Cherry Audio's next synth is (probably) a Polivoks on steroids

[IvyBirds]

Again the other view states that people dropped thousands of dollars in a synth that they didn't like the sound of

At no point has anyone but you said that. Read what's f**king written on the f**king page.

I did read what you wrote you wrote

What I find equally interesting is that the Junos are so well regarded these days. At the time they were cheap, entry-level instruments whose main attributes were patch memory and a decent number of keys for not a lot of money. They sold on price, not sound. I honestly can't recall ever seeing one on stage back in the day.

You said they didn't buy it for the sound, which as these are musical instruments that make sound would mean they didn't like the sound but got them anyway because of the price

You were the one who took sound out of the equation. Not me, if they liked the sound that would have been a consideration as to why they got it would it not?

[machinesworking]

Way to build that Strawman argument,

Please, don't do that, it's so dull to attempt to turn around an observation someone just made about your post, It's literally a "no you!"

I actually do like the Atomika and have even mentioned in this this thread how I asked my brother in law to buy me the hardware Polivocks if he found one in his travels to the former Soviet Union

You mentioend that, but you also mentioned you thought it was too aggressive and had a limited audience because of this, if you follow what I've said, you would know that was my contention. How could you know how the Polivoks would compete in terms of sentimental value (which no doubt the Juno soft synths are sold on), when it was completely unknown by most people?

My entire point which you fail to acknowledge is that the Juno was popular because of its sound and the fact you could get that sound at a great value

I think it's clear you don't like the response back that the thing had but one sound really, and the value definitely added to it's popularity. See, no one is denying it didn't have a sound or wasn't popular, it's the fact it was cheap enough to maybe get ahold of that helped make it popular that somehow has you arguing with people.

You have indicated that you think Bones is correct when he sates that people in the 1980s didn't buy it for it's sound but because it was cheap, and he can't fathom why anyone likes them in 2024.

I acknowledge it had a particular sound, and it's pretty great, but I don't acknowledge that's the reason why it's popular over other synths, it was cheap enough and polyphonic, that was a hard thing to come by in 1982. You even admit above it's price played into it's popularity. Pop music 100% tends to eat itself, as soon as the DX7 hit, that was what you heard on every song. I never even thought about a Juno back then quite honestly, I wanted a sampler, Oberheim, or a Poly Moog. Personally at the time to me the sound was synonymous with glitzy new wave bands with too much reverb on everything. Now I like having a particularly low CPU using bread and butter synth in my collection.

Let's be honest here though, no one was rushing into the studio to play the Juno if there was a Fairlight CMI or Synclavier there, they might bring one in because they owned it, they had a song, and a patch that worked with that song.

[EnGee]

I love its character and sound. It’s great especially for the ‘dark’ mode songs. It is from the best I heard in 2024. It’s very unique and inspiring.

I’ll demo it before I buy it. Just to be sure it works fine with my system and cpu.

[IvyBirds]

You mentioend that, but you also mentioned you thought it was too aggressive and had a limited audience because of this,

Again with the Strawman arguments, what's amazing is the logical leaps you have to take

Do you not think someone can personally like something while at the same time acknowledge that the thing they like hae limited mass market appeal

I do think the aggressive nature of the synth and the reality of how Cherry Audio has chosen to market it, have limited it's mass market appeal, but that has no bearing on how I personally feel about it.

Let's be honest here though, no one was rushing into the studio to play the Juno if there was a Fairlight CMI or Synclavier there, they might bring one in because they owned it, they had a song, and a patch that worked with that song.

Could Vangelis afford to use a studio with a Fairlight? Could Enya? Could Guns 'n Roses, could a ton of other big name artists who had major contracts with major labels and large production budgets? Of course and they they used a Juno anyway

Again you are building a Strawman here and it's not based in reality. What's pathetic is you project on others exactly what you are doing. Over and over and over again you have misrepresented what I have ACTUALLY said and falsely accused me of things based on your own personal bias

Again I love Cherry Audio and own pretty much all of their products, in fact it wouldn't surprise me if I own more of them than you do or at least as many. My entire point one you continue to ignore while simultaneously lying about my position with Strawman arguments is that if we are going to compare and contrast Vintage instruments let's make sure we are getting the history right. The actual history of the Juno line is that while it was less expensive than the flagship Jupiter 8 and other flagship Analog Polys of the early 1980s it still wasn't cheap. It still costs thousands of dollars. It was also loved by many people, including major artists who could use whatever gear they wanted

The Juno continues to be very popular today because of its sound as evidenced by the many plugins available that emulate it, and the fact Roland continues to sell hardware that emulates the Juno line

When it comes to the Alpha Juno line the Hoover sound it could make was unique and was a very important synth sound used in a lot of popular songs



It is simply incorrect to say that people were not buying and using the Juno Synths for their sound, but you said that was the correct viewpoint, and keep on doubling down on that while attacking me

[poonna]

That's not a strawman, that's what he said

You said that statement was correct, so again I ask why do you think that the Juno sounds sucks and sounds like shit?

IvyBirds, I think your argument above regarding what BONES said can be considered a strawman. Please understand that this is not ad hominem, just me trying to explain something.

Here's what BONES said:

They sold on price, not sound.

He didn't say that the Juno sounds like shit. What he said was that the Juno sold on price, and not on the sound. This can't be taken as saying that the Juno sounds bad. That would be a false dilemma or black and white thinking. When thing isn't so great that it becomes a deciding factor, it doesn't mean it is bad. It can be good, but not great, or it can be great but a one-trick pony, or many other possibilities.

To take what he said (Juno's sound wasn't what made it sell) and change it to something different (Juno sounds like shit), then argue on that point instead, is what we call a strawman fallacy.

This is not to say that BONES is right either. It's only his opinion, which can be wrong like anyone else. I just want to make a point on this strawman thing.

[carrieres]

Thanks Poonna, as a french, I did not understand what a strawman fallacy was

[machinesworking]

Could Vangelis afford to use a studio with a Fairlight? Could Enya? Could Guns 'n Roses, could a ton of other big name artists who had major contracts with major labels and large production budgets? Of course and they they used a Juno anyway

Yeah, those things weren't plugins back then, completing a song involved patches or settings on multiple synths. If MIDI was involved you wanted as many synths as possible set up. No one said the Juno doesn't have a place or a sound, it's just been said that it has one sound, and a limited place. The 80's were filled with it for sure, but not the 90's or early 2000's it's now old enough to have sentimental value. The straw man is you keep on attempting to say people have said it sucked, most of us have said it was simple, and you ran to your own conclusions.

To take what he said (Juno's sound wasn't what made it sell) and change it to something different (Juno sounds like shit), then argue on that point instead, is what we call a strawman fallacy.

The problem is I cannot imagine a world where this completely logical argument is going to get through. It's kicking water uphill, which I guess I'm fond of attempting.

[elassi]

A Juno in action (being the only synth in this performance). Okay, it's a quite simple arrangement and won't satisfy Jazz fans but good enough to make random people smile and dance:




Add: This guy knows his tool in and out.

[machinesworking]

Could we end the Juno side track for now? I mean this thread is about the Polivoks.

Here's the creator demoing it.


Jexus

[EnGee]

The hardware is less harsh and more of everything nice! Difficult to explain. The software by Cherry however is still great however. I bought it after demoing it for about 5 mins! Great synths are shouting at me 'BUY ME!!' usually after few minutes, so it is a no brainer especially at this price.

The CPU is fine. When using 4x oversampling on my Windows PC (Ryzen 5800x), it hits 30%~40% in AB Live and S1, so it is similar to Korg ARP 2600. I haven't installed it on my mini M1 but I expect slightly less than than or similar. It sounds great with oversampling or not, so I will see if there is an advantage in oversampling regarding the preset I use.

I found great presets and I like how you can mark it fav without opening its browser. Still in 'B' alphabetically! I can tweak forever as I like all kinds of sounds (leads, bass, pads and effects) it produces.

[BONES]

I would greatly appreciate it if you would stop the Strawman and ad hominem attacks against me

And I would greatly appreciate it if you would just read what is written and not try to put words into my mouth, if that's not asking too f**king much.

You said they didn't buy it for the sound, which as these are musical instruments that make sound would mean they didn't like the sound but got them anyway because of the price

No, you're still not listening because that's not what it means at all. It means that how it sounded was less important than the fact it was a simple, easy to use polysynth with patch memory for around $1500, which was roughly one-third of the price of other higher profile synths with those features at the time. That's not saying anything at all about how it actually sounded, is it?

When it comes to the Alpha Juno line the Hoover sound it could make was unique and was a very important synth sound used in a lot of popular songs

Yeah, when it was 15 years old and you could buy one for $1000. Not when it was new.

It is simply incorrect to say that people were not buying and using the Juno Synths for their sound, but you said that was the correct viewpoint, and keep on doubling down on that while attacking me

He said that because he's right and you're wrong. When I had $1500 to spend on a new synth, the Juno 6 didn't even enter my calculations, it was way tpo simple to be of much use. Mine was a 3 way decision between a JX-3P, Korg PolySix and DX-9. OK, I'll admit I made a poor decision back then and bought the impenetrable DX-9, when the JX-3P would have made a lot more sense, but my later purchase of an SH-101 just confirmed to me that I was right to never consider a Juno. 30 years later, I relearned that lesson when I was stupid enough to buy a JU-06, based mostly on how it sounded. Without all the extra additions of software emulations, that thing was f**king useless and I sold it after less than a year.

[machinesworking]

The hardware is less harsh and more of everything nice! Difficult to explain. The software by Cherry however is still great however. I bought it after demoing it for about 5 mins! Great synths are shouting at me 'BUY ME!!' usually after few minutes, so it is a no brainer especially at this price.

The CPU is fine. When using 4x oversampling on my Windows PC (Ryzen 5800x), it hits 30%~40% in AB Live and S1, so it is similar to Korg ARP 2600. I haven't installed it on my mini M1 but I expect slightly less than than or similar. It sounds great with oversampling or not, so I will see if there is an advantage in oversampling regarding the preset I use.

I found great presets and I like how you can mark it fav without opening its browser. Still in 'B' alphabetically! I can tweak forever as I like all kinds of sounds (leads, bass, pads and effects) it produces.

I think one the things that people like about old analogs is the instability. There's something to a sound that is subtly evolving, yet doesn't really sound like it is. I was watching a guy dissect a couple famous singers by using pitch correction software to determine if the concerts were just recordings, and it's surprising how inaccurate even the best singers are when attempting to repeat the same line perfectly multiple times. So if it's exactly the same vocal line it will look exactly the same, if it sounds the same but are different performances it will still look different.

All this to say the real Polivoks is far more subtly unstable than Atomika. The comparison videos really do prove how close the sound is, so a lot of what you're perceiving is general instability.

Plus Jexus is a good player, he can make anything sound solid.

[EnGee]

I agree that the ‘instability’ is one of the most important factors. But also the combination of the different components plays a significant role.

It takes some time to treasure’live’ performances and acoustic instruments, for example. Synths are no different. The precise tunes get us tired after time, although it’s catchy at first. Maybe that’s why I hate auto tuning. A sound with movements and reasonable imperfections is the best for me. But that wasn’t what I looked to when I was young! Although, living in different cultures and listening to very different languages and music made me patient in understanding the ‘new’ elements of sound. Still the western 80’s pop (and synth) music has the most effect on me (especially the UK bands).

So maybe it also depends on what musical background do you have.

[biberact]

How does Atomika compare to Ivoks by Red Rock Sound? Which one is closer to the original?

[bobbackwards]

Plus Jexus is a good player, he can make anything sound solid.

This...
A good player can make anything sound good...a cheap Casio, an out of tune church piano, a toy xylophone, whatever. I said it before, I like weird and unusual synths like Atomika since I try to play rather than program my music (nothing wrong with composing with a piano roll, just not my preference) and I am shit at keys so neat textures and sounds help bring character to my songs even with my simple playing. Also, I don't tend to feature synths since I am more guitar, bass, drums so I am really looking more for "color."