PG8X (inspired by the JX8P): new beta version uploaded

[AdmiralQuality]

lol i know AQ.. i've had both an MKS70 and a JP6 .. and i never mentioned a Jupiter 8, but a Jupiter 6, which is much closer to the JX8P in a couple of ways.

Anyway, i merely suggested the JP6 since given Martins' talent, it would probably turn into a spot on emulation And since he was planning on creating a version with more features anyway, this might be something to consider.

Oh i also noticed i wrote JP8 when i meant JX8.. scuze moi, correcting the error

Yes, you said JP8, that's why I posted that.

I've never owned a JP6 or 8 -- I wasn't rich enough (and I'm still not ). Played with them a bit though. What about a Jupiter 6 is like a JX-8P?

Arguably all 3 synths have a very similar voice architectures -- 2 oscillator poly-synths with 2 envelopes and a single LFO. But the DCOs in the JX-8P just sound nothing like real VCOs. And I'm sure the filters in the JX-8P can't be built anything like what was in an JP8 or even JP6. (Wasn't a 6 just a cheaper 8 with two fewer voices and MIDI? As well as some minor differences in the sound due to different components?)

If Martin did do a true emulation of the JP6, wouldn't that mean it lacked velocity sensitivity? (I would think the MKS-80 would be the ultimate Roland analog to emulate. Every time I see someone selling an MKS-80 I start thinking crazy thoughts. )

[martin_l]

If Martin did do a true emulation of the JP6, wouldn't that mean it lacked velocity sensitivity? (I would think the MKS-80 would be the ultimate Roland analog to emulate. Every time I see someone selling an MKS-80 I start thinking crazy thoughts. )

Sorry guys, I definitely will not attempt to emulate any of the Jupiters. First of all, having the hardware is crucial to getting close to the sound, and I don't have a JP6, JP8 or MKS80. And also, emulating a real VCO with all its instabilities and imperfections if a completely different task than trying to capture the sound of a DCO.

I am thinking about a synth which is based on the same engine as the pg8x but allows for more controls, such as PW modulation and more routing options.

But don't hold your breath for that. Writing the plugin is only a hobby for me, and I have quite a demanding day job and a family. So, after finishing the pg8x I need to concentrate on other things again...


Cheers,
Martin

[martin_l]

I discovered a bug, which MIGHT have triggered the observed crashes on some systems. I fixed it now and uploaded version 0.991 to my webpage.

Please, try whether it still crashes or whether this fixed the problem, and let me know.

Further to this fix, the red colours of the small sliders is changed to green now for better readability.


Cheers,
Martin

[PeWe]

Sorry guys, I definitely will not attempt to emulate any of the Jupiters. First of all, having the hardware is crucial to getting close to the sound, and I don't have a JP6, JP8 or MKS80. And also, emulating a real VCO with all its instabilities and imperfections if a completely different task than trying to capture the sound of a DCO.

Martin,- it's true, emulating a JP8, JP6 or MKS80 would be a different task,- a completely different synth emulation.

But trying to emulate some global features of the MKS70, using pg8x, seems to be not that difficult.
The MKS70 is 2 voiceboards, each a JX8P,- so you have it.
There are global play modes and 2 of these being obsolete w/ a plugin because these can be realized by using 2 instances of pg8x,- single and split.
The mode needed to get that fat sound w/ 12 (2x6) voices is DUAL and the detune feature, detuning the 2 voiceboards,- as also 2 stereo chorus devices, both feeding a separate stereo out.
This could be done w/ a simple 2 stereo in > stereo out module, both stereo ins offering a balance control, so you can place the VSTi in one stereo instrument track in the host and trigger it by the same MIDI channel info, which would be great for live gigging w/ the plug.

Most other features are obsolete because these are only necessary in a hardware module,- chase play (can be mimiked delaying midi notes in a track), separate MIDI channels for each voice board, octave shift of upper and lower voiceboard and so on, which can all be realized in a hosts track parameters already and by using 2 instances.

Maybe the play modes of a single voiceboard in DUAL mode are interesting, like poly unison, mono and unison,- but it seems you nailed these already.

I know, a MKS70 emu will need twice the CPU because of the 12 voices needed.

I am thinking about a synth which is based on the same engine as the pg8x but allows for more controls, such as PW modulation and more routing options.

Well, a lot of 2 Osc/ Filter/ Amp synths w/ PWM and more routing options already exist in software and for cheap as also as freeware,- some good, some not, but there's no emulation out doing the DUAL mode feature of a MKS70 together w/ 2 separate chorus devices and a 2 stereo in > stereo out mixer implemented.

But don't hold your breath for that. Writing the plugin is only a hobby for me, and I have quite a demanding day job and a family. So, after finishing the pg8x I need to concentrate on other things again...

Understandable !
What I wrote above is just only a idea.

I own a MKS70 (and some more dinos) since decades and are able to provide you w/ the tech details owning owners- and service-manuals.

PeWe

[payt69]

If Martin did do a true emulation of the JP6, wouldn't that mean it lacked velocity sensitivity? (I would think the MKS-80 would be the ultimate Roland analog to emulate. Every time I see someone selling an MKS-80 I start thinking crazy thoughts. )

Sorry guys, I definitely will not attempt to emulate any of the Jupiters. First of all, having the hardware is crucial to getting close to the sound, and I don't have a JP6, JP8 or MKS80. And also, emulating a real VCO with all its instabilities and imperfections if a completely different task than trying to capture the sound of a DCO.

I am thinking about a synth which is based on the same engine as the pg8x but allows for more controls, such as PW modulation and more routing options.

But don't hold your breath for that. Writing the plugin is only a hobby for me, and I have quite a demanding day job and a family. So, after finishing the pg8x I need to concentrate on other things again...


Cheers,
Martin

Thanks for that, Martin. I'm still enjoying your JX-8P emu a lot.. it's kindof like having my MKS70 again (well, half of it, at least )

AQ: The JP6 and JP8 have little in common, technically. Where the JP8 uses discrete electronics, the JP6 uses chips. The JP6 and MKS80 use the same chips, it's just that the MKS80 has 2 more of them and also has a little bit of circuitry to enhance the bass department a bit.. something that a lot of people feel was lacking from the JP6.

I would have loved a proper emu of a JP6 or MKS80.. somehow noone has really done it as far as i know.

So we'll see what's coming our way, and in the meanwhile i'll have lots of fun with Martins' PG emu

[goldenanalog]

This is really good! And I own a JX-8P!

martin I wrote:

I am thinking about a synth which is based on the same engine as the pg8x but allows for more controls, such as PW modulation and more routing options.

*THAT* got my attention!

Question: Could you possibly implement pulse-width modulation into your current pg8x offering, or would that be too much work for you?

[loungedumore]

Why not just make a PG8XL with all the extras and double the voices ? Sounds kind a like what your describing the next synth being anyway .
Regardless thanks for this I just sold my Alpha , but don't have to miss it too much with this

[goldenanalog]

How about a 'circuit bent' version, where the sound and graphics are enhanced/deconstucted by some well-placed knobs, switches, etc. that add functions the original designer(s) never implemented (or even wanted)?

I'd love to see that as a trend.

Circuit Bent Roland JX-8P by Martin...

[martin_l]

But trying to emulate some global features of the MKS70, using pg8x, seems to be not that difficult.

In fact, I am thinking about that (possibly called MLs-70...) but I am not yet sure to which extent it can be done (at least using SE as framework). The difficult bit seems to be the memory architecture, i.e. the organization of the patches into the "patches" and the "tones". I first have to read the manual of the MKS70 to understand how it works. Then I can think about how it could be implemented. The rest, i.e. the playing modes, including crossfade etc. should not be so hard. I think the main limitation will be whether the resulting plugin would still be playable, or whether it would use too much CPU as to be useful.

On my system (quite ancient, Athlon XP 3200, Win XP3 and Cubase VST), I managed to run 4 instances of pg8x, but I had to increase the audio buffersize to 1024 bit in order to prevent crackles. Two instances (which would correspond to one MKS70) were just about running with small latency (depending on the patch). So, even on more modern machines, this plugin would probably use up one core.

Why not just make a PG8XL with all the extras and double the voices ? Sounds kind a like what your describing the next synth being anyway .
Regardless thanks for this I just sold my Alpha , but don't have to miss it too much with this

How about a 'circuit bent' version, where the sound and graphics are enhanced/deconstucted by some well-placed knobs, switches, etc. that add functions the original designer(s) never implemented (or even wanted)?

I'd love to see that as a trend.

Circuit Bent Roland JX-8P by Martin...

I have not quite decided what to do next. I think I will leave the current pg8x as it is (apart from some updates and fixes). This is mainly because I am afraid that every change will destroy patch-compatibility. If I manage to add something without making old patch banks obsolete, I might add some features.


The new synth I'm having in mind is something like a "Matrix JX" will have more routing options plus PW control. Furthermore, I was planning to have slightly different ranges for the values of the sliders. Thus, this thing will be different from the pg8x and be more than just a pg8x++.

So far, I did not see the reason to build a circuit bend pg8x, since that would just be somewhere in between the two. I will see how things evolve...

But now, I will first concentrate on finishing and debugging the pg8x.


Cheers,
Martin

[fmr]

AQ: The JP6 and JP8 have little in common, technically. Where the JP8 uses discrete electronics, the JP6 uses chips. The JP6 and MKS80 use the same chips, it's just that the MKS80 has 2 more of them and also has a little bit of circuitry to enhance the bass department a bit.. something that a lot of people feel was lacking from the JP6.

I would have loved a proper emu of a JP6 or MKS80.. somehow noone has really done it as far as i know.

So we'll see what's coming our way, and in the meanwhile i'll have lots of fun with Martins' PG emu

I think when you compare the Jupiter-6 with the MKS-80 you mean the Jupiter-8, right? Because the MKS-80 has little to nothing to be compared with a Jupiter-6. It is a Jupiter-8 in a rack, with dual mode, splits and layers.

[payt69]

Well, not to derail the thread too much, but the jupiter 6 and MKS 80 have the same basic chipsets, and technically the MKS80 has little in common with the Jupiter 8.

This is what AnalogHell has to say about it:

'The MKS80 Super Jupiter is a classic. One of the greatest synths of all time and the king of the MKS series. Made from 1984 through to 1987 the MKS80 is very similar to a rack version of the Jupiter 6 & 8 series of keyboard synths. Some claim it's is a version of the Jupiter 8 and others a Jupiter 6. In reality it is somewhere between the two. The only MKS series synths with real VCO's was produced in 2 distinct versions.

Serials number up to 511800 (OS Version 4) used standard CEM 3340 VCO chips. Most people claim that these early versions are disctinclty better. Serial numbers from 511801 onwards (OS Version 5) used custom Roland chips. The Roland IR-3R03 VCO and IR-3R05 VCF. The cross-modulation and filter resonance were tamed to reduce distortion and the ADSR decay rate reduced.'

http://analoghell.com/studio/mks/roland-mks-80/

[AdmiralQuality]

AQ: The JP6 and JP8 have little in common, technically. Where the JP8 uses discrete electronics, the JP6 uses chips. The JP6 and MKS80 use the same chips, it's just that the MKS80 has 2 more of them and also has a little bit of circuitry to enhance the bass department a bit.. something that a lot of people feel was lacking from the JP6.

I would have loved a proper emu of a JP6 or MKS80.. somehow noone has really done it as far as i know.

So we'll see what's coming our way, and in the meanwhile i'll have lots of fun with Martins' PG emu

I think when you compare the Jupiter-6 with the MKS-80 you mean the Jupiter-8, right? Because the MKS-80 has little to nothing to be compared with a Jupiter-6. It is a Jupiter-8 in a rack, with dual mode, splits and layers.

Jupiter 8 had splits and layers, no? I thought the addition to the JP8 voice in the MKS-80 was velocity sensitivity.

[fmr]

AQ: The JP6 and JP8 have little in common, technically. Where the JP8 uses discrete electronics, the JP6 uses chips. The JP6 and MKS80 use the same chips, it's just that the MKS80 has 2 more of them and also has a little bit of circuitry to enhance the bass department a bit.. something that a lot of people feel was lacking from the JP6.

I would have loved a proper emu of a JP6 or MKS80.. somehow noone has really done it as far as i know.

So we'll see what's coming our way, and in the meanwhile i'll have lots of fun with Martins' PG emu

I think when you compare the Jupiter-6 with the MKS-80 you mean the Jupiter-8, right? Because the MKS-80 has little to nothing to be compared with a Jupiter-6. It is a Jupiter-8 in a rack, with dual mode, splits and layers.

Jupiter 8 had splits and layers, no? I thought the addition to the JP8 voice in the MKS-80 was velocity sensitivity.

I never owned a Jupiter-8 (I own an MKS-80), but I believe it's monotimbral, therefore, no splits and layers were possible.

Replying to the previous poster, here is what Wikipedia says:

"Throughout the production of the JP-8 there were several changes. Starting at serial #171700 the D/A converter on the Interface board was changed from 12-bit to 14-bit. This change was made mainly to improve tuning stability. The problem with the 12-bit digital-to-analog converter on the original JP-8 is that it could cause the autotune to be inaccurate in some instances. Some say to avoid these early JP-8's while others say they haven't experienced tuning problems. Starting at serial #242750 the LEDs of the display were changed to brighter ones. Starting at serial #282880 the JP-8 came standard with a DCB port. These newer JP-8's may be referred to as JP-8A's. DCB, or Digital Control Bus, was Roland's pre-MIDI interface that allowed the JP-8 to talk to other DCB enabled hardware, such as the Roland MC4 and MC8 microcomposers. Previous JP-8's had the option of having the OC-8 retrofit installed to give it DCB capability.

The Jupiter-6 was released 2 years after the JP-8 and was an attempt at more affordable version of Roland's flagship. It features a similar voice architecture and appearance. It stored fewer patches, and had six voices. In order to make it cheaper to manufacture, a move towards integrated circuits (Curtis) was made, to replace discrete circuits used in JP-8's oscillators and amplifiers. The JP-6 is built using CEM3340 chip for its oscillators, and CEM3360 for its voltage controlled amplifiers. These changes imparted a change in sonic character. Additionally, the Jupiter-6 features a true multimode resonant filter, built-in MIDI, unison detune function and ability to make multiple selection of waveforms on its oscillators.

The Roland MKS-80 "Super Jupiter" is a MIDI-controlled, rack-mountable sound module with a similar voice architecture to the Jupiter-8. However, its first released incarnation in 1984 (revision 3 and 4) used hardware identical to its predecessor, Jupiter 6 (combination of Curtis VCO and VCA chips and Roland's own filter). In 1985 out came another revision of MKS-80, known as "Rev 5", that had no ties with any previous Jupiter's hardware, as it used a new generation of both Roland VCO's, VCA's and filter. The Rev 5 filter was also used in JX-8P, JX-10 and MKS-70 synthesizers."

So, I think we can conclude that the MKS-80 is a different beast, but closer to the Jupiter-8, in what concerns synth engine and voice architecture, which is what's more important, IMO.

[martin_l]

AQ: The JP6 and JP8 have little in common, technically. Where the JP8 uses discrete electronics, the JP6 uses chips. The JP6 and MKS80 use the same chips, it's just that the MKS80 has 2 more of them and also has a little bit of circuitry to enhance the bass department a bit.. something that a lot of people feel was lacking from the JP6.

I would have loved a proper emu of a JP6 or MKS80.. somehow noone has really done it as far as i know.

So we'll see what's coming our way, and in the meanwhile i'll have lots of fun with Martins' PG emu

I think when you compare the Jupiter-6 with the MKS-80 you mean the Jupiter-8, right? Because the MKS-80 has little to nothing to be compared with a Jupiter-6. It is a Jupiter-8 in a rack, with dual mode, splits and layers.

Jupiter 8 had splits and layers, no? I thought the addition to the JP8 voice in the MKS-80 was velocity sensitivity.

Analog hell has most of the user manuals and even service manuals online. All the answers should be in there...

http://analoghell.com/studio/docs/

@payt69: Thanks for the link! Definitely an interesting source of information...


Cheers,
Martin

[fmr]

AQ: The JP6 and JP8 have little in common, technically. Where the JP8 uses discrete electronics, the JP6 uses chips. The JP6 and MKS80 use the same chips, it's just that the MKS80 has 2 more of them and also has a little bit of circuitry to enhance the bass department a bit.. something that a lot of people feel was lacking from the JP6.

I would have loved a proper emu of a JP6 or MKS80.. somehow noone has really done it as far as i know.

So we'll see what's coming our way, and in the meanwhile i'll have lots of fun with Martins' PG emu

I think when you compare the Jupiter-6 with the MKS-80 you mean the Jupiter-8, right? Because the MKS-80 has little to nothing to be compared with a Jupiter-6. It is a Jupiter-8 in a rack, with dual mode, splits and layers.

Jupiter 8 had splits and layers, no? I thought the addition to the JP8 voice in the MKS-80 was velocity sensitivity.

I double checked, and it was duo-timbral, so you are probably right.