TAL-U-NO-LX. Uber accurate Juno 60 emulation.

[minijetsdonttalk]

Everyone needs to check out the EXT 16 arp mode. It makes sequencing your arp in your piano roll very very cool.

How is this done? Maybe I'm doing something wrong but I've tried routing it to another synth on channel 16 in Reaper but no joy.......................

[braj]

Just send the plugin a midi note clip on ch 16 in mono with the frequency you want the arp to trigger, this can include whatever notes you like, say whole note, fife 16ths, half half quarter.... then set the plugin to arp on, enable that EXT 16 setting, and push play on the sequencer, and finger some chords. As it hits each of your pulses, it will advance the arpaggiator one step. I haven't tried routing this in Reaper I guess you would send a track on ch 16 to the track that has the plugin. I'm very sleepy so not so clear headed to explain so please forgive me.

[jbuonacc]

also, any comment on this?

also, i noticed that self-oscillation doesn't kick in unless the Res slider is all the way at 10. it's been years since i've had a Juno (had a 60 and 106), but i don't think this is accurate. i think it starts to come in around 7 or 8.

I have to check, but would need something more specific. AFAIK, real self oscillation only happens at 10, or very close to it. However, with some values, we notice other sounds coming from the resonance (I have some patches based on that). So, I would need you to elaborate a little, to allow me to seek what you mean.

I will try to record the output of the Juno-60 tomorrow, and compare it the U-No-LX regarding the resonance quirkiness.

i guess turn off all oscillators, and see exactly at what point (1-10) by turning up the Resonance that the real Juno starts making audible noise. with U-No-LX it's absolutely silent unless it's all the way at 10, but i'd be surprised if it didn't start creeping in faintly just before this. from memory, i thought it "swelled" a bit into self-oscillation, as opposed to acting like a sort of on/off function.

it's frustrating not being able to compare actual analogs to softsynths these days, as i've owned several over the years. it makes me want to buy a couple again just to compare. actually, i just did this recently in a way. i bought an Ensoniq Mirage to compare it to 112dB's 'Morgana'. i came to the conclusion that any differences were miniscule, if worth mentioning at all.

personally, for me, softsynths have pretty much "replaced" all hardware and i'm totally happy with them. there's still some sort of "doubt" in the back of my mind though in regards to certain things.

i still find it hard to believe that the Juno-60 exhibits that resonance behavior that i was asking about. and if it does, that it would sound nearly so "digital/wrong" as it does on U-NO-LX.

overall though, i think U-NO-LX is fantastic, and pretty much nails it well enough for me. i didn't even really want or need a Juno emulation, but bought it immediately without a demo just to support TAL for everything they've (he's) done. i sure wish he'd fix those buttons and slider caps though.

[JimmiG]

Just tried the demo. It sounds *very* different from Diva with the Juno-60 template, especially the filter. A bit strange since they're supposed to emulate the same thing.

[fmr]

also, any comment on this?

also, i noticed that self-oscillation doesn't kick in unless the Res slider is all the way at 10. it's been years since i've had a Juno (had a 60 and 106), but i don't think this is accurate. i think it starts to come in around 7 or 8.

I have to check, but would need something more specific. AFAIK, real self oscillation only happens at 10, or very close to it. However, with some values, we notice other sounds coming from the resonance (I have some patches based on that). So, I would need you to elaborate a little, to allow me to seek what you mean.

I will try to record the output of the Juno-60 tomorrow, and compare it the U-No-LX regarding the resonance quirkiness.

i guess turn off all oscillators, and see exactly at what point (1-10) by turning up the Resonance that the real Juno starts making audible noise. with U-No-LX it's absolutely silent unless it's all the way at 10, but i'd be surprised if it didn't start creeping in faintly just before this. from memory, i thought it "swelled" a bit into self-oscillation, as opposed to acting like a sort of on/off function.

it's frustrating not being able to compare actual analogs to softsynths these days, as i've owned several over the years. it makes me want to buy a couple again just to compare. actually, i just did this recently in a way. i bought an Ensoniq Mirage to compare it to 112dB's 'Morgana'. i came to the conclusion that any differences were miniscule, if worth mentioning at all.

personally, for me, softsynths have pretty much "replaced" all hardware and i'm totally happy with them. there's still some sort of "doubt" in the back of my mind though in regards to certain things.

i still find it hard to believe that the Juno-60 exhibits that resonance behavior that i was asking about. and if it does, that it would sound nearly so "digital/wrong" as it does on U-NO-LX.

overall though, i think U-NO-LX is fantastic, and pretty much nails it well enough for me. i didn't even really want or need a Juno emulation, but bought it immediately without a demo just to support TAL for everything they've (he's) done. i sure wish he'd fix those buttons and slider caps though.

Well, I tried the resonance with the Juno-60. I did as you suggested: Everything at 0, except filter cutoff (at 5), resonance (at 10), KBD modulation (10) and envelope sustain (10) and release (5). VCA is at maximum (10).
As expected, I have a bell like tone (basically, a sine). If I lower the resonance to below 9, I stop hearing any sound.
With the same settings, the U-No-LX sounds until 8, more or less, than it stops sounding too. So, there is a difference in the self resonance, but Actually, it's the U-No-LX that fades slower, not the Juno.
Regarding the recording of the resonance quirkiness, I don't have a server to upload the recording, so, if someone has a server, I can e-mail the file comparing the Juno and the U-No-LX to upload, and make available here.

[fmr]

Just tried the demo. It sounds *very* different from Diva with the Juno-60 template, especially the filter. A bit strange since they're supposed to emulate the same thing.

As Urs pointed, DIVA is not "emulating" the Juno, nor did it pretend to. It just got some modules from it (basically, the oscillators). We can get similar sounds in DIVA, but we have to tweak it to quite some extent, with values that don't relate at all with the Juno values.

[jbuonacc]

Well, I tried the resonance with the Juno-60. I did as you suggested: Everything at 0, except filter cutoff (at 5), resonance (at 10), KBD modulation (10) and envelope sustain (10) and release (5). VCA is at maximum (10).
As expected, I have a bell like tone (basically, a sine). If I lower the resonance to below 9, I stop hearing any sound.
With the same settings, the U-No-LX sounds until 8, more or less, than it stops sounding too. So, there is a difference in the self resonance, but Actually, it's the U-No-LX that fades slower, not the Juno.
Regarding the recording of the resonance quirkiness, I don't have a server to upload the recording, so, if someone has a server, I can e-mail the file comparing the Juno and the U-No-LX to upload, and make available here.

ahh, you're right. at certain cutoff settings, the resonance doesn't need to be exactly at 10 for it to self-oscillate. i'll play around with it some more tonight after work. (again, i wish i could test it myself, just for kicks. a friend has/had a Juno-6, i'll try to see if he's still got it.)

if you'd like, you can email the file to me at:

jbuonaccorso (at) hotmail

[fmr]

Well, I tried the resonance with the Juno-60. I did as you suggested: Everything at 0, except filter cutoff (at 5), resonance (at 10), KBD modulation (10) and envelope sustain (10) and release (5). VCA is at maximum (10).
As expected, I have a bell like tone (basically, a sine). If I lower the resonance to below 9, I stop hearing any sound.
With the same settings, the U-No-LX sounds until 8, more or less, than it stops sounding too. So, there is a difference in the self resonance, but Actually, it's the U-No-LX that fades slower, not the Juno.
Regarding the recording of the resonance quirkiness, I don't have a server to upload the recording, so, if someone has a server, I can e-mail the file comparing the Juno and the U-No-LX to upload, and make available here.

ahh, you're right. at certain cutoff settings, the resonance doesn't need to be exactly at 10 for it to self-oscillate. i'll play around with it some more tonight after work. (again, i wish i could test it myself, just for kicks. a friend has/had a Juno-6, i'll try to see if he's still got it.)

if you'd like, you can email the file to me at:

jbuonaccorso (at) hotmail

Mail sent. Just the Juno-60. Patch details explained there. The quirkiness isn't exactly the same in both, but it's similar (and we are talking about small and obscure details here).

[RexXx]

Fernando's Resonance A/B Files

Juno-60 Resonance Quirkiness.wav:
https://www.box.com/s/8c37eee5a5333416456f

U-No Resonance Quirkiness.wav:
https://www.box.com/s/102399c96288b27dfde3

[akademie]

Fernando's Resonance A/B Files

Juno-60 Resonance Quirkiness.wav:
https://www.box.com/s/8c37eee5a5333416456f

U-No Resonance Quirkiness.wav:
https://www.box.com/s/102399c96288b27dfde3

Wow, but this doesn't seem like accurate emulation, not only the quirks, but mainly raw waveform has totaly different tonality ... ? From these recordings the UNO comes out really very thin in contrast to real Juno

... and comparison audio files on TAL web sit were so close , why such difference now ? ...

akademie

[BDeep]

Please factor in the A/D converters, pre amp etc needed to record the real Juno 60. What I mean to say is, comparing the sound this way is not entirely fair. Th examples were meant to demonstrate the filter behaviour in certain settings and are adequate for that.

[Kees49]

I heard some bad aliasing in the upper registers.
Diva all the way...

[akademie]

Please factor in the A/D converters, pre amp etc needed to record the real Juno 60. What I mean to say is, comparing the sound this way is not entirely fair. Th examples were meant to demonstrate the filter behaviour in certain settings and are adequate for that.

Well OK. Sure, if some preamp was used and saturated signal eventually ...

I have to say I like character and sound of U-NO-LX ... I own JUNO-106 (and love it), I will have to bring it home someday and make some comparisons. But JUNO-106 is not JUNO-60, you know

akademie

[fmr]

I heard some bad aliasing in the upper registers.
Diva all the way...

What do you mean? That's not aliasing. That's distortion caused by the resonance, and the Juno also has it. Take the demo, mess with it, and then, if you find aliasing, you're welcome to post it.

[fmr]

Please factor in the A/D converters, pre amp etc needed to record the real Juno 60. What I mean to say is, comparing the sound this way is not entirely fair. Th examples were meant to demonstrate the filter behaviour in certain settings and are adequate for that.

Precisely. The Juno-60 was recorded. therefore, the sound has some coloration, while the U-NO was rendered. The purpose of this was to show there was some quirkiness on both filters under some circumstances when resonance is at maximum. I could easily make both sounds match, but I wasn't worried with that.