Project VST Plugin Jv3P (JX-3P Roland)

[JvR]

First disappointment: the values displayed had nothing to do with the real ones. The MKS-30 displays values go from 00 to 99, and several knobs are selectors, with just three or four positions.
Your instrument displays strange dotted values, have a range from zero to sixteen, and the selectors go above and below the values they should select, which makes me uncertain of what is selected at those positions. I don't know if the JX-3P uses your values (the MKS-30 certainly doesn't, and it is supposed to be the very same synth), but since you are using the PG-200 image, you should notice that it goes from 0 to 10 for a reason (00 to 99, see?).

Hi fmr

This Vst is compared only to the JX-3P and the values control of the JX-3P go from 00-16.
I keep this Vst only for the JX-3P Synthesizer simulation and have not tried to incorporate the JX-8P or MKS30. I have two JX-3P Hardware Synth. and both of them are good but different in the values control and sound !!!
To create a good VST, you need the hardware model !!!
I hope you can use the Jv3P Synt. and I have at the moment of time to update the Jv3P Synt.

JvR

[fmr]

First disappointment: the values displayed had nothing to do with the real ones. The MKS-30 displays values go from 00 to 99, and several knobs are selectors, with just three or four positions.
Your instrument displays strange dotted values, have a range from zero to sixteen, and the selectors go above and below the values they should select, which makes me uncertain of what is selected at those positions. I don't know if the JX-3P uses your values (the MKS-30 certainly doesn't, and it is supposed to be the very same synth), but since you are using the PG-200 image, you should notice that it goes from 0 to 10 for a reason (00 to 99, see?).

Hi fmr

This Vst is compared only to the JX-3P and the values control of the JX-3P go from 00-16.
I keep this Vst only for the JX-3P Synthesizer simulation and have not tried to incorporate the JX-8P or MKS30. I have two JX-3P Hardware Synth. and both of them are good but different in the values control and sound !!!
To create a good VST, you need the hardware model !!!
I hope you can use the Jv3P Synt. and I have at the moment of time to update the Jv3P Synt.

JvR

Hi JvR:
Please don't take my criticism as an attack, personal or other. I thak you for sharing your hard work, and as I said, I don't have a JX-3P, so I don't know what values it uses. But both JX-3P and MKS-30 (which is the JX-3P in a rack) share the same programmer, the PG-200, and this has values ranging from 0 to 10, or 00 to 99, if you prefer (JX-8P is a completely different beast, and it wasn't me who mentioned it). The MKS-30 display also shows values from 00 to 99. Anyway, I can make a table with the corresponding values, to "translate the 0 - 16 range of the JX-3P in a 00 - 99 range as the MKS-30 uses, but besides that, the MKS-30 must match the JX-3P, soundwise... and I could not even come close to the sound using your Jv3P. That's why I felt disappointed, but if you don't have the time...

[martin_l]

This Vst is compared only to the JX-3P and the values control of the JX-3P go from 00-16.
I keep this Vst only for the JX-3P Synthesizer simulation and have not tried to incorporate the JX-8P or MKS30. I have two JX-3P Hardware Synth. and both of them are good but different in the values control and sound !!!
To create a good VST, you need the hardware model !!!
I hope you can use the Jv3P Synt. and I have at the moment of time to update the Jv3P Synt.

JvR

Maybe, you can implement a switch which let's you choose whether the readouts should be JX3P style or MKS-30 style...

Martin

[JvR]

It can be operated by a switch adapted for other values in the in the future.

Also my old values of my presets on the JX-3P Synthesizer (200 pieces created in 1982 with values go 1-16) what I've saved did not match to the Jv3P too.
I start with the old saved values and finally adjust until I have the good sound. This is also done for the factory presets in the Jv3P Vst. (32 presets)
It's much work to constantly re-adjust all presets when you make a small change in your Vst Project. This is the reason that I like it to share with everyone who is using a JX-3P Synthesizer.

If jmr will use his old presets values (00-99) of his MKS30 in the Jv3P Vst then he have do the same to start with the old saved values and finally adjust until he have the good sound.

It is difficult to make a VST to everyone's needs.

Good luck JvR

[fmr]

OK, this will be my final post, since this is a free synth, after all, and it will be unfair to demand the author something he don't want or have the time to do.
BUT... what is the point of releasing a VSTi claiming it is an emulation of the JX-3P and then ask the user to adjust the values until it matches the sound of the JX-3P? What about those that don't have a JX-3P? What will they match to? And if the purpose is to recreate the sound, and the sound alone, then we have plenty of synths where we can do that already, as long as we want to adjust parameters until we get it (Admiral just told that his synth does that, and basically any good VA synth will be able to do that, because the JX-3P is not that advanced os sophisticated).
So, if the synth doesn't match your JX-3P either, instead of messing with the parameters until you find the sound, you should tune the parameters until they match, because using the same parameters you have in the JX-3P must give you the same or very near results. Otherwise, you can' claim it is a JX-3P amulation, just that you use a similar signal path, to the very best.
Anyway, again, take this as constructive criticism, and I renew my offering to help, if you wish.

[martin_l]

I agree with Fernando here, that an emulation should sound as close as possible to the original, when programmed with the same parameters. In fact, when creating my pg-8x, I spend quite some substantial time on that sort of 'tuning'.

However, there is of course the problem that not all hardware synths sound the same. So, I think it is not possible to tune the VST so that it matches all incarnations of the hardware. But I think it should fall well inside the spread of the hardware synths. So, if you have two JX-3P's try to get as close as possible to either one of them, or stay somewhere in the middle.

Unfortunately, I don't have a 3P to test how close the VST really comes...


Cheers,
Martin

[fmr]

Duplicated post by mistake

[brok landers]

well, all i can say, i had 2 jx3p's, 2 different revisions, of which (iirc) one had rolands own voice chips, and the older one had, again iirc, the external chips that were used in the jupiter 4, and i can say tjat even both were the same synths, they sounded quite different... so much for emulations... what i am trying to say is, that a lot of emulatios suffer from the sheer fact that they actually were buildt diffent over the time... so if you do an emulation, you might be able to do it for the version you have as comparsion, not more... you always have to tweak these by ear, to see if you can make them fit....
just my 2 cents...

[fmr]

well, all i can say, i had 2 jx3p's, 2 different revisions, of which (iirc) one had rolands own voice chips, and the older one had, again iirc, the external chips that were used in the jupiter 4, and i can say tjat even both were the same synths, they sounded quite different... so much for emulations... what i am trying to say is, that a lot of emulatios suffer from the sheer fact that they actually were buildt diffent over the time... so if you do an emulation, you might be able to do it for the version you have as comparsion, not more... you always have to tweak these by ear, to see if you can make them fit....
just my 2 cents...

I didn't knew there were JX-3P built with the voice chips of the Jupiter-4. Are you sure that wasn't a mod?
Because, AFAIK, the Jupiter-4 was much older than the JX-3P, and used VCOs, while the JX-3P used DCOs.

[DrewDale]

Edit

[AdmiralQuality]

I've never heard a different sounding JX-3P. Are you sure you're not confusing the JX-8P with the JX-3P? The '8P had velocity sensitivity, a second envelope, and a few other features not found in the '3P's voice architecture.

[DrewDale]

Edit

[bob bobwood]

All links, registration and (instantly linked) download worked fine here just five minutes ago.

http://www.josvanras.com/synthesizer/

[ghettosynth]

I've never heard a different sounding JX-3P. Are you sure you're not confusing the JX-8P with the JX-3P? The '8P had velocity sensitivity, a second envelope, and a few other features not found in the '3P's voice architecture.

This is correct. I will say though, as usual with any threads discussing old hardware, there is some incorrect information.

The original Jupiter 4 uses the BA-662 VCA with fet buffers in an OTA based filter. The later versions used the Roland IR3109 filter chip which, wait for it, is essentially four sections of BA-662 with fet buffers on a chip. So, they are not identical, because, well, they're not, but they do sound very similar. What makes the Jupiter 4 stand out is the VCOs.

The JX3P uses, yes, the IR3109 filter on a chip. Roland carried their basic filter designs through many models with minor changes. The MKS30 uses the infamous 80017 VCF+VCA module. What's in the 80017? I'm sure that you can guess by now, that's right an IR3109 plus a BA-662 VCA in a surface mount package. The reason that the MKS30 and the JX3P sound very much alike is because they have the same basic VCF and VCA and, yes, it is the same basic design that's in the Jupiter 4. That said, the devil is in the details.

The Roland Juno 60 uses the IR3109 and the Juno 106 uses the 80017. They do not sound exactly alike for a number of reasons. Subtle changes in the hardware, and changes in the software affect the sound.

So, the Jupiter 4 != the JX3P != MKS-30, but all have similar filter designs. The MKS30 also shares DCO design and programmer with the JX3P so they sound much more similar to each other than either does to the Jupiter 4.

Note, just because two synths share the same programmer does not mean that they sound exactly the same. A lot of people have commented that the MKS-70 and JX8P/JX10 sound somewhat different owing to software differences. This is reasonable as all of the envelopes and lfos are in software.

Also, the JX8P is very different from the JX3P and uses Roland's later IR3R05 VCF which sounds nothing like the IR3109.

BTW: The IR3109 is a fantastic filter. See my blog for some details on a module that I built for my DIY modular using an 80017 module removed from an MKS-30.

[fmr]

BTW: The IR3109 is a fantastic filter. See my blog for some details on a module that I built for my DIY modular using an 80017 module removed from an MKS-30.

You're damn right. I am thinking in upgrade my MKS-30 with the new MIDI EPROM, to make it able to be programmed and remotely controlled through Sys-Ex. The only problem with these units are those damned 80017 chips, which are prone to fail almost for sure. Right now, I have two units being serviced because of 80017 chip failure. I suppose you removed the plastic on the one you used to build the module, right?