Jump to content

Is the Juno-60 as amazing as I think it is?


Recommended Posts

  • Members

I've been doing a little synth research lately, becasue while my R3 is a great synth, I'm thinking it may not be ideal for me. Kinda complicated setup, countless unnecessary features, and small keyboard compromise the greatness.

 

The one that i have found that does seem to be ideal for me is the Juno-60. Great sound, easy layout, big keyboard, all analog, it seem like a dream come true.

 

So, before I go about trying to get one, I was just wondering what the input from you guys is? It seems to be a highly respected machine. What are your personal experiences?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 61
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  • Members

It's so good, I have 2.

 

Simple, One OSC, but it's sound can be HUGE.

 

The Arp is basic, but can get interesting with a little creativity and luck.

 

PWM, Roland Chorus, and a Sub help fatten it up.

 

Also, with an array of pedals, it really comes alive. Sweeping filters with your foot is cool !

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

It's amazing enough if you can get one for around $400. And you still can if you're patient.

 

Not so amazing when someone wants more like $600 or so.

 

Good sound, but keep in mind that it's not all there. Only one EG and one VCO per voice severely limits it's sonic palette. What I miss the most on this series are sync-sweeps.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

The Juno 60 was my first real synth back in the 80's when they came out. At the time it was state of the art, but in my opinion, there are much better ones available since then. I had a Juno 106 later that I liked better. The Juno 60 is definitely a decent synth, but I don't know if I'd call it "amazing". As I remember it was pre- midi.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

By today's standards the Juno 60 is a boring synth. I owned one of them and another Juno long ago. They were fine then. Unless you are really into the Juno, your money would now be well spent on something else, even if it means saving for something that costs a lot more than the Juno.

 

In the interim your R3 should be giving you a lot of enjoyment. Don't go backward in time just because you feel the R3 is complex. Learn to use what you own already.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

By today's standards the Juno 60 is boring synth..

 

Agreed. In particular, the analog filters on that thing give it a very boring sound, compared to that of newer, better and more modern digital filters which - thank God - don't exactly do a stellar job emulating the old ones. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

One measly oscillator. Shallow modulation. Narrow sonic range. No MIDI.

 

And yet, what a synth! There's a reason it has so many loyal fans. It's fun, easy to use, and sounds remarkably good (ideal, too, for learning subtractive synthesis). As others have written, what it does it does very, very well. I'd also agree with the general consensus that this would not make a good choice for your one and only synth (but then again, neither would the R3). But as a complement to one or more other synths, it's a great choice.

 

Of my four synths, it's the one that feels most like a bona-fide instrument.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

countless unnecessary features

 

Like...?

 

 

and small keyboard compromise the greatness

 

 

You can overcome this simply with a bigger controller.

 

 

So, before I go about trying to get one, I was just wondering what the input from you guys is? It seems to be a highly respected machine. What are your personal experiences?

 

 

I'd get a Nord Lead 2. It's the modern day Juno-106, basically; cheap, ubiquitous, no rocket surgery required. The 60 is nice, but you'll most likely pay too much for one, it doesn't do MIDI, and it's got a limited range of sounds. I have one - and will keep it, but I'm not kidding myself; it's mostly for nostalgia, since it was my first synth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

The Juno60 sounds samey no matter what you do. I'm not a huge fan of the metallic filter anymore either. The lfo is slow as hell and a fixed tri. The chorus is overpowering, and has just on or off. Typical 80s sounds, and nothing beyond that. Pretty useless modulation button. HPF with 4 fixed values, where everything above 0 sounds too thin. The HPF with a setting of zero adds a significant amount of low end. It looks way better than it is. I still have mine, but I'm looking to unload it locally in Pittsburgh.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

don't be a {censored}: get a juno 6 instead.

 

you don't need patch storage with such a simple architecture, and not having it will make you a better programmer.

 

 

 

 

 

 

hey you forgot to say what exactly you wanted to do with it. that's like, a huge factor in what synth is appropriate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I'd go with the Juno 6 as well. Cheaper and that HPF is not step based. Will teach you more and make you want your R3 back ;)

 

If you click on the link below my myspace link(btw not my personal page, group I'm in). Esteban, Faustus and Ahab are made 100% with a Juno 6 .. well except the drums.

 

Now how about those hidden modes on the 6/60? (cough)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I had a Juno 106 for a little bit, it was boring and I would say it's one analog that is easily covered soundwise by a modern VA. But if there is one thing I can say about these synths, you cannot make them sound bad and the interface/layout is really good. The SH-101 has a similar voice architecture but sounds much, much better even without the chorus. Of course it is monophonic, and prices really seem to be creeping up on these. I had one I bought for like $300 about 4 years ago, but those days seem to be long gone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I agree ... 106 sounds different ... glassier, not as raw or buzzy as 6/60 ... I would have kept 106 around but didn't have time for the voice chip issue(s) ... Actually, if 106s didn't give me problems I might never have gone 60 ...

 

Great tone, great controls, easy on the eyes ... I think of it more as a "third oscillator" synth ...

 

Will be interesting to see what happens after JP-8 arrives and how the two sound together (along with JP-6 !!!) ...

 

BTW ... Patch storage and MIDI capability are not overrated imo (though it wouldn't necessarily stop me from picking up a nice-priced 6 if one sashayed my way ... ) With Ju-6 ... Do you really want to be wearing out your vintage synth by replicating slider movements umpteen times ... ??? Patch storage is basically an useful tool ...

 

And if you're using it to beef up another synth or warm up an digital ... and Ju-6/60 is great at that ... MIDI is kind-of a must ...

 

All I know is that after demoing Ju-60 in person, I had to have one ...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...