The sounds are very close (practically identical). However, in my headphones I heard more background noise (hiss) with the real 106 for some reason. Also, I heard popping from the Cloud Juno which makes me think your buffer might be set very small giving low latency (I don't know your settings). If it does need a larger buffer then the feel might not be as good. These are standard virtual instrument issues I know. Just my observations.
Yeah the buffer looks pretty small, or the computer can´t handle the 106 VST. All the legendary Roland ACB are pretty intensive on CPU but I have the Roland Cloud and they can work perfectly and on real time without any weird noise with the right CPU/buffer settings. The noise from the 106 can be the chorus. The boutiques have the same effect but you can turn it off.
The thing I like about hardware is the setup is way simpler. With software you have to involve a computer and that opens up the possibility of a lot of problems such as the computer not recognizing the midi controller. The latency might be really bad then there's the issue of not having a powerful enough computer and so you hear digital pops when playing complex chords with lots of effects like we heard in this video. With hardware you don't have to worry about any of that. You just turn it on and play.
That's true, but a lot of people can get it to work fine. As your studio or house starts filling up with keyboards and your out of room, or if you play live and a single laptop can effectively replace countless keyboards and your setup in a half hour, instead of hours moving gear, that's where you'll see the benefit. Not to mention, the cost differences.
For me, it is about the portability, complexity of setup at home or elsewhere. Even if a decent app is used on a tablet or an excellent software instrument is linked to a laptop, the added link can introduce latency and setup failure points. Nevertheless, a high end MIDI instrument coupled with a pro-level laptop and a premium software instrument provides a flexibility in switching between keyboard brand patches, legacy instruments sounds and keyobard types like vintage organ, synthesizer and modern beat making machines.
@@michaelskywalker3089 I've been using Windows soft synths on laptops in "all" of my bands since 1997. It's just a matter of spending the time to learn which VST's are over taxing, and which ones are system resource hogs. In general, most VST's run in a live performance without noticable latency issues even on an older computer. If your trying to run a whole studio off it, that may be a different story. Use a separate computer for the VST's and one for recording if needed. A laptop takes up a lot less room than a synth like the Juno, Jupiter, etc. Demos are available of most VST's so you can test them out and see if they run well enough.
Interesting review. One big difference is the Roland Cloud VST has build in effects on the bottom right side, also reverb and delay so that automatically makes the vst sound different. If you notice on the 1984 strings patch the effect strip has an addition chorus (CH2) cranked up to 100%, added onto the build in chorus already.
been using Roland Cloud for a couple of years now and they keep adding tons of new patches, instruments and like endless effects, I know I won't sub forever but I'm having a blast with this thing atm
Great video as always. I have a 106 (which i will always keep), and i've tried the cloud. The cloud is great alternative if the price of a 106 is not what you want to spend your cash on / or can afford..... but for me - nothing beats playing the real 106 - both in terms of sound, character, and the tactile nature - basically it's soo much fun.
I hear all of these people saying there's no difference....But there is. There's more depth, better transients, warmer vibe from the real analog. You can't beat it!
Isn’t cloud synths just gonna be the 21 century version of “I wish I never sold that thing” “Oh yeah had those sounds back in the day, shame they cancelled the service”
@Rhizosphere I bought one recently and it's a great sounding synth like almost everything from Roland, with a pretty decent knobby interface. The Juno plugouts are definitely my most used so far.
I was all about VSTs 20 years ago, when the best of them already matched (and even exceeded) the capabilities of hardware synths. I spent quite a bit of money on them too, proudly preaching to everybody willing to listen how hardware was now unnecessary and inferior to software. ...and then two decades have come to pass. NONE of my original software is functional anymore: many (SOOO many!😥) expired together with their company, others never switched to 64bit or stayed compatible with newer versions of Windows. With them went my presets/patches, my songs, my setups, my sweat and blood and tears, my decades of work (even if it was 'just' a hobby). The only hardware I bought at the time (a Roland JP8080) is the only thing that is still functional, that retained my work, that I can use the same way as I did 20 years ago, and that I can still get serviced (although it never needed it except for a quick $50 clean and checkup to ensure its lasting presence). All that money spent on software is now gone too, whereas I could still sell my Roland for about a third of the price it cost me brand new in 2000. Oh, and hardware allows me to use both of my hands to interact with a complex yet functionally optimized interface instantly, without having to do multiple complicated setups, assignments, and all that other creativity-killer on a controller. Make of it what you will.
First of all., plugins have certainly not sounded „perfect“ 20 years ago, and many still don’t. Secondly: Whether you work with hardware or software, always bounce to audio! If you can not access 20 year old projects it means you never finished them.
The sounds are quite similar, the hardware synth sounds generally more dirty but you can do it to the vst with saturation/noise and stereo phase/pitch modulation, but having it from start makes you (arguably) interact better with the sounds as you play expressively...
Cloud synths provide an opportunity to get the most suitable version of a patch and may be equaled only by a constant update by the hardware manufacturer. I guess the difference becomes moot as the mixing hardware and amplification gear rises in power and quality; especially as the computing power reaches a certain level given a very low setup and output latency. This might hold true only for the highest quality VSTs that are able to operate at high bit rate and are able to process high frequency wave files at a decent efficiency. Nice to see and hear Jack playing without the need for a blind fold! Nevertheless, I would always prefer as much sound processing and interactive devices (including the keyboard) be included in the hardware keyboard or in a 'sophisticated' high end MIDI keyboard.
Seems like where they got the sounds to match exactly it's a toss-up as the cloud performance is so well done, but if you need to match the 106 exactly for every patch you may want to stick with the 106 - great comparison of the two!
I owned a Juno 106 back in the 80's. Also a Korg polysix and then a Roland jx10. Hearing it now, I appreciate it's sound way more than I did then😀. I was so thrilled to ditch analogue synths for the "real" sounds of first gen romplers (m1, d70) and touch sensitivity too!
Jack, and D...so tasty! If everyone could get as high on life, as we can on music...there'd be no need, for drugs. I'm really impressed, by all the patches. What a time, to be alive; and especially, to be playing keys! Just like, a guitarist...an artist's sound, is in the touch of their hands. D just knows, how to serve up the cream. Really enjoyed listening to this.
i live poor life so roland cloud is amazing for me at least...i love it so much and lots of great sounding patches for neo soul/jazz/funk type music 😍🤩
They're incredibly close. I just noticed a subtle thinning of the sound on the software version; it was fractionally less fat. However, blindfolded, I probably couldn't tell the difference.
Tal Uno Lx is a great Juno vast emulation as is Cherry Audio’s DCO 106 for those on a budget. The Roland cloud 106 is very authentic but it’s about 150 or £20 within Roland Cloud ultimate on a subscription basis. Rolands Zen Core Juno which can live in the Fantom just doesn’t seem to have the heft of the Roland legendary instruments which use ACB technology rather than Zencore. Zencore sounds weak in comparison.
Tal Uno Lx is great indeed, but emulates the Juno 60 (which has a similar architecture as the 106, but a different sonic character - which is the reason why many people own both). Another great 106 emulation is the new Softube Model 84. same quality level as Roland‘s ACB version. And yes, the ACB versions sound more authentic than the ZEN/ABM versions, which sound good and similar, but not quite as accurate than the legendary series. If sb has a powerful computer, ACB is recommended for authentic recreation, as it is rather CPU hungry, compared to ZEN
The emulation is very close, no difference on some sounds. But surely he is comparing two different sounds on the last comparison, it sounds like an Organ sound on the hardware, not the E Piano sound.
Great comparaison, i think there is no limit to how close you can get the cloud to sound like the real thing but it take time. At the end very little difference. Roland did a great job. I think the difference is bigger with the Jupiter-8 because i found that the oscillator on the cloud sound harsher than real VCO but not harsher than Roland vintage DCO.
D.Bingerz bringing the heat! 😁 With all these comparisons I've seen, I wonder how much the settings on the audio interface (sample rate, etc.) might affect the comparison? I suppose it would be difficult to try and tune the output of an AI to the sound quality that the Juno's output produces, but either way, I just enjoy the sound of all of the Roland instruments I've tried since subscribing last year - I just renewed my subscription last month!
Having both the Jupiter-X and the System-8, I would confidently say that the System-8 has a much nicer emulation. The Jupiter-X is running a simplified version requiring significantly less processor power, but loses some of the richness and authenticity (maybe 10-20% depending on the patch).
Unfortunately easy on headphones just because the swirl on the white noise in the background stands out so much. Buuuuut… Still amazing how similar they sound. Not surprised some of the Cloud version were better. Real hardware is subject to deterioration of production defects or…well, any number of things that might make your unit sound just ever so slightly not as thick or not as creamy or (etc). But with software, you can dial in the perfect sound and it will *always* be the perfect sound. All of that said (and also admitting I own a Jupter-Xm and have the 106 on Cloud)…….. I still yearn for a real Juno-106 something fierce. Just want a part of history, the fact I can use it on tracks is really more of a bonus at that point.
Pretty fricken hard to hear the difference. But I suppose that's to be expected with an electronically-generated tone. I imagine recreating such a tone is far easier than recreating an organic sound, such as a hammer striking a piano string or a tine in a Fender Rhodes electric piano. Or even the spinning tonewheels inside a Hammond organ.
@@psychowsky Yeah, I think they realized there were a lot of people that feel like you do. I've been subscribing for a couple of years. I think it's a good investment. It would take me a long time to buy the synths that I use on a regular basis. Having access to them all is great.
Real deal seems punchier and have more cutting transients which will make it easier for mixing, also less boomy low end. Thats the difference i hear on my Adam A7X speakers. Kind regards to all nerds out there.
I thought the real Juno sounds all sounded a bit more open, with a bit more attack. Loved all the sounds from both, and I’m sure the Cloud version could be tweaked.
Maaaan that sounds good, I wonder if they put any UA plug-ins on the insert for the Juno in Console before going into Logic. I sometimes put an API or SSl channel strip on the insert for my MPC 2500 before going in to Ableton.
Awesome video comparison! I think I know the answer, but would you recommend the Juno 106 or the Juno 60 as a first Juno software synth from Roland? I already have the SH-101. Thank you.
Did you pick one in the end? 6/60 has the more vintage tone, arp, no factory midi. 106 has midi but common voice chip failure, no arp, some might say doesn't sound as good as 6/60 but it's so close. 6 is the cheapest due to no patch memory but has a wonderfuly simple design layout and fast patch creation anyway.
I can easily hear the difference. Analog Juno is more forward as if compressed (soft knee). More depth, realism. The software is flat, less three dimensional. Those guys in the room have the PA cranked up which is giving them body based perception, but in headphones, I can easily hear the difference. I am an audio engineer by trade though. Now, if you record an album and stack several analog keyboards together you get a deeper, more vibrant presence that new albums using plug ins dont have.
I hear W&W! I tried matching the perceived volume in the room before Dan sat down and had Gain plugins on the channels in an effort to balance things out. I could see the clipping but didn’t want to ruin the flow of the video and give the game away - dammed either way. Thanks for watching and commenting Xx
Either somethings not right with noise floor level or universal audio interfaces aren’t worth the money. Dreadful floor noise being recorded in this video. It’s worse with Juno audio out jacks. Were proper TRS cables used? Maybe speech mics are picking up room speakers or something. If it’s intentional with chorus fx then I wouldn’t be interested in introducing dreadful noise artefacts into a mix.
For those complaining about the software/subscription paradigm (fairly), just buy the Roland System 8, same exact sound engine (ACB) in a knobby 'gig synth'. It should be noted that the New Fantom/JupiterX/Xm uses a cut-down version of ACB, which gives you less accuracy but more polyphony. Having all those vintage emulations in a workstation is pretty sweet though.
@@swtdr34mz I had a real 106 for years. The System 8 Juno is like 85% there, and the voice chips don't die for no reason. Plus all the modern conveniences, I would recommend it over paying crazy money for a vintage 106 these days.
@@AynsleyGreen the Roland Cloud is about 85% too / and you can choose a much better Controller with better knobs and better Keys. System 8 Keybed is for 1 Chord Players, not for Vintage Leads or BassRuns. If you want the Juno Sound, get the Model84 and Keylab MKII - but thats just MY Taste. If you like System 8 - love it. For me it was overprized af - The FM Update was a nice Addon but for that Money the ASM Hydrasynth is the Synth to go 👍
@@swtdr34mz The latest System 8 engine does a lot of what the Hydrasynth does when you dig in to it (I'm serious, it's deeper than it looks), plus the Plug-Outs do all of the 80s classic sounds very convincingly - I don't understand why people shit on it. Used it on probably one hundred gigs as a bass synth - I had no issues with the keybed. If they did a System 16 with more voices and such I'd buy it.
Used to have the real thing now have the cloud , soft synths are great and no problem with the hardware taking up space…. But you still need a powerful computer which are not cheap! But I think for keyboards like the Juno Jupiter etc etc the cloud is the way forward , and this comparison proves it. I have done the same with my Korg keyboards and cloud and found you can hardly hear any difference…..
The two String I patches were extremely different. So if you knew your synth well, it would be easy to find the right one. It's a pain to make two patches as equal as possible and also EQ / mix them to the same level at all frequencies.
The problem is that the sound of Roland Cloud in the video is very similar to the original synth, but the sound I played through my DAW doesn't sound as good as that. Does anyone know where the differences come from?
I think the sounds itself are not relevant, the "issue" I see with Roland is they went from selling synths (you own a machine and you can do whatever you like) to RENTING you the possibility to make some sounds .. that s***ks IMHO
On the first patch I disagree: the OG has slightly more high end sheen...not factoring in noise and listening through good headphones but it is so darn close!
I bet if know one knew that they were switching between the plug in and the hardware they would just go on about how warm it sounds yadda, yadda, yadda. We humans are so full of it.. lol
You can still buy lifetime keys... I don’t see the point of people complaining about this, if you don’t want subscription then just don’t get it, they still offer lifetime keys (which I also prefer)
@@lumer2b No, they don't offer lifetime keys. The only thing you get are weekly licenses. If the weekly renewal fails for whatever reason then you are screwed and your money is gone. Probably forever if the cloud owner thinks that it's a good idea (ie by banning you for unknown reasons).
@@matt_phistopheles They do, I have SH-2 and D-50 lifetime keys. You buy them through Roland Cloud, you just need a free account and you can buy perpetual keys. I use them offline in my computer. Edit = I looked up and they say you need to connect online every 7 days, so this sucks indeed. It is somehow still working for me. This is a problem of software in general, even if they didn't do this crap authentication process and you had your software forever, your computer will inevitably become obsolete and die, and your lifetime software will most likely not work on newer machines. So, yeah, buy the System-8 or Jupiter-X(m) if you want ownership.
@@lumer2b No, even the so called lifetime keys are only valid for one week. After a week they deactivate themselves automatically unless you ask Roland about permission to use them for another week (which fails more often than not). A real lifetime key means: Install and activate once and then run forever afterwards without requiring any interaction with the developer.
Corrupting minds lol. will old synths go the way of old cameras? maybe -- its happening slower that photography equipment but it is happening - its easy to replicate any sound but sweeping lfos around and keeping authenticity - that isnt easy for vsts! - yet
Good spot Roman, sadly it’s a feature of any OG Juno 106, especially when the Chorus is enabled. The Cloud allows you to add hiss in, which I did, couldn’t quite get it as loud as the original but think it managed to make them close enough that Dan couldn’t guess from the hiss alone. Thanks for stopping by X
@@jackduxbury1632 a reply from THE MAN himself! I've learnt all I know from your keyboard lessons for beginners, pretty much. Waiting for a singing tutorial: how to high-pitch harmonize "just the two of us" and "dock at the bay" :) Please keep doing what you're doing, best of wishes
@@vechirni_anbernic oh Maaaaaan, thanks so much for sitting through even 30 seconds of my perpetual nonsense mate. Dodgy singing tutorial coming your way soon then!! Appreciate you hanging out Brother X
The two hardware same synths model (any brand, any model), won't sound the same neither because different conditions (temperature, status of parts etc), that's important to remember
It's the digitized new world and physical everything is slowly sinking into history. The hardware guys are making it happen faster with the ridiculous prices on vintage gear. A piece of gear you hated back in the day, now you'll pay thousands for it because it old and think being old automatically makes it cool. Sorry that only works when talking about me I'm old AF so I'm cool.
Real Juno all the way. The difference gets lost through the internet and RUclips. That's what Roland is counting on. And that "noise" factor is being exaggerated. My 106 has zero noise even with the chorus on.
Sorry to say this Roland, but the Cloud version sucks. It's terrible seriously. Muddy and not coming forward and so synthetic which i know it sounds weird, but it's true.
So huge difference. Original is so organic and have so much small random factors (resolution). Software is disgustingly right... It does not have same quality.
Softube Model 84 comparison next please! Outstanding vst!
The sounds are very close (practically identical). However, in my headphones I heard more background noise (hiss) with the real 106 for some reason. Also, I heard popping from the Cloud Juno which makes me think your buffer might be set very small giving low latency (I don't know your settings). If it does need a larger buffer then the feel might not be as good. These are standard virtual instrument issues I know. Just my observations.
Yeah the buffer looks pretty small, or the computer can´t handle the 106 VST. All the legendary Roland ACB are pretty intensive on CPU but I have the Roland Cloud and they can work perfectly and on real time without any weird noise with the right CPU/buffer settings.
The noise from the 106 can be the chorus. The boutiques have the same effect but you can turn it off.
I think it was clipping
@@kingdomofheavenmusic3 Definitely clipping.
The thing I like about hardware is the setup is way simpler. With software you have to involve a computer and that opens up the possibility of a lot of problems such as the computer not recognizing the midi controller. The latency might be really bad then there's the issue of not having a powerful enough computer and so you hear digital pops when playing complex chords with lots of effects like we heard in this video. With hardware you don't have to worry about any of that. You just turn it on and play.
You dont have to justify your GAS to us, sir. We're all here for the same reason. :)
That's true, but a lot of people can get it to work fine.
As your studio or house starts filling up with keyboards and your out of room, or if you play live and a single laptop can effectively replace countless keyboards and your setup in a half hour, instead of hours moving gear, that's where you'll see the benefit. Not to mention, the cost differences.
Until the sound chips decide to go crackle-crackle-poof (*gazing at the now silent, dead shell of my Juno-106*).
For me, it is about the portability, complexity of setup at home or elsewhere. Even if a decent app is used on a tablet or an excellent software instrument is linked to a laptop, the added link can introduce latency and setup failure points. Nevertheless, a high end MIDI instrument coupled with a pro-level laptop and a premium software instrument provides a flexibility in switching between keyboard brand patches, legacy instruments sounds and keyobard types like vintage organ, synthesizer and modern beat making machines.
@@michaelskywalker3089 I've been using Windows soft synths on laptops in "all" of my bands since 1997. It's just a matter of spending the time to learn which VST's are over taxing, and which ones are system resource hogs. In general, most VST's run in a live performance without noticable latency issues even on an older computer. If your trying to run a whole studio off it, that may be a different story. Use a separate computer for the VST's and one for recording if needed. A laptop takes up a lot less room than a synth like the Juno, Jupiter, etc.
Demos are available of most VST's so you can test them out and see if they run well enough.
Interesting review. One big difference is the Roland Cloud VST has build in effects on the bottom right side, also reverb and delay so that automatically makes the vst sound different. If you notice on the 1984 strings patch the effect strip has an addition chorus (CH2) cranked up to 100%, added onto the build in chorus already.
4:10
VST chorus is on 2
Hardware is on chorus 1
been using Roland Cloud for a couple of years now and they keep adding tons of new patches, instruments and like endless effects, I know I won't sub forever but I'm having a blast with this thing atm
They're so close when you use them in a sound you can't even find out, cloud is a great option to use multiple synths without breaking the bank
Great video as always. I have a 106 (which i will always keep), and i've tried the cloud. The cloud is great alternative if the price of a 106 is not what you want to spend your cash on / or can afford..... but for me - nothing beats playing the real 106 - both in terms of sound, character, and the tactile nature - basically it's soo much fun.
I agree, something about the real thing!
I hear all of these people saying there's no difference....But there is. There's more depth, better transients, warmer vibe from the real analog. You can't beat it!
Isn’t cloud synths just gonna be the 21 century version of “I wish I never sold that thing”
“Oh yeah had those sounds back in the day, shame they cancelled the service”
Exactly what i think seeing every kind of cloud service!
@Rhizosphere Buy a system 8, get the cloud synths stored in hardware.... ?
@Rhizosphere I bought one recently and it's a great sounding synth like almost everything from Roland, with a pretty decent knobby interface. The Juno plugouts are definitely my most used so far.
@@synthlogue True dat.The S-8 emulations are more or less spot on.
Had a real one. Sold it because one key didnt work. I was like: This thing doesnt work let me sell it pfff
I see D-Bingerz, I click. Simple.
would be interesting to see Softubes Model 84 (their 106) comes close
I was all about VSTs 20 years ago, when the best of them already matched (and even exceeded) the capabilities of hardware synths. I spent quite a bit of money on them too, proudly preaching to everybody willing to listen how hardware was now unnecessary and inferior to software.
...and then two decades have come to pass. NONE of my original software is functional anymore: many (SOOO many!😥) expired together with their company, others never switched to 64bit or stayed compatible with newer versions of Windows. With them went my presets/patches, my songs, my setups, my sweat and blood and tears, my decades of work (even if it was 'just' a hobby).
The only hardware I bought at the time (a Roland JP8080) is the only thing that is still functional, that retained my work, that I can use the same way as I did 20 years ago, and that I can still get serviced (although it never needed it except for a quick $50 clean and checkup to ensure its lasting presence). All that money spent on software is now gone too, whereas I could still sell my Roland for about a third of the price it cost me brand new in 2000. Oh, and hardware allows me to use both of my hands to interact with a complex yet functionally optimized interface instantly, without having to do multiple complicated setups, assignments, and all that other creativity-killer on a controller.
Make of it what you will.
This.
Perfectly said .
So you're telling me that you no longer use edirol orchestral and sampletank 2?
First of all., plugins have certainly not sounded „perfect“ 20 years ago, and many still don’t. Secondly: Whether you work with hardware or software, always bounce to audio! If you can not access 20 year old projects it means you never finished them.
Did no-one else spot that on the strings patch, one was set to chorus 1 and the other to chorus 2? Or am I mistaken? (I am a Juno 6 hardware owner!)
Exactly what I noticed. And then they are so surprised that the patches sound different...
The Dream Team, love it. Dan's #passtheparcelbeats has been a huge highlight of this year.
The 106 sounds amazing.
The sounds are quite similar, the hardware synth sounds generally more dirty but you can do it to the vst with saturation/noise and stereo phase/pitch modulation, but having it from start makes you (arguably) interact better with the sounds as you play expressively...
Cloud synths provide an opportunity to get the most suitable version of a patch and may be equaled only by a constant update by the hardware manufacturer. I guess the difference becomes moot as the mixing hardware and amplification gear rises in power and quality; especially as the computing power reaches a certain level given a very low setup and output latency. This might hold true only for the highest quality VSTs that are able to operate at high bit rate and are able to process high frequency wave files at a decent efficiency. Nice to see and hear Jack playing without the need for a blind fold! Nevertheless, I would always prefer as much sound processing and interactive devices (including the keyboard) be included in the hardware keyboard or in a 'sophisticated' high end MIDI keyboard.
Seems like where they got the sounds to match exactly it's a toss-up as the cloud performance is so well done, but if you need to match the 106 exactly for every patch you may want to stick with the 106 - great comparison of the two!
Chorus settings are different on the strings shootout. Hardware is on 1 and software is on 2.
Do a "Jack meets Daniel Bingham" please 👀👀
Impressive! I wonder how Arturia’s Jun-6V compares in there.
That one emulates the Juno 6, not the 106. Different sound, despite the similar architecture
@@danielfisch389 Thank you Daniel!
@a
I owned a Juno 106 back in the 80's. Also a Korg polysix and then a Roland jx10. Hearing it now, I appreciate it's sound way more than I did then😀. I was so thrilled to ditch analogue synths for the "real" sounds of first gen romplers (m1, d70) and touch sensitivity too!
Same for all the rest of us 80s synth players. Digital was absolutely the shiny new thing.
YES! BON IVER"S HAT! WELL DONE JACK! ♡
Thanks for noticing mate!! So much love for the Bon 🙌 Sending you all my best G X
Jack, and D...so tasty! If everyone could get as high on life, as we can on music...there'd be no need, for drugs. I'm really impressed, by all the patches. What a time, to be alive; and especially, to be playing keys! Just like, a guitarist...an artist's sound, is in the touch of their hands. D just knows, how to serve up the cream. Really enjoyed listening to this.
i live poor life so roland cloud is amazing for me at least...i love it so much and lots of great sounding patches for neo soul/jazz/funk type music 😍🤩
and it's always updated and got more sounds/patches now and in the future 😍 i love korg and been using them too
They're incredibly close. I just noticed a subtle thinning of the sound on the software version; it was fractionally less fat. However, blindfolded, I probably couldn't tell the difference.
Tal Uno Lx is a great Juno vast emulation as is Cherry Audio’s DCO 106 for those on a budget. The Roland cloud 106 is very authentic but it’s about 150 or £20 within Roland Cloud ultimate on a subscription basis.
Rolands Zen Core Juno which can live in the Fantom just doesn’t seem to have the heft of the Roland legendary instruments which use ACB technology rather than Zencore. Zencore sounds weak in comparison.
Tal Uno Lx is great indeed, but emulates the Juno 60 (which has a similar architecture as the 106, but a different sonic character - which is the reason why many people own both). Another great 106 emulation is the new Softube Model 84. same quality level as Roland‘s ACB version. And yes, the ACB versions sound more authentic than the ZEN/ABM versions, which sound good and similar, but not quite as accurate than the legendary series. If sb has a powerful computer, ACB is recommended for authentic recreation, as it is rather CPU hungry, compared to ZEN
They sound identical. Great job to the programmers at Roland!
Check out the chorus hiss - the genuine sound of the Juno!
You should compare that Juno against the Deepmind
The emulation is very close, no difference on some sounds. But surely he is comparing two different sounds on the last comparison, it sounds like an Organ sound on the hardware, not the E Piano sound.
Great comparaison, i think there is no limit to how close you can get the cloud to sound like the real thing but it take time. At the end very little difference. Roland did a great job. I think the difference is bigger with the Jupiter-8 because i found that the oscillator on the cloud sound harsher than real VCO but not harsher than Roland vintage DCO.
where can i learn about these wicked chord progressions ?
I wish you could do a hardware vs software with the Arturia V series :)
D.Bingerz bringing the heat! 😁 With all these comparisons I've seen, I wonder how much the settings on the audio interface (sample rate, etc.) might affect the comparison? I suppose it would be difficult to try and tune the output of an AI to the sound quality that the Juno's output produces, but either way, I just enjoy the sound of all of the Roland instruments I've tried since subscribing last year - I just renewed my subscription last month!
wow can I know the exact chord structure and sequence at 3:30 yo 3:45??
What about vs Softube 84
the only difference is the hiss from the output on the 106!
Good spot, it was hard to get the built in hiss as loud as my OG!
Wow it's getting very close these days 🤓
Dope!!!! This translates 1:1 to Jupiter X and Fantom, right?
Also, in the first strings patch I feel like the Software had chorus and the 106 didn’t 😅
I think the X series has a different sound engine - the cloud versions will work in the System 8 though
Having both the Jupiter-X and the System-8, I would confidently say that the System-8 has a much nicer emulation. The Jupiter-X is running a simplified version requiring significantly less processor power, but loses some of the richness and authenticity (maybe 10-20% depending on the patch).
Unfortunately easy on headphones just because the swirl on the white noise in the background stands out so much. Buuuuut… Still amazing how similar they sound. Not surprised some of the Cloud version were better. Real hardware is subject to deterioration of production defects or…well, any number of things that might make your unit sound just ever so slightly not as thick or not as creamy or (etc). But with software, you can dial in the perfect sound and it will *always* be the perfect sound.
All of that said (and also admitting I own a Jupter-Xm and have the 106 on Cloud)…….. I still yearn for a real Juno-106 something fierce. Just want a part of history, the fact I can use it on tracks is really more of a bonus at that point.
Pretty fricken hard to hear the difference. But I suppose that's to be expected with an electronically-generated tone. I imagine recreating such a tone is far easier than recreating an organic sound, such as a hammer striking a piano string or a tine in a Fender Rhodes electric piano. Or even the spinning tonewheels inside a Hammond organ.
It's not been easy until recently
The E Piano Sounded like an organ xD
Is the Roland Cloud limited to 4 note polyphony like the JU-06a?
No. If I remember the Juno Cloud version can go up to 8 or 16. Def not limited to 4. I own it.
For the ones He couldn't tell then it should of been void as guessing counts for nothing. I like his hair though.
Whats Patch name is the first one on the cloud?
🔥
prefer the hardware tbh
I know saying this is death penalty..but you have to use cubase , reaper, ableton in stead of logic to make vsts sound better (warmer）😢
Funny thing, cloud sounds more phat than the analog ... :-/ Great work! Still wouldn't -buy- rent anything subscription based.
Just fyi, you can buy the synths in the roland cloud separately now without a subscription.
@@waynebo248 Yes you're right. I think this option came later. Or at least it was not mentioned at their site, at the time I wrote the comment.
@@psychowsky Yeah, I think they realized there were a lot of people that feel like you do.
I've been subscribing for a couple of years. I think it's a good investment. It would take me a long time to buy the synths that I use on a regular basis. Having access to them all is great.
Real deal seems punchier and have more cutting transients which will make it easier for mixing, also less boomy low end. Thats the difference i hear on my Adam A7X speakers.
Kind regards to all nerds out there.
I thought the real Juno sounds all sounded a bit more open, with a bit more attack. Loved all the sounds from both, and I’m sure the Cloud version could be tweaked.
Maaaan that sounds good, I wonder if they put any UA plug-ins on the insert for the Juno in Console before going into Logic. I sometimes put an API or SSl channel strip on the insert for my MPC 2500 before going in to Ableton.
Dry as bone and no unison stuff in the way in but you’re so right about doing that - good choices too!! X
Awesome video comparison! I think I know the answer, but would you recommend the Juno 106 or the Juno 60 as a first Juno software synth from Roland? I already have the SH-101. Thank you.
Did you pick one in the end? 6/60 has the more vintage tone, arp, no factory midi. 106 has midi but common voice chip failure, no arp, some might say doesn't sound as good as 6/60 but it's so close. 6 is the cheapest due to no patch memory but has a wonderfuly simple design layout and fast patch creation anyway.
I had no idea the Juno 106 was so hissy.
I can easily hear the difference. Analog Juno is more forward as if compressed (soft knee). More depth, realism. The software is flat, less three dimensional. Those guys in the room have the PA cranked up which is giving them body based perception, but in headphones, I can easily hear the difference. I am an audio engineer by trade though. Now, if you record an album and stack several analog keyboards together you get a deeper, more vibrant presence that new albums using plug ins dont have.
Don't get why you didn't cut the volume on the strings patch so it wasn't clipping? Bit of an obvious giveaway and not a good test.
I hear W&W! I tried matching the perceived volume in the room before Dan sat down and had Gain plugins on the channels in an effort to balance things out. I could see the clipping but didn’t want to ruin the flow of the video and give the game away - dammed either way. Thanks for watching and commenting Xx
Either somethings not right with noise floor level or universal audio interfaces aren’t worth the money. Dreadful floor noise being recorded in this video. It’s worse with Juno audio out jacks. Were proper TRS cables used? Maybe speech mics are picking up room speakers or something. If it’s intentional with chorus fx then I wouldn’t be interested in introducing dreadful noise artefacts into a mix.
For those complaining about the software/subscription paradigm (fairly), just buy the Roland System 8, same exact sound engine (ACB) in a knobby 'gig synth'. It should be noted that the New Fantom/JupiterX/Xm uses a cut-down version of ACB, which gives you less accuracy but more polyphony. Having all those vintage emulations in a workstation is pretty sweet though.
If I knew they were going to have the Juno 60 plug out, I would have the Virus TI2 right now. But things happen for a reason. TI2 is my good buddies
the 106 Plugout in the System8 sounds TERRIBLE ma friend. believe me that!
@@swtdr34mz I had a real 106 for years. The System 8 Juno is like 85% there, and the voice chips don't die for no reason. Plus all the modern conveniences, I would recommend it over paying crazy money for a vintage 106 these days.
@@AynsleyGreen the Roland Cloud is about 85% too / and you can choose a much better Controller with better knobs and better Keys. System 8 Keybed is for 1 Chord Players, not for Vintage Leads or BassRuns. If you want the Juno Sound, get the Model84 and Keylab MKII - but thats just MY Taste. If you like System 8 - love it. For me it was overprized af - The FM Update was a nice Addon but for that Money the ASM Hydrasynth is the Synth to go 👍
@@swtdr34mz The latest System 8 engine does a lot of what the Hydrasynth does when you dig in to it (I'm serious, it's deeper than it looks), plus the Plug-Outs do all of the 80s classic sounds very convincingly - I don't understand why people shit on it. Used it on probably one hundred gigs as a bass synth - I had no issues with the keybed. If they did a System 16 with more voices and such I'd buy it.
Jack is funny
Hissss
Bruh the strings 1 difference is so huge.
@ghost mall Exactly! That was my first thought.
d bingerz!!!😍
Used to have the real thing now have the cloud , soft synths are great and no problem with the hardware taking up space…. But you still need a powerful computer which are not cheap! But I think for keyboards like the Juno Jupiter etc etc the cloud is the way forward , and this comparison proves it. I have done the same with my Korg keyboards and cloud and found you can hardly hear any difference…..
The two String I patches were extremely different. So if you knew your synth well, it would be easy to find the right one. It's a pain to make two patches as equal as possible and also EQ / mix them to the same level at all frequencies.
That's because the hardware synth is set on chorus 1 and software synth set on chorus 2
i can hear the chorus'ing of the real Juno much more. dead give away. but they ALL sound tremendous.
Lol, you have the chorus on the software on 2. And the hardware on 1 for the sound bank 1 number 2. I still don't think it would have mattered anyway.
Amfetamine is hell of a drug.
the chorus swooshing on the original gives it away.
does roland cloud have the best quality sounds
Why is the cloud sounding better to me WHAT BRO
You can tell by the hiss on the real juno, and what about the distortion of the plugin in the second sound?
Good spot on the hiss. Yeah my bad, hopefully that one moment didn’t ruin it for ya. Thanks for stopping by X
I’ll take one for my M1 iPad Pro please, Roland!
Do you run an iM1 on your M1? 😁
@@Roboprogs no, but I like the way you think :)
The problem is that the sound of Roland Cloud in the video is very similar to the original synth, but the sound I played through my DAW doesn't sound as good as that. Does anyone know where the differences come from?
I think the sounds itself are not relevant, the "issue" I see with Roland is they went from selling synths (you own a machine and you can do whatever you like) to RENTING you the possibility to make some sounds .. that s***ks IMHO
They now offer them for sale, as well as the rental option.
It's no longer just a rental option.
@@n8goulet thanks
Of course, eventually the operating system underneath it shifts away.
On the first patch I disagree: the OG has slightly more high end sheen...not factoring in noise and listening through good headphones but it is so darn close!
The new Softube Model 84 is the best Software 106 emulation i've personally tried!
Amen
Why so much hiss ?
You didn't fool him enough imo. Should've switched it up more. Good video anyways
I bet if know one knew that they were switching between the plug in and the hardware they would just go on about how warm it sounds yadda, yadda, yadda. We humans are so full of it.. lol
106 - perfectly
Cloud VST - very bad! such a lifeless cold sound
Roland Cloud - "you'll own nothing and you'll be happy about it, and paying annual fees!"
You can still buy lifetime keys... I don’t see the point of people complaining about this, if you don’t want subscription then just don’t get it, they still offer lifetime keys (which I also prefer)
@@lumer2b good for you, enjoy your lifetime keys, per instrument. ;)
@@lumer2b No, they don't offer lifetime keys. The only thing you get are weekly licenses. If the weekly renewal fails for whatever reason then you are screwed and your money is gone. Probably forever if the cloud owner thinks that it's a good idea (ie by banning you for unknown reasons).
@@matt_phistopheles They do, I have SH-2 and D-50 lifetime keys. You buy them through Roland Cloud, you just need a free account and you can buy perpetual keys. I use them offline in my computer. Edit = I looked up and they say you need to connect online every 7 days, so this sucks indeed. It is somehow still working for me. This is a problem of software in general, even if they didn't do this crap authentication process and you had your software forever, your computer will inevitably become obsolete and die, and your lifetime software will most likely not work on newer machines. So, yeah, buy the System-8 or Jupiter-X(m) if you want ownership.
@@lumer2b No, even the so called lifetime keys are only valid for one week. After a week they deactivate themselves automatically unless you ask Roland about permission to use them for another week (which fails more often than not). A real lifetime key means: Install and activate once and then run forever afterwards without requiring any interaction with the developer.
Corrupting minds lol. will old synths go the way of old cameras? maybe -- its happening slower that photography equipment but it is happening - its easy to replicate any sound but sweeping lfos around and keeping authenticity - that isnt easy for vsts! - yet
audible hiss all around
Good spot Roman, sadly it’s a feature of any OG Juno 106, especially when the Chorus is enabled. The Cloud allows you to add hiss in, which I did, couldn’t quite get it as loud as the original but think it managed to make them close enough that Dan couldn’t guess from the hiss alone. Thanks for stopping by X
@@jackduxbury1632 a reply from THE MAN himself! I've learnt all I know from your keyboard lessons for beginners, pretty much. Waiting for a singing tutorial: how to high-pitch harmonize "just the two of us" and "dock at the bay" :)
Please keep doing what you're doing, best of wishes
@@vechirni_anbernic oh Maaaaaan, thanks so much for sitting through even 30 seconds of my perpetual nonsense mate. Dodgy singing tutorial coming your way soon then!! Appreciate you hanging out Brother X
The girlfriend lives to see another day. Nice demo, friends.
You can pry my real Juno 106 from my cold dead hands.
I would never....but if you wanted to give it to me I'd take it!
The hardware always has so much more attack and depth, it’s very easy to hear in my car’s sound system
flick and morty 😂
4:59 terrible clicking noises
Good spot Hawk Ears/Eyes! Bit of clipping, my bad!! Thanks for stopping by X
I can reaaaaaally tell the difference. I think I've just been watching too many synth videos lately hahaha.
The two hardware same synths model (any brand, any model), won't sound the same neither because different conditions (temperature, status of parts etc), that's important to remember
Well done calling out shitty subscription based software instruments, and well done to Roland recognising that fact.
Real one is so hissy. That's the giveaway
It's the digitized new world and physical everything is slowly sinking into history. The hardware guys are making it happen faster with the ridiculous prices on vintage gear. A piece of gear you hated back in the day, now you'll pay thousands for it because it old and think being old automatically makes it cool. Sorry that only works when talking about me I'm old AF so I'm cool.
Wow huge hiss coming from the old guy on the other hand the cloud has real bad dropouts for sure.
The cloud is dead. Long live the cloud.
Real Juno all the way. The difference gets lost through the internet and RUclips. That's what Roland is counting on. And that "noise" factor is being exaggerated. My 106 has zero noise even with the chorus on.
Sorry to say this Roland, but the Cloud version sucks. It's terrible seriously. Muddy and not coming forward and so synthetic which i know it sounds weird, but it's true.
So huge difference. Original is so organic and have so much small random factors (resolution). Software is disgustingly right... It does not have same quality.
Not a fan of renting software.... Otherwise I would consider it.