How many Behringer Synths should one buy?

[egbert101]

This video convinces me that the Juno is actually a great synth:

[ghettosynth]

What a load of tosh. The Alpha Junos were priced at $895/$1295 in the mid 80s without the PG-300 programmer which was $295 IIRC. The Juno 2 + PG300 would be over $4500 accounting for inflation today. They were nowhere close to the value of the deepmind, not then, not now, not ever.

The Junos/MKS-50 have Roland's most shit filter on a chip and sound terrible as Roland was going for "clean" sounds to compete with the DX-7. They're not useless mind you, I still have an MKS-50, but they were never interesting and never competitive in any sense of the word.

My only regret is not buying as many as I could for peanuts in the early 90s so that I could sell them to suckers today.

[ghettosynth]

BTW: I can't exactly recall, or find, the original retail price of the PG-300. I thought that it was $395, but that seems high, so maybe it was $295. I dunno. At any rate. I did ask ChatGPT-4 as I'm currently using that for work. I thought that you lot might get a chuckle out of the conversation.

User
what was the original retail price of the Roland PG-300
ChatGPT
The Roland PG-300 is a programmer and controller unit designed to work with Roland synthesizers, particularly the Roland JX-3P and MKS-30. It was originally released in the early 1980s. The exact retail price of the Roland PG-300 at the time of its release can vary depending on factors like location and currency fluctuations. However, it was generally sold for several hundred dollars, typically around $300 to $400 USD when it first came out. Keep in mind that vintage equipment prices can vary significantly on the used market due to factors such as rarity, condition, and collector demand.

User
You are wrong. The PG-300 did not work with the MKS-30 or the JX-3P.
ChatGPT
I apologize for the incorrect information in my previous response. You are absolutely right; the Roland PG-300 was not designed to work with the Roland MKS-30 or the JX-3P. I appreciate your correction.

The PG-300 was actually a programmer and controller unit for the Roland JX-3P synthesizer. I apologize for any confusion my previous response may have caused. Thank you for pointing out the error.

I think that skynet is a few years away yet.

[kritikon]

I agree with the presenter of that vid - kinda conflicted over the AlphaJunos. They were definitely capable of a wider range of sounds than the other Junos with some reasonably complex patches, but lacked some real oomph in too many places. I ended up using my Alpha more than my 106 exactly because of the complexity, and the velocity sensitivity was a huge bonus for the time. It didn't really miss having a self-oscillating filter, it squelched enough as it was. And anyway the Juno filters were pretty shite in self oscillation, just whistly irritating little things - never used mine for that, ever..

You can hear it really well in that vid, especially on long sweeping filter squelches - the LFOs were really steppy. And it was royal PITA to program, those buttons and wheel were fkn awful. But some of the pros were things like the independent chorus LFO which effectively gave you 2 LFOs instead of the usual 1, and some of those waves were unique for the time - great metallic sounds from an analogue synth. The hoover became so well used from Alphas precisely because so many other analogue synths just couldn't make that kinda weirdness.

Ultimately - my 106 and my Alpha are both broken and lying around unused. Neither of them are worth the expense of fixing IMO, though I suspect the Alpha is likely easier to fix. There isn't much either of them do that can't be done with various plugins nowadays, and there are shitloads of cheapish analogue synths that have overtaken what any Juno can do. The 106 might get fixed because it at least is easy to program. I'm unlikely ever to fix the Alpha because although I prefer its sound, it's such a tedious synth to program, I doubt I could ever be bothered to patch it again. They're great nostalgia synths and I enjoyed using them at the time, no regrets at all. But they don't stand up to much today IMO.

[kritikon]

Actually, I thought the JXs had far more character than any of the Junos. I loved my JX3p in hindsight - should have kept that and sold the Junos instead of being a dumb f**k and doing it the other way around.

I might buy that Behringer Juno when it comes out, but really it would only be for nostalgia. Not for any kind of exciting sound.

[ghettosynth]

Actually, I thought the JXs had far more character than any of the Junos. I loved my JX3p in hindsight - should have kept that and sold the Junos instead of being a dumb f**k and doing it the other way around.

I might buy that Behringer Juno when it comes out, but really it would only be for nostalgia. Not for any kind of exciting sound.

The JX-3P has the IR3109 which is the same filter as the Juno 60. So it is similar two a 2-DCO 60 with some interesting oscillator features. Again, much better if you have the PG-200 to go with it.

The MKS-30, unfortunately, uses the same surface mount filters as the Juno-106 which is the number one thing that goes wrong with the both of them.

The JX8/10 uses the same filter as the Alpha Junos, but at least has two DCOs. Again, also better with the PG-800.

[Uncle E]

I still have an MKS-50, but they were never interesting and never competitive in any sense of the word.

Alpha Juno 1 is the one to get. Alpha Juno 2 and MKS-50 sound flat in comparison. HS-10’s (student version of the 1) still sell for peanuts.

The JX-3P has the IR3109 which is the same filter as the Juno 60. So it is similar two a 2-DCO 60 with some interesting oscillator features.

You brought up AM Synths the other day, his page has instructions for goosing the JX-3P resonance. There’s also a trimpot for turning up the output. It can become warmer and much less tame by tweaking those.

[discogsaddict]

"Alpha Juno 1 is the one to get. Alpha Juno 2 and MKS-50 sound flat in comparison. "

This is interesting. I never owned a juno 2 but assumed they were the same aside from the 2 having velocity, more keys etc.

So in a side by side comparison the juno 1 sounds better?

[Uncle E]

"Alpha Juno 1 is the one to get. Alpha Juno 2 and MKS-50 sound flat in comparison. "

This is interesting. I never owned a juno 2 but assumed they were the same aside from the 2 having velocity, more keys etc.

So in a side by side comparison the juno 1 sounds better?

Yes. I'd always heard that a 2 was just a 1 with velocity, but when I opened them up, they were completely different circuitry inside.

[ghettosynth]

I don't buy it. I've never noticed anything astonishing about the Juno-1 and the voice circuits are completely identical, including the same revision of the DCO chip. Keep in mind that there's almost nothing to the VCF/VCA as it's entirely inside the IR3R05. Even the main gate array is the same. The Juno-2 has a second gate array to process the keyboard, which makes sense and so, of course, the firmware is going to be different. They're both driven by an 8032 CPU and both take midi into the CPU in the same way.

The only thing that I can think of that might make a slight difference is that the software driven envelopes might be snappier in the Juno-1 owing to a potentially lower load on the CPU. I don't think so, but it's possible.

It's more likely that the absence of velocity fools the ear into thinking that the Juno-1 is punchier.

[Uncle E]

I had them open side-by-side with the express intention of stealing parts from the 1 to fix the 2. It couldn’t be done, they’re nothing alike inside.

[ghettosynth]

I had them open side-by-side with the express intention of stealing parts from the 1 to fix the 2. It couldn’t be done, they’re nothing alike inside.

The vast majority of the parts are identical, even in the digital section of the synth. The parts numbers are in the service docs. You can see both boards in these two videos. As I said above, it's really only in the processing of the keyboard that you see major differences. There are other minor differences, but not in the voice circuits.





The schematics are online but here's the core of the voice circuits.

[tehlord]

I sensed a disturbance in the force and came straight to this thread.

I sensed correctly. Two people 'arguing' about a synth, but respectfully AND with evidence.

Is this judgement day?

[dellboy]

The 106 might get fixed because it at least is easy to program. I'm unlikely ever to fix the Alpha because although I prefer its sound, it's such a tedious synth to program, I doubt I could ever be bothered to patch it again.

There is an easy free fix for programming an Alpha Juno called "CTRLR". I have an Alpha Juno 2 and find the software almost as easy to use as a VST. In fact, it can be used as a VST inside your DAW if you want.............


https://ctrlr.org/juno-alpha/

[Uncle E]

The vast majority of the parts are identical, even in the digital section of the synth. The parts numbers are in the service docs. You can see both boards in these two videos. As I said above, it's really only in the processing of the keyboard that you see major differences. There are other minor differences, but not in the voice circuits.

I see what you mean and I'm sure you're right. I was probably just confused because the boards are lain out differently.