I had a Juno 106 but because of financial issues; had to sell it. Worst feeling in the world. I like this juno-x. But that price tag? Ah no. I’ll keep my integra-7. But I like what I see, tho.
Also, at it's core it's a VA synth...with no analog filter, making it a hybrid synth. It looks great and I like it but still, it's a VA digital synth with a so-so filter. That said, I would like to have one...but they messed up the price. They want analog synth money for a digital VA synth, lol.
You know something? As a former Juno 106 owner, I'd have to say the original oscillators sounded thin and weedy. What made it sound so good was the fantastic filter and BBD chorus. I quite like the Juno-X, actually if it was available in 1984 nobody would've bought the Juno 106!
This is what I’ve been waiting for! Thank you for sticking to you guns and staying with the flexible Zen Core engine. The money you save using Zen Core on multiple platforms allows you to offer us HIGH QUALITY HARDWARE!!! This is important for us who still buy hardware, and don’t want plastic gear. THANK YOU! I already ordered mine, just waiting for it to get here.
Okay, I’m going to go for the hate comments and probably will delete this comment after a while….but….good grief I am so bored of people slating this. Simple point - if you’re not into it, then maybe you’re not their market. Watch the video, shrug and go and look at the video what is grabbing you. Comment on here “Yeah, not for me, but hey” if you like…but… “It’s just a VST in a box” - maybe, at the heart of it, that is what you’re getting, but if you were buying this from a software company this isn’t just a cheap little VST, they would sell it as a number of VSTs, so it would still rack up in price, particularly when you add in a custom controller designed to match the VSTs it wouldn’t be cheap. Is it overpriced? Maybe. Will it go down in price. Almost certainly. “It can’t replicate the sounds of analog” / “Sounds nothing like a ….” - Yet oddly there’s been more than one comparison of Zen core vs the original they are modelling and they’re very close. Yep, not identical, but then few analogue synths sound identical to each other. And yes, again, if you prefer to have the original analogue, go for it. But claiming they sound nothing like it? “If it’s not analog then I’m not buying” - Fair play, do what works for you. No, I’m serious, I own analogue synths and love them. And I also know people who played the original analog synths on tour (yes, I’m old enough for that, and yes, I do know people in the industry) who LOATHED how much analogue synths would play up on stage. One favourite story is a band member for a well known band who had the van pull over after an early tour and lobbed the minimoog over the hedge somewhere as he was so sick of it going out of tune on stage. Want it for your home studio? Go for it. “Roland have no clue what their customers want” - Roland have been around for a while, and despite apparently not knowing what customers want since the 80s (I remember the launch of the D50 and the utter disdain this digital synth brought out), they’re still going. Are they chasing after profit? Almost certainly. Are they sacrificing innovation in the process? Quite possibly. Are they clueless? Probably not. Again, it’s worth remember that they don’t just sell synths to Joe Public, they are very well regarded for touring equipment. Have a look at the rigs used by the backing bands for a lot of the big names and see how often it’s Roland. Yeah, I know, not EVERY time, but they are very big in that market. They’re work horses. Are they as interesting and exciting as some of the recent innovations, perhaps not, but are they clueless…? Don’t get me wrong. I don’t see this and think it looks amazing. I do lust more after the Hydrasynth etc. that we’ve seen in recent months, but the utter bile being dished out over this is way over the top. I just read some of these comments and read them as “What about me? You didn’t make the synth I want? That’s not fair”
Why would anyone spend $2,000 for VST's in a box(when for the same money....one could have recording, sampling & the money to purchase all the Juno softsynths)...i.e., the Fantom 06 & the VST's via RolandCloud??
I've owned both the 60 and the 106 and Is model digital circuits can't touch them When is Roland gonna get back end of building old school analog synthesizers
It could be great control surface for Roland Ju06a, but it is way to expensive :) As a sound source - i do not hear anything special, just another generic zen synth in diffrent package. But it looks georgeus.
Roland keeps re-releasing the same thing - a CPU in a package which runs software code, in a different shell. The Jupiter X, Jupiter Xm, Juno, X, and Roland Cloud are all the same thing. How is this an event?
People not into coding software have no clue and will buy it. Roland things musicians are not technical people and since new timers have not experienced the real Juno would not know what they are missing. Better upgrade my PC to more cores than to buy their weak super expensive dsp/ control board that imitates the Juno. Like digital cameras that play a recording of an SLR shutter click when you take a photo.
This is cheaper than the Jupiter X. You could buy this instead and get everything the Jupiter X can do minus the Jupiter X model. It is essentially a cheaper Jupiter X concept in a Juno box. Makes sense to me. Some might want both for the different interfaces, while others will get one or the other.
It's the interface for me. One reason people love the Juno is the intuitive control layout-- the faders and such. Super fast and easy to create sounds. My Jupiter X(m) sounds awesome but if you don't mess with it for a month you basically start over in terms of learning curve.
@@davidknight754 makes no sense to me. If Roland wanted to, they could unlock the Jupiter X form this machine - they're all the same. They just handicap it with source code.
@@station2station544 Same could be said between the Fantom 0 and the full Fantom. They could simply put in the full compliment of chips and include everything. Dude, these are at different price points. Jupiter X costs more than the Juno X. Pick one and go with it. You don't need both and wouldn't miss out much between them.
What I find particularly annoying, apart from the generic Zen core sound, are the built-in speakers. They make this thing heavier and even more expensive, and aren‘t useful at all. I don‘t expect a synth to give ‘feedback‘ like an acoustic piano!
I could see them coming in handy for traveling bands that want to rehearse without setting up speakers, and for song writers who want to quickly compose in hotel rooms.
...Why? Not trying to start a war, I'm genuinely curious what people see in this. If you have a midi keyboard and a computer, you have the Juno X already. It's literally a VST in a box. If you want hardware, get hardware that does hardware things. Things like being analog and not needing a cloud subscription or internet connection. If you want a Juno, you can buy a real, mint, one for this much money. Want something modern? Deepmind 12 is the modern Juno. For 2K you could get SO MANY amazing analog modern/vintage synths, or incredible modern digital ones (Waldorf, Hydrasynth, etc). And if you really, really, really want the Roland Zencore sounds... Get a 101, or if you need it in a keyboard, a much cheaper and better Roland Fantom. There is truly no scenario I can imagine in which the Juno X makes sense.
@@Leo9ine For me it’s that I don’t get that kick out of using a computer. That is not in any way saying there’s anything wrong with people who do, I guess I just am used to having the sounds come straight out of the keyboard I’m playing, and not needing an external computer for it. I’ve tried it, just found I wasn’t using it and went back to the hardware synths. Probably just habits, but just doesn’t click for me using a computer for it.
@@DaveG207 I agree! I only use hardware, VSTs just didn't do it for me. But then, why a VST in a box for the same money and space as a real analog synth? I get digital hardware for wavetables and FM, but if you're emulating analog AND using hardware... Just go analog?
@@DaveG207 You'll have to forgive my tone - as being based as a professional player in the east; my tolerance is somewhat limited (the rehash of their ignorant nonsense soon takes its toll). Out the gate; we aren't that dissimilar. I hate the concept of VST when put to practice. Likely because I am classically trained - and transitioned into being a band/keyboard artist in direction. I am as you put it, used to an instrument. It goes without saying that the unit was designed [concept] for a very specific user. In many respects, 'me' and those like me. A 1:1 port of the past; it is not; as per the company board directive. It's part homage - to the respect that it is a Roland. In a modern frame. However it is unit that builds upon the past. The core technology and ambition reflect this - on every level. Vintage technology has short fallings and limitations. So do other engines in other product lines, be it Roland or otherwise. Jupiter-X is wonderful. It's not however a Juno-X. Which is a far more immediate and thus inter-compatible in its design direction [live]. Analogue is a waste of stage space [today]. People underestimate just how vast an artists needs can be - taking into account footprint. Not every gigging musician has the room Kebu does. We need a selection of boards; often playing in front of others. They need to be specific in their range of features. Sometimes that literally requires stack/feature overlap. Sometimes it does not (different brand/keybed or range). VST in a box - is intended to be an insult. Nothing more. Juno-X will join my Jupiter-X; much in the way people have numerous ASM, Yamaha or similar; in overlap. Juno offers access to Zen-C; Juno modelling - in a way that draws them all together; within a footprint. This isn't difficult to understand.
@@Leo9ine Sounds like Leo should not buy a Juno X… That being said, I absolutely love the idea of the Juno-X. VSTs - been there and done that, for years. Even sold my Fantom-S and committed to the idea of VSTs and a midi controllers. The experience was just not as romantic as people made it out to be. I began searching for a “hardware VST” unit, a “VST in a box” that was disconnected from the PC with massive power, and a dedicated UI. The best example of this is Waldorf Iridium! The Iridium Keys 🎹 is what I would get if money were no object, but after buying a Prophet 5 module (which I love), I promised myself that I would never spend more than 2K on another synth (after all this is just a hobby) Enter Juno-X. I sold some analog gear that was nice for the moment but started to feel restrictive, and now I’m waiting until the Juno X arrives.
I'm late to this thread, but according to the demo videos I've seen recently and reading the owner's manual (even before I've received my Juno X,) you can load up to 2 of the Model expansions at one time. Roland Cloud Manager, as I understand it, is where you can manage all the things you've got access to.
I rarely leave negative comments but today I was mistakenly so happy when I saw the picture pop up in my RUclips feed I ran circles around my girlfriend in joy as she looked at me like wtf, thinking foolishly for some strange reason Roland would finally care and listen to what the Juno and Roland synth community have been pleading for. Finally a real analog reissue? Nope. Roland is still in a "No analog" self defeating crisis with their own Analog heritage. It's like a person that hates where they came from and tries to run from it so much that they sell out saying it's "moving forward" and become a shell of themselves. This is literally a shell of a Juno. It is a computer plugin in a Juno shell. Roland needs therapy. I never thought Roland would lose customer synth enthusiasm to even Behringer. Ashamed? You all should be 🎹 🗑️
Perfectly stated. For $2k I am buying a perfectly refurbished vintage 106. So much Money left on the table by Roland .. The Juno x is a $2k midi controller lol
You got it right. They have repacked the dsp/cpu board and just added some new algorithms. Nothing like the Junos of old. They only positive the layout and constructions looks well made. But really is just Roland code running on chips, its just self contained. Eventually in a few years it would be on the Roland cloud. One other negative of new digital synths vs old ones is the following. New synths have flash memory which will fail after some years and cannot be repaired. Also they use microcontrollers which also have flash memory. Old designs like DX7 had a custom made chips that can last for a long time, and the code of the cpu was in eprom. New designs have a 20 year or less maximum lifespan.
@@dfloper And there's not even a meagre analog filter on these new Roland VA synths, a filter that would soften up the harsh digital sound, making the synth into hybrids, like many of the old Ensoniq synths. Also, there's a free JX-8P VST emulation on the web I tested, THAT sounds exactly like the hardware (genius coding there) while the ZenCore emulation of the synth on the Jup-X sucks big time, lol.
There is zero chance a positive review of this wasn't sponsored. "Position Roland as number one"? Yeah, they were 40 years ago. They're a joke now. People, this thing is a $2000 SOFTWARE PROGRAM IN A BOX
Mark Watson actually is an employee of Roland Australia. X not having multiple outputs is a deal breaker. Also, programming drum pattern by going through separate pad sections is rather strange. Roland should have made a synth without RD, XV patches and keep its price at 1499. At 2000 you expect multiple outputs and keyboard aftertouch.
"software program in a box" Just like every digital synth ever? I don't see anyone making the same inane complaint about the Prophet X, Wavestation, M1, D-50, Kronos, Motif XF, etc. And these companies aren't charities and neither are the various companies that produce all the parts. The programmers aren't volunteers either, they all expect to be paid. The "box" is going to cost money, too bad. That said, this thing looks like a watered-down Fantom-0 with a price increase. At least the Juno-X has aftertouch, but that doesn't justify the price hike in the slightest.
@@Jason75913 In my Yammy AN1X - which is a VA synth - there are still tons of separate circuits, stacks of discrete IC:s...while in the modern VA:s there's only a fast CPU...so there's a big difference, early VA and digital synths still could sound analog-like, thanks to the separate IC-units.
Its like a Juno VST, but many times digital synths can sound good. Take DX7, Blofeld, Hydrasynth, Access Virus. For me the Juno - X is a fake imitation of the real thing. Roland has lost it. If the wanted to make a digital synth name it something else not Juno, this is an emulation of the real thing.
It uses ARM CPU cores, so it should be running something analogous to Linux, right? Nearly all major digital instruments run ARM CPUs, even the MIDI controllers.
@@Jason75913 some also use Microchip PIC and others chips, Xilinx or so. but your could be right, my tv also runs on Linux, it shows that it has many open source software libraries installed, maybe my cablebox aswel. But noone makes a ASIO (hi end) type of usb soundcard for linux.
Why the heck do you make an overview without identifying the more important sound design features such as the number of oscillators, LFOs, envelope generators, and filters, and LFO parameters, filter types, and unison and stereo mode in each synth engine. Do they hope that you're so infatuated with the name of the synth, Juno, that you'd buy it without knowing all its sound design features. If a synth doesn't have at least 3 envelopes and lfos with delay, and wave shaping features in its oscillator section, oscillator sync and fm, fliter drive, at least 8 modulation slots with endless routing options, and multiple applicable efx, I don't care about its name and how good it's supposed to sound, I won't buy it. I can make any synth sound good if the synth also includes the features I mentioned above.
Read the Parameter/Reference manuals for this thing, duh. Zen-Core has too much to cover, no one does it. Since when do retailers go over the synth structure in detail? Unless the synth is so simplistic that it has barely anything to talk about. Go read the free manuals. Now, for editing Zen-Core synth patches, that is best done on the Jupiter-X to begin with, or Fantom and Fantom-0, not the Juno-X, this one is for stage players that are also Juno-106 enthusiasts/users.
@@Jason75913 Preset Junkies such as yourself rely on factory presets and waste hours scrolling through presets for the perfect sound and base how good a synth sounds on its factory presets. I'm a sound designer utilizing the features of a synth to create sounds from scratch and whose sound design ability determines how good a synth sounds, not factory presets. We are not in the same league! You preset junky!
I had a Juno 106 but because of financial issues; had to sell it. Worst feeling in the world. I like this juno-x. But that price tag? Ah no. I’ll keep my integra-7. But I like what I see, tho.
Also, at it's core it's a VA synth...with no analog filter, making it a hybrid synth. It looks great and I like it but still, it's a VA digital synth with a so-so filter. That said, I would like to have one...but they messed up the price. They want analog synth money for a digital VA synth, lol.
You know something? As a former Juno 106 owner, I'd have to say the original oscillators sounded thin and weedy. What made it sound so good was the fantastic filter and BBD chorus.
I quite like the Juno-X, actually if it was available in 1984 nobody would've bought the Juno 106!
Love it!!! Great job!!!!
This is what I’ve been waiting for! Thank you for sticking to you guns and staying with the flexible Zen Core engine. The money you save using Zen Core on multiple platforms allows you to offer us HIGH QUALITY HARDWARE!!! This is important for us who still buy hardware, and don’t want plastic gear. THANK YOU! I already ordered mine, just waiting for it to get here.
Roland y’all are killing it. I’m getting one of these!
you can buy fantom or jupiter x and have more or buy JU06 and have the same
Or but an actual vintage analog juno for the same money lmao
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!
Okay, I’m going to go for the hate comments and probably will delete this comment after a while….but….good grief I am so bored of people slating this. Simple point - if you’re not into it, then maybe you’re not their market. Watch the video, shrug and go and look at the video what is grabbing you. Comment on here “Yeah, not for me, but hey” if you like…but…
“It’s just a VST in a box” - maybe, at the heart of it, that is what you’re getting, but if you were buying this from a software company this isn’t just a cheap little VST, they would sell it as a number of VSTs, so it would still rack up in price, particularly when you add in a custom controller designed to match the VSTs it wouldn’t be cheap. Is it overpriced? Maybe. Will it go down in price. Almost certainly.
“It can’t replicate the sounds of analog” / “Sounds nothing like a ….” - Yet oddly there’s been more than one comparison of Zen core vs the original they are modelling and they’re very close. Yep, not identical, but then few analogue synths sound identical to each other. And yes, again, if you prefer to have the original analogue, go for it. But claiming they sound nothing like it?
“If it’s not analog then I’m not buying” - Fair play, do what works for you. No, I’m serious, I own analogue synths and love them. And I also know people who played the original analog synths on tour (yes, I’m old enough for that, and yes, I do know people in the industry) who LOATHED how much analogue synths would play up on stage. One favourite story is a band member for a well known band who had the van pull over after an early tour and lobbed the minimoog over the hedge somewhere as he was so sick of it going out of tune on stage. Want it for your home studio? Go for it.
“Roland have no clue what their customers want” - Roland have been around for a while, and despite apparently not knowing what customers want since the 80s (I remember the launch of the D50 and the utter disdain this digital synth brought out), they’re still going. Are they chasing after profit? Almost certainly. Are they sacrificing innovation in the process? Quite possibly. Are they clueless? Probably not. Again, it’s worth remember that they don’t just sell synths to Joe Public, they are very well regarded for touring equipment. Have a look at the rigs used by the backing bands for a lot of the big names and see how often it’s Roland. Yeah, I know, not EVERY time, but they are very big in that market. They’re work horses. Are they as interesting and exciting as some of the recent innovations, perhaps not, but are they clueless…?
Don’t get me wrong. I don’t see this and think it looks amazing. I do lust more after the Hydrasynth etc. that we’ve seen in recent months, but the utter bile being dished out over this is way over the top. I just read some of these comments and read them as “What about me? You didn’t make the synth I want? That’s not fair”
Why would anyone spend $2,000 for VST's in a box(when for the same money....one could have recording, sampling & the money to purchase all the Juno softsynths)...i.e., the Fantom 06 & the VST's via RolandCloud??
But it has a vocoder!!! That alone justifies the price tag, right?!
@@kiko1935 Lol are you serious?!
I wonder whether they will send one to Espen Kraft to review?
I've owned both the 60 and the 106 and Is model digital circuits can't touch them When is Roland gonna get back end of building old school analog synthesizers
But it's so damn eye-candy...it's hard to resist! :-)
❤️
It could be great control surface for Roland Ju06a, but it is way to expensive :)
As a sound source - i do not hear anything special, just another generic zen synth in diffrent package. But it looks georgeus.
Roland keeps re-releasing the same thing - a CPU in a package which runs software code, in a different shell. The Jupiter X, Jupiter Xm, Juno, X, and Roland Cloud are all the same thing. How is this an event?
People not into coding software have no clue and will buy it. Roland things musicians are not technical people and since new timers have not experienced the real Juno would not know what they are missing. Better upgrade my PC to more cores than to buy their weak super expensive dsp/ control board that imitates the Juno. Like digital cameras that play a recording of an SLR shutter click when you take a photo.
This is cheaper than the Jupiter X. You could buy this instead and get everything the Jupiter X can do minus the Jupiter X model. It is essentially a cheaper Jupiter X concept in a Juno box. Makes sense to me. Some might want both for the different interfaces, while others will get one or the other.
It's the interface for me. One reason people love the Juno is the intuitive control layout-- the faders and such. Super fast and easy to create sounds. My Jupiter X(m) sounds awesome but if you don't mess with it for a month you basically start over in terms of learning curve.
@@davidknight754 makes no sense to me. If Roland wanted to, they could unlock the Jupiter X form this machine - they're all the same. They just handicap it with source code.
@@station2station544 Same could be said between the Fantom 0 and the full Fantom. They could simply put in the full compliment of chips and include everything. Dude, these are at different price points. Jupiter X costs more than the Juno X. Pick one and go with it. You don't need both and wouldn't miss out much between them.
Overpriced unfortunately - Juno synth not a workstation - however better than the Xm
What I find particularly annoying, apart from the generic Zen core sound, are the built-in speakers. They make this thing heavier and even more expensive, and aren‘t useful at all. I don‘t expect a synth to give ‘feedback‘ like an acoustic piano!
I could see them coming in handy for traveling bands that want to rehearse without setting up speakers, and for song writers who want to quickly compose in hotel rooms.
There is an invention for song writers in hotel rooms called ‘headphones‘. ;)
Hello Mark, where can I buy the Roland watch you wear? Thanks for your answer.
What's the polyphony?
Up to 256 voices, according to Roland.
I am making room in my Studio for this!!!!!
...Why? Not trying to start a war, I'm genuinely curious what people see in this. If you have a midi keyboard and a computer, you have the Juno X already. It's literally a VST in a box. If you want hardware, get hardware that does hardware things. Things like being analog and not needing a cloud subscription or internet connection.
If you want a Juno, you can buy a real, mint, one for this much money. Want something modern? Deepmind 12 is the modern Juno. For 2K you could get SO MANY amazing analog modern/vintage synths, or incredible modern digital ones (Waldorf, Hydrasynth, etc).
And if you really, really, really want the Roland Zencore sounds... Get a 101, or if you need it in a keyboard, a much cheaper and better Roland Fantom.
There is truly no scenario I can imagine in which the Juno X makes sense.
@@Leo9ine For me it’s that I don’t get that kick out of using a computer. That is not in any way saying there’s anything wrong with people who do, I guess I just am used to having the sounds come straight out of the keyboard I’m playing, and not needing an external computer for it. I’ve tried it, just found I wasn’t using it and went back to the hardware synths. Probably just habits, but just doesn’t click for me using a computer for it.
@@DaveG207 I agree! I only use hardware, VSTs just didn't do it for me. But then, why a VST in a box for the same money and space as a real analog synth? I get digital hardware for wavetables and FM, but if you're emulating analog AND using hardware... Just go analog?
@@DaveG207 You'll have to forgive my tone - as being based as a professional player in the east; my tolerance is somewhat limited (the rehash of their ignorant nonsense soon takes its toll).
Out the gate; we aren't that dissimilar. I hate the concept of VST when put to practice. Likely because I am classically trained - and transitioned into being a band/keyboard artist in direction. I am as you put it, used to an instrument.
It goes without saying that the unit was designed [concept] for a very specific user. In many respects, 'me' and those like me. A 1:1 port of the past; it is not; as per the company board directive. It's part homage - to the respect that it is a Roland. In a modern frame. However it is unit that builds upon the past. The core technology and ambition reflect this - on every level.
Vintage technology has short fallings and limitations. So do other engines in other product lines, be it Roland or otherwise. Jupiter-X is wonderful. It's not however a Juno-X. Which is a far more immediate and thus inter-compatible in its design direction [live].
Analogue is a waste of stage space [today]. People underestimate just how vast an artists needs can be - taking into account footprint.
Not every gigging musician has the room Kebu does. We need a selection of boards; often playing in front of others. They need to be specific in their range of features. Sometimes that literally requires stack/feature overlap. Sometimes it does not (different brand/keybed or range).
VST in a box - is intended to be an insult. Nothing more. Juno-X will join my Jupiter-X; much in the way people have numerous ASM, Yamaha or similar; in overlap. Juno offers access to Zen-C; Juno modelling - in a way that draws them all together; within a footprint. This isn't difficult to understand.
@@Leo9ine Sounds like Leo should not buy a Juno X… That being said, I absolutely love the idea of the Juno-X. VSTs - been there and done that, for years. Even sold my Fantom-S and committed to the idea of VSTs and a midi controllers. The experience was just not as romantic as people made it out to be. I began searching for a “hardware VST” unit, a “VST in a box” that was disconnected from the PC with massive power, and a dedicated UI. The best example of this is Waldorf Iridium! The Iridium Keys 🎹 is what I would get if money were no object, but after buying a Prophet 5 module (which I love), I promised myself that I would never spend more than 2K on another synth (after all this is just a hobby) Enter Juno-X. I sold some analog gear that was nice for the moment but started to feel restrictive, and now I’m waiting until the Juno X arrives.
How many different synths from roland cloud can you load onto it at one time?
None, other than the zencore and the rompler. Go with the system 8 if you want cloud stuff in a hardware synth 🤙🏽
@@jansonrawlings8169 oh okay, cause I have the system 8. But I have no clue what this zen core stuff is
I'm late to this thread, but according to the demo videos I've seen recently and reading the owner's manual (even before I've received my Juno X,) you can load up to 2 of the Model expansions at one time. Roland Cloud Manager, as I understand it, is where you can manage all the things you've got access to.
it is a RD piano plus VA in juno case 🤑no analogue in here
But can it run Crysis?
Yes, and probably Microsoft Word. It's a PC running some roland code.
Still prefer the System-8 :-/
Hey Mark please reply to my emails lol 😂
I rarely leave negative comments but today I was mistakenly so happy when I saw the picture pop up in my RUclips feed I ran circles around my girlfriend in joy as she looked at me like wtf, thinking foolishly for some strange reason Roland would finally care and listen to what the Juno and Roland synth community have been pleading for. Finally a real analog reissue? Nope. Roland is still in a "No analog" self defeating crisis with their own Analog heritage. It's like a person that hates where they came from and tries to run from it so much that they sell out saying it's "moving forward" and become a shell of themselves. This is literally a shell of a Juno. It is a computer plugin in a Juno shell. Roland needs therapy. I never thought Roland would lose customer synth enthusiasm to even Behringer. Ashamed? You all should be 🎹 🗑️
Perfectly stated. For $2k I am buying a perfectly refurbished vintage 106. So much Money left on the table by Roland .. The Juno x is a $2k midi controller lol
And no Alpha Juno waves.... does it even hoover?
You got it right. They have repacked the dsp/cpu board and just added some new algorithms. Nothing like the Junos of old. They only positive the layout and constructions looks well made. But really is just Roland code running on chips, its just self contained. Eventually in a few years it would be on the Roland cloud. One other negative of new digital synths vs old ones is the following. New synths have flash memory which will fail after some years and cannot be repaired. Also they use microcontrollers which also have flash memory. Old designs like DX7 had a custom made chips that can last for a long time, and the code of the cpu was in eprom. New designs have a 20 year or less maximum lifespan.
@@dfloper
And there's not even a meagre analog filter on these new Roland VA synths, a filter that would soften up the harsh digital sound, making the synth into hybrids, like many of the old Ensoniq synths.
Also, there's a free JX-8P VST emulation on the web I tested, THAT sounds exactly like the hardware (genius coding there) while the ZenCore emulation of the synth on the Jup-X sucks big time, lol.
Not analog? OK see ya.
There is zero chance a positive review of this wasn't sponsored.
"Position Roland as number one"? Yeah, they were 40 years ago. They're a joke now. People, this thing is a $2000 SOFTWARE PROGRAM IN A BOX
Mark Watson actually is an employee of Roland Australia. X not having multiple outputs is a deal breaker. Also, programming drum pattern by going through separate pad sections is rather strange. Roland should have made a synth without RD, XV patches and keep its price at 1499. At 2000 you expect multiple outputs and keyboard aftertouch.
"software program in a box"
Just like every digital synth ever? I don't see anyone making the same inane complaint about the Prophet X, Wavestation, M1, D-50, Kronos, Motif XF, etc.
And these companies aren't charities and neither are the various companies that produce all the parts. The programmers aren't volunteers either, they all expect to be paid. The "box" is going to cost money, too bad.
That said, this thing looks like a watered-down Fantom-0 with a price increase. At least the Juno-X has aftertouch, but that doesn't justify the price hike in the slightest.
@@Jason75913
In my Yammy AN1X - which is a VA synth - there are still tons of separate circuits, stacks of discrete IC:s...while in the modern VA:s there's only a fast CPU...so there's a big difference, early VA and digital synths still could sound analog-like, thanks to the separate IC-units.
@@Aetila not refuting my point, there
I still s*** on a troll, buddy 🤗
@@Jason75913
You lost your freaking mind, calling me a troll, you can eat it up!
So..... this is again a digital Juno rip off. Luckily Behringer clones everything
Its like a Juno VST, but many times digital synths can sound good. Take DX7, Blofeld, Hydrasynth, Access Virus. For me the Juno - X is a fake imitation of the real thing. Roland has lost it. If the wanted to make a digital synth name it something else not Juno, this is an emulation of the real thing.
LOL
No linux support?
It uses ARM CPU cores, so it should be running something analogous to Linux, right?
Nearly all major digital instruments run ARM CPUs, even the MIDI controllers.
@@Jason75913 some also use Microchip PIC and others chips, Xilinx or so.
but your could be right, my tv also runs on Linux, it shows that it has many open source software libraries installed, maybe my cablebox aswel.
But noone makes a ASIO (hi end) type of usb soundcard for linux.
NOOO!!! TRY AGAIN! WE ALREADY HAVE THIS RECYCLED! LMAOF $2000? LOLOLOLOL
Sounds like vst
Why the heck do you make an overview without identifying the more important sound design features such as the number of oscillators, LFOs, envelope generators, and filters, and LFO parameters, filter types, and unison and stereo mode in each synth engine. Do they hope that you're so infatuated with the name of the synth, Juno, that you'd buy it without knowing all its sound design features. If a synth doesn't have at least 3 envelopes and lfos with delay, and wave shaping features in its oscillator section, oscillator sync and fm, fliter drive, at least 8 modulation slots with endless routing options, and multiple applicable efx, I don't care about its name and how good it's supposed to sound, I won't buy it. I can make any synth sound good if the synth also includes the features I mentioned above.
Read the Parameter/Reference manuals for this thing, duh. Zen-Core has too much to cover, no one does it.
Since when do retailers go over the synth structure in detail? Unless the synth is so simplistic that it has barely anything to talk about. Go read the free manuals.
Now, for editing Zen-Core synth patches, that is best done on the Jupiter-X to begin with, or Fantom and Fantom-0, not the Juno-X, this one is for stage players that are also Juno-106 enthusiasts/users.
@@Jason75913 Preset Junkies such as yourself rely on factory presets and waste hours scrolling through presets for the perfect sound and base how good a synth sounds on its factory presets. I'm a sound designer utilizing the features of a synth to create sounds from scratch and whose sound design ability determines how good a synth sounds, not factory presets. We are not in the same league! You preset junky!
Booooo
This has nothing in common with the real Junos. Just listen.
Indeed, just so off: ruclips.net/video/kvkfmMKnIVo/видео.html