coming from someone whos owned both vintage 60s and 106s. I would still buy this. If you want one of those, shell out the extra money, be prepared for repairs and chips to die over time. they sound great when they work, and are a blast, but as a producer whos not into using a laptop or computer for my sounds, this is something super creative. its quick, reliable, and the sounds sound good. 2100 in a day when Nords are 2700-4000 it just doesn't seem like a bad value. sounds can get exchanged, tons of effects. i feel theres a ton of value for money. especially if you're new into the vintage synth game. is it super different than a jupiter x? no, but the layout is easier to manage. it all comes down to taste. Do you want more controls to dig and edit, or do you like quick presets with easy to manage controls. its something for everyone.
exactly..SAM for PREZ!!!!!!!!!...Get over yourselves whinig about this old azz stuff..and yes,I have the HS60...lovely and OLDdddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddd....
As a Juno 106 owner (upgraded to Kiwi 106) I can speak from experience about it being temperamental, it's heading back to the repair shop to replace 2 sound chips and a wave chip, every few years something goes, after it's fixed I'm selling it. I got a Juno X and am extremely happy, does and sounds like everything the 106 does and a whole lot more.
Retro styling, functional keyboard action, easy to use presets.... hahaha, I don't think we're going to see this one on "Bad Gear", but it'd be a fun episode no doubt. Look at the quality of demos Florian does with Bad Gear. Imagine what he could do with this kind of quality kit.
This is a massive upgrade to the juno ds. If you really want an analog synth, go buy an analog synth. With this feature set and sound, I think it's worth the money.
It's a worthy reimagination. ZEN-Core is great, It emulates the Juno sound very good and it has the looks. But ... for that price, they should at least have included the JP, JX and SH models.
I really like this channel. More informative than most. Thank you for the insights and also, you have a nice style of playing. I find your chord progressions and scales very soothing
My 106 died on me about 20years ago and I miss it. I’ve since then bought the Cherry Audio 106 VST synth and it sounds even better with added features like arpeggios, reverbs etc…. It only cost me $50. This Juno X with all its other sounds. It just the 60 or 106 brain is very cool and sounds great. Multi layering capabilities and the fact you can load other sounds from the cloud is a major plus.. if I could justify $2000 I would buy the X today. Analog out of a digital synth still sounds great. I want one now. If I was able to buy a vintage 106 over an X I’d buy the X first every time. Thanks for the video.
My first guitar lessons were at Alamo Music there off Babcock Rd back in like '98 with a dude named Dave! Now I'm heavily into synths and synth-youtube and I'm glad y'all are making these!!! Keep it up and keep in touch!
As I go from video to video checking out this synth, the most common concern seems to be cost, but I honestly don't feel like $2,000 is that much. (I'm a music teacher who composes on the side, so I'm not a rich person. Haha!...far from it.) I want one because it reminds me of my K2000 in that it's going to be relevant in 20 years. I feel that 20 years from now, I'll still be pulling music out of this. In the end, $2,000 isn't that much if the keyboard produces $2,000 worth of music. The truth is instruments are expensive. I'm a sax player, and my sax was around $6,000 25 years ago, which would be around $11,000 today after we consider inflation. My Strat was $2,000 20 years ago, which would be more than $3,500 today after inflation. My K2000 synth, which I love and has made a ton of music was originally around $3,000 back in the mid-90s (around $5,500 today after inflation). Thankfully, I bought my K2000 used, so that's my only thing. Maybe it would be worth the wait to get the Juno-X used, but I also need it now. I can't wait, or I would. With supply chains where they are, it could be years before you can get a Juno-X used, and considering how much other comparable instruments cost, I feel like $2,000 isn't that bad. That's just how I see things, and I understand not everyone agrees. I think an instrument's value really depends on who's using it and what they're doing with it. Cost can be relative. A lot of people have no problem spending $2,000 on a TV, but for me that's way too much. My family just doesn't use a TV enough to legitimize spending that much, but to other families it makes a lot of sense to spend that much. However, my next keyboard will be used 30-40+ each week, because it's a teaching tool and a composition tool. I feel like I'll get my money's worth out of it, and I think there are many others like me.
So I gave up the Jupiter X after being flummoxed by the interface and little menu diving screen on the left panel. It sounded great but the controls varied by the model activated. I gave it up before the control software was released, and I went back to Kronos. I am going to give this one a hard look however. As a Juno 60 fan and player for many years I think the panel interface is stellar. My assessment of the I-Arp was not great out of the box. For those who have the smarts ad patience to figure out how to get musical results out of it, it has promise but falls short of Montage/MODX and Kronos KARMA by a wide margin IMHO. This instrument just looks beautiful and sounds good, I might have to have one.
For this price and with the Jupiter-X already existing, you'd think they would put more effort to take it farther into the Juno world. An alpha Juno 2 engine would have been a good way to achieve that and propose something not currently on the market. But as always, the synths that don't have a name, that aren't well known, are banished from today's culture, suffering the Roland equivalent of Damnatio Memoriæ. Alpha Juno, Jupiter 6, CR-78, just to name the most well-known outcasts
My initial thoughts were it's 4 years too late, an octave too wide, and a grand too expensive. But now I see I'm not the target audience. I think it's a stage synth to place on the rack above one's Nord or CP88 stage piano. Neither the players nor the audience will care that it's another shell for Zen-core as long as it looks and sounds the part.
I just wish Roland still made anything analog anymore. I mean this could do everything that any other zen core synth can do... they just have parts locked out so there's a reason to sell jupiter X's and Fantoms.
I really like this and I am also a Jupiter X owner. Love the looks and 61 keys. I would never sell my Juno 60. The difference between this and the 60 is that the 60 sounds alive and breathing. However, the Juno X does sound very good. I wish that the price was around 1499.00. This is too expensive. You are looking at 2,300.00 with tax. Behringer built an analog deepmind and sold it for under 1k.
Here's what I propose: same everything as the 106, I mean analog and all, but with 2 oscillators, 16 voice polyphony, as a bi-tambral (2 x 8 voice). Add a pitch envelope with repeat function and modern fx and presto! The new "Juno 116" programmable analog synthesizer 😉
I ordered one....I have NOT been a fan of Roland Cloud or their VST attempts. Have been listening to synths, hardware & VST over internet for a very very long time. If people got past the "is it a Juno" crap and just listen to the synth they would love it. There are very few synths, hardware or VTS that sound like this synth. Of course that is subject to opinion. I bought a System 8 and returned it, many love the ACB over Zencore. One of the biggest selling point for me, XLR balanced output and the Vocoder. I own the lifetime Key for the Jupiter 8 and System 8 so I can add those to this synth. Lastly, I desperately needed a new MIDI controller and there have been manys comments on how good the build quality and key bed are.
@ghost mall Roland has been using the name Juno for digital keyboards since 20 years ago at least, why would anyone still expect analog because of the name is beyond me
Touch Circle; You are not a fan of Roland's VST's and yet, you are willing to pay $2,000 for the same VST's housed in a Roland keyboard? Where's the logic in that? I don't like RolandCloud subscriptions either(but renting the sounds is just one of 2 options available.) You can buy the Zenology Pro software for $229 and have 4,000 presets to tinker with AND you can buy a lifetime license for whatever modelled classic synths you want. Also...there are many choices of midi controller keyboards of good quality and you won't be resigned to just 61 keys(all of which bought together, would easily be half the cost of the Juno-X keyboard.)
@@lumer2b M-Audiio Oxygen Pro 61 is very close to having as many controls & it's $300. Nektar Panorama T6 61 has a decent amount of controls & a nice sized LCD display and it's the same price($300.) Arturia KeyLab is similar in all respects....
You wouldn't want to record with it but for stage/live/mime Top of the Pops or The Tube, both of which are returning to live UK TV on their original time slots Thursday 7pm and Friday 5.30pm maybe...
@@brianmansfield666 I'll be getting drunk with my baby on the honeymoon. It's a killer synth and the ones who choose to invest will make their own choices. I know 4 people who sold their Moog-One and that's not counting the man who runs this channel and that's a much higher end market, lol.
@@brianmansfield666 I know, I'm wrong. I can admit it. If Brian Mansfield has a opinion everyone with a different view must be wrong! I spaced out about that topic in school. I can see the light now, thank you =P
I like this zen core retro synth more than the Jupiter X. I will buy one used next year most likely. I have lots of old roland synths and new roland synths. Do I need it? Nope. But I like it.
the problem is not that much cost (as all roland costs too much) and it is not even the fact that it is digital. The problem is that roland is making instruments with very few differences between them, which sound the same, giving names that refer to noble names and then playing piano sounds! We are not talking about ugly synths but synths without their own identity
Moreover you can have all those zen core sounds on your computer for much much cheaper price. You paying extra just for box hands on control but we know there is workaround like midi keyboards.
I can assure you, the guitar world is EVERY bit as ‘catty’/cork-sniffery … probably more-so … do ‘synth-nerds’ have an equivalent for tonewood? Toneplastic housings, maybe … ?!! 😉
There are definitely synth nerds who insist that the intangibles of analog can never be truly emulated in digital. There’s also some cork-sniffery surrounding filters.
Yep. I love all the hoohah about the wood then Jack White sticks some nails into a bit of 2x4 and slaps on a pickup and lets rip. However I do think materials have a stronger influence on the sound of an acoustic guitar (though design and workmanship are possibly more important).
It’s great! If I didn’t already own a 106 I’d buy it in a heartbeat (....well almost)....the pricing is just off, given it’s already existent software just packaged in really nice controller I think Roland are being a bit grabby on the price. Sounds fantastic & aside from the odd dumb decisions like putting in n speakers (?.who has ever asked for those) it does have a lot of features so I’m sure they’ll sell a ton.
A shameless cash grab? No , whoever said that was thinking of Terminator Dark Fate, or, Star Wars: The Force Awakens" or..."goes into a COMA" This new Juno -X is an amazing platform that has the most state of the art sound library, user presests, effects, and user friendly controls that I have ever seen..and I started playing keyboards in 1988. I still own the original Yamaha DX-7
Please, could anyone tell me, if the Jupiter X has a better keybed vs the Juno X? (It seems that the Juno X has the Fantom 06 keybed, only now with aftertouch, however I suspect the Jupiter X may have the Fantom 6 keybed - not sure about either one.) In other words, if the Jupiter X keys are mechanically superior to the Juno X? Or they are equal? Or Juno's keys are better?
@@nilsvanderplancken Roland perfectly can re-release the classics, but they prefer to scam dumbs selling a, overpriced cheap computer with knobs with names as Jupiter, Juno etc. And the worse, this page is plenty of those idiots who say "both sound same". As if one skateboard sounded same as a classic Ferrari GTO, the world is plenty of low iq idiots.
I want to get either a Juno X or a Jupiter X for my home studio and to drag around to jam sessions. Can you tell me why I would pick one over the other?
How many expansions can you load in the Juno X ? (Not the Model Expansions) but the Wave Expansions 1-15 Just tryna figure out How many "Wave Expansions" can you load up on the Juno X? @Anyone!
One thing I want to know is, where is the weight coming from? This thing weighs more than a Juno 106, but it's not an analog synthesizer, so really it shouldn't weigh any more than a keyboard controller.
you probably don't care anymore since this is two years old but for anyone else interested it's the Juno 106 PolyKey which is one of the default scenes on the Juno 106 model bank
Of course the analog purists won’t like it (they hated the Jupiter 80 too, which was actually a great board). For keyboard players, this is quite nice but I’m not sure where it would fit in a live setup. Overall, I don’t know where the market is for this product, as it isn’t niche enough for synth collectors or versatile enough for live performers. A studio might also just be better off getting the cloud version for much less..
I think it would excel in a live setup due to its scenes and preloaded settings. Not to mention it’s simple control layout. I like the two landing pads for FX pedals. I’d do a pair of Strymon BigSky & TimeLine. Bypass some internal FX. Those pedals can be preloaded with preset settings too. Plus an expression pedal and a vocoder. I’m ready… let’s set it up and forgot about the politics of pure analog juice! Let it ride!
Unfortunately much of Roland release now is so what and basically much the same as before and a bit of good for the eye. This is a vst in a box. Good one but a vst. The Behringer DM12 kicks this in to touch at a fraction of the price. So does the Hydrasynth for price too. They are best off just knocking out the boutiques at least they are great on price. I love my ju06. Could they dare destroy themselves with uping the polyphony of that with a MK2? Id buy one if they did.
I've seen side by side comparisons where people have easily replicated Juno-106 sounds on the Juno-X in real time with just the front panel controls, and they really do sound alike. But I still wonder who this is really for. If you're fine with digital, than buying a Fantom-0 and the Juno model expansion would get you more sounds and capabilities for the money. You'd lose the retro analog controls, but you still have some, and it's more versatile and powerful. If you want an analog synth only, than a DeepMind 6 or DeepMind 12 is a a lot cheaper and also works and looks like a Juno. So it's too expensive for an analog Juno clone, but not really a full digital workstation either. Neither fish nor fowl.
This video would have benefitted from sitting down at a desk and writing down what you wanted to say, and then refine it and then shoot it. This one feels rushed, and rambly. It’s a highly subjective question; Is this a great musical instrument? That’s the same question as asking “Do you like it?”. I am sure there are people who WILL love it. And there are people who won’t. Why won’t roland launch a digital product and call it something that isn’t JUNO or JUPITER or FANTOM, and is something new, and oh by the way it has JUNO and JUPITER modes in its zen-core features. Why? Because they’re selling us what they think we want to buy. Something that looks like, and functions somewhat like a classic JUNO, including the JUNO like control surfaces. As for me, this does not do anything for me. I’d rather buy a nice controller and just play software instruments rather than buy a zen-core powered keyboard. There’s nothing here that I can’t do on a laptop.
I think it is a good idea and surely would be something nice to see on stage, but it does not worth $2,000, you can say whatever of how it sounds, but it is still a VST on a Juno 106 chassis with speakers (totally unnecessary in my opinion), besides, Roland already has the System 8 which uses Analog Circuit Behavior for $1700 with Juno 60 and 106 engines If you need a 106 vst it's better to consider the Roland 106 VST, or the TAL U NO LX for $65 My conclusion is, great sounds, great looking, but overpriced AF
The price is okay, I mean it's a huge synthesizer and it's not the 80s anymore, let's face it - it's made for a small audience of enthusiasts and it's expensive to make all those bits and pieces that comes with hardware, even if it's just a computer inside. The thing I don't get with these remakes is their incredibly small screens, at that price range you can easily use a smartphone display and it won't cost that much, it's already mass produced in every variation you can imagine, touch screens and all. And you can add sequencers to make it a little more dawless fun to use, most people who purchase hardware synthesizers don't use computers for a reason, if they did - they might as well just use a VST plugin, these hardware synths are made for people who like the "hands-on" feel of knobs, buttons and sliders to make adjustments on the fly while performing.
@@ThisisRends Indeed, throw the Roland JD-Xi if you can't afford the fantom series, or MODX if you wanna go cheap but powerful, Montage if you wanna go nuts.
Ah come on, yet another Zen Core player? It's the same engine like the MC 101, but it's 4 times more expensive. How is this NOT a money grab?!?! EDIT: To be fair, it sounds great, it really looks beautiful and it has a lot of Juno vibes coming with it. I can totally see why ppl would love it, but 2 grand? Roland? Seriously?
I'd be happy if it was at the $1500 price point. This is just too steep for what my Deepmind already does just fine. I don;t need the drums or sequencing or other bells and whistles. I need something to play juno sounds that isn;t eating up CPU cycles.
No disrespect to any Juno X fans, but this is not innovation. Roland no longer designs the future, they just exploit their past. Analog does not = backwards
It sound pretty good for digital synth, but it dont sound full and punchy like any analog gear, nevertheless the best updated engine of Roland digital synths.
@@DNGMaestro wrong! You obviously have not owned a juno 6, 60 or 106. I have a 6 and 106. The 6 sounds amazing almost magical if you massage the sliders.. 106 is punchy. Digital gear just sounds flat period WHEN A/B to the real deal. TH-cam video comparisons don't reveal the nuance. This is why they cost thousands now because they are living breathing works of art...same as vintage Marshall Plexi amps or R8 R9 Les Pauls. There is a reason why Lenny Kravitz bought ex Abbey Road ex Beatles studio console. Because human ears like analogue audio.. emotional response.. Not on paper perfect technical statistics...
@@brianmansfield666 lol... I actually played the 60, the 106 and the X, side by side, in a store, which was a great experience. I had also already played the originals several times before. It's clearly you who never played the Juno-X in person and although you say "yOUtUbE vIdEO cOmpARisOns dOn'T rEveAL tHE nUancE", you are judging exclusively by youtube videos, which is a pretty idiotic irony. Anyway, youtube videos show clearly how it sounds as good and better in many cases. If you can't aknowledge that you personally want the originals to sound better, regardless of them sounding better or not, you're just in denial and you are using those pieces of gear just to feel better about yourself, and then you come on youtube videos say that type ignorant catchphrases "dIgItAL gEaR jUsT SouNDs Flat". You're the type of person that would fail a blind test and then would make ridiculous excuses about it. Like i said, people should start hearing more with their hears instead of their head.
Around 4:50 in this video, paraphrasing: "The synth has built-in speakers and they are pretty useless. Kind of a fun nod to its legacy. And it has a hoover patch" - great job trying to sell this synth. Made me lol a lot.
Acb technology is stronger so why are they using zen core again for more polyphony. Aight.......that don’t make sense to me though who’s gonna use over 100 notes at once ? It’s over 100 notes at the same right ? Lmfao god damn
I’d say it’s got good build quality on the outside but on the inside it’s the inferior zen core and a korg radias sounds more thick at Juno sounds than it. Not worth 2k, looks beautiful, doesn’t sound like the competing Dave smith synths or a real Juno
@@jonathanc1458 yes I'm sure that on these extremely overpriced synths that very little effort is placed into making them, whereas, with dave smith synths, I look under the hood and it looks like a piece of impressive technical achievements with african mahogany side panels, which, is not what I can say for some of the other synths I've looked inside.
At 1400 bucks it might have been acceptable, at $2K it's a travesty. I don't get the Zencore engine. Is there a recognizable "zencore sound"? Something that it's particularly good at? Or does the engine only exist to emulate classic sounds? Roland seems such a confused company. Look at the synths Korg is coming out with, and look at the emulator c**p that Roland is putting out.
Relax. It sounds like a 106 and it's future proof. It's exactly what so many want. Zencore does does an amazing job at recreating the old sounds without the instability of analog tech.
Zencore is it's own thing, it just happens to do the old models. It's like any other engine. TBH, the Zen sounds are mostly better than many of the models. People get hung up about "the models" and forget it's a fully blown engine. Maybe because EVERY TH-cam video bangs on about JX, JD and JP blah blah.
I wouldn't say they're that confused. If you look at the company as a whole, Roland's whole thing is that they have advanced digital modelling and realistic "interfaces" for a bunch of traditionally accoustic instruments. Like realistic digitally modelled pianos (I have the flagship and it's really good), digitally modelled saxophones, digitally modelled drum kits, and digitally modelled accordions. All with extra quality of life features (backing parts, different models and parameters for different kinds of pianos/drums/wind instruments/accordions, piano doesn't have to be tuned every few months, can use headphones to play at night, etc). And here we have a digitally modelled analogue synth that can be used as a replacement to a juno 106 (like my piano is a replacement for an upright accoustic that's more convenient) for a gigging musician. But it also has a bunch of quality of life features for those who want them (backing parts, models for the 60, 106 and kinda the alphas, noise settings for chorus, can tweak temperature based detuning to be off or consistent). Am I going to spend 3.8k AUD on it? No, it's not worth it for me. But if you're in the market for a 106 and don't want the old analogue circuitry screwing up then it might be. So given all of this I actually think they're being pretty consistent with what they're putting out.
@@lordpooptrain Of course. It's just the reviewer states that it's not quite like the real thing. The question is I expect most people will ask is by how much? That I appreciate is not easy to measure.
To me what really break it is this whole workstation with 4 parts multi timbral and the iArpeggio crap that makes everything you play sound like a crappy 80s wedding band that covers Kenny G. Nobody asked for 256 notes polyphony, why not ditch the speakers, the workstation functions, the iArpeggio, just keep 16 notes polyphony, keep the Juno emulation and sell this for $1200.
Sounds a little dead and repetitive to me. As soon as you get them side by side with a classic model. That’s the deal breaker for me, it’s like, I’d just buy a vintage one at that point. Deepmind is a friendly option too!
Their "never go backwards" mission misconstrues analogue as backwards when it is in fact futuristic. We still haven't figured out how finito get digital to sound as pleasing to the ear as analogue. Infinite resolution of analogue is unmatched. Take something like a Polybrute and play some really high notes (c7 and up) and it is immediately obvious that no matter how many times you oversample digital it just doesn't sound as good as analogue in the very top registers. If Roland really were a forward looking company they'd concede this point and try to innovate in the analogue domain.
Of course, we want a great synth with great sounds and features for our money. In general, we often can understandably be too picky and criticize too deeply, looking for faults as well as pluses. We live in an imperfect world. Nothing is perfect. For me, possibly from the JP 8000, Roland keeps taking a step backwards. Why not stick to a winning formula?. Perhaps, this is their attempt to recreate one. The sounds on this sound very familiar, nothing much new here. I'm by no means an expert, but does this mean we are going to hear the same sounds again and again, on every new record. Like the DX7?. If you like the old classic sounds, then great. Nothing beats the original synths,. They have their own character.
The synths of the past are thr precursors of the synths of the future!!! The sunths of the future take the technology of the past and transform it into the technology of the future!!! Plus the future technology adds to that technology of the past by the advances ot the future!!! I am very impresses by the sound of this machine, and Roland can say that here is the future in the NOW!!!
Yea, the Juno-G of the early 2005 ish was cheap. It was clearly a money grab. BUT THIS! and the new JX-08 is worthy to hold the original names. Well done Roland.
I like this baby...but you can buy tons of synths for that money, for example: Korg WaveState + ModWav + Minilogue XD REAL analog synth and even a Lenovo laptop for sequencing/DAW to controll the synths. From this perspective it's pretty expensive...in this synth-saturated world. I also remember the prices from the eighties but I don't know how to calculate with devaluation, 2000 USD is always 2000 USD, at that time one could get the Korg M1 workstation, or a D50 + Juno 106. Nevertheless, this synth impresses me, despite what the funny haters say, hehe.
the one thing epic about the juno was the chorus, i see from another video that they modelled in the white noise making it unusable! come on give us the truth if we are going to buy it then we need to know the shortfallings : )
If you want Roland analogue, vote with your dollars … it’s the only thing Roland will understand, clearly … I’m not giving Roland another red cent until they start listening to their (in my case, at least, past - and, hopefully, analog future - consumers) … but that remains to be seen … Thousands, for a not-even-ACB VST, in a big box … Not a chance 👋🏼 …
Sure, it's passable. It does the famous sounds, to the non-discerning ear. But the punch isn't threre, the raw impact isn't there. It's kind of "flat and glazed over" sounding. The filter is definitely not as fat or juicy. It's rather expensive. Why waste the component costs of built in speakers?! How bout skip those entirely and just sell this at $1299, where it's decent emulation would be a good overall deal. At $2k I really don't know why you wouldn't save up a bit more and try and find a Juno 6 or 60, or you could buy a 106 AND a JX-3P probably and have the real things.
Um.... All Strats sounds like Strats except... Well, the strings, the electronics, the pots, the pickups, the wiring the neck. Erm. Roger that (Not)... Anyway, not sure useless "Internal Speakers" really qualify as "Fun nod to it's legacy". They're pretty junky & qualify as "just another thing to go bad".
It's not a question of what makes an instrument as much as what makes a synthesizer. An analogue synthesizer is it's own instrument like a stratavarious for violins. It's not electronics like a pc. A 386 pc is obsolete because new 8 core pcs are better. A Jupiter 8 is NOT obsolete because the digital versions are not better. They don't sound better they in fact sound a bit worse. So it's not progress and improvement to say you "don't look back" and pass off computer software in a case as a real analog synthesizer. There's only one reason roland would do it. It's not improving the instrument. It's improving their CA$H. Plain and simple. The margin on discrete electronics is maybe 200% . The margin on digital software in a box must be up around 1000. The accountants made the decision there. How would you like to buy a plastic violin that has been computer micro-carved to resonate AS IF it was real wood. And then laminated with a 4k photograph of wood grain on the outside. The benefit to you vs. Real wood violin: Nothing. The benefit to the violin maker, 75% reductions in material costs. "But it's still a PLASTIC violin!" exactly. But they will pass it off as just as good because they will insist their computerized plastic etching machines are so accurate at compensating for the plastic material to make it vibrate just like wood! Bogus. Oberheim is re-issuing their obxa as obx8. All analog. Behringer is making analog versions of everything that is a far better value TO THE CUSTOMER than any of the software in a box is. This Juno x is a great DIGITAL software in a controller box. But it is not an analog synthesizer. And the cheating is in trying to pass it off as one. If the margin was the same they would be honest. But it's not. And so roland is not.
Oh barf. I've never ordered a synth faster in my life. You guys need to relax. Every digital synth ever made is "software in a box". It's digital code in a chip. This things sounds and looks amazing.
Even through TH-cam I can hear that it's not analog. I just spent 2k on a real one, and another 700 bucks to have it completely re-done-voice chips, capacitors, power supply, outputs, all upgraded. It sounds phenomenal. This thing just doesn't do it.
Totally different. A boutique has less voices, only 1 part where this is 4 part. No keys, or screen or pitch wheel. You can load different models into these. Check the website, I think they have a comparison chart somewhere.
Boutique has 4 voices and 1 Oscillator lmao. Juno-X has 256 voices and 4 Oscillators. Not to mention built in effects, aftertouch, and a vocoder. You sure?
they are over priced but I don't think it's a cash grab, there are some real differences in the hardware that make it worth the lay out. Should be $1999, not $2699.
Just look at the similar synths from the '80 s and look at the price. Take inflation rate into consideration and conclusion will come alone. No , this is not expensive. Is it needed with already existing Jupiter X , System 8 , Fantom...that's another question. In that case it sounds like money grabber
![[ 🔴LIVE ] Minecraft : Day5 บ้านหรู หนูอยู่สบายย](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/q3e6qfwDwFs/mqdefault.jpg)
coming from someone whos owned both vintage 60s and 106s. I would still buy this. If you want one of those, shell out the extra money, be prepared for repairs and chips to die over time. they sound great when they work, and are a blast, but as a producer whos not into using a laptop or computer for my sounds, this is something super creative. its quick, reliable, and the sounds sound good. 2100 in a day when Nords are 2700-4000 it just doesn't seem like a bad value. sounds can get exchanged, tons of effects. i feel theres a ton of value for money. especially if you're new into the vintage synth game. is it super different than a jupiter x? no, but the layout is easier to manage. it all comes down to taste. Do you want more controls to dig and edit, or do you like quick presets with easy to manage controls. its something for everyone.
exactly..SAM for PREZ!!!!!!!!!...Get over yourselves whinig about this old azz stuff..and yes,I have the HS60...lovely and OLDdddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddd....
As a Juno 106 owner (upgraded to Kiwi 106) I can speak from experience about it being temperamental, it's heading back to the repair shop to replace 2 sound chips and a wave chip, every few years something goes, after it's fixed I'm selling it. I got a Juno X and am extremely happy, does and sounds like everything the 106 does and a whole lot more.
On first glance, the Juno X is ticking all the boxes
Retro styling, functional keyboard action, easy to use presets....
hahaha, I don't think we're going to see this one on "Bad Gear", but it'd be a fun episode no doubt. Look at the quality of demos Florian does with Bad Gear. Imagine what he could do with this kind of quality kit.
You have already heard the Juno X in today's intro tune.
Sounds amazing. Has quality materials, beauty and power. Time to start saving.
@Melissa Lord out of curiosity, are you just curious or does this really matter to you? If so, why?
This is a massive upgrade to the juno ds. If you really want an analog synth, go buy an analog synth. With this feature set and sound, I think it's worth the money.
It's a worthy reimagination. ZEN-Core is great, It emulates the Juno sound very good and it has the looks. But ... for that price, they should at least have included the JP, JX and SH models.
Agreed 200 per key can add up. You would be 2600 in the hole at that point à prophet 6 used or a super 6 is within range
Or make it into a hybrid synth with analog filter...it's funny to see how Roland hates analog stuff nowadays, lol.
you can add the JP 8 now
I really like this channel. More informative than most. Thank you for the insights and also, you have a nice style of playing. I find your chord progressions and scales very soothing
My 106 died on me about 20years ago and I miss it. I’ve since then bought the Cherry Audio 106 VST synth and it sounds even better with added features like arpeggios, reverbs etc…. It only cost me $50. This Juno X with all its other sounds. It just the 60 or 106 brain is very cool and sounds great. Multi layering capabilities and the fact you can load other sounds from the cloud is a major plus.. if I could justify $2000 I would buy the X today. Analog out of a digital synth still sounds great. I want one now. If I was able to buy a vintage 106 over an X I’d buy the X first every time. Thanks for the video.
My first guitar lessons were at Alamo Music there off Babcock Rd back in like '98 with a dude named Dave! Now I'm heavily into synths and synth-youtube and I'm glad y'all are making these!!! Keep it up and keep in touch!
I love how you summarized that its not ash exact relics and that’s ok, it’s great as it is
As I go from video to video checking out this synth, the most common concern seems to be cost, but I honestly don't feel like $2,000 is that much. (I'm a music teacher who composes on the side, so I'm not a rich person. Haha!...far from it.)
I want one because it reminds me of my K2000 in that it's going to be relevant in 20 years. I feel that 20 years from now, I'll still be pulling music out of this. In the end, $2,000 isn't that much if the keyboard produces $2,000 worth of music. The truth is instruments are expensive. I'm a sax player, and my sax was around $6,000 25 years ago, which would be around $11,000 today after we consider inflation. My Strat was $2,000 20 years ago, which would be more than $3,500 today after inflation. My K2000 synth, which I love and has made a ton of music was originally around $3,000 back in the mid-90s (around $5,500 today after inflation). Thankfully, I bought my K2000 used, so that's my only thing. Maybe it would be worth the wait to get the Juno-X used, but I also need it now. I can't wait, or I would. With supply chains where they are, it could be years before you can get a Juno-X used, and considering how much other comparable instruments cost, I feel like $2,000 isn't that bad. That's just how I see things, and I understand not everyone agrees. I think an instrument's value really depends on who's using it and what they're doing with it. Cost can be relative. A lot of people have no problem spending $2,000 on a TV, but for me that's way too much. My family just doesn't use a TV enough to legitimize spending that much, but to other families it makes a lot of sense to spend that much. However, my next keyboard will be used 30-40+ each week, because it's a teaching tool and a composition tool. I feel like I'll get my money's worth out of it, and I think there are many others like me.
So I gave up the Jupiter X after being flummoxed by the interface and little menu diving screen on the left panel. It sounded great but the controls varied by the model activated. I gave it up before the control software was released, and I went back to Kronos. I am going to give this one a hard look however. As a Juno 60 fan and player for many years I think the panel interface is stellar. My assessment of the I-Arp was not great out of the box. For those who have the smarts ad patience to figure out how to get musical results out of it, it has promise but falls short of Montage/MODX and Kronos KARMA by a wide margin IMHO. This instrument just looks beautiful and sounds good, I might have to have one.
This is like ice cream or chocolate, I don't need it but I want it.
For this price and with the Jupiter-X already existing, you'd think they would put more effort to take it farther into the Juno world. An alpha Juno 2 engine would have been a good way to achieve that and propose something not currently on the market. But as always, the synths that don't have a name, that aren't well known, are banished from today's culture, suffering the Roland equivalent of Damnatio Memoriæ. Alpha Juno, Jupiter 6, CR-78, just to name the most well-known outcasts
My initial thoughts were it's 4 years too late, an octave too wide, and a grand too expensive. But now I see I'm not the target audience. I think it's a stage synth to place on the rack above one's Nord or CP88 stage piano. Neither the players nor the audience will care that it's another shell for Zen-core as long as it looks and sounds the part.
I'm waiting bro !!
I just wish Roland still made anything analog anymore. I mean this could do everything that any other zen core synth can do... they just have parts locked out so there's a reason to sell jupiter X's and Fantoms.
they made an analog semi recently and nobody bought it can you blame them for not caring what people say
Do the Juno-X sliders transmit CC or SysEx like the original Juno-106 did?
Thanks for the demo! Did you like the keybed on the new Juno X? (I wonder how it compares to the Jupiter X keybed mechanically.) Thanks!
I really like this and I am also a Jupiter X owner. Love the looks and 61 keys. I would never sell my Juno 60. The difference between this and the 60 is that the 60 sounds alive and breathing. However, the Juno X does sound very good. I wish that the price was around 1499.00. This is too expensive. You are looking at 2,300.00 with tax. Behringer built an analog deepmind and sold it for under 1k.
I’ve got a Juno 60 and just bought the Juno X. There’s nothing in it. I do love playing my 60 though, but sound wise no.
They sound the same
Here's what I propose: same everything as the 106, I mean analog and all, but with 2 oscillators, 16 voice polyphony, as a bi-tambral (2 x 8 voice). Add a pitch envelope with repeat function and modern fx and presto! The new "Juno 116" programmable analog synthesizer 😉
I ordered one....I have NOT been a fan of Roland Cloud or their VST attempts. Have been listening to synths, hardware & VST over internet for a very very long time. If people got past the "is it a Juno" crap and just listen to the synth they would love it. There are very few synths, hardware or VTS that sound like this synth. Of course that is subject to opinion. I bought a System 8 and returned it, many love the ACB over Zencore. One of the biggest selling point for me, XLR balanced output and the Vocoder. I own the lifetime Key for the Jupiter 8 and System 8 so I can add those to this synth. Lastly, I desperately needed a new MIDI controller and there have been manys comments on how good the build quality and key bed are.
P.S...I have owned a Jupiter 8 for 40 yrs now, they will look lovely together : }
@ghost mall Roland has been using the name Juno for digital keyboards since 20 years ago at least, why would anyone still expect analog because of the name is beyond me
Touch Circle; You are not a fan of Roland's VST's and yet, you are willing to pay $2,000 for the same VST's housed in a Roland keyboard? Where's the logic in that? I don't like RolandCloud subscriptions either(but renting the sounds is just one of 2 options available.) You can buy the Zenology Pro software for $229 and have 4,000 presets to tinker with AND you can buy a lifetime license for whatever modelled classic synths you want. Also...there are many choices of midi controller keyboards of good quality and you won't be resigned to just 61 keys(all of which bought together, would easily be half the cost of the Juno-X keyboard.)
@@HighlandStudio91 What MIDI controllers have this amount of controls?
@@lumer2b M-Audiio Oxygen Pro 61 is very close to having as many controls & it's $300. Nektar Panorama T6 61 has a decent amount of controls & a nice sized LCD display and it's the same price($300.) Arturia KeyLab is similar in all respects....
This synth was aimed for "Eye Candy" rather than sound enhancement you can get the same sound via Zen Core synths
Finally I’ll be able to get the System8 😅
Also great and the sound is even better!
Key question: is it simply a cut-down Jupiter-X ?
This would be great in an 80s cover band
You wouldn't want to record with it but for stage/live/mime Top of the Pops or The Tube, both of which are returning to live UK TV on their original time slots Thursday 7pm and Friday 5.30pm maybe...
I'll be recording with it all the time
@@toddsmithmusic3172 let's see how many come up on ebay after the honeymoon is over....
@@brianmansfield666 I'll be getting drunk with my baby on the honeymoon. It's a killer synth and the ones who choose to invest will make their own choices. I know 4 people who sold their Moog-One and that's not counting the man who runs this channel and that's a much higher end market, lol.
@@toddsmithmusic3172 "Lola... la la la la Lola...." ( ref The Kinks song... thinkabardit)
@@brianmansfield666 I know, I'm wrong. I can admit it. If Brian Mansfield has a opinion everyone with a different view must be wrong! I spaced out about that topic in school. I can see the light now, thank you =P
I like this zen core retro synth more than the Jupiter X. I will buy one used next year most likely. I have lots of old roland synths and new roland synths. Do I need it? Nope. But I like it.
the problem is not that much cost (as all roland costs too much) and it is not even the fact that it is digital. The problem is that roland is making instruments with very few differences between them, which sound the same, giving names that refer to noble names and then playing piano sounds! We are not talking about ugly synths but synths without their own identity
I can dig it, they all sound amazing.
@@lordpooptrain shut up, spammer.
Moreover you can have all those zen core sounds on your computer for much much cheaper price. You paying extra just for box hands on control but we know there is workaround like midi keyboards.
What about Nord then? 🫢
@@joseluishernandezseptien Nord's Lead A1 is the same price and does a lot less than the Juno-X. What's your point?
I can assure you, the guitar world is EVERY bit as ‘catty’/cork-sniffery … probably more-so … do ‘synth-nerds’ have an equivalent for tonewood? Toneplastic housings, maybe … ?!! 😉
There are definitely synth nerds who insist that the intangibles of analog can never be truly emulated in digital. There’s also some cork-sniffery surrounding filters.
"tonewood" lol nerds
Yep. I love all the hoohah about the wood then Jack White sticks some nails into a bit of 2x4 and slaps on a pickup and lets rip. However I do think materials have a stronger influence on the sound of an acoustic guitar (though design and workmanship are possibly more important).
Totally!
Yeah, basically anything that can be altered (or has a different generation, etc, etc, etc) can become a point of contention.
It’s great! If I didn’t already own a 106 I’d buy it in a heartbeat (....well almost)....the pricing is just off, given it’s already existent software just packaged in really nice controller I think Roland are being a bit grabby on the price. Sounds fantastic & aside from the odd dumb decisions like putting in n speakers (?.who has ever asked for those) it does have a lot of features so I’m sure they’ll sell a ton.
Why not just buy the Jupiter X? I wouldn't be surprised that you could eventually get the Juno X synth through Zencore for the Jupiter X.
Thanks, nice explanation. Wonder if you would show the built in speakers sound in other occasion.
Great Synth!
A shameless cash grab? No , whoever said that was thinking of Terminator Dark Fate, or, Star Wars: The Force Awakens" or..."goes into a COMA" This new Juno -X is an amazing platform that has the most state of the art sound library, user presests, effects, and user friendly controls that I have ever seen..and I started playing keyboards in 1988. I still own the original Yamaha DX-7
Please, could anyone tell me, if the Jupiter X has a better keybed vs the Juno X?
(It seems that the Juno X has the Fantom 06 keybed, only now with aftertouch, however
I suspect the Jupiter X may have the Fantom 6 keybed - not sure about either one.)
In other words, if the Jupiter X keys are mechanically superior to the Juno X?
Or they are equal?
Or Juno's keys are better?
don't care about the juno-106, but the juno-6 is a gem you could still find at this price point.
the 60 is the best one
@@falangistavaleroso9689 that's the one I kept, but very difficult to find nowadays for the price the juno-x is going for.
@@nilsvanderplancken Roland perfectly can re-release the classics, but they prefer to scam dumbs selling a, overpriced cheap computer with knobs with names as Jupiter, Juno etc. And the worse, this page is plenty of those idiots who say "both sound same". As if one skateboard sounded same as a classic Ferrari GTO, the world is plenty of low iq idiots.
Juno 6 sounds magical
I want to get either a Juno X or a Jupiter X for my home studio and to drag around to jam sessions. Can you tell me why I would pick one over the other?
The Jupiter is more aggressive sounding in a nut shell, more voices too I believe but don't qoute me on that.
Great Video as Always!
Yamaha needs to release the CS80 synth, in a modernized version.
How many expansions can you load in the Juno X ? (Not the Model Expansions) but the Wave Expansions 1-15 Just tryna figure out How many "Wave Expansions" can you load up on the Juno X? @Anyone!
Great sounds, great commentary.
Great review. Thanks!
Better the Juno X, or the Jupiter X?
One thing I want to know is, where is the weight coming from? This thing weighs more than a Juno 106, but it's not an analog synthesizer, so really it shouldn't weigh any more than a keyboard controller.
15:49 what patch is that, worth buying for that alone
you probably don't care anymore since this is two years old but for anyone else interested it's the Juno 106 PolyKey which is one of the default scenes on the Juno 106 model bank
Of course the analog purists won’t like it (they hated the Jupiter 80 too, which was actually a great board). For keyboard players, this is quite nice but I’m not sure where it would fit in a live setup. Overall, I don’t know where the market is for this product, as it isn’t niche enough for synth collectors or versatile enough for live performers. A studio might also just be better off getting the cloud version for much less..
I've never ordered a synth faster in my entire life. It sounds amazing and looks amazing.
I think it would excel in a live setup due to its scenes and preloaded settings. Not to mention it’s simple control layout. I like the two landing pads for FX pedals. I’d do a pair of Strymon BigSky & TimeLine. Bypass some internal FX. Those pedals can be preloaded with preset settings too. Plus an expression pedal and a vocoder. I’m ready… let’s set it up and forgot about the politics of pure analog juice! Let it ride!
"Roland. We don't chase ghosts, we just cash in on them."
They never said that, just pricks on the internet getting what they said wrong. Happens frequently...
Wait can't you get the same sounds from the Jupiter x which I already own.?
Yes
Unfortunately much of Roland release now is so what and basically much the same as before and a bit of good for the eye. This is a vst in a box. Good one but a vst. The Behringer DM12 kicks this in to touch at a fraction of the price. So does the Hydrasynth for price too. They are best off just knocking out the boutiques at least they are great on price. I love my ju06. Could they dare destroy themselves with uping the polyphony of that with a MK2? Id buy one if they did.
for this price range = go analog One...or for lower price pick up an used decent digital like System 8 synth
Why not just reissue the original?
13:44 I thought you were gonna start playing True by Spandau Ballet. 😄
Analog Circuitry is a personality trait at this point xD
I've seen side by side comparisons where people have easily replicated Juno-106 sounds on the Juno-X in real time with just the front panel controls, and they really do sound alike. But I still wonder who this is really for. If you're fine with digital, than buying a Fantom-0 and the Juno model expansion would get you more sounds and capabilities for the money. You'd lose the retro analog controls, but you still have some, and it's more versatile and powerful. If you want an analog synth only, than a DeepMind 6 or DeepMind 12 is a a lot cheaper and also works and looks like a Juno. So it's too expensive for an analog Juno clone, but not really a full digital workstation either. Neither fish nor fowl.
This video would have benefitted from sitting down at a desk and writing down what you wanted to say, and then refine it and then shoot it. This one feels rushed, and rambly.
It’s a highly subjective question; Is this a great musical instrument? That’s the same question as asking “Do you like it?”. I am sure there are people who WILL love it. And there are people who won’t. Why won’t roland launch a digital product and call it something that isn’t JUNO or JUPITER or FANTOM, and is something new, and oh by the way it has JUNO and JUPITER modes in its zen-core features. Why? Because they’re selling us what they think we want to buy. Something that looks like, and functions somewhat like a classic JUNO, including the JUNO like control surfaces. As for me, this does not do anything for me. I’d rather buy a nice controller and just play software instruments rather than buy a zen-core powered keyboard. There’s nothing here that I can’t do on a laptop.
I think it is a good idea and surely would be something nice to see on stage, but it does not worth $2,000, you can say whatever of how it sounds, but it is still a VST on a Juno 106 chassis with speakers (totally unnecessary in my opinion), besides, Roland already has the System 8 which uses Analog Circuit Behavior for $1700 with Juno 60 and 106 engines
If you need a 106 vst it's better to consider the Roland 106 VST, or the TAL U NO LX for $65
My conclusion is, great sounds, great looking, but overpriced AF
Simply put..there is a lot to like in this synth
The price is okay, I mean it's a huge synthesizer and it's not the 80s anymore, let's face it - it's made for a small audience of enthusiasts and it's expensive to make all those bits and pieces that comes with hardware, even if it's just a computer inside. The thing I don't get with these remakes is their incredibly small screens, at that price range you can easily use a smartphone display and it won't cost that much, it's already mass produced in every variation you can imagine, touch screens and all. And you can add sequencers to make it a little more dawless fun to use, most people who purchase hardware synthesizers don't use computers for a reason, if they did - they might as well just use a VST plugin, these hardware synths are made for people who like the "hands-on" feel of knobs, buttons and sliders to make adjustments on the fly while performing.
You are describing the Fantom Series 😀
@@ThisisRends Indeed, throw the Roland JD-Xi if you can't afford the fantom series, or MODX if you wanna go cheap but powerful, Montage if you wanna go nuts.
"small audience of enthusiasts" LOL has this guy been asleep for the entire boutique series?
Ah come on, yet another Zen Core player? It's the same engine like the MC 101, but it's 4 times more expensive. How is this NOT a money grab?!?!
EDIT: To be fair, it sounds great, it really looks beautiful and it has a lot of Juno vibes coming with it. I can totally see why ppl would love it, but 2 grand? Roland? Seriously?
Very comparable price to other digital synths of similar specs. It's features rival the Nord Lead A1 for the same price.
Exactly my thoughts, looks and sounds great, but it is overpriced
I'd be happy if it was at the $1500 price point. This is just too steep for what my Deepmind already does just fine. I don;t need the drums or sequencing or other bells and whistles. I need something to play juno sounds that isn;t eating up CPU cycles.
It's possible Zach might not be able to share his true feelings ;)
Please do the Juipter 80
With 2000 euros I would get the Moog matriarch
No disrespect to any Juno X fans, but this is not innovation. Roland no longer designs the future, they just exploit their past.
Analog does not = backwards
It sound pretty good for digital synth, but it dont sound full and punchy like any analog gear, nevertheless the best updated engine of Roland digital synths.
It sounds better than the original actually. You should start hearing more with your hears instead your head.
@@DNGMaestro wrong! You obviously have not owned a juno 6, 60 or 106. I have a 6 and 106. The 6 sounds amazing almost magical if you massage the sliders.. 106 is punchy. Digital gear just sounds flat period WHEN A/B to the real deal. TH-cam video comparisons don't reveal the nuance. This is why they cost thousands now because they are living breathing works of art...same as vintage Marshall Plexi amps or R8 R9 Les Pauls. There is a reason why Lenny Kravitz bought ex Abbey Road ex Beatles studio console. Because human ears like analogue audio.. emotional response.. Not on paper perfect technical statistics...
@@brianmansfield666 lol... I actually played the 60, the 106 and the X, side by side, in a store, which was a great experience. I had also already played the originals several times before. It's clearly you who never played the Juno-X in person and although you say "yOUtUbE vIdEO cOmpARisOns dOn'T rEveAL tHE nUancE", you are judging exclusively by youtube videos, which is a pretty idiotic irony.
Anyway, youtube videos show clearly how it sounds as good and better in many cases.
If you can't aknowledge that you personally want the originals to sound better, regardless of them sounding better or not, you're just in denial and you are using those pieces of gear just to feel better about yourself, and then you come on youtube videos say that type ignorant catchphrases "dIgItAL gEaR jUsT SouNDs Flat". You're the type of person that would fail a blind test and then would make ridiculous excuses about it.
Like i said, people should start hearing more with their hears instead of their head.
@@brianmansfield666 Good luck massaging those 127 steps of scratchy sliders hahaha What a crock o' shit lol
@@brianmansfield666 🥱💨
Around 4:50 in this video, paraphrasing: "The synth has built-in speakers and they are pretty useless. Kind of a fun nod to its legacy. And it has a hoover patch" - great job trying to sell this synth. Made me lol a lot.
Acb technology is stronger so why are they using zen core again for more polyphony. Aight.......that don’t make sense to me though who’s gonna use over 100 notes at once ? It’s over 100 notes at the same right ? Lmfao god damn
I’d say it’s got good build quality on the outside but on the inside it’s the inferior zen core and a korg radias sounds more thick at Juno sounds than it.
Not worth 2k, looks beautiful, doesn’t sound like the competing Dave smith synths or a real Juno
Probably got a nice fat raspberry pi under there like the korgs 🤣
@@jonathanc1458 yes I'm sure that on these extremely overpriced synths that very little effort is placed into making them, whereas, with dave smith synths, I look under the hood and it looks like a piece of impressive technical achievements with african mahogany side panels, which, is not what I can say for some of the other synths I've looked inside.
At 1400 bucks it might have been acceptable, at $2K it's a travesty. I don't get the Zencore engine. Is there a recognizable "zencore sound"? Something that it's particularly good at? Or does the engine only exist to emulate classic sounds? Roland seems such a confused company. Look at the synths Korg is coming out with, and look at the emulator c**p that Roland is putting out.
Relax. It sounds like a 106 and it's future proof. It's exactly what so many want. Zencore does does an amazing job at recreating the old sounds without the instability of analog tech.
Zencore is it's own thing, it just happens to do the old models. It's like any other engine. TBH, the Zen sounds are mostly better than many of the models. People get hung up about "the models" and forget it's a fully blown engine. Maybe because EVERY TH-cam video bangs on about JX, JD and JP blah blah.
@@lordpooptrain They already have a vst on Roland cloud. Roland seems to be catering to fetishists with the hardware.
I wouldn't say they're that confused. If you look at the company as a whole, Roland's whole thing is that they have advanced digital modelling and realistic "interfaces" for a bunch of traditionally accoustic instruments. Like realistic digitally modelled pianos (I have the flagship and it's really good), digitally modelled saxophones, digitally modelled drum kits, and digitally modelled accordions. All with extra quality of life features (backing parts, different models and parameters for different kinds of pianos/drums/wind instruments/accordions, piano doesn't have to be tuned every few months, can use headphones to play at night, etc).
And here we have a digitally modelled analogue synth that can be used as a replacement to a juno 106 (like my piano is a replacement for an upright accoustic that's more convenient) for a gigging musician. But it also has a bunch of quality of life features for those who want them (backing parts, models for the 60, 106 and kinda the alphas, noise settings for chorus, can tweak temperature based detuning to be off or consistent). Am I going to spend 3.8k AUD on it? No, it's not worth it for me. But if you're in the market for a 106 and don't want the old analogue circuitry screwing up then it might be. So given all of this I actually think they're being pretty consistent with what they're putting out.
@@lordpooptrain Not as much of an amazing job as ACB on the Boutiques and System 8.
Vst in a box with nostalgia flavor
Every single digital synth ever made is a vst in a box. It's digital code in a chip instead of a computer.
@@lordpooptrain i mean zen core is rly not so good in terms of quality of the sound. I would prefer at least acb or analog.
Is the difference between this and a 106 really that much?
It's a future proof 106 with modern effects and 4 stackable parts. XLR out, USB, and a vocoder. No chorus noise. It's amazing.
@@lordpooptrain Of course. It's just the reviewer states that it's not quite like the real thing. The question is I expect most people will ask is by how much? That I appreciate is not easy to measure.
I have a Juno-60. I can dial my Xm to the point nobody could tell, even me!
The difference is this one is not a pain to have. Also, it’s world’s more powerful and versatile in every single way imaginable.
To me what really break it is this whole workstation with 4 parts multi timbral and the iArpeggio crap that makes everything you play sound like a crappy 80s wedding band that covers Kenny G. Nobody asked for 256 notes polyphony, why not ditch the speakers, the workstation functions, the iArpeggio, just keep 16 notes polyphony, keep the Juno emulation and sell this for $1200.
Sounds a little dead and repetitive to me. As soon as you get them side by side with a classic model.
That’s the deal breaker for me, it’s like, I’d just buy a vintage one at that point.
Deepmind is a friendly option too!
Their "never go backwards" mission misconstrues analogue as backwards when it is in fact futuristic. We still haven't figured out how finito get digital to sound as pleasing to the ear as analogue. Infinite resolution of analogue is unmatched. Take something like a Polybrute and play some really high notes (c7 and up) and it is immediately obvious that no matter how many times you oversample digital it just doesn't sound as good as analogue in the very top registers. If Roland really were a forward looking company they'd concede this point and try to innovate in the analogue domain.
That’s not even their mission statement 😂
Why buy this if you can buy cheaper System 8 and have Juno60, Juno106 aaand Jupiter8 ?
And jup 4 :)
A bit of both
Sounds good, glad to see its not a rompler.
Your hands seems to take my attention.
Of course, we want a great synth with great sounds and features for our money. In general, we often can understandably be too picky and criticize too deeply, looking for faults as well as pluses. We live in an imperfect world. Nothing is perfect. For me, possibly from the JP 8000, Roland keeps taking a step backwards. Why not stick to a winning formula?. Perhaps, this is their attempt to recreate one. The sounds on this sound very familiar, nothing much new here. I'm by no means an expert, but does this mean we are going to hear the same sounds again and again, on every new record. Like the DX7?. If you like the old classic sounds, then great. Nothing beats the original synths,. They have their own character.
Is this deepfake? Guy looks like a young Steve Porcaro!!
The synths of the past are thr precursors of the synths of the future!!! The sunths of the future take the technology of the past and transform it into the technology of the future!!! Plus the future technology adds to that technology of the past by the advances ot the future!!! I am very impresses by the sound of this machine, and Roland can say that here is the future in the NOW!!!
Yea, the Juno-G of the early 2005 ish was cheap. It was clearly a money grab. BUT THIS! and the new JX-08 is worthy to hold the original names. Well done Roland.
Can't see the point of it. Don't you have most of these sounds in the fantom fa, plus srx expansion?
I pre orded it ! Most expensive synth yet !
oh no, built in speakers ? this gets me a no no
I like this baby...but you can buy tons of synths for that money, for example: Korg WaveState + ModWav + Minilogue XD REAL analog synth and even a Lenovo laptop for sequencing/DAW to controll the synths. From this perspective it's pretty expensive...in this synth-saturated world.
I also remember the prices from the eighties but I don't know how to calculate with devaluation, 2000 USD is always 2000 USD, at that time one could get the Korg M1 workstation, or a D50 + Juno 106. Nevertheless, this synth impresses me, despite what the funny haters say, hehe.
It’s sounds just like a 106 and 60
"A strat's a strat." No my, good man, no. The guitar world is just as wild - tone chasing is equally, if not more, prevalent there too.
Shameless cash grab.
the one thing epic about the juno was the chorus, i see from another video that they modelled in the white noise making it unusable! come on give us the truth if we are going to buy it then we need to know the shortfallings : )
You should be able to turn off the noise. At least in the Zenology Pro VST and in the MC-707 you can adjust the noise level of the Juno chorus.
You can turn off the noise or have it permanently off.
May Yahweh bless you please do a video on the roland jupiter 80!!!!!!😁😁😁🙏🙏💪💪
Am i crazy or was this originally listed at $1700 or $1800 & then jumped up to $2000 everywhere online within a week ?
The Reverb Lords don’t sleep!
If you want Roland analogue, vote with your dollars … it’s the only thing Roland will understand, clearly …
I’m not giving Roland another red cent until they start listening to their (in my case, at least, past - and, hopefully, analog future - consumers) … but that remains to be seen …
Thousands, for a not-even-ACB VST, in a big box … Not a chance 👋🏼 …
@@sheateeley1 personally ill not buy this even for 200
People try to sound techy and then say something like vst in a box. Juno X sounds amazing.
They are going to sell a ton of these
I’ll keep buying these, they’re fantastic!
I couldn't agree more, VST in a box for 2k is stupid. Roland is on board with agenda 2030, I'm done with them.
Sure, it's passable. It does the famous sounds, to the non-discerning ear. But the punch isn't threre, the raw impact isn't there. It's kind of "flat and glazed over" sounding. The filter is definitely not as fat or juicy. It's rather expensive. Why waste the component costs of built in speakers?! How bout skip those entirely and just sell this at $1299, where it's decent emulation would be a good overall deal. At $2k I really don't know why you wouldn't save up a bit more and try and find a Juno 6 or 60, or you could buy a 106 AND a JX-3P probably and have the real things.
You cannot have a classic of classics. This is just a reimagining
Um.... All Strats sounds like Strats except... Well, the strings, the electronics, the pots, the pickups, the wiring the neck. Erm. Roger that (Not)... Anyway, not sure useless "Internal Speakers" really qualify as "Fun nod to it's legacy". They're pretty junky & qualify as "just another thing to go bad".
It's not a question of what makes an instrument as much as what makes a synthesizer. An analogue synthesizer is it's own instrument like a stratavarious for violins. It's not electronics like a pc. A 386 pc is obsolete because new 8 core pcs are better. A Jupiter 8 is NOT obsolete because the digital versions are not better. They don't sound better they in fact sound a bit worse. So it's not progress and improvement to say you "don't look back" and pass off computer software in a case as a real analog synthesizer. There's only one reason roland would do it. It's not improving the instrument. It's improving their CA$H. Plain and simple. The margin on discrete electronics is maybe 200% . The margin on digital software in a box must be up around 1000. The accountants made the decision there. How would you like to buy a plastic violin that has been computer micro-carved to resonate AS IF it was real wood. And then laminated with a 4k photograph of wood grain on the outside. The benefit to you vs. Real wood violin: Nothing. The benefit to the violin maker, 75% reductions in material costs. "But it's still a PLASTIC violin!" exactly. But they will pass it off as just as good because they will insist their computerized plastic etching machines are so accurate at compensating for the plastic material to make it vibrate just like wood! Bogus. Oberheim is re-issuing their obxa as obx8. All analog. Behringer is making analog versions of everything that is a far better value TO THE CUSTOMER than any of the software in a box is. This Juno x is a great DIGITAL software in a controller box. But it is not an analog synthesizer. And the cheating is in trying to pass it off as one. If the margin was the same they would be honest. But it's not. And so roland is not.
Oh barf. I've never ordered a synth faster in my life. You guys need to relax. Every digital synth ever made is "software in a box". It's digital code in a chip. This things sounds and looks amazing.
Right!
You will be happy to know the casing on the Juno X is real metal and they are going to offer real wood sides, not a 4k laminated print of wood.
😂 & ..🗣 "We Design The Future!"👻.. R.I.P Mr Kakehashi.
Even through TH-cam I can hear that it's not analog. I just spent 2k on a real one, and another 700 bucks to have it completely re-done-voice chips, capacitors, power supply, outputs, all upgraded. It sounds phenomenal. This thing just doesn't do it.
No reason it can’t be both.
So it's a ' boutique ' but in a bigger case ! lol
Totally different. A boutique has less voices, only 1 part where this is 4 part. No keys, or screen or pitch wheel. You can load different models into these. Check the website, I think they have a comparison chart somewhere.
@@MusicZeroOne so it sounds better than a boutique does it? More emotion... More ' dynamic'?
Boutique has 4 voices and 1 Oscillator lmao. Juno-X has 256 voices and 4 Oscillators. Not to mention built in effects, aftertouch, and a vocoder. You sure?
@@brianmansfield666 Better is subjective. I just highlighted they are totally different machines. You seem to be confused
@@MusicZeroOne you think it's appropriate to punch down ?
Cash grab imo , def
they are over priced but I don't think it's a cash grab, there are some real differences in the hardware that make it worth the lay out. Should be $1999, not $2699.
Best money I've spent on a synth in a long time but okay :)
@@lordpooptrain congrats
@@vegettoblue8705 There is a massive market for this synth and the synth purists are outnumbered. It's amazing.
@@lordpooptrain “synth purists”, you mean idiots right? A real synth purist only cares about sound, not concepts.
Just look at the similar synths from the '80 s and look at the price. Take inflation rate into consideration and conclusion will come alone. No , this is not expensive. Is it needed with already existing Jupiter X , System 8 , Fantom...that's another question. In that case it sounds like money grabber
Get someone that can play.