BD, SD and Toms sounded very similar as expected, though the uncased one seemed to have more noise on SD and Toms - you can adjust a trimmer inside to set the noise level. The hats and cymbals were where the biggest differences were apparent, sounds like the uncased one possibly has a duff oscillator in the hex inverter, or possibly the capacitors and resistors which set the frequencies are different values (IIRC 10% tolerance on those parts) One other thing to check is that the uncased tempo dial was set to the same as the master cased one, as this impacts hihat decay slightly. But great video as always 👊
That's quite a difference! I personally prefer the one without the box, but that's quite a good point you've made about the originals not sounding like one another. I see people doing the same with the SID chip, but the originals, even the same revisions, sound different to one another to begin with.
Back in the days Roland sourced cheap components from various vendors, even b-stock chips that are out of specification. So the hardware of the vintage synthesizers differ slightly depending on batch and production date. It is not only the age, they all have unique character!
I love the 606 so much, this was an absolute treat. I also find this to be perfect example to point to when folks fuss over whether or not the Roland ACB models sound "correct" :)
Great demo, the difference is much greater than I thought it would be. On a different note. I watched The Hives new video Countdown to Shutdown, and it reminded me so much of your FYMW video
Fantastic, Gwem. Keep doing these please. I'd be interested in comparisons between even more specimens. It's statistically unlikely that these 2 sounding so very different is a total anomaly, as you point out, so comparing 3 or 4 against each other might yield even more radical results.
The funny thing about the TR-606 is that every unit I hear in another video sounds very different on the Hi Hats and Cymbals than the one before. Mine is from series 250*** and I've been told that's the first revision where they changed the sound of the metal oscillators on purpose. It turned out I'm that lucky guy that got exactly the unit which has the metal sound I like the most out of all others I heard.
It'd be interested to hear two RE-606s together. Component aging could definitely play a part, but many of these components have different tolerances and exact values out the gate. Great video!
@@gwEmbassy One more thing to consider is the batteries. I'm pretty sure whether the 606 or 808 have batteries installed will influence the sound a bit. Sunshine Jones made a post about this.
Aren't the metallic sounds produced by a noise generator that goes through some logic gates? That was the most obvious sound difference, and is a pretty interesting concept, that the "random noise source" is actually providing a unique identity to each individual unit. I'm pretty sure there was a slight filter difference that could have been attributed to an ageing capacitor, but I suspect that much of the tone differences can be tuned to be very similar with a trimmer pot somewhere on the circuit board.
Yes, the cymbal noise source is 6 logic IC oscillators tuned at slightly different frequencies. There was a revision to the noise circuit according to the service manual. So newer and older units will sound different.
Nice comparison, thanks. It would be hard to say much about the effects of aging on the sound without knowing what these specific 606 originally sounded like. The component tolerances could have these 606 sounding slightly different from each other since the day they rolled out of the assembly line. Both still sounding nice, though!
Looking abit sporty there... 😉 To me this is a reminder to all those who claim that the new BXYZ doesn't sound like the original XYZ. While this is often true, what is not being said is that the two original XYZs do not sound like each other either. Some time ago Kebu did a video about his 2 KORG MonoPolys and his newer Behringer MonoPoly - there was a bigger difference between the two Korgs than between one of the Korgs and the Behringer.
I think you need a larger sample size... acquire another 10 units or so and see how wide the variance is? :D. I'd be also interested in how the official Roland TR-606 VST compares, you'd hope that they've recreated accurately recreated a perfectly tuned unaged example, but maybe not!
Something about this shootout seems quite sporty and fit, not sure what it is 😉 It seems you've got a spare 606, I'll take the one on the left please. Excellent video as usual. I wonder what specific test points on these units vary the most versus the factory tuning specs?
🥰💪 That’s a great question there. There are a few tuning points affecting the sound in the service manual. But only one is spec’d which is for the noise source.
It seems the noise generators on the left machine are 2 semitones higher and are a bit more verby on the toms. It is a fact that no 2 vintage superstar machines sound the same but do you know which one is the oldest or most used?
@@gwEmbassy you are welcome.😀 Was wondering to what extend different components where used per production run (as with the 808.). Slightly different components with for instance different tolerances and from different manufactures. Also: these were made as budget machines, so it would be safe to assume some corners were cut in the production runs. All this could result in (slight) sound differences between brand new 606's form different production runs. I guess we will never know for sure...
I would say the only components that will change over time are electrolytic caps. The 606's only differ in pitch on the ride and hat sounds, may be i needed head phones for the other sounds as i am just on laptop speakers.
In fact resistors can vary over time as well. I discovered this on an old Marshall guitar amp. One of the resistors (a carbon type) had changed in value by nearly 50% I suppose metal film won’t change as much. There are other differences in the sounds, particularly the toms which had differing amounts of noise.
@@gwEmbassy That is pretty odd, resistors are used to set control voltage values, I really would not expect tolerance to change by 50% ... 100% if they get nuked xD. Like how do you wear out a resistor were you are not exceeding watts?
BD, SD and Toms sounded very similar as expected, though the uncased one seemed to have more noise on SD and Toms - you can adjust a trimmer inside to set the noise level. The hats and cymbals were where the biggest differences were apparent, sounds like the uncased one possibly has a duff oscillator in the hex inverter, or possibly the capacitors and resistors which set the frequencies are different values (IIRC 10% tolerance on those parts) One other thing to check is that the uncased tempo dial was set to the same as the master cased one, as this impacts hihat decay slightly.
But great video as always 👊
Thanks for the great comment! I 100% agree with all of that. It’s the kinds of things you have to bare in mind dealing with older gear.
This is a really interesting video! the toms sounded so cool on the one on the left!
Yes, they did! Nice and full 😃
That's quite a difference! I personally prefer the one without the box, but that's quite a good point you've made about the originals not sounding like one another. I see people doing the same with the SID chip, but the originals, even the same revisions, sound different to one another to begin with.
that’s really fascinating, because you’d like to assume chips of the same revision would be the same!
@@gwEmbassy Exactly! but as you know already, it's the beauty of analogue 🙂
Back in the days Roland sourced cheap components from various vendors, even b-stock chips that are out of specification. So the hardware of the vintage synthesizers differ slightly depending on batch and production date. It is not only the age, they all have unique character!
lol exactly
Great point!
I love the 606 so much, this was an absolute treat. I also find this to be perfect example to point to when folks fuss over whether or not the Roland ACB models sound "correct" :)
That’s what I hoped people would think :) :)
Great demo, the difference is much greater than I thought it would be. On a different note. I watched The Hives new video Countdown to Shutdown, and it reminded me so much of your FYMW video
I just checked out that new Hives video after your comment. I really like it actually :) Thanks!
Great video thank you so much.
Pleased you liked that one :)
Fantastic, Gwem. Keep doing these please. I'd be interested in comparisons between even more specimens. It's statistically unlikely that these 2 sounding so very different is a total anomaly, as you point out, so comparing 3 or 4 against each other might yield even more radical results.
I’d like to try more 606s of course. I don’t have access to any more right now. But I will keep an eye out!! Thanks for the comment :)
Great, thanks!
You’re welcome :)
Hi Gwem great vidwos brill thanks
You’re welcome Karl!
you pulled that off
Thanks Techno 🙏
Wicked video Gwem!
Thanks Aaron!
The funny thing about the TR-606 is that every unit I hear in another video sounds very different on the Hi Hats and Cymbals than the one before. Mine is from series 250*** and I've been told that's the first revision where they changed the sound of the metal oscillators on purpose. It turned out I'm that lucky guy that got exactly the unit which has the metal sound I like the most out of all others I heard.
if it sounds good, it is good :)
It'd be interested to hear two RE-606s together. Component aging could definitely play a part, but many of these components have different tolerances and exact values out the gate. Great video!
That’s also a good point! Thanks for commenting :)
@@gwEmbassy One more thing to consider is the batteries. I'm pretty sure whether the 606 or 808 have batteries installed will influence the sound a bit. Sunshine Jones made a post about this.
@jhatzia interesting point. I will look for that video.
Looking very sporty in this one
thanks for noticing Philip
Aren't the metallic sounds produced by a noise generator that goes through some logic gates? That was the most obvious sound difference, and is a pretty interesting concept, that the "random noise source" is actually providing a unique identity to each individual unit. I'm pretty sure there was a slight filter difference that could have been attributed to an ageing capacitor, but I suspect that much of the tone differences can be tuned to be very similar with a trimmer pot somewhere on the circuit board.
Yes, the cymbal noise source is 6 logic IC oscillators tuned at slightly different frequencies.
There was a revision to the noise circuit according to the service manual. So newer and older units will sound different.
Nice comparison, thanks. It would be hard to say much about the effects of aging on the sound without knowing what these specific 606 originally sounded like. The component tolerances could have these 606 sounding slightly different from each other since the day they rolled out of the assembly line. Both still sounding nice, though!
This is a great comment, and yes they both still sound nice!
Looking abit sporty there... 😉
To me this is a reminder to all those who claim that the new BXYZ doesn't sound like the original XYZ. While this is often true, what is not being said is that the two original XYZs do not sound like each other either. Some time ago Kebu did a video about his 2 KORG MonoPolys and his newer Behringer MonoPoly - there was a bigger difference between the two Korgs than between one of the Korgs and the Behringer.
Thanks 🙏😃
And I think this is the main moral of the video
Part tolerance is also a large factor in overall sound difference
Agreed
This gent sure as heck looks sporty AF today bruh
👍👌 thanks Tim
I think you need a larger sample size... acquire another 10 units or so and see how wide the variance is? :D. I'd be also interested in how the official Roland TR-606 VST compares, you'd hope that they've recreated accurately recreated a perfectly tuned unaged example, but maybe not!
I’d love another 10 606s! If anyone wants to donate… 😎
Great vid, Gwem. At a guess the one on the left is older?
Cheers Mark!
You are right, the one on the left might well be older. Although, as far as I know they were only made from 81-84.
Something about this shootout seems quite sporty and fit, not sure what it is 😉
It seems you've got a spare 606, I'll take the one on the left please. Excellent video as usual. I wonder what specific test points on these units vary the most versus the factory tuning specs?
🥰💪
That’s a great question there. There are a few tuning points affecting the sound in the service manual. But only one is spec’d which is for the noise source.
It seems the noise generators on the left machine are 2 semitones higher and are a bit more verby on the toms. It is a fact that no 2 vintage superstar machines sound the same but do you know which one is the oldest or most used?
It’s not 100% clear which is the most used. But maybe the one on the left has the most knob wear.
damn gwEm, you're looking good, have you been working out? ;)
Thanks man 🩷
definitely the left one
👍👍
Try trim-pot adjusting?
Not yet, but that would be the next step.
@@gwEmbassy On the other hand, if you want keep both 606s, these diffrences will give you richer sound palette
damn you look fit bro.
Thanks for saying so VNDM 🙏
@@gwEmbassy you are welcome.😀 Was wondering to what extend different components where used per production run (as with the 808.). Slightly different components with for instance different tolerances and from different manufactures. Also: these were made as budget machines, so it would be safe to assume some corners were cut in the production runs. All this could result in (slight) sound differences between brand new 606's form different production runs. I guess we will never know for sure...
That is also a great question. From the service notes, the 606 went through quite a few revisions in its 3 years production run.
Not necessarily ageing. Could be compounded part tolerances.
great point!
I would say the only components that will change over time are electrolytic caps. The 606's only differ in pitch on the ride and hat sounds, may be i needed head phones for the other sounds as i am just on laptop speakers.
In fact resistors can vary over time as well. I discovered this on an old Marshall guitar amp. One of the resistors (a carbon type) had changed in value by nearly 50% I suppose metal film won’t change as much.
There are other differences in the sounds, particularly the toms which had differing amounts of noise.
Indeed it sounds like the metal noise oscillators have drifted!
@@gwEmbassy That is pretty odd, resistors are used to set control voltage values, I really would not expect tolerance to change by 50% ... 100% if they get nuked xD. Like how do you wear out a resistor were you are not exceeding watts?
@@gwEmbassy is the noise generated for toms from the same source as the hats and rides ?
Good question, I checked the schematic and it looks like they do!