PG-8X (2.0) released

[Supercollider]

The JX-8P and JX-3P have somewhat different architectures, with the JX-3P being some two years older than the 8P. Because of that, the JX-3P is a little more "basic", with no velocity sensitivity and fairly basic MIDI implementation, for example. They also store the patches slightly differently.

Steve

I'm sincerely not trying to be a "smarty pants know-it-all." However, I did want to mention that at one point Roland (or maybe it was a third-party?) offered an upgrade kit back in the late 1980s that made the JX-3P velocity sensitive. I owned a JX-3P at the time and was considering installing this new circuit board or circuit board add-on. But then a nice salesman at my local music store talked me out of it. He said that he had installed the upgrade in his JX-3P and now all of the preset patches sounded completely different. In his view, the JX-3P presets were one of the best reasons for owning that synth. I don't know if I would have gone that far. But I sort of saw his point. Those presets were pretty impressive for the time.

Incidentally, I'm not talking about the KiwiTechnics upgrade that basically turns the JX-3P into a powerhouse of a synth and adds a whole host of features to the JX-3P, the least of which is velocity sensitivity. Since I already owned the KiwiTechnics "Patch Editor" universal programmer, I was seriously tempted on several occasions to purchase a JX-3P and upgrade it with that Kiwi mod. People claimed that it turned your JX-3P into a "poor man's Jupiter 8." Again, I'm not sure about that. But it was enticing nevertheless.

Finally, if you purchased the MKS-30 rackmount version of the JX-3P, that was velocity sensitive with no additional modifications.

I only know all this stuff about the JX-3P because it was the second synth I ever owned after my Juno 60. So the JX-3P will always be near and dear to my heart!

[planetearth]

The JX-8P and JX-3P have somewhat different architectures, with the JX-3P being some two years older than the 8P. Because of that, the JX-3P is a little more "basic", with no velocity sensitivity and fairly basic MIDI implementation, for example. They also store the patches slightly differently.

Steve

I'm sincerely not trying to be a "smarty pants know-it-all." However, I did want to mention that at one point Roland (or maybe it was a third-party?) offered an upgrade kit back in the late 1980s that made the JX-3P velocity sensitive. I owned a JX-3P at the time and was considering installing this new circuit board or circuit board add-on. But then a nice salesman at my local music store talked me out of it. He said that he had installed the upgrade in his JX-3P and now all of the preset patches sounded completely different. In his view, the JX-3P presets were one of the best reasons for owning that synth. I don't know if I would have gone that far. But I sort of saw his point. Those presets were pretty impressive for the time.

Incidentally, I'm not talking about the KiwiTechnics upgrade that basically turns the JX-3P into a powerhouse of a synth and adds a whole host of features to the JX-3P, the least of which is velocity sensitivity. Since I already owned the KiwiTechnics "Patch Editor" universal programmer, I was seriously tempted on several occasions to purchase a JX-3P and upgrade it with that Kiwi mod. People claimed that it turned your JX-3P into a "poor man's Jupiter 8." Again, I'm not sure about that. But it was enticing nevertheless.

Finally, if you purchased the MKS-30 rackmount version of the JX-3P, that was velocity sensitive with no additional modifications.

I only know all this stuff about the JX-3P because it was the second synth I ever owned after my Juno 60. So the JX-3P will always be near and dear to my heart!

Fair enough. I've heard about the after-market options (though I don't recall Roland offering one, especially not so soon after releasing the synth). But in your experience, don't the mods effectively "break" backwards compatibility with SysEx data or saved patches? I know they do on some mods. So you could find yourself in a situation where even your JX-3P can't load SysEx data from...the previous version of the JX-3P!

Steve

[Supercollider]

Fair enough. I've heard about the after-market options (though I don't recall Roland offering one, especially not so soon after releasing the synth). But in your experience, don't the mods effectively "break" backwards compatibility with SysEx data or saved patches? I know they do on some mods. So you could find yourself in a situation where even your JX-3P can't load SysEx data from...the previous version of the JX-3P!

Steve

That's a really good question. I don't know if the KiwiTechnics mod breaks backwards compatibility with previous JX-3P or MKS-30 patches. I wouldn't be surprised if it did because the Kiwi mod turns the JX-3P into an almost new synth.

If I had room for another keyboard I might still buy a JX-3P even at current prices and install the Kiwi mod. I just have such a fondness for the JX-3P given my history with it. I used to actually "program" different sequences on it between songs when I would play live with it if you can believe that. I LOVED that synth! I used it on everything for almost a decade.

The Roland Cloud JX-3P just doesn't cut it for me, btw. That's a shame because I would love to have a spot-on software emulation of the JX-3P that is patch-compatible with the original hardware.

Incidentally, have you heard about the TAL "TAL-Pha" emulation of the Alpha Juno 2 / MKS-50? That is maybe the best software emulation of a hardware synth I have ever heard. And get this, it's patch compatible with the original Alpha Juno 2 / MKS-50 and can even be used as an editor/librarian for the hardware synths! Now THAT'S the way to do it!

[ramseysounds]

Windows is far more popular than Mac.

Not on the planet I live on. You wouldn't believe the anarchic revolt that broke out recently in my office when our IT department decided in their infinite wisdom that all new hires, including executives, would be issued Dell XPS laptops and not MacBook Airs and Pros. People were literally threatening to quit even though it didn't affect them. LOL.

And these were "nice" XPS laptops and not some plastic POS Acer abominations.

So no, Windows is not "far more popular than Mac" unless you are literally forced to use a PC either by fiat or insanity.

Im talking about popularity as in numbers. Windows users account for 72% of all computer users.

[machinesworking]

Im talking about popularity as in numbers. Windows users account for 72% of all computer users.

At least here in the USA, the not even arguably largest market. I would for the billionth time point out that it’s at the very least 50/50 PC to Mac in the audio world. Where I live it’s overwhelmingly mac for audio professionals, and I’m maybe 30 miles from Microsoft HQ. It is IMO without a doubt just KVR bluster to say with anything like credibility that there’s some clear winner in the audio world in terms of which is dominant. With touring bands I literally always notice when it’s not a MacBook, because it’s rare.

[ramseysounds]

I’ll just leave this here

[machinesworking]

I’ll just leave this here

False equivalencies are fun. I see a lot of live music, touring bands from Europe and the Americas etc. Again, it's so rare that I see Windows laptops on stage that I always notice it. Every studio in town has Macs, only some have PCs.

I really could care less that someone uses PC or Mac, but it's a tired and stupid internet cliche to compare the general populations computers of choice percentages to what musicians use. Audio is likely the most Mac heavy niche computers are used for, the fact your grocery store checkout stand is running Windows doesn't change that.

[Aloysius]

PCs are used 100% here. The last time I saw a Mac was probably in the 1980s. I'm a musician so that also means 100% of musicians use PCs.

[bungle]

Audio is likely the most Mac heavy niche computers are used for.

Audio would not even dip in to the graphics/video world for Macs.
Audio production is a tiny market.

[IvyBirds]

I’ll just leave this here

False equivalencies are fun. I see a lot of live music, touring bands from Europe and the Americas etc. Again, it's so rare that I see Windows laptops on stage that I always notice it. Every studio in town has Macs, only some have PCs.

I really could care less that someone uses PC or Mac, but it's a tired and stupid internet cliche to compare the general populations computers of choice percentages to what musicians use. Audio is likely the most Mac heavy niche computers are used for, the fact your grocery store checkout stand is running Windows doesn't change that.

So you see a few dozen live acts a year, and know of a few studios in your area that use Macs so that means everyone who does audio uses Macs?

Wow talk about confirmation bias. Even in your town the majority of people who use DAW software and have plugins installed on their PC's use Windows. How do I know this? Because Mac's don't even have a 15% market share

You are right false equivalency is fun, like pretending a few dozen live acts all in similar genres, and a few studios local to you represents the world of audio production as a whole

[machinesworking]

So you see a few dozen live acts a year, and know of a few studios in your area that use Macs so that means everyone who does audio uses Macs?

Wow talk about confirmation bias. Even in your town the majority of people who use DAW software and have plugins installed on their PC's use Windows. How do I know this? Because Mac's don't even have a 15% market share

You are right false equivalency is fun, like pretending a few dozen live acts all in similar genres, and a few studios local to you represents the world of audio production as a whole

Please read what I wrote first before responding. I never stated the majority of people use macs in audio, I flatly stated it's closer to 50/50 than the 15% market share.

In fact if you take a moment to read what I wrote instead of emotionally responding I mention that it's silly to take your local statistics as reflective of the whole picture. My whole take of mentioning how completely dominant Macs are here locally wasn't to say that it represented the whole of the USA and certainly not Europe and the rest of the world, it's to point out that using local stats is pointless if you only use local stats.

Touring bands wise, nope, no genre here, locals I know who work at clubs and stadiums confirm, the norm for all touring bands is macbooks etc. This doesn't reflect home musicians, and FL Studio is overwhelmingly a PC DAW etc. Again, my entire point is that neither is dominant in almost every part of the audio world, except Pro Tools Studios, there I would bet it's still dominant as well.

[Stokely]

Computers are tools. I wonder if carpenters get into holy wars over the brand of their hammers and saws? I've used macs and pcs (dos then windows 3.1, then xp etc) for music and the same (along with Sun, unix and others) for my day job since the mid 80s. They all have their pros and cons and end of the day I don't care what I use as long as it works.

I used a JX10 in the mid-late 80 and it was a great keyboard. Very versatile for an "analog" keyboard (DCO for those purists out there) IMO. Hell I played piano and organ parts on it, because it was what I had!

I haven't really looked for an emulation, just because there are so many cool plugins out there that are similar (if not exact) that scratch the poly/mono itch. I'm not that picky I guess as long as the sound is good! That said, I may be getting a Fantom for live gigs and I'd be lying if I said I'm not looking forward to pulling up the JX models in it!

[IvyBirds]

Please read what I wrote first before responding. I never stated the majority of people use macs in audio, I flatly stated it's closer to 50/50 than the 15% market share.

I'll just leave this here

Where I live it’s overwhelmingly mac for audio professionals

Only it's not which is why I wrote what I wrote

[machinesworking]

Please read what I wrote first before responding. I never stated the majority of people use macs in audio, I flatly stated it's closer to 50/50 than the 15% market share.

I'll just leave this here

Where I live it’s overwhelmingly mac for audio professionals

Only it's not which is why I wrote what I wrote

I live in Seattle, it's overwhelmingly mac for audio professionals here. It really is weird how people just decide not to understand. I never see PC's dominate here, in recording studios, on stage, at audio events of any kind. Maybe in Redmond? but not surprisingly Redmond is not a musical hub of the NW.

[planetearth]

Fair enough. I've heard about the after-market options (though I don't recall Roland offering one, especially not so soon after releasing the synth). But in your experience, don't the mods effectively "break" backwards compatibility with SysEx data or saved patches? I know they do on some mods. So you could find yourself in a situation where even your JX-3P can't load SysEx data from...the previous version of the JX-3P!

Steve

That's a really good question. I don't know if the KiwiTechnics mod breaks backwards compatibility with previous JX-3P or MKS-30 patches. I wouldn't be surprised if it did because the Kiwi mod turns the JX-3P into an almost new synth.

If I had room for another keyboard I might still buy a JX-3P even at current prices and install the Kiwi mod. I just have such a fondness for the JX-3P given my history with it. I used to actually "program" different sequences on it between songs when I would play live with it if you can believe that. I LOVED that synth! I used it on everything for almost a decade.

The Roland Cloud JX-3P just doesn't cut it for me, btw. That's a shame because I would love to have a spot-on software emulation of the JX-3P that is patch-compatible with the original hardware.

Incidentally, have you heard about the TAL "TAL-Pha" emulation of the Alpha Juno 2 / MKS-50? That is maybe the best software emulation of a hardware synth I have ever heard. And get this, it's patch compatible with the original Alpha Juno 2 / MKS-50 and can even be used as an editor/librarian for the hardware synths! Now THAT'S the way to do it!

In your experience, what is it about the JX-3P that you don't like? I've never had a JX-3P, and I'll admit I'm not a big fan of what I hear from Roland's emulation. But I don't know if that's because I just don't like the sound it makes or just the presets that came with it. I'll play with it more to figure that out.

I have heard about the TAL-Pha, and it's on my list to grab as soon as the price drops! I was honestly surprised that I liked its single-oscillator sound more than the JX-3P's dual oscillators. (And I'm glad there's more too it than just that damned "hoover" sound! )

Isn't this the first TAL emulation that's SysEx compatible with the original? (Like Cherry Audio's new Rhodes Chroma emulation, which is also their first SysEx-compatible emulation.)

Steve