Arturia Jun-6 Chorus is free right now

[Tj Shredder]

There's a BBD delay chip inside the Korg Minilogue, […]

huh?
i thought it is a PT2399, isn't it?
which afaik is a digital chip

https://www.electrosmash.com/pt2399-analysis

Great! Thanks for clearing that up. I was told it was a bbd by a rep in a store.

Sound is always processed by the mind. Thats shocking news and you can only model that part of the chain with classic propaganda. (Arturia has mastered that successfully since ages btw...)
I bet that it still could sound better than the bbd option, there is a reason why engineers choose such a chip...

[fmr]

fmr's got one: maybe he'd be willing to post a dry saw saw wave playing a few sustained notes, a low note, a mid note, and a very high note dry. Then do the same thing with each of the 3 chorus modes. Then we could compare at home using TAL Chorus, OSL, Arturia...I've even got some Syntorus 2 presets I feel get pretty close to the Juno sound.

Would be great.

What do you say fmr?

I'd really be interested in hearing a very high note because that Arturia emulation definitely does something weird with very high notes. So I'd love to hear the highest note a Juno-60 could produce with a Saw Waveform.

OK, I finally got my Juno-60 back in the studio, and recorded the requested sounds.

There are four audio files. One is the naked saw (without any processing), another with Chorus I added, another with Chorus II added and another with Chorus III (I + II).

In all of them I played C1, C3, C4 and C6 in this order. I can't play anything above C6 because that's the limit of the Juno-60 range.

And now, the links:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1UckyZk ... sp=sharing

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1TJ-ruL ... sp=sharing

https://drive.google.com/file/d/17ObWC6 ... sp=sharing

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1k3cRch ... sp=sharing

[foosnark]

Looking at the C6 example, I'm not seeing any aliasing.

Testing vs. a saw generated in Bitwig Grid at the same frequency and amplitude, with the Jun-6 chorus plugin, I'm also not seeing aliasing either.

If you crank up the amplitude of the saw enough, there's just a hint of aliasing you can see on an analyzer -- but this pure unfiltered saw is a lot brighter than the Juno-60 saw anyway. Filter it so the slope matches (which happened to be 1-pole, 3.5k) and it's fine.

With that filter in place, I can go up two more octaves with the saw through Jun-6 before any aliasing is apparent...

So basically, if you want Jun-6 chorus to sound more like a real Juno-60 chorus and also not alias, put a gentle lowpass filter in front of it. But also don't bother with really high-pitched saws

[Funkybot's Evil Twin]

fmr's got one: maybe he'd be willing to post a dry saw saw wave playing a few sustained notes, a low note, a mid note, and a very high note dry. Then do the same thing with each of the 3 chorus modes. Then we could compare at home using TAL Chorus, OSL, Arturia...I've even got some Syntorus 2 presets I feel get pretty close to the Juno sound.

Would be great.

What do you say fmr?

I'd really be interested in hearing a very high note because that Arturia emulation definitely does something weird with very high notes. So I'd love to hear the highest note a Juno-60 could produce with a Saw Waveform.

OK, I finally got my Juno-60 back in the studio, and recorded the requested sounds.

There are four audio files. One is the naked saw (without any processing), another with Chorus I added, another with Chorus II added and another with Chorus III (I + II).

In all of them I played C1, C3, C4 and C6 in this order. I can't play anything above C6 because that's the limit of the Juno-60 range.

And now, the links:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1UckyZk ... sp=sharing

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1TJ-ruL ... sp=sharing

https://drive.google.com/file/d/17ObWC6 ... sp=sharing

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1k3cRch ... sp=sharing

Thanks for doing this! Was great. Interesting how much of a volume boost there is with the hardware. I was able to get Syntorus 2 dialed in very close with Chorus I and Chorus II modes, aside from the missing noise and maybe some width. Chorus I+II is tricker but not really a great sounding mode anyway.

Really appreciate you taking the time.

[fmr]

So basically, if you want Jun-6 chorus to sound more like a real Juno-60 chorus and also not alias, put a gentle lowpass filter in front of it. But also don't bother with really high-pitched saws

I believe that's the main issue. People was testing with very high pitched sounds, when the Juno-60 don't go beyond C6 (which is not "that" high). I believe that the real Juno-60 chorus, with higher notes, would also alias.

[Lucastyle]

fmr's got one: maybe he'd be willing to post a dry saw saw wave playing a few sustained notes, a low note, a mid note, and a very high note dry. Then do the same thing with each of the 3 chorus modes. Then we could compare at home using TAL Chorus, OSL, Arturia...I've even got some Syntorus 2 presets I feel get pretty close to the Juno sound.

Would be great.

What do you say fmr?

I'd really be interested in hearing a very high note because that Arturia emulation definitely does something weird with very high notes. So I'd love to hear the highest note a Juno-60 could produce with a Saw Waveform.

OK, I finally got my Juno-60 back in the studio, and recorded the requested sounds.

There are four audio files. One is the naked saw (without any processing), another with Chorus I added, another with Chorus II added and another with Chorus III (I + II).

In all of them I played C1, C3, C4 and C6 in this order. I can't play anything above C6 because that's the limit of the Juno-60 range.

And now, the links:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1UckyZk ... sp=sharing

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1TJ-ruL ... sp=sharing

https://drive.google.com/file/d/17ObWC6 ... sp=sharing

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1k3cRch ... sp=sharing

Man thanks for doing this, this is exactly the kind of content I want to hear in this forum, I compared the files with arturia's chorus and it's obvious that the aliasing is not present on the hardware, although the hardware has that nice noise which the Roland Cloud modeled, my conclusion is that this it's just another "close but no cigar" Arturia's standard emulation.

[jamcat]

Man thanks for doing this, this is exactly the kind of content I want to hear in this forum, I compared the files with arturia's chorus and it's obvious that the aliasing is not present on the hardware, although the hardware has that nice noise which the Roland Cloud modeled, my conclusion is that this it's just another "close but no cigar" Arturia's standard emulation.

So in other words, you missed the entire conversation that took place.

[Lucastyle]

Man thanks for doing this, this is exactly the kind of content I want to hear in this forum, I compared the files with arturia's chorus and it's obvious that the aliasing is not present on the hardware, although the hardware has that nice noise which the Roland Cloud modeled, my conclusion is that this it's just another "close but no cigar" Arturia's standard emulation.

So in other words, you missed the entire conversation that took place.

I did miss the conversation , but also I wanted to address and thank him personally.

[jamcat]

I suspect the only significant difference between the Roland Cloud and Arturia versions is Roland decided to lowpass the aliasing high frequencies and cover it up with noise, which is just a different design choice than Arturia made, not superior modeling.

[Lucastyle]

I suspect the only significant difference between the Roland Cloud and Arturia versions is Roland decided to lowpass the aliasing high frequencies and cover it up with noise, which is just a different design choice than Arturia made, not superior modeling.

I thought we were comparing the Arturia vs the hardware for accuracy but the cloud chorus seems to alias way less than the Arturia so I guess we could say its more accurate.

Also you can turn off or lower the noise in the Roland Cloud by lowering the tone Knob, that's also a huge plus if you want more flexibility for the character of the chorus.

[jamcat]

I agree that the addition of the noise does make it more accurate to the hardware. Arturia gave the chorus on the JUN-06 model that option, so it is puzzling why they excluded it for the standalone chorus plugin.

We really don't know what a real Juno 6 chorus would do to audio at those high frequencies because the Juno 6 doesn't produce frequencies that high. Would the chorus circuit have a lowpass filter on its input or output? I really doubt it would, since it's not going to be fed any frequencies that would alias. So, I suspect the Arturia model is actually the most accurate model in that regard, but we really just don't know.

So the best course forward if you want to guarantee the most accurate results is to only use the chorus on material that falls within the range of a Juno 6.

[fmr]

We really don't know what a real Juno 6 chorus would do to audio at those high frequencies because the Juno 6 doesn't produce frequencies that high. Would the chorus circuit have a lowpass filter on its input or output? I really doubt it would, since it's not going to be fed any frequencies that would alias. So, I suspect the Arturia model is actually the most accurate model in that regard, but we really just don't know.

I believe that's the case, indeed