only? Since those seconds could give an insight in whether it can sound analog.
I'll do another one at some point showing it against a vintage Jupiter 8, Oberheim, and Prophet.
On decent monitors, that few seconds along with all the other sounds I showcased should be enough for anyone who's familiar with analog synths in general. It absolutely does sound "analog", but more important to me, the question is whether it sounds *good*. 😁
Man I love my Jupiter and like you fell out of love didn’t sell it but kept in a case. Then the JD-800 expansion came out. I owned a JD-990 and regret selling it years ago. I pulled it out the case and loaded the expansion and WOW‼️‼️. I’ve watched your video comparing it with the System 8 I believe. I didn’t subscribe but after today I’m a subscriber. Us older vets recognize a classic. And the Jupiter is just that. I almost got a Prophet X from Sequential. I’m back in love with my Jupiter
Appreciate the kind words!
Have the Xm... it's a little beast!!!
WRT the question as to whether it can sound analogue... I have the Roland AE-30 wind synth and it is taking time to figure out how to make patches (okay, "scenes") that come close to the wind synth patches I create on my Behringer Neutron.
Apart from the rather peculiar ZEN-Core architecture (multiple single-oscillator synths) it is taking a frustrating amount of time to figure out how to go beyond merely replicating the settings to making tweaks to get closer to the emotional feel of the sounds. Admittedly the Neutron responds beautifully to wind synth control so the bar is set rather high!
Thanks Jim. I always love your practical thoughts and great demonstrations on synths. The Roland software based synths do sound really good, and Roland deserves some credit for what they have done to make Zencore, ABM, and ACB available in so many various packages (hardware keyboards and software on a computer). Choices are good.
Like many, I wish they would release some proper analog synths (re-issues or based on past Roland analog tech) like Korg, Moog, and Sequential/Oberheim have, but I don't consider it a requirement to get that Roland sound. I have several vintage Roland synths, but I am just as happy to use my Fantom or even my MC-707 for those sounds as they offer other benefits.
Everything sounds too bright and too thin(?) relative to what I want to hear.
Really? Because even next to an Oberheim, Prophet, and Moog, there's nothing "thin" about this whatsoever. And in that brief comparison with the OB, the OB has more high frequency content, and both show a nearly identical low frequency curve...
@@JimDaneker I could give it another listen. Was my first impression.
Is agree, it might be my bias bc I know it’s digital, but something about the high end sounds brittle and piercing which gives the illusion of thin-ness.
Some patches I’m sure are indistinguishable from a Jupiter 8, but to my ears the analog counterpart is just slightly rounder in the high end which gives it a more pleasant tone. Still haven’t heard a digital synth who’s tone I really love.
@@NicoHolloman ... yeah, I can confirm that it's your bias.
What you want to hear is the distortion that is inherent with anologue synthesizers, that “warm sound” in a real life situation, it is almost impossible to tell if it is analogue or digital.
And apart from the sound, Juno X (more or less the same engine than Jupiter X) is my Logic bestfriend when using a very light configuration : Juno X using audio over USB, makes the 3 (Logic on my laptop, including many Uhe, GForce, Synapse softsynths, a headphones and the Juno X) the only 3 pieces of hardware i need to have a very strong composition tool, with plenty of direct pots and sliders at fingertips, but a very little to carry
I appreciate your amazing skill and I don’t want to negative in any way-the patches sound great - but I can hear something in the high end that does not sit right with me. The best way to describe it is that it feels cold / fuzzy. It is not a lack or too much highs in any way. I kept hearing that on the Oberheim comparison. And I do love Vsts - GForce, Moog and the new Synapse audio Hz. On the Roland JX-8P - I have a original one and love it - again, I can hear the difference in the high end on the Jupiter-X. I really want to like it, but I can’t bring myself to do it
Thanks for the kind words! I fully expected someone to make these sorts of observations - it happens every time on threads like these. And yet I have to wonder, if it were just an audio demo with no reference to digital modeling, would someone say "man, something just doesn't sound right here - the high end is off somehow." I have extreme doubts that would be the case. I've done a LOT of comparing in the last few years between iconic analog synths and "recreations" of them, and while some are certainly better than others, our biases or preconceptions *always* inform what we hear. Always. Lots of double-blind tests have revealed that over and over again.
Fascinating stuff. Hopefully the point comes across that at the end of the day, it's the music that matters, and if a synth inspires you, that's what counts. Thanks for weighing in! ;-)
Obviously it is not vst in a box since audio engine is something Roland worked on for a long time. It is also not an analogue synth, so as much as it can stack up in some cases, it cannot beat analogue in analogue domain. Also, really Roland could ve made a fortune by re-issuing Jupiter 6 and 8 with modern features and analogue engine. I have J6 and would not trade it for the Jx.
Amazing sounds and demo track! If you had to choose between the Jupiter X and System 8, which one would it be?
That's an all-time tough choice… I wouldn't want to be without either of them. For a straight-up time machine back to the glory days of the 80s, the System 8 is really tough to beat - it's 100% focused on all of those sounds. In fact, I love that thing so much I've seriously pondered getting a second one to have more plug out slots available!
The System 8 is much smaller - that may be a plus or a minus depending on your studio situation and key-bed preference. The System 8 is also the most intuitive synth I’ve ever used as almost every function is on the front panel. But it’s also green. The Jupiter X is so much better looking. Many say ACB of the System 8 is superior to the Zencore of the Jupiter X, but from this (amazing) demo I can’t tell.
@@dirkfierce2525 yep, it's a tough choice between the two. As much as I love the Jupiter X in lots of ways, I'd go to the System 8 first for the absolute best analog modeling - and for the straight-ahead ease of use you mentioned.
@@JimDaneker I'll probably start with the System 8, but after this video I'm very interested in the Jupiter X. It sounds huge and very analog, but super hi-fi. Reminds me of an 80s classic movie remastered in 4k, where you can make out the detail of the film grain. Really cool!
@@dirkfierce2525 i like the green! Lol I've been watching them on the used market for a while, id love to check one out one of these days
I learned my mistake with the JD XA/Xi, where menu diving became the norm.
It doesn't matter how well something sounds, if you have to surf menus, count me out.
One of the reasons I sold my MC707 too.
Menu surfing is not required for any of the kind of thing I showed in this video. And even if you do want to dive deeper than the surface, there are all kinds of shortcuts for getting around using the Shift key - it's really quite fast once you learn it. I do agree the screen placement off to the side is just dumb, but I hardly have to look at it now that I know how to quickly navigate.
@@JimDaneker
I never watched your video because I find them uninformative.
I Joke I joke.
I will watch the vid, I was pressed for time. I am sure you make some seriously valid points, the $ of an X is the same as a UDO S6 desktop here so I would go for that instead, even though it has no screen.
It appears to me that it’s the (I’ve spent a bunch on Reverb and eBay acquiring vintage synths, so I know best and I don’t want the bottom to fall out of the vintage market) analogue crowd that’s hating on the new recreations… you can oscilloscope the crap outta the waveforms all you like but at the end of the day if the new stuff sounds good (and this sounds great), then so what! Democratisation for all…..
Make sure you put aside money for all the repairs and refurbishment your vintage synths will eventually need.
YES. And I do not miss all of the reliability headaches and repair bills of the vintage stuff!
I've had an Access Virus KB and Ti since they came out, as well as a Waldorf MicroQ (among other synths). Recently installed the "Motorola DSP56300 emulator" I kept seeing videos about, which is the DSP chip used in all of the above synths, on Windows 10 and uploaded the firmware for each synth to it. I was pretty blown away at the sound quality of the emulator vs actual hardware. Literally can't tell them apart except when using obscene polyphony. The waveforms of the output even look identical. Kinda made me sad.
Agree. I use to own a Virus TI. The Ostirus emulator is pure fire! I hear no difference what so ever.
Absolutely stunning playing and a synth that pretty much kills all others that are available new today.
Also capable of reproducing the same sounds as vintage synthesizers.
Very kind of you to say… Thanks much!
@@JimDaneker I agree, you play 1000 times better than I do
Congrats! So perfect your video! If I have a change definitivaly I will buy it
The intro and demos sound epic. I'm actually surprised if the pro's of the Jupiter-X don't, in many ways, outweigh the cons for most people.
This and TEO-5 are top of my wishlist, for my needs anyway. Either one is likely more than I'll ever need and desire!
Until then, I'm more than happy with Arturia Pigments!
Glad to see someone with experience put some perspective on Jupiter-X
Yes, indeed… all great points. And what a combo that would be - this and the TEO-5 would be killer!
Not gonna lie, this sounds good.
Over the last 3 years or so "analog" VSTs moved up in quality a lot.
The first one that blew me away was Softube's Model 84 (Juno 106 emulation)
In 10 years VSTs are going to sound more "analog" than analog 😄
Yes indeed! And those Softube models are STUNNING! My favorite of theirs is Model 72 - best Minimoog I've ever heard!
Anthony Martinelli did a video discussing this very issue. Worth watching.
Behind synthesizers there are not only musicians, but also lovers of electronics, from my point of view as an engineer, it is beautiful and fascinating to see schematics as complex as Roland's analog synthesizers, it saddens me to see everything now reduced to a CPU. with advanced technologies. Maybe for a phone or a computer they are great but for a synthesizer whose function is to output analog signals I don't see it appropriate, nor does it matter who says it, the X series will always be a VST in a box, in the few years they can be changed for other boxes with keys and cpu, not like the classic analog ones that are repairable and many modifications and clones can be made, as Beringer does by reviving the classic analog ones that will probably be sold, used and last longer than the current Roland synthesizers.
I get it. I too am an avid lover of electronics, and I fully understand the almost romantic nature of the old analog legends. I've owned many, and still have the Prophet 5, OB, etc. Having said all that, my over-riding priorities will ALWAYS be the end result: SOUND, and whether it inspires me. In that sense, I couldn't care less what's under the hood. And "VST in a box" is not a bad thing at all these days, IMO - there are some jaw-dropping software synths these days ;-) Thanks for your great input!
I could not agree more... A lost era of electronics engineering. Open a CS-80, or Jupiter 8, or OB-X and they are just as beautiful from an engineering and design standpoint as they sound.
@@JimDaneker I have no problem with Roland selling VST in a box
just drop the price
pass the savings in production on to the consumers
@@robinsss manufacturing and shipping flagship-level hardware around the world isn't cheap; it's priced in line with any other top quality synth, if not cheaper.
@@JimDaneker ever heard of the synth project?
The people who are mocking the synth dont have one and have the knowledge in the back of their mind this not being analog. I just purchased it. Its a dream synth for life. It blows my Korg Prologue away, and I have owned several Juno from the 80's. It does match that vibe., It has a lot of movement in sound. I think this is their best synthesizer up to date. People hating on it are mostly the people who hate Roland for not making pure VCO analog synths.
This is an added comment. I also owned a J X -3 P with the programmer.
I want to love Roland Cloud but the once every 30 day authorization of lifetime keys is a deal breaker for me. Also, while I can also port zenology pro sounds into my MC-707…I was none too happy to have to pay $229 for the privilege especially considering Roland did not include a native patch editor which they always used to do for gear (like the Fantom XR). Bottom line for me is I am not buying hardware that requires buying software that used to come free anymore. Roland is the worst offender in this category.
The Jupiter X does not requirre you to buy software. There is a free editor you can use. You can perfectly use the X without buying additional software.
I absolutely agree that Roland Cloud's authorization issues can be a pain - but that's actually another point in favor of the Jupiter X: there are no authorization issues with the hardware. You can create a bunch of sounds in the software or simply download them as expansion packs, fly them into the keyboard, and from then on, zero issues. The hardware isn't tied to the internet and requires no further steps - it's permanent.
@@ghfjfghjasdfasdf except it's not. You may want to check the facts. How much energy are you going to spend bellyaching on this thread about non-issues? We get it. You don't like this synth. And your reasoning on most points is outright wrong.
@@JimDaneker that’s what brought me to the video….looking for alternatives to MC-707. I just left the comment in hopes that Roland will see it and stop doing this with the newer gear. The Jupiter X escaped this because it is one of the first Zenology capable synths Roland put out, and Roland hadn’t yet locked the software down with DRM. They have since introduced a dongle approach to loading data onto hardware that will be quite terrible if rolled out on all new synths. This seems to be an industry theme as Native Instruments is basically copying Roland’s cloud format. I learned my lesson with software when Adobe bought Cool Edit Pro and won’t go down that road again.
Thanks so much for this eye-opening video. How does it compare with the Juno-X? Would a comparison video work for you? I am attracted to the Juno-X because it is smaller and lighter. Can it perform as well as the Jupiter-X? Do they both use the same firmware? Is the Juno-X up to date with the Jupiter-X at the game-changing V3.0?
The Juno-X is very much equivalent to the Jupiter-X in many ways; they both share a lot of the same vintage models (Juno 106, SH-101, XV-5080, etc.) - but they do have a few that are exclusive to each of them: the Jupiter-X has a new 4-oscillator "expanded" version of the classic Jupiter 8 engine, while the Juno-X has a similar model of that reimagines the Juno. It also has a fantastic Juno 60 model as well. And both can take advantage of all the Zenology content on Roland Cloud. So they definitely have differences, but one's not better than the other… It's just that they focus on slightly different things ;-)
Also an important thing to know is that the Juno-X has the cheaper keybed from the Fantom-06 series and the Jupiter-X has the way better keybed from the Fantom 6. I think Jupiter-X is the better choice, unless you're really focusing on Juno sounds instead of Jupiter sounds.
@@JimDaneker Thank you very much.
@@Pingeltingel Thank you very much.
Since Jupiter X came out I have much better monitoring. This video sounds fantastic, bass like an earthquake. I'm really impressed with this synth now. Lush, massive and, just wonderful.
Yep! I listen through massive PMC mastering monitors, and it moves the earth!
UK manufactured transmission line monitors, digital power amp.
This sounded damned good. I have the JP8 and 106 expansions in my Fantom 07 and they sound great. I own a real 106 and I’m impressed. The JP8 sounds great though I can’t compare it to a real Jupiter.
I find it that it depends on the sound when comparing to a Jupiter 8. For the kind of stuff I gravitate to (like many of the sounds I show in this video) it's essentially interchangeable with a JP8. Alex Ball did a fantastic video directly comparing the two and they are essentially identical.
Hey Jimbo! Love ya brother! Always super enjoyable hearing you tickling on ivory!
Or high quality plastic in this case! 😁😂👊🏻
I'm an audio engineer who has been interested in synths and synthesis since the 80's. I started making recordings with analog tape and analog consoles. I've used digital reel to reel decks, dedicated hard-disk recorders and DAW's, of course. Software CAN sound as good or better than hardware. BUT, if I'm working on a physical console, and it doesn't have to be an analog one, either, I will get a DIFFERENT result than thru using software; oftentimes that result will also be better. I'm not a hater; I use DAW'S daily and don't long for any hardware in my process(es). For me, there's just "something" about getting my hands on something that changes the way that I work. Software has come a LONG way! There was a time when I wouldn't use a plug-in EQ or compressor; I would even entertain it! Nowadays, I don't think about it at all. I'm always looking for a better, more "hands on" approach to manipulating software....
PS: This Jupiter X sounds spectacular to my ears! Thank-you for making this video.
Thanks for the kind words and the COMMON SENSE! ;-) And same here - for me, I love hardware purely for the tactile experience and the results that tends to inspire ;-)
Just bought a JupiterX. Not alot og videos on How to build Sounds from initialized tones on each model. Please make a video building juno106 patches from scratch ( not from an existing patch or preset).
@@findmads but ...why? There's a whole bag of existing Juno 106 patches in there already. No need to start from an initialized patch.
@@JimDaneker because I want play Them as instruments in their own right and I currently find it hard to reproduce the original juno sounds from scratch. I end up with a different result… maybe and probably because of my lack of knowledge. So I’m curious to know if you guys also end up with a different result? Also to learn about how these models generate their sounds like the Jupiter-x was advertised to be able to do…. Otherwise it is a VST in a box… I bought it to design my own sounds from scratch mainly - best way to learn an instrument in my opinion. the factory sounds are nice to have also and not bad.
@@findmads as I said in the video, it absolutely *is* a "VST in a box" - but that is not a bad thing at all. Every digital synth ever made is a VST in a box, and I couldn't care less: what I care about is how they sound, and whether they inspire me. The JPX is an absolute monster synth and is endlessly inspiring. And yes, I can get it to sound completely indistinguishable from the original analog synths it models.
I understand what you are saying about wanting to learn programming, so in that sense, starting from scratch is a valuable exercise. From my perspective as a working pro, I just don't have the time, so when I'm looking for a particular sound, I always start with something that's as close as possible and tweak it from there. Keep at it - it's a phenomenal instrument and full of endless potential!
@@JimDaneker thank you for taking the time to answer. I can relate to that, and they are good sounding factory patches, but they also have a lot of stuff added to the tones that can’t be seen from the surface. knowing sound design and getting to know your instrument deeply has always been my way to go, but that is actually easier said than done because of the lack of information about how to do navigate each model - there is not a lot of help from the manual. I use the editor but still. Eventually I will get there, but would have been nice to have some more resources on how to go about it. It is a good sounding synth and the updates have made it better.
This test is awesome, so exaustive and straight to the point. I wish all reviews from other people were like this. They aren't. Congrats
@@BELLRECORDINGSTUDIO thanks for the kind words. I need to do another one that's actually a legitimate comparison with some of my other analog synths - most people misunderstood this one 😁
Great Vid - Like Doctor Mix without the over excitement 🙂
@@ewanHackett 😂😂😂
I bought my JPX when it was first released. I absolutely love it. I can use it for 80's cover band sounds or for digital sounds. It's a synth I will never sell. The cons: It's way too heavy. It needs the organs that are in the new Fantom series..Upper left screen is too small. I also believe it's time for a Roland system 16 or 1000 with lots of polyphony and 61 keys.
The Fantom-06 is a good deal - light, versatile, does all the Zencore things. But it does not top the System 8 - I doubt we shall see a sequel
Absolutely agreed on the System 16 - LOTS of people asking for that! I don't mind the weight though - it makes it feel like a real, substantial classic Roland synth ;-)
Timely comment: currently-RIGHT NOW-Amazon and B&H have it for 2348, about 500 less than others. Is it worth it? I ordered mine just now from Amazon because of the free returns. Now is it worth it?
I got the System 8 a while back and it comes with three plugins from Roland Cloud, what are called plug outs. Sheesh eyeroll. The Jupiter X comes with 2 of the same plugins and a different synth as detailed in the video. Now comes more of the eyeroll. Roland has been zen coring the F out of their old hardware, and it appears the X has a different “modeling” method than the System 8. Should you be concerned? Nope unless you’re currently sporting a pocket protector and taped glasses. What is concerning is when Roland claims in typical weasel speak that this model “reproduces “ X synth and it “includes” X synth/drum sounds. When I get my Jupiter X I’ll check how far the marketing lingo “models” reality. See what I did there Roland?
But us the X worth it?
Yes, even for a System 8 owner. The keybed is better quality, has another octave and THANKS FOR NOTHING ROLAND, has friggin’ aftertouch. Even the cheapest impulse buy Hydrasynth has Polyphonic Aftertouch for gawds sake. Plus I want to justify anothe G.A.S. purchase.
as far as im concerned vst's are getting just as good sound quality as hardware nowadays . so if it sounds great to which it does then who cares. is it as convenient as a vst in a daw ? heck no but people buy hardware to play and enjoy. personally im over my GAS but some prefer to collect whenever they can. great vid and beautiful synth.
Thank you - refreshing common sense 😁👊🏻
19:41 THX Theme 😮😮😮 You're a genius, thank you for demonstrating the depths of this thing, it's literally all of Roland's synth greatness in one package
Yeah, that was a fun moment - I’m definitely a child of the 80s! Appreciate the kind words 😁
Is it as good as a Phantom? First time on your channel. LOVE it
Thanks for the kind words! The Fantom is technically more powerful, but they do have a lot in common including several of their model "engines."
What depth and what “fat” this JPX has. Fabulous...and superb programming
Thanks so much! I listen on big PMC mastering monitors, and it shakes the foundations. It really is a monster synth!
@@JimDaneker Listening to KH310, “it sounds thick”…
Nice to see you, Jim! Lived in Nashville for 28 years, surprising we never crossed paths but glad to find you here. I agree on all your comments around VSTs and the quality of this synth. I have the Juno X, and the Fantom 8 EX. It's an explosive combo. For those of us who truly used the OG keyboards back then, I think most of the players from that time agree that the obsessive addiction to analog is overblown. For those that know, they know. Analog can be problematic, especially live. Tuning was/is always an issue with analog oscillators unless you add the digital circuits to correct them, at which point the analog vs. digital debates kind of get "blurred" to me, as with the Juno 106. I remember having to let my boards warm up for at least 15-20 minutes before tuning for a show, especially if they had been in the cold truck in the winter. They sound really fat in the studio too, but sometimes can get lost in the mix live - I've found the digital versions cut through the live mix much, much better, and have felt that for years.
Thanks for posting this Jim, look forward to more content!
Thanks for the kind words Bill!