Just had a million UA-cam alerts for all this Roland gear news on a bunch of different channels. Don’t matter. Loopop uploads, we watch it. Everybody else can get in line.
Considering people dont typically just have a couple thousand pounds lying around, this is a cheap, great, & close alternative to the real thing that 99% of audiences won't notice. Most audiences will just appreciate that is sounds great. And you can for sure make great sounds with 4 voices. That's my piece
The Juno 60 hands down cuts better through my speakers. The sound is more electric and alive. The chorus comparison is also very telling of how organic the vintage one sounds. Still, having said that I am thoroughly impressed with this emulation. As you said it captures some of the vibe of the original at a fraction of the size and cost of owning a vintage machine. After more than a decade of collecting old gear, I'm getting tired of maintenance. I think people are in the wrong to bash Roland for actually creating a virtual platform of their vintage synths, while universally praising company b. Company b is out there literally copying other peoples work and pushing out thousands of units that have a lot more carbon footprint than a VST for example, Roland are actually looking into the future with these ever more precise digital recreations.
Agree with this completely. I'm convinced it's mostly bedroom wannabes doing the complaining. I've recorded twice using the SH-01A and TR-08 and they sound fantastic in the mix. I couldn't care any less that they aren't analog--and the limitations, like polyphony (although the SH-01A has four voices and the original 101 is mono) are no worse than the limitations of other gear. Like the Behringer Boog that goes out of tune every other song...
ModulerDrone - I used to be a big fan of the old Roland gear, was lucky enough to own all the x-o-x machines (apart from the 707) alongside a J-60, J-6 and a J-8. And a JD800 because it looked cool! Unfortunately for Roland a lot of people want 'true' analog machines especially when Behringer are able to sell them cheaper than Roland's digital stuff. Completely agree with the comments relating to digital recreations sounding just as good in the mix (always makes me smile when folk go on about the lush bottom end of old vintage gear, and then roll it all off as soon as they record it). However, even though I know it doesn't really matter, my money always gravitates towards analog stuff. The point is that Behringer are giving folk what they want, or what they think they want which is the same thing, at amazing value for money. Their new 808 would sell out instantly at £600 a pop but they're quite happy to let it gor for less than £300. Ultimately we're very lucky to have both Roland and Behringer doing their thing. My first set-up consisted of an Atari ST and a Korg Wavestation A/D, over £1,000 second hand, so I'm very jelous of anyone getting into music production now that there's so much great gear around. That new Korg box, for £100? Stunning.
i owned a juno60 too and some other great old synth`s. but TBH, i think they are most likely all very overrated. you can get amazing sounding analog synthesizers these days, very cheap, new with warranty, and in most cases with more and better features. but there are also great exsamples of new stuff, like the korg MS20 mini, wich sounds the same las the MS20, but costs around 500.
@@herickvar8608 if you look at the modelling of vintage instruments, much of the effort goes into the differences between voices. Analogue polysynths need to be compared with software emulations differently to monophonic instruments. The way that the voices sound slightly different to one another is a key feature of the polyphonic synth. In this section, single notes are used to demonstrate differences. (ua-cam.com/video/eMwj0DfFBd0/v-deo.html) my argument is that chords would give a better representation of the differences.
When I close my eyes, I don't really know which is which. I have played a ridiculous amount of synthesizers in my 47 years. I like the fact that the new stuff will probably outlive me. My old gear is a pain in the ass! This stuff will be worth a fortune in a quarter of a century. Me me me. Always wanting something!
I'm really glad Roland went in this direction, I've owned most of the classic roland gear over the years and after having just watched about 30 videos comparing the Korg MS20, Mini and K2, I kinda wish Korg had taken a similar path... or perhaps i'm just too old, and tired of investing in gear which will need servicing and repairs down the line. Only got into the boutiques this year, after 20yrs of concentrating on modular, but they're like serious coffee-table collectibles that also function as serious studio instruments...
I can totally hear the difference. I'm sure everyone can. Some of the comparisons are hugely different. They're not tuned to each other very well, which is distracting when trying to make these kind of comparisons, but aside from that they sound noticeably different in the way that most of these vintage/recreation comparisons do. The original is old and probably sounds a lot different from when it was new (sounds a bit saturated, transients rounded, darker and beefier all of which I like about the old one). But... the 06-A sounds pretty decent, especially in your real world examples.
The one thing I really noticed was that with the Juno-60, there was a high frequency, splashy resonance that was slightly more noticeable than on the 06A
I'm listening on Focal CMS 50s - even through the YT compression the difference above 7-8kHz is pretty dramatic, particularly when chorus is on. That lovely inter-modulation in upper-harmonics content is not happening so good on the 06. Most people won't care because a) you have to be listening for the difference in the first place and b) you have to be able to hear them on your playback device(s).
@@OneAndOnlyMe Yes, the difference is subtle and in a mix neglectible. Always a little fun to hear people with golden ears comment on comparisons, especially when we are talking about a comparison on YT which has its own compression tech on top of the recordning. And as @shaft9000 said, you have to be able to hear it on your playback device. A minority of a minority have these kind of devices, is my qualified guess. The JU-06A sounds great, hopefully it will last as long as the original (keeping my fingers crossed).
I've had no maintenance problems with Juno 60's. I've owned a lot of vintage analogs, including two Juno 60's and I think this is the only model that I've never had to do upkeep on. Even the original batteries still going strong since the early 80's which is amazing.
They are very, very close. The very fast attack times sounded different. The digital version clicks in a sharp way, while the analog version pops in a deep way. The other difference is in the weight of the sound, especially the sub osc. The analog Juno is heavier. For the most common uses, the emulation is spot on.
All ive been wondering is if the 06a is analog or digital and out of like 4 hundred videos and articles nobody will mention it. Thanks for clearing that up. Im going with behringer.
Thank you Loopop, I was on the wall about this synth, but this deep dive convinced me to buy one. As a former Juno 106 owner, I'm very impressed, it's not exactly the same, but it's so similar. In fact much more difference between the Juno 60 and the 106 IMO, than the 106 model on the JU-06A and the original 106. The slightly more steady sound of the JU-06A may be slightly worse than a 106 for richness, however I like the JU-06A better for bass lines.
Good review! I'm glad Roland liberated the space on the left side of the old Boutique front panel formerly consumed by those (low-utility) touch strips, I still wonder why the arp and keyboard controls had to take up all of that space, instead. It would have been nice if the sliders had been spread out a bit more.
I agree. Those strips were a waste of space, and not very good anyway. You have to press them firmly or they don't register touch. Compared to the amazing touch strips on my NI controllers (Komplete Kontrol S49 mk1 and Maschine mk3), I find Roland's unpleasant enough that I just don't bother using them. My guess is there's a limit to how many controls they can put in that area because the battery compartment is underneath it. The early models were pretty conservative about what they did with that space. The SE-02 was the first one to fill that area with lots of controls, and it doesn't have a battery compartment to contend with. The sliders are definitely a bit too close together. My SH-01A suffers from the same problem. It's usable, but you have to grab the sliders like a princess gently picking up a teacup. I also wonder why they didn't at least make the sliders a lot longer. The short travel makes it very difficult to hit the sweet spots in some cases. I often use the knobs on my MIDI controller to tweak a sound on the SH-01A after getting it in the right ballpark with the controls on the unit itself.
@@st0rmchild I had the opposite of that with the strips. The actual casing pressed down onto the strips and caused it too move by itself that I had to take a couple screw out of the jx03 lol
Nicely done as ever. As a 60 owner I've never heard a Juno clone get the filter exactly right, but this sounds like they actually finally did it. If you really do close your eyes - the differences seem to be arbitrary, not to say one is necessarily better or worse. Would be interesting to hear how it sounds doing more full-on arrangements with high resonance, there's a particular sort of vowelley 'eh-ow' sound it does (you can hear it on the 'Cirklon Education Jam' vid I did for reference!).
That's odd to hear coming from a Juno owner. I have never played a Juno 60 in person, so my basis in this instance is solely based on the comparison in this video. When he instructs you to close your eyes on the 100% resonance filter sweep comparison I initially thought the JU-06A was the real deal when he started, but once he did the second one I noticed a very distinct difference in harmonic range. I instantly knew that was the actual Juno 60, and upon opening my eyes I found myself to be correct. I noticed the harmonic range of the original's filter was a little fuller and once he got to around the 60% closed range I noticed a far more significant difference in the bass of the original Juno 60s filter. The JU-06A sounds a lot muddier and cuts off most frequencies sooner than the original. Keeping in mind the nature of UA-cam audio quality the JU-06A sounds quite good compared to the original, I suppose it's a compliment that I initially couldn't tell the difference until it was compared next to the real deal. However, as I mentioned before, I've never played a Juno 60 before. Sorry for the long winded comment!
The Roland JU06A is a great sounding synth, I have had both of these synthesizers. The Roland JU06A come so very close to the real thing in many ways. I sold the Juno 60 becuse it had too many issues that I couldn't commit myself to fixing and I sold the Roland JU06A because of the 4 note limit. If Roland did a 6 or 8 note version I would be all over it, its that good. Even with the four notes its is still a great machine. I may even grab it up again just because I think it sounds that good. Thanks for the video @Loopop you do great work! Synth On!
This is my issue with old analogue synths too. You’re basically paying thousands for something that’s already at the end of its natural life. They’re lovely, but they’re knackered. It’s a rich person’s game if you want a reliable working tool to make music with. I got my Juno 6 in 1998 for £125 and it was having problems then. I wouldn’t be surprised if some of the more positive reactions here come from people who’ve owned the ‘real thing’ and discovered the downsides!
they clearly didn't mind adding extra features so why didn't they add "random" for the ARP? I REALLY don't understand Roland approach to these.... and the 4 voices? .....
I'm torn. It looks awesome, the aesthetics alone are enough to make me want one. Four voice polyphony is also not a deal breaker for me, and it does sound nice. But still...it is basically a VST in a box. Albeit a particularly nice VST in a very pretty box.
I mean the equivalent vst is a huge cpu hog from roland itself. Plus you buy this for hands on control and parts cost money. Sure you are definetly paying for roland brand, and this is not as cheap as it could be. But it's small, portable, authentic replication 10x more reliable than a vst by nature of being hardware and the best hands on controls. So yeah different flavours for different people. Remember though vsts virtually have no resale value. This is like all things a trade off.
@ghost mall the only vst that is worth to route to a cintroller is diva, repro1 and zebra2 imo :p diva and repro1 just sound like hardware stuff, i am 100 sure nobody can tell the difference between the repro5 vst and the prohpet5 synth, the stuff from u-he is just a whole level above other software synths :p
Wow! What a neat little unit! I was lucky enough to play a Jupiter 60 once and fell in love instantly. I'm going to have to show some serious restraint not picking up this new little guy!
@@whitmore-project I think he’s referring to the fact that the JU-06A has only 4 voices as opposed to the 6 voices of the original Juno 6, 60, and 106.
The boutique are lovely, I just don’t get this voice limitation, I would definitely get one if it had full voice count but I do find the difference between 6 and 4 to be more critical than 8 (or 16!) and 6.
Cocker that’s the thing, I would be happy to pay a bit more and have the full voice count. As it is now for any meaningful use you need two units. It’s not even about cost, two units kind of defeat the point of a compact format.
@@MarioTorre I agree. Buying two of these things is a terrible idea (not just because it's a waste of space, but the way it handles the voice overflow is pretty bad). If they made a version that requires AC power but supports six (or even eight) voices, I'd buy one. That said, these things were designed to be portable. If it requires AC power it might as well be a bit bigger so the controls can be full size and properly spaced apart. These tiny sliders make it very hard to dial in the sweet spots.
Am I the only one who sees value in a unit like this? 4 voices aside, I thought the JU-06A wasn't exact, but really dang close, and dare I say, usable.
It is absolutely usable. The emulations are incredibly good, and you don't always need four voices. I bought a System-8 because I wanted full polyphony for all the emulations, but in some tracks I use it for the bassline (the Juno-106 is amazing for bass sounds), and in a lot of other cases I only need or want 2-4 voices. If every synth in the mix is playing 5/6-note chords, the mix just turns into bland soup. As far as being exact goes, even two original Juno-60s fail to sound exactly the same. I can definitely hear some differences in this comparison, but I would only describe them as "different"; not better or worse.
@@oracle-0018 The SH-01A is the pinnacle of what the boutiques can and should be. Very happy to see the JU-06 get the 'A' treatment. I wish there was some way they could wave a magic wand and make it support six voices, but I understand the technical limitations that made it impossible to do that without compromising on portability. The SE-02 is a bit strange in that it requires AC power, which makes it not portable, which means they could have put it in a bigger box with normal size controls properly spaced apart (I still want one though). To me this highlights the reason why they chose to prioritize portability over voice count on the polysynth boutiques.
I have to say, the sequence you play at the beginning and end of the video is amazing...one of my favorite 16-step sequences that I've ever heard. Would love to hear that fleshed out and released as a track!
I've owned a Juno-60 for about 35 years. Had Roland simply matched the voice count of the original, I would have happily bought one at this price point and used it side by side with my 60. But offering this with fewer voices than the original is truly puzzling. I thought the point of vintage reissues was to add modern features & functions while retaining the best aspects of the original. WTF, Roland?
I guess they had to balance cost, portability (battery powered) with the available chips if the time. They should release a V2 with 8 note polyphony, should be possible with 2024 tech.
@@lundsweden Or then if you need more than 4 voices, you'd get two. They are pretty affordable today on the second-hand market, available for 250€ +-30€, at least in my local market.
@@josephfelice601 so That's why it's so cheap! great point! I bet some longer faders would cost more than 50 bucks per instrument. Thanks Roland for keeping it so cheap!
When you were showing the JU-06A suboscillator in the 106 emulation, the HPF was set to 0, which I believe provides a bass boost, so that's why you saw that much different looking waveform, fyi. Thanks for the review.
I really wanted the boutique to sound very close to the original, or have it sound better in some comparisons, but damn... there's an energy and harmonic beauty in the original which is undeniable. I was prepared to buy an 06 before watching this. Now I'm trying to decide it plunking down $3,500.00 for a used 60 is realistic. I don't care about the differences in the envelopes so much, but the TIMBRE... the timbre in the 60 just has that secret sauce. I honestly think Roland could have come closer if they had tried harder.
@@richnewman The fact that the 4 voice polyphony of previous boutiques was one of the main reasons they drew criticism and that Roland almost certainly heard that criticism, knew it was a point of contention and then didn't bother to improve upon it for this iteration is just plain bollocks. And STILL powered over USB???!! Rubbish
Rich Newman it’s big enough though. I probably would have bought this if it had even at least 6 voices and maybe a quarter inch out. At 4voices it’s a hard pass for me.
Rich Newman No, the other obvious con is not being fully analog. Sorry Roland, but it's exactly this "worst of both worlds - combination" that leads to disapproval of so many potential customers. You're obviously leaving a little too much room for improvement in the future... Behringer where are you?
Great video as I'm just learning about these ancient relics from the 80's (I could never afford them back then). I just stumbled upon the highly underrated Alpha Juno1/2's, and am left wondering if this ju-06a covers those too. I'll keep investigating.
Unfortunately the Alpha Junos are not that well loved, and have way more waveforms and complexity compared to the 6/60/106. The good thing though is the Alpha Junos are still cheap and are very reliable unlike the 106 (VCF chips and chorus) and the 6/60 that suffer from chorus issues.
i had the chance to play an original roland, it was either the 60 or 106 but man, i remember that day vividly it was like I had the entire genre of Jungle/Drum&Bass, in my hands you can just hear all the pure electronic industrial synth it felt like it literally came straight out of a factory, like literally a factory. its just so Industrial i wonder what the designers studied in university, I wonder how they made this thing!
The 60 never had issues, it's a bulletproof tank of a synth that was considered worthless for near 30 years and the fact that they all survived that mostly intact is a testament to how insanely well built they were compared to most mass produced stuff today. Remember- the 60 was never a classic. They were free or $100 until about 2013 when Laszlo Kovari put out the Minerva mod.
Bit like Pixel Snooping with Camera resolution there are differences but without snooping they sound the same/look the same. A lot less hassle and cost with the JU than a Juno 60 and add in a decent emulkation of the 106 I see it as a no brainer if you want a J 60 /106 without spending x amounts more. Totally agree about Polyphony why 4 in this day and age of 'Digital' and cheap Processing is beyond me other than the sales pitch of buy another unit to make it 8 etc..
Don't really get why so many developers keep insisting on this ridiculous 4-voice limit, especially when emulating an older instrument which had more voices in its original form. No matter what the marketing says, minimum functional polyphony for a proper polysynth is 6 voices.
J Saul Kane finally someone who knows , i was going to say the same , you need to understand that these are meant to hook people in then they’ll want the jupiter x , system 8 etc.
I had the same reaction the first time I checked out the plugin versions in Roland Cloud. Was almost certain they wouldn't sound right, but the emulations are actually pretty stunning.
I really wish Roland would succeed. Since I have a Behringer Deepmind 12, I see 0.0 reasons why I should buy a 4 voice digital mini synth with no keyboard.
An excellent little synth and a great demo. Four voices is stingy for a polysynth (it’s why I never got the Mopho +4...) but I suspect the delay will compensate a bit for that. Still, I wish they'd release a kind of master controller with big keys that could house several of these...
For the people owning an original juno 106, there's a Belgian company called Analogue Renaissance. They have reverse engineered the voice chips and made them more reliable. The sound is dead on
klinkske I have a Juno 6 and it’s so much better than the boutique. And you can get them for 1k sometimes, or even better get a Roland juno alpha for $400
@@nathankirklambo1986 I'm loving my Wavestation EX which I got for $280. My first vintage large-keyboard synth. Would love to one day own a Juno or a Prophet.
i'm sure roland has done everything within their power to create a replica product its just hard to know for sure what the process involved is and how far in depth did they really go to remake/reproduce this product
So this is a plugin in a box? I can't tell the difference, but if it is not done with proper hardware I could just use a plugin in my DAW and save a lot of $$$.
Yamaha Reface CS has a 32-key keyboard, 8 voices, built-in effects, and integrated speakers for $280. a 4-voice VA for $400 in 2019 is borderline insulting.
Even with the 60 being slightly louder at certain moments (louder usually sounds better), the wave forms are SO much sharper on the 60. Also; the low pass filter on the 60 brought tears to my eyes. The new “emulation” they’ve just released can mimic the wave forms; but the 4 voice limitation is a drawback and the low pass filter on the 60a is a far cry from the original.
I got one a week or so ago. I know my way of recording is not the usual way people record. I use my yamaha ex7 sequencer to record on and quantize.. then play back each thing into the pc separately thus being able to work the levels on my movie edit program, so can work with my audio and video clips in one place.. But one really irritating thing when I press record and start to record, the metronome on my ex7 counts in and then this machine instantly plays some arpeggio thing and I got to press the white button to stop it. It is no huge deal though then as after I pressed the white button to stop it, I just count the next bar and start my recording after that. But once already I accidentally pressed one of the bank numbers in error and lost the sound that took me ages to get. I used the sliders to tweak it, spent a bit of time to get it the way i wanted it to sound, was so happy and even said out loud that's it!..that's what I want!.. but all gone by pressing one of bank numbers by mistake to turn off this arpeggio thing starting. So it is a bit inconvenient for this to start and definitely a little irritating. Especially when I make sure the arpeggio is switched off before I start but this thing always starts every time. I got to press the bottom left white button to stop it. But tbh the only disappointing thing as it is definitely good value for money.
@@moistpeanut5986 But the Roland polychain is not really useable. We bought 2 JU-06 to polychain, and found out too late that it only triggers the next 4 voices if you hold down the keys ie it won't play more than 4 voices on patches that ring out via VCA release, once you take your fingers off the keys.
sucks Roland can't even replicate the voice count correctly. this modern age of advanced technology. here's your measly 4 voices suckers 🖕 good luck! at least the graphics look good
Hi I really like your videos I learn so much you are a wizard of synthesisers I really thank you so much for all the information you give thanks very much I watch all the videos you make and made 👍🎼
What is this? A synthesizer for ants? It needs to be at least 3 times bigger! Size aside a big difference is in the note attack. My Juno 60 has a beefy thwack with every key I play (especially on the square wave). It may be a small detail but it’s one of my favorite aspects of the Juno 60. I don’t hear the same aggressive attack on the 06a. 40 years later and still nothing compares to the Juno 60. The original designers set the bar really high.
You people don't get it! Its the analog hardware ENV of the Juno 60 that has that fast hard snap that makes it so special. Its like driving rain on a tin roof.
There are times when the original has the edge, but I was surprised by how many times I preferred the 06A. Plus, with the features of the 06A, the non-stepped HPF... if you were offering me the choice, even though the original is much more valuable, I would want the 06A. I make relatively minimal music and I'm not a great keyboard player though, otherwise I don't think I could accept the 4-voice limit, but for me that's okay.
As everybody else said, the 4-voice limitation is a bummer. The JU-06 (the first series) came out 4 years ago, one would expect Roland to be able to beef up the ACB technology during the years so that it can handle at least 6-voices. Dropping the touch strips was a smart move though, they're not very accurate and eat up much space on the frontpanel. Let's hope Roland will do some more Boutique's now as there is more space to put knobs and sliders. I also like that the buttons are now Juno 60 style. Coming back to the 4-voice limit, where's the Boutique Jupiter 4! Now that would be a nice one, as it only had 4 voices anyway.
Hate to say that I could actually tell the difference in an eyes closed test. The Juno 60 has a lower end on a lot of patches. I have a JU-06A and am very happy with it. I just got a Juno 6 in for a service and it does sound better to my ears, as in more low end. Some of this I admit can be due to internal bias as I gaze at the Juno with affection
In all honesty I've listened on my laptop and my headphones and all though these are probably not the best points of reference I can tell the difference. not that one is worse or better than the other, they just sound different. I think If synth producers just made all this cool gear instead of using reference names then we'd appreciate fully what they did and not constantly compare.
60 sounds darker and rounder than boutique. You can also see that on scope where 06A has those longer spikes on waveforms. That 06A full LFO modulation on filter is a nice sound tho, like it!
Sounds pretty much identical. In a mkx with effects no one can tell the difference. But the 2 missing voices are the only drawback. Can you link 2 Boutiques for 8 voices?
@@josephlepkowski2383 what do u mean exactly? I know there are some issues with poly chain (like limitation on midi channels), but for what i know it's adds other four voices
@@angelantoniomajorano1444 it does not add four voices. When four notes are reached on the first unit the second plays a new stand alone 5th note. it never was a poly chain proper where you could play 6 or more voices at once. Truth
fact is even if it sounds exactly the same, I think what USERS value is the feel and the vintage look of the gear as you play it, gives you the feel of "im playing an old juno-60", rather than "im playing a generic midi keyboard that has the juno 60 exact sounds", so yeah, i would pay a lot more money for the original piece of gear just because the synth is beautiful.
I think if it weren't for the 4-voice polyphony thing, the JU-06A would be a pretty solid contender. I think it sounds really close in most important aspects, and the lower cost, smaller size, and, of course, the convenience of modeled analog circuitry rather than rare/obscure/hard-to-maintain proper analog electronics make it a solid piece of kit IMO. But then, I'm not that hardcore of a synth head (yet), so I don't really have the same attachment to some of these classic analog boards.
There are virtual analog approximations of old Roland synths that have awesome sound, fully programmable sequencers and zero weight. They are called VSTi.
This looks and sounds amazing, but the four voice limitation is really unfortunate. There are lots of situations where four voices is plenty, but for someone who loves to play 5-note chords, the difference between four and six voices is pretty big. It also just bugs me on a philosophical level; the original 6/60/106 all have "6" in the name because they're six voice synths. I guess it wouldn't make sense to call it JU-04A, but still. My guess is they'd have to add a second DSP to support more than four voices, which would double the cost of the most expensive component, and also require AC power. For some people that would be a reasonable tradeoff (myself included), but these things are designed to be portable; if they can't run on batteries or bus power, it defeats a lot of the purpose of cramming tiny versions of the controls into a small form factor. I know the SE-02 requires AC power, but it's an anomaly.
4 voices.... I heard 4 voices once, and they told me 4 important little words.. .." Do not buy this " ... the Se 02 on the other hand is solid in the mono department.. comes in handy for quick bass patches. as soon as Behringer releases the Oberheim clone..its all over
ELECTRO WAYNE The fact that it has four voices makes it emulate not two but three classic Roland synths: Jupiter 4 as well ;) Lol. Jokes aside I am definitely getting one of these.
As much as I love my deepmind 12. I went with an actual ob6. Yeah the 49 keys is a downside but it's fine. However, the overall tone and playability of it are so out of this world good. I'm not saying the behringer wont be good. But I have little faith it will be as good as the ob6. Plus I do plan on buying some more behringer synths and while I'm not an elitist, I dont really want a room full of all clones.. either way, dsi and behringer are both awesome. Roland peaked in the 80s and have done not much since. Even the 60 dollar tal no u lx vst sounds just as good as the ju06a. Plus 6+ voices. The Jupiter x and xm are really cool but they are cash grabs imo. They could both be half the price.
I 'm listening in my studio on a pair of adam A7x and I think there definitely is a difference. There is more body and weight to the sound of the original , its less noticeable on higher lead sounds but any low to midrange sounds have less fatness and warmth. But saying that I still think its a great little synth as it really has all the character of the Juno 60 and nothing wrong with fattening it up later with a little eq . Also price wise its going to be a fraction of the cost of a vintage one and it won't need repairing all the time because the parts are 40 years old . Well done Roland .
Just had a million UA-cam alerts for all this Roland gear news on a bunch of different channels. Don’t matter. Loopop uploads, we watch it. Everybody else can get in line.
what other modules have they updated? just the juno? i cant find any info anywhere. can you give me a channel name of some other uploads?
@@emilyschmanks a new groovebox called mc-707
basically
WORD
Stephen Harrell fanboy lol
Considering people dont typically just have a couple thousand pounds lying around, this is a cheap, great, & close alternative to the real thing that 99% of audiences won't notice. Most audiences will just appreciate that is sounds great. And you can for sure make great sounds with 4 voices. That's my piece
The four voice thing is quite an issue and very strange for a soft synth in a box.
@@joachim595 go get a juno60 for only a couple thousand more then lmfao
@@beauaddams2692 I actually own one.
@@sheateeley1 I love the sound of the synth itself though.
Correct 👍
Your video quality is beautiful, I’ve never seen such clarity, absolutely stunning!
The Juno 60 hands down cuts better through my speakers. The sound is more electric and alive.
The chorus comparison is also very telling of how organic the vintage one sounds.
Still, having said that I am thoroughly impressed with this emulation.
As you said it captures some of the vibe of the original at a fraction of the size and cost of owning a vintage machine.
After more than a decade of collecting old gear, I'm getting tired of maintenance.
I think people are in the wrong to bash Roland for actually creating a virtual platform of their vintage synths,
while universally praising company b.
Company b is out there literally copying other peoples work and pushing out thousands of units that have a lot more carbon footprint than a VST for example, Roland are actually looking into the future with these ever more precise digital recreations.
Agree with this completely. I'm convinced it's mostly bedroom wannabes doing the complaining. I've recorded twice using the SH-01A and TR-08 and they sound fantastic in the mix. I couldn't care any less that they aren't analog--and the limitations, like polyphony (although the SH-01A has four voices and the original 101 is mono) are no worse than the limitations of other gear. Like the Behringer Boog that goes out of tune every other song...
“But it’s not true analog!1!1!”
his juno 60's volume is also a bit higher than the boutique which might make you think it is cutting better
ModulerDrone - I used to be a big fan of the old Roland gear, was lucky enough to own all the x-o-x machines (apart from the 707) alongside a J-60, J-6 and a J-8. And a JD800 because it looked cool! Unfortunately for Roland a lot of people want 'true' analog machines especially when Behringer are able to sell them cheaper than Roland's digital stuff.
Completely agree with the comments relating to digital recreations sounding just as good in the mix (always makes me smile when folk go on about the lush bottom end of old vintage gear, and then roll it all off as soon as they record it). However, even though I know it doesn't really matter, my money always gravitates towards analog stuff.
The point is that Behringer are giving folk what they want, or what they think they want which is the same thing, at amazing value for money. Their new 808 would sell out instantly at £600 a pop but they're quite happy to let it gor for less than £300.
Ultimately we're very lucky to have both Roland and Behringer doing their thing. My first set-up consisted of an Atari ST and a Korg Wavestation A/D, over £1,000 second hand, so I'm very jelous of anyone getting into music production now that there's so much great gear around. That new Korg box, for £100? Stunning.
i owned a juno60 too and some other great old synth`s. but TBH, i think they are most likely all very overrated. you can get amazing sounding analog synthesizers these days, very cheap, new with warranty, and in most cases with more and better features. but there are also great exsamples of new stuff, like the korg MS20 mini, wich sounds the same las the MS20, but costs around 500.
When comparing polysynths, it's important to play chords. It's the interaction between voices that is important when simulating vintage instruments.
Elaborate your dogmatic statement.
Can You explain? 😊
@@herickvar8608 if you look at the modelling of vintage instruments, much of the effort goes into the differences between voices. Analogue polysynths need to be compared with software emulations differently to monophonic instruments. The way that the voices sound slightly different to one another is a key feature of the polyphonic synth. In this section, single notes are used to demonstrate differences. (ua-cam.com/video/eMwj0DfFBd0/v-deo.html) my argument is that chords would give a better representation of the differences.
@@decimal1815 Ohhh Its so clear now! Thank you!
Sold my Juno-60 for 2000$ and, while I have no regrets, it's good to know you can get a very similar sounding one for a quarter of that price.
A much better overall and sound is almost indistinguishable. Another great video.
When I close my eyes, I don't really know which is which. I have played a ridiculous amount of synthesizers in my 47 years. I like the fact that the new stuff will probably outlive me. My old gear is a pain in the ass! This stuff will be worth a fortune in a quarter of a century. Me me me. Always wanting something!
I'm really glad Roland went in this direction, I've owned most of the classic roland gear over the years and after having just watched about 30 videos comparing the Korg MS20, Mini and K2, I kinda wish Korg had taken a similar path... or perhaps i'm just too old, and tired of investing in gear which will need servicing and repairs down the line.
Only got into the boutiques this year, after 20yrs of concentrating on modular, but they're like serious coffee-table collectibles that also function as serious studio instruments...
Did... did I just accidentally discover the best synth channel on UA-cam? Subscribed the instant I saw the graphic overlays pop up, in any case.
Brilliant arpeggio/sequence at the beginning and end. So rich and so deep. I could listen to that sort of thing all day. Great work again!
I can totally hear the difference. I'm sure everyone can. Some of the comparisons are hugely different. They're not tuned to each other very well, which is distracting when trying to make these kind of comparisons, but aside from that they sound noticeably different in the way that most of these vintage/recreation comparisons do. The original is old and probably sounds a lot different from when it was new (sounds a bit saturated, transients rounded, darker and beefier all of which I like about the old one). But... the 06-A sounds pretty decent, especially in your real world examples.
The one thing I really noticed was that with the Juno-60, there was a high frequency, splashy resonance that was slightly more noticeable than on the 06A
I'm listening on Focal CMS 50s - even through the YT compression the difference above 7-8kHz is pretty dramatic, particularly when chorus is on. That lovely inter-modulation in upper-harmonics content is not happening so good on the 06.
Most people won't care because a) you have to be listening for the difference in the first place and b) you have to be able to hear them on your playback device(s).
I thought it was subtle difference. Not sure I'd be able to tell the subtle difference when mixed in with other sounds.
@@OneAndOnlyMe Yes, the difference is subtle and in a mix neglectible. Always a little fun to hear people with golden ears comment on comparisons, especially when we are talking about a comparison on YT which has its own compression tech on top of the recordning. And as @shaft9000 said, you have to be able to hear it on your playback device. A minority of a minority have these kind of devices, is my qualified guess. The JU-06A sounds great, hopefully it will last as long as the original (keeping my fingers crossed).
I've had no maintenance problems with Juno 60's. I've owned a lot of vintage analogs, including two Juno 60's and I think this is the only model that I've never had to do upkeep on. Even the original batteries still going strong since the early 80's which is amazing.
The 60 is a tank.
Apparently the Juno 60 used mil spec components. The 106 was all about reducing the price, but I think both synths are pretty good considering.
All what I can hear is that the 06A has a slitly higher pitch^^
man, you have to tune them right! xD
Damn. Thought I was the only person who noticed!
Closing your eyes makes no difference
They are very, very close. The very fast attack times sounded different. The digital version clicks in a sharp way, while the analog version pops in a deep way. The other difference is in the weight of the sound, especially the sub osc. The analog Juno is heavier. For the most common uses, the emulation is spot on.
4 voices
All ive been wondering is if the 06a is analog or digital and out of like 4 hundred videos and articles nobody will mention it. Thanks for clearing that up. Im going with behringer.
Thank you Loopop, I was on the wall about this synth, but this deep dive convinced me to buy one. As a former Juno 106 owner, I'm very impressed, it's not exactly the same, but it's so similar.
In fact much more difference between the Juno 60 and the 106 IMO, than the 106 model on the JU-06A and the original 106. The slightly more steady sound of the JU-06A may be slightly worse than a 106 for richness, however I like the JU-06A better for bass lines.
Good review! I'm glad Roland liberated the space on the left side of the old Boutique front panel formerly consumed by those (low-utility) touch strips, I still wonder why the arp and keyboard controls had to take up all of that space, instead. It would have been nice if the sliders had been spread out a bit more.
I agree. Those strips were a waste of space, and not very good anyway. You have to press them firmly or they don't register touch. Compared to the amazing touch strips on my NI controllers (Komplete Kontrol S49 mk1 and Maschine mk3), I find Roland's unpleasant enough that I just don't bother using them. My guess is there's a limit to how many controls they can put in that area because the battery compartment is underneath it. The early models were pretty conservative about what they did with that space. The SE-02 was the first one to fill that area with lots of controls, and it doesn't have a battery compartment to contend with.
The sliders are definitely a bit too close together. My SH-01A suffers from the same problem. It's usable, but you have to grab the sliders like a princess gently picking up a teacup. I also wonder why they didn't at least make the sliders a lot longer. The short travel makes it very difficult to hit the sweet spots in some cases. I often use the knobs on my MIDI controller to tweak a sound on the SH-01A after getting it in the right ballpark with the controls on the unit itself.
@@st0rmchild I had the opposite of that with the strips. The actual casing pressed down onto the strips and caused it too move by itself that I had to take a couple screw out of the jx03 lol
Roland has problems with the left side of things
the juno 60 filter sweep reminds me of the sound of commercial tapes in the 80's remember at the beginning of each side!
Hahahaha those were tone sequences designed to test the signal levels and designate cutting areas for the tape. Great call! 👍
Nicely done as ever. As a 60 owner I've never heard a Juno clone get the filter exactly right, but this sounds like they actually finally did it. If you really do close your eyes - the differences seem to be arbitrary, not to say one is necessarily better or worse. Would be interesting to hear how it sounds doing more full-on arrangements with high resonance, there's a particular sort of vowelley 'eh-ow' sound it does (you can hear it on the 'Cirklon Education Jam' vid I did for reference!).
Thanks, I will check it out!
That's odd to hear coming from a Juno owner. I have never played a Juno 60 in person, so my basis in this instance is solely based on the comparison in this video. When he instructs you to close your eyes on the 100% resonance filter sweep comparison I initially thought the JU-06A was the real deal when he started, but once he did the second one I noticed a very distinct difference in harmonic range. I instantly knew that was the actual Juno 60, and upon opening my eyes I found myself to be correct. I noticed the harmonic range of the original's filter was a little fuller and once he got to around the 60% closed range I noticed a far more significant difference in the bass of the original Juno 60s filter. The JU-06A sounds a lot muddier and cuts off most frequencies sooner than the original. Keeping in mind the nature of UA-cam audio quality the JU-06A sounds quite good compared to the original, I suppose it's a compliment that I initially couldn't tell the difference until it was compared next to the real deal. However, as I mentioned before, I've never played a Juno 60 before. Sorry for the long winded comment!
@@jamesortiz6312 You're listening to youtube videos and have never played them. Your input is totally worthless. You are not the main character.
The Roland JU06A is a great sounding synth, I have had both of these synthesizers. The Roland JU06A come so very close to the real thing in many ways. I sold the Juno 60 becuse it had too many issues that I couldn't commit myself to fixing and I sold the Roland JU06A because of the 4 note limit. If Roland did a 6 or 8 note version I would be all over it, its that good. Even with the four notes its is still a great machine. I may even grab it up again just because I think it sounds that good. Thanks for the video @Loopop you do great work! Synth On!
This is my issue with old analogue synths too. You’re basically paying thousands for something that’s already at the end of its natural life. They’re lovely, but they’re knackered. It’s a rich person’s game if you want a reliable working tool to make music with. I got my Juno 6 in 1998 for £125 and it was having problems then. I wouldn’t be surprised if some of the more positive reactions here come from people who’ve owned the ‘real thing’ and discovered the downsides!
It sounds good but far away from being anything like the 6 or 60.
they clearly didn't mind adding extra features so why didn't they add "random" for the ARP? I REALLY don't understand Roland approach to these.... and the 4 voices? .....
Clock in doesnt even sync to arp
Thank you so much man. You just saved me from wasting $ on what is supposed to be exactly like a Juno 60. You're my hero dude!
I'm torn. It looks awesome, the aesthetics alone are enough to make me want one. Four voice polyphony is also not a deal breaker for me, and it does sound nice. But still...it is basically a VST in a box. Albeit a particularly nice VST in a very pretty box.
I mean the equivalent vst is a huge cpu hog from roland itself. Plus you buy this for hands on control and parts cost money. Sure you are definetly paying for roland brand, and this is not as cheap as it could be. But it's small, portable, authentic replication 10x more reliable than a vst by nature of being hardware and the best hands on controls. So yeah different flavours for different people. Remember though vsts virtually have no resale value. This is like all things a trade off.
@@WalkinonSunshyne excellent response!
@@WalkinonSunshyne I agree 100%
Do you know if the output jack it's TRS Stereo?
@ghost mall the only vst that is worth to route to a cintroller is diva, repro1 and zebra2 imo :p diva and repro1 just sound like hardware stuff, i am 100 sure nobody can tell the difference between the repro5 vst and the prohpet5 synth, the stuff from u-he is just a whole level above other software synths :p
@@DubElementMusic yea uhe makes great stuff. Hive is also a great one
Wow! What a neat little unit! I was lucky enough to play a Jupiter 60 once and fell in love instantly. I'm going to have to show some serious restraint not picking up this new little guy!
Ryan Allen jupiter 60?
should be called the JU-04A
Why? They are called the Juno 6, 60, and 106
@@whitmore-project I think he’s referring to the fact that the JU-06A has only 4 voices as opposed to the 6 voices of the original Juno 6, 60, and 106.
@@kwamebrandt-pierce1607 I didn’t know it only had 4 voices. In that case, it makes sense
@@whitmore-project , "it makes sense"
No, it won't. The figure "6" refers to not to the voicing capacity but the sound of Juno 6, 60, and 106.
@@MSM5500 and what do you think that number initially stood for on the originals..?
The boutique are lovely, I just don’t get this voice limitation, I would definitely get one if it had full voice count but I do find the difference between 6 and 4 to be more critical than 8 (or 16!) and 6.
if it were 6 or 8 voice then you wouldn't need to buy any of their bigger line of ACB synths
Cocker that’s the thing, I would be happy to pay a bit more and have the full voice count. As it is now for any meaningful use you need two units. It’s not even about cost, two units kind of defeat the point of a compact format.
4 is enough as you can use Mod and PB with your other hand
@@MarioTorre I agree. Buying two of these things is a terrible idea (not just because it's a waste of space, but the way it handles the voice overflow is pretty bad). If they made a version that requires AC power but supports six (or even eight) voices, I'd buy one. That said, these things were designed to be portable. If it requires AC power it might as well be a bit bigger so the controls can be full size and properly spaced apart. These tiny sliders make it very hard to dial in the sweet spots.
@@cockur exactly!
Am I the only one who sees value in a unit like this? 4 voices aside, I thought the JU-06A wasn't exact, but really dang close, and dare I say, usable.
You are not alone. I am a bit picky with the boutiques have sh01 d05 and se-02 this is really two synths in one
It is absolutely usable. The emulations are incredibly good, and you don't always need four voices. I bought a System-8 because I wanted full polyphony for all the emulations, but in some tracks I use it for the bassline (the Juno-106 is amazing for bass sounds), and in a lot of other cases I only need or want 2-4 voices. If every synth in the mix is playing 5/6-note chords, the mix just turns into bland soup. As far as being exact goes, even two original Juno-60s fail to sound exactly the same. I can definitely hear some differences in this comparison, but I would only describe them as "different"; not better or worse.
@@oracle-0018 The SH-01A is the pinnacle of what the boutiques can and should be. Very happy to see the JU-06 get the 'A' treatment. I wish there was some way they could wave a magic wand and make it support six voices, but I understand the technical limitations that made it impossible to do that without compromising on portability. The SE-02 is a bit strange in that it requires AC power, which makes it not portable, which means they could have put it in a bigger box with normal size controls properly spaced apart (I still want one though). To me this highlights the reason why they chose to prioritize portability over voice count on the polysynth boutiques.
Definitely agree the se-02 could be bigger!
I love the size and portability
I have to say, the sequence you play at the beginning and end of the video is amazing...one of my favorite 16-step sequences that I've ever heard. Would love to hear that fleshed out and released as a track!
Thanks! In my album coming soon ;)
@@loopop Any updates on that album?
Neil Carson yes! It’s live with that track - but don’t expect much fleshing out ;)
@@loopop Nice! Loopop One is the name? I'll check it out now!
Totally agree, its so emotional, I love it too 😊
I've owned a Juno-60 for about 35 years. Had Roland simply matched the voice count of the original, I would have happily bought one at this price point and used it side by side with my 60. But offering this with fewer voices than the original is truly puzzling. I thought the point of vintage reissues was to add modern features & functions while retaining the best aspects of the original. WTF, Roland?
I guess they had to balance cost, portability (battery powered) with the available chips if the time. They should release a V2 with 8 note polyphony, should be possible with 2024 tech.
@@lundsweden Or then if you need more than 4 voices, you'd get two. They are pretty affordable today on the second-hand market, available for 250€ +-30€, at least in my local market.
the 'piano werner' sticker adds a lovely vintage touch, my Juno 106 had a 'Musik Eck' sticker on it.
I think I'll hold on to my Juno 60 :)
Me too. Though I did get the JU-06 too.
The last minute sold it for me, thanks,
You're a great reviewer.
This guy does it right. Most of these comparison videos are rendered meaningless by not properly matching patches and levels.
the four voices is a dealbreaker for me. I have a j60 and need the small one Bc I’m moving away from my studio for a while
Why didn't they make the sliders longer? There's a ton of blank space on that front panel.
Have fun to control the sound without jumps, even the original has issues with 7bit etc, but you have at least a longer slider.
because they are lazy and they are making a nostalgia play?
Maybe there's things inside the box too, needing space?
@@josephfelice601 so That's why it's so cheap! great point! I bet some longer faders would cost more than 50 bucks per instrument. Thanks Roland for keeping it so cheap!
Prot Eus lol
The difference is there and it's noticable. Not so much with saw, but with square, the difference is there.
Exactly my thoughts. Specifically in the low end. Not that big of a difference but it's there
@@gilgamessianic Yeah, but it still sounds good though... Kinda having GAS
I wonder if Roland is coming up with new boutiques. I would love a reissue of the MC 202...
Yes, me also. CR78, Space Echo, MC202
i love the design of the ju06a so much, beautifull little synth
When you were showing the JU-06A suboscillator in the 106 emulation, the HPF was set to 0, which I believe provides a bass boost, so that's why you saw that much different looking waveform, fyi.
Thanks for the review.
The background track in the intro is great!
Thanks! I continue it in the outro, will be release in an album soon...
I really wanted the boutique to sound very close to the original, or have it sound better in some comparisons, but damn... there's an energy and harmonic beauty in the original which is undeniable. I was prepared to buy an 06 before watching this. Now I'm trying to decide it plunking down $3,500.00 for a used 60 is realistic. I don't care about the differences in the envelopes so much, but the TIMBRE... the timbre in the 60 just has that secret sauce. I honestly think Roland could have come closer if they had tried harder.
Juno x
For the most part, that Boutique, that VST Cloud, there is no difference, only Cloud is pissed.
Pretty darn close. 2 more iterations and we got the real deal.
The fact that the boutique only has 4 voices is a pretty big con that you could have mentioned at the end there.
About the only con though. And the JU-06A has a LOT of functionality not on the originals. It's a buy for me.
@@richnewman The fact that the 4 voice polyphony of previous boutiques was one of the main reasons they drew criticism and that Roland almost certainly heard that criticism, knew it was a point of contention and then didn't bother to improve upon it for this iteration is just plain bollocks. And STILL powered over USB???!! Rubbish
This is a sponsored review, like in the others youtube channels, you will never see negative words about new gear.
Rich Newman it’s big enough though. I probably would have bought this if it had even at least 6 voices and maybe a quarter inch out. At 4voices it’s a hard pass for me.
Rich Newman No, the other obvious con is not being fully analog. Sorry Roland, but it's exactly this "worst of both worlds - combination" that leads to disapproval of so many potential customers. You're obviously leaving a little too much room for improvement in the future... Behringer where are you?
Great video as I'm just learning about these ancient relics from the 80's (I could never afford them back then). I just stumbled upon the highly underrated Alpha Juno1/2's, and am left wondering if this ju-06a covers those too. I'll keep investigating.
Unfortunately the Alpha Junos are not that well loved, and have way more waveforms and complexity compared to the 6/60/106.
The good thing though is the Alpha Junos are still cheap and are very reliable unlike the 106 (VCF chips and chorus) and the 6/60 that suffer from chorus issues.
i had the chance to play an original roland,
it was either the 60 or 106 but man, i remember that day vividly
it was like I had the entire genre of Jungle/Drum&Bass, in my hands
you can just hear all the pure electronic industrial synth
it felt like it literally came straight out of a factory, like literally a factory. its just so Industrial
i wonder what the designers studied in university, I wonder how they made this thing!
Try Roland juno ju-06! NOT JU-06A!
3:15 Houston, we have a problem...
bullerbyne indeed ju06a sounds very thin in the low end compared to the 60.
Its one of the best boutique out....also Sh-01a and SE-02 !
The 60 never had issues, it's a bulletproof tank of a synth that was considered worthless for near 30 years and the fact that they all survived that mostly intact is a testament to how insanely well built they were compared to most mass produced stuff today. Remember- the 60 was never a classic. They were free or $100 until about 2013 when Laszlo Kovari put out the Minerva mod.
Thats mad 😮
Bit like Pixel Snooping with Camera resolution there are differences but without snooping they sound the same/look the same. A lot less hassle and cost with the JU than a Juno 60 and add in a decent emulkation of the 106 I see it as a no brainer if you want a J 60 /106 without spending x amounts more. Totally agree about Polyphony why 4 in this day and age of 'Digital' and cheap Processing is beyond me other than the sales pitch of buy another unit to make it 8 etc..
Don't really get why so many developers keep insisting on this ridiculous 4-voice limit, especially when emulating an older instrument which had more voices in its original form. No matter what the marketing says, minimum functional polyphony for a proper polysynth is 6 voices.
because they want to sell you their 6/8 voice + synths later.
@@jsaulkane5893 bingo. roland intentionally gimps their budget synths to force people into their expensive stuff
J Saul Kane finally someone who knows , i was going to say the same , you need to understand that these are meant to hook people in then they’ll want the jupiter x , system 8 etc.
wouldnt worry about the voices too much.. more that it sounds like a softsynth.. may as well use those.. no voice limit.
So you buy two and connect them I guess
Very nice video! I am actually psyched for this to come out since I don't have any room for another keyboard anyway.
Behold...The infamous JUNO 4
LMAO
Roland. Always making what nobody asked for.
I was skeptical at first but this is actually pretty good for being a digital emulation
I had the same reaction the first time I checked out the plugin versions in Roland Cloud. Was almost certain they wouldn't sound right, but the emulations are actually pretty stunning.
Pretty good? I'd say excellent. Whatever criticisms I may have, the sound isn't one of them.
I've been tempted by the sound of the 06a many times, but the 4 voices... UGH.
Thanks for the informative comparison.
I really wish Roland would succeed. Since I have a Behringer Deepmind 12, I see 0.0 reasons why I should buy a 4 voice digital mini synth with no keyboard.
Warren Triantafelo I know right lol
Same here
hahaha same here...
small + battery powered. a lot of people want that.
Same here,no need and DM12 has 12. ANALOG voices vs 4 on JU06a.
An excellent little synth and a great demo. Four voices is stingy for a polysynth (it’s why I never got the Mopho +4...) but I suspect the delay will compensate a bit for that. Still, I wish they'd release a kind of master controller with big keys that could house several of these...
Marc Weerts I had that same thought. Then if you did want more voices you could safely house more than one of them in one keyboard unit.
For the people owning an original juno 106, there's a Belgian company called Analogue Renaissance. They have reverse engineered the voice chips and made them more reliable. The sound is dead on
is there a product there putting these chips in, i would like to purchase
I want a JUNO 60
klinkske I have a Juno 6 and it’s so much better than the boutique. And you can get them for 1k sometimes, or even better get a Roland juno alpha for $400
@@nathankirklambo1986 I'm loving my Wavestation EX which I got for $280. My first vintage large-keyboard synth. Would love to one day own a Juno or a Prophet.
i'm sure roland has done everything within their power to create a replica product
its just hard to know for sure what the process involved is and how far in depth did they really go to remake/reproduce this product
I wonder how different the JU-06A sounds compared to the Roland Cloud Juno.
Nice vid! Huge fan of Psysex, so it was fun and unexpected to see that you use their synth ))
So this is a plugin in a box? I can't tell the difference, but if it is not done with proper hardware I could just use a plugin in my DAW and save a lot of $$$.
That box has soul
Once roland does a 6 voice of this, the price will go up and everyone will be mad because of the price boost.
Wow! Absolutely identical
Still 4 voices .... Seems they just don't get it over at Roland !!!
Infuriating.
Yeah man, 4 voices in the 21th century, where you can build synths in 3x3x5 cm and there are more capable then this one.
Yamaha Reface CS has a 32-key keyboard, 8 voices, built-in effects, and integrated speakers for $280. a 4-voice VA for $400 in 2019 is borderline insulting.
@@mikesmith42069 You are very right.
Its nice if you only have one arm.
Sounds pretty good. I've got the juno 60 and this little thing is nice.
Even with the 60 being slightly louder at certain moments (louder usually sounds better), the wave forms are SO much sharper on the 60. Also; the low pass filter on the 60 brought tears to my eyes. The new “emulation” they’ve just released can mimic the wave forms; but the 4 voice limitation is a drawback and the low pass filter on the 60a is a far cry from the original.
I got one a week or so ago. I know my way of recording is not the usual way people record. I use my yamaha ex7 sequencer to record on and quantize.. then play back each thing into the pc separately thus being able to work the levels on my movie edit program, so can work with my audio and video clips in one place.. But one really irritating thing when I press record and start to record, the metronome on my ex7 counts in and then this machine instantly plays some arpeggio thing and I got to press the white button to stop it. It is no huge deal though then as after I pressed the white button to stop it, I just count the next bar and start my recording after that. But once already I accidentally pressed one of the bank numbers in error and lost the sound that took me ages to get. I used the sliders to tweak it, spent a bit of time to get it the way i wanted it to sound, was so happy and even said out loud that's it!..that's what I want!.. but all gone by pressing one of bank numbers by mistake to turn off this arpeggio thing starting. So it is a bit inconvenient for this to start and definitely a little irritating. Especially when I make sure the arpeggio is switched off before I start but this thing always starts every time. I got to press the bottom left white button to stop it. But tbh the only disappointing thing as it is definitely good value for money.
here I was hoping this new version would give me proper amount of polyphony... it cant be that hard to add two digital voices.
gotta artificially create some reason to force people into a Jupiter X. never change roland.
Claiborn Timmer or having to buy a second boutique to polychain... greedy strategy
Yes this is so weak - especially in the era of Behringer
@@moistpeanut5986 But the Roland polychain is not really useable. We bought 2 JU-06 to polychain, and found out too late that it only triggers the next 4 voices if you hold down the keys ie it won't play more than 4 voices on patches that ring out via VCA release, once you take your fingers off the keys.
@ultimate patches True. But a hold pedal attached to a controller keyboard can help.
Oh i just noticed the PSYSEX sticker on the 60. A man of true old school taste ;-)
It’s actually his synth - I just borrowed it
@@loopop colour me starstruck!!! To me he kinda marked the threshold when we went through "goa trance" to "psytrance".
The old Juno 60 seems slightly out of tune, and a bit louder. The ACB seems pretty good!
Just came back to this post to request a video on the Juno-X! 🥳
Your wish is my command!
I wait for the rev. B (JU-06B) with longer sliders and 6 voices.
sucks Roland can't even replicate the voice count correctly. this modern age of advanced technology. here's your measly 4 voices suckers 🖕 good luck! at least the graphics look good
I wouldn't hold my breath.
yup
This already is the second revision. I don't think the version you're hoping for is ever coming.
Hi I really like your videos I learn so much you are a wizard of synthesisers I really thank you so much for all the information you give thanks very much I watch all the videos you make and made 👍🎼
☕️👌 damn so cool that you made this comparison!!!
Thanks! It’s was a good excuse to spend time with a real Juno 60 ;)
What is this? A synthesizer for ants? It needs to be at least 3 times bigger!
Size aside a big difference is in the note attack. My Juno 60 has a beefy thwack with every key I play (especially on the square wave). It may be a small detail but it’s one of my favorite aspects of the Juno 60. I don’t hear the same aggressive attack on the 06a.
40 years later and still nothing compares to the Juno 60. The original designers set the bar really high.
In a mix, y'all will NOT know the difference.
You people don't get it! Its the analog hardware ENV of the Juno 60 that has that fast hard snap that makes it so special. Its like driving rain on a tin roof.
You need to tune your Juno-60 :)
oh yes!
At least it would have 6 voices instead of 4
I heard it instantly
There are times when the original has the edge, but I was surprised by how many times I preferred the 06A. Plus, with the features of the 06A, the non-stepped HPF... if you were offering me the choice, even though the original is much more valuable, I would want the 06A. I make relatively minimal music and I'm not a great keyboard player though, otherwise I don't think I could accept the 4-voice limit, but for me that's okay.
As everybody else said, the 4-voice limitation is a bummer. The JU-06 (the first series) came out 4 years ago, one would expect Roland to be able to beef up the ACB technology during the years so that it can handle at least 6-voices. Dropping the touch strips was a smart move though, they're not very accurate and eat up much space on the frontpanel. Let's hope Roland will do some more Boutique's now as there is more space to put knobs and sliders. I also like that the buttons are now Juno 60 style. Coming back to the 4-voice limit, where's the Boutique Jupiter 4! Now that would be a nice one, as it only had 4 voices anyway.
Hate to say that I could actually tell the difference in an eyes closed test. The Juno 60 has a lower end on a lot of patches. I have a JU-06A and am very happy with it. I just got a Juno 6 in for a service and it does sound better to my ears, as in more low end. Some of this I admit can be due to internal bias as I gaze at the Juno with affection
In all honesty I've listened on my laptop and my headphones and all though these are probably not the best points of reference I can tell the difference. not that one is worse or better than the other, they just sound different. I think If synth producers just made all this cool gear instead of using reference names then we'd appreciate fully what they did and not constantly compare.
It's actually very obvious with the square wave at around 2:34 where the Boutique sounds a lot thinner and less "round" than the OG Juno.
I am buying it right now.
Roland do you ever listen?? 4 voices and aliasing?? You could easily make an 6 voice true analog for the same price.......Behringer?.........
THey have no more analog engineers nor factory to produce the chips. THey are stuck with their AIRA crappy digital emulation that is not good!
sounds legit for me
^100% True. Hope Behringer will does some magic...
The Deepmind 6 exists. Only 6 voices but that’s quite usable and sounds really very nice.
Ok time to buy it
Play a 5-note chord. They sound different! Great review though BTW. Thanks.
5-Note-Chord can´t be played with 4 Voices.
@@Analoque444 Einstein
@@Analoque444 Whooooooooosh
@@Analoque444 oh dear u are slow aren't u
@@fantasyproduct1042 hahahah :)) yes, I am slow :D Yeah, I got it now
Hi, awesome video man! One question: what did you use as oscillocope and spectroscope? Thanks
60 sounds darker and rounder than boutique. You can also see that on scope where 06A has those longer spikes on waveforms.
That 06A full LFO modulation on filter is a nice sound tho, like it!
it sounds thin ju06a and the june 60 is a littl flat which sometime just works in a track. Love this channel. thank you
Sounds pretty much identical. In a mkx with effects no one can tell the difference. But the 2 missing voices are the only drawback. Can you link 2 Boutiques for 8 voices?
Yes, with polychain
That poly chain never worked as they claimed it would. Its not round robin style it does NOT give you more poly.
@@josephlepkowski2383 what do u mean exactly? I know there are some issues with poly chain (like limitation on midi channels), but for what i know it's adds other four voices
@@angelantoniomajorano1444 it does not add four voices. When four notes are reached on the first unit the second plays a new stand alone 5th note. it never was a poly chain proper where you could play 6 or more voices at once. Truth
@@josephlepkowski2383 ok understood, but can u ear the difference after all? Im curious because i was thinking to buy another jx for poly chain
fact is even if it sounds exactly the same, I think what USERS value is the feel and the vintage look of the gear as you play it, gives you the feel of "im playing an old juno-60", rather than "im playing a generic midi keyboard that has the juno 60 exact sounds", so yeah, i would pay a lot more money for the original piece of gear just because the synth is beautiful.
I think if it weren't for the 4-voice polyphony thing, the JU-06A would be a pretty solid contender. I think it sounds really close in most important aspects, and the lower cost, smaller size, and, of course, the convenience of modeled analog circuitry rather than rare/obscure/hard-to-maintain proper analog electronics make it a solid piece of kit IMO.
But then, I'm not that hardcore of a synth head (yet), so I don't really have the same attachment to some of these classic analog boards.
There are virtual analog approximations of old Roland synths that have awesome sound, fully programmable sequencers and zero weight. They are called VSTi.
TAL U NO LX
Can you chain the previous JU06 with the new 06a for 8-voice polyphony? Thanks
This looks and sounds amazing, but the four voice limitation is really unfortunate. There are lots of situations where four voices is plenty, but for someone who loves to play 5-note chords, the difference between four and six voices is pretty big. It also just bugs me on a philosophical level; the original 6/60/106 all have "6" in the name because they're six voice synths. I guess it wouldn't make sense to call it JU-04A, but still.
My guess is they'd have to add a second DSP to support more than four voices, which would double the cost of the most expensive component, and also require AC power. For some people that would be a reasonable tradeoff (myself included), but these things are designed to be portable; if they can't run on batteries or bus power, it defeats a lot of the purpose of cramming tiny versions of the controls into a small form factor. I know the SE-02 requires AC power, but it's an anomaly.
Smart thinking
4 voices.... I heard 4 voices once, and they told me 4 important little words.. .." Do not buy this " ... the Se 02 on the other hand is solid in the mono department.. comes in handy for quick bass patches. as soon as Behringer releases the Oberheim clone..its all over
ELECTRO WAYNE The fact that it has four voices makes it emulate not two but three classic Roland synths: Jupiter 4 as well ;) Lol. Jokes aside I am definitely getting one of these.
"as Behringer releases the Oberheim clone..its all over" FOR SERIOUS !
I'm loving the Neutron. My first warm-sounding synth, I really needed it to compliment my rather colder/metallic sounding synth setup.
As much as I love my deepmind 12. I went with an actual ob6. Yeah the 49 keys is a downside but it's fine. However, the overall tone and playability of it are so out of this world good. I'm not saying the behringer wont be good. But I have little faith it will be as good as the ob6. Plus I do plan on buying some more behringer synths and while I'm not an elitist, I dont really want a room full of all clones.. either way, dsi and behringer are both awesome. Roland peaked in the 80s and have done not much since. Even the 60 dollar tal no u lx vst sounds just as good as the ju06a. Plus 6+ voices. The Jupiter x and xm are really cool but they are cash grabs imo. They could both be half the price.
Yep, what I have said and many others! A CON!
Psysex Logo on the Juno-60? Good music!!! :D
He let me borrow his synth ;)
I 'm listening in my studio on a pair of adam A7x and I think there definitely is a difference.
There is more body and weight to the sound of the original , its less noticeable on higher lead sounds but any low to midrange sounds have less fatness and warmth.
But saying that I still think its a great little synth as it really has all the character of the Juno 60 and nothing wrong with fattening it up later with a little eq .
Also price wise its going to be a fraction of the cost of a vintage one and it won't need repairing all the time because the parts are 40 years old .
Well done Roland .