Quantcast
Anything a Juno 106 is better at than the juno 60? - Page 6 - Gearspace.com
The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
Anything a Juno 106 is better at than the juno 60?
Old 23rd December 2017 | Show parent
  #151
Deleted User
Guest
A dirty little secret of the JX-3P (and at the time I tested I had two of them)
if that the high C is off a bit from what it should be, frequency wise.

I only found this out as I was trying to tune the self oscillating filters to track the octaves, (which I could never get), I pulled back on the resonance and did the C up to C frequency readout on both, and there was not a perfect 2:1 ratio between second last C and high C (on both 3Ps)

I did however, end up tweaking all 6 VCF res pots up an 1/8 of a turn .

I wonder if these trimpots exist on a 6-60-106. They should.
Gooose that resonance up , they all have IR3109s (or equivalent) I believe.



Quote:
Originally Posted by lectrojape ➡️
Sure, the frequency of the oscillators can be affected by many things - the effects of temperature changes on components, where they are placed on the board, the stability of the clock....all these things are capable of influencing the sound.

FWIW I have heard plenty of 60's, 6's, and 106's and regardless of them being just tuned and trimmed with a scope the 60 and 6 share a certain character that is a little bit different to the 106. It's not a big difference by any means but it is there. Does it matter? That's up to the individual.
Old 24th December 2017
  #152
Lives for gear
 
Breaks Dude's Avatar
 
1 Review written
🎧 5 years
I paid $150 for a very nice 106 in December of 2015 that needed the voice chip service...but I completely ruined the traces trying to get the chips off the board. I sold it to an overseas buyer off eBay $400 literally 3 hours after I listed it the same day. I then paid $135 for another near mint 106 in April of 2016. It needs the voice chip service, too, but I will send the board out when I get the time. Deals are out there.
Old 2nd January 2018 | Show parent
  #153
Here for the gear
 
ajsmcs's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by swiller ➡️
Nice story, i got mine for £400 about 8 years ago, started having issues 2-3 years after..spent £400 having it sorted with sockets for the chips to take the pain away, in 2016. A bargain. Done by ben in hereford who is revered synth tech in uk.

Let me briefly tell you a story about a skip in Richmond London.
So i was walking back from work one winters evening in 2005 and at top of my road, a flightcase poking out of a skip.
So i grabbed it and took a peek inside and.... JD800! with just one cursor key missing. Its obviously knackered i thought.
Back home, plugged in, all working. WOW. Midi, sliders, screen, outputs all working, just the kursor key missing. No sticky keyboard issue. Scracthes and scrapes but its a fully working JD800... In a skip ffs. Happy daze.
Kept and loved it for 10 years. Did not need anything done at all and used the midi editor for cursor key duties.
Moral of the story...
Dont just check the junk shops, check those builders skips as well
If Envy could make a person glow green, you could see me from orbit. I've been on the hunt for a good JD800 for the past year. Found a near-mint, epoxy-serviced board with new keybed for $1000+$50, (which is a fair price in today's market), but unfortunately I had other fiscal priorities at the time (damn water heater)...

Quote:
I paid $150 for a very nice 106 in December of 2015 that needed the voice chip service...but I completely ruined the traces trying to get the chips off the board. I sold it to an overseas buyer off eBay $400 literally 3 hours after I listed it the same day. I then paid $135 for another near mint 106 in April of 2016. It needs the voice chip service, too, but I will send the board out when I get the time. Deals are out there.
Seriously just snip the old chips off, set them aside, then desolder each remaining leg one at a time. It's infinitely easier and definitely more foolproof than trying to desolder all 11 pins at once. Then install sockets, install the Analog Renaissance replacements, and never have to worry about reliability issues for the rest of the life of the instrument. Then proceed with calibration.


FWIW I'm not a zealot. If anyone can explain to me exactly which specific aspects of either DCO and VCFA circuits would result in a noticeable difference in timbre between the 6/60 and 106, preferably with some waveform screenshots, I'd happily change my tune. I'm more concerned with having correct knowledge than I am being right. But I'll never just take somebodies word without really understanding why, and I'd encourage everyone else to do the same. (that goes for what I say, too)

So I'd like to be more specific re: my previous comments.

I apologize in advice if this sounds very stream of conscious. I'm on break at work, and my mind is definitely on other things, but I thought I'd chime in anyway...

Again, we're excluding any model-specific features that would impact sound. (Bass boost, EG PWM, etc) After scanning through the schematics again, and here's what I've got for you:
"They have the same VCFA."
The VCFA circuits on the 6/60 use a combination of an IR3109 and a pair of BA662's. The 106 uses the 80017A chip, which is literally just an offboard combination PCB featuring an IR3109 and a pair of BA662's wired up in exactly the same way as on the 6/60.

Sure you could argue that being on a separate board might have some impact on the behavior of the signal, but we're talking about audio frequencies, not f***ing microwaves. Any minute electrical differences would be lost in the sea of part variances via component tolerances.

"They have the same DCO."
Like with the VCFA, the 106 has its voice chip circuitry on an offboard chip. And for the same reasons, that isn't really relevant to discussion of differences. [PLACEHOLDER I RAN OUT OF TIME TO DO THIS NOW WILL UPDATE LATER AND ADDRESS COMMENT RE: VARIANCES IN CLOCKING ON TIMBRE]


I know a lot of you have first hand experience with differences between the 6/60 and 106. But like I've said - calibrated or not - the thing that makes 106 voice chips fail***(1) will almost certainly have an affect on the electrical function - and subsequently, the sound - up until the point they stop working. The 6/60 will not have had this problem; this theoretical tonal change will not occur in the 6/60, and so it only stands to reason that they will have a different "aged" sound character than will the 106.

Another pertinent point - never discount the affect of personal bias on our physical perception. If you truly believe the 6/60 sounds different than the 106, you will hear a difference - even if there isn't one. Now, I'm not saying this is specifically the case. But there are a few important things to consider:

1) A brand new Juno-60 cost $800 more than the Juno-106 - almost double. Imagine being a working musician Juno-60 owner in 1984 and finding out you could've gotten essentially the same thing with useful features for basically half the price if you'd waited a few months. I think people had been trying to justify to themselves that that extra $800 was money well spent, that they must have cut too many corners in the 106 to hit that price, resulting in an inferior-sounding instrument, etc.

The savings really came down to streamlining the production, like losing the arpeggiator circuitry, replacing the EG circuits with a digital equivalent, and ditching the heavy wood case. Just compare the calibration procedures between the instruments to see what I mean. The Juno-60 has something like 28 steps. The Juno-106 only has ~16. In 2017 it takes maybe 30mins - 1hr to cal a 106. Double that - at minimum - for the 6/60.
The 6/60 just took a lot more time and money to manufacture without a really justifiable benefit.

2) The difference in value has basically stayed the same today. I'm sure there are people who sought out and shelled out for a 60 because they'd heard it sounded better than a 106, and they have an invested interest in that continuing to be the case. There are also just a lot more 106's lying around, since they produced a lot more of them. Supply and demand.

Which brings me to...

They do have different EGs. I'm open to the possibility that that might cause some difference, albeit a very, very subtle one. (I would LOVE to see scope readings comparing the two.) And despite it being subtle, it might be enough to make someone prefer one over the other given a choice of the two.

But I keep hearing this claim - frequently, from a multitude of sources - that the Juno-106 somehow sounds vastly different than the -60, using words like "colder," "more digital," "lifeless." That they sound so dramatically different so as to make one's sound suitable for some genres of music but not for others, and vice versa. Like, you could replace every instance of "Juno-60" & "Juno-106" with "Jupiter-8" & "Teach-Me-Piano Funplayer by Casio" and it would still sound reasonable...
...and that is just absolute nonsense to the highest possible degree.

Yes, full disclosure I own a Juno-106. But I honestly only bought it due to lucky happenstance, and even then I still believed the BS about the superiority of the Juno-60. I spent so little I frankly had zero investment in it being the 60's equal. It was only after tearing into it and exhaustively researching it that I discovered that supposed "obvious" timbral superiority to be false. In other words, it wouldn't bother me to own an "inferior" instrument cuz it was cheap af. But it bothers me that such ridiculous misinformation is so commonplace.


***(1) I haven't looked too far into the cause of the problem, but I've heard it has something to do with the epoxy becoming more conductive as it ages. If that is in fact the case, then it would be like adding potentiometers between every adjacent trace, and slowly lowering the resistance over time until they eventually become short circuits. I imagine that would make it sound pretty anemic. >.>
Old 2nd January 2018
  #154
Gear Maniac
 
🎧 5 years
I have owned 2 x Juno-60 and 2 x Juno-106 over the years. For some reason I prefer the sound of the 106.
Old 2nd January 2018
  #155
Moderator
 
Don Solaris's Avatar
 
4 Reviews written
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by sctt_stone ➡️
Anything a Juno 106 is better at than the juno 60?
Has MIDI connection.

/thread
Old 2nd January 2018 | Show parent
  #156
Lives for gear
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Don Solaris ➡️
Has MIDI connection.

/thread
The killer feature Midi from the glorious CC free first generation
Old 2nd January 2018 | Show parent
  #157
Here for the gear
 
ajsmcs's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Don Solaris ➡️
Has MIDI connection.

/thread
For the sake of answering the original question, I'll add...

"More low end. (But only if you want it) "
Old 2nd January 2018 | Show parent
  #158
Lives for gear
 
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by ajsmcs ➡️

But I keep hearing this claim - frequently, from a multitude of sources - that the Juno-106 somehow sounds vastly different than the -60, using words like "colder," "more digital," "lifeless." That they sound so dramatically different so as to make one's sound suitable for some genres of music but not for others, and vice versa. Like, you could replace every instance of "Juno-60" & "Juno-106" with "Jupiter-8" & "Teach-Me-Piano Funplayer by Casio" and it would still sound reasonable...
...and that is just absolute nonsense to the highest possible degree.
Honestly, I have never heard anybody make that claim - I would agree that it is a huge exaggeration. The differences are subtle - there are differences but they could never be described as vast.

Out of interest could you point in the direction of the sources that make these claims?
Old 2nd January 2018 | Show parent
  #159
Lives for gear
 
🎧 5 years
having no midi and scratching your head thinking
where the f*** m'i gonna find a 'dcb' cable is
pretty poignant. if the ju-106 had an arpeggiator,
nobody would be asking.

still don't know what the big deal about the JU-6
is though - ??
Old 2nd January 2018
  #160
Lives for gear
 
🎧 5 years
Plugging in a kenton box to get midi is easier than desoldering the voice chips i'd say. But doesn't the 106 have poly-portamento? That is something the 60 can't do. It has a bass bump too that the 60 doesn't. Keybed feels a little different too - I prefer the 60 on that.
Old 2nd January 2018 | Show parent
  #161
Here for the gear
 
ajsmcs's Avatar
I found most while bored-browsing on my phone waiting for lab tests to finish, so I don't remember a lot of them off hand. But here are two that immediately come to mind:

An Entire Vice Article Lusting over the Juno-60 in which they say "All good things come to an end and the production of the Juno 60 ended in February 1984, to be replaced by the Juno-106." Spoken as if something magical had gone away, rather than simply being...ya know...just revised. (VICE?! Being infatuated with something they're actually clueless about?! Color me shocked!)

Arguably the worst offender. Although the Juno-106 offers quite comprehensive MIDI, it’s no substitute for the Juno-60. the Juno-106 is also very different... Its sound is more “electronic” and less “natural”. Whether you like it or not (or need it or not) depends on the sort of music you’re producing.

Also if you read through this thread from the beginning, and you see those ideas pop up pretty consistently. That's what motivated me to make an account and comment on this thread in the first place.

Quote:
Originally Posted by islandmonkey ➡️
having no midi and scratching your head thinking
where the f*** m'i gonna find a 'dcb' cable is
pretty poignant. if the ju-106 had an arpeggiator,
nobody would be asking.

still don't know what the big deal about the JU-6
is though - ?? - somehow it's the big deal ?
Yeah, I'm with you. I know why they ditched it, but I really wish they hadn't. I know the Kiwi mod gives you one, but I just hate the idea of taking a board that's awesome for the immediacy of its control-per-feature interface and then imbuing it with 5 layers worth of menu-diving. (I also wouldn't mind the EG PWM either, but its not worth killing over.)

Are you talking about the actual Juno 6, or the digital Roland Boutique Juno-106 recreation that is actually called "JU-06?"

If the former...its literally just a Juno-60 without the ability to save presets. And I don't mean it in the 60 v 106 sense, where they took the circuits and moved them around and optimized things so they're effectively identical with minor differences. I mean they are literally identical.

If you own a 60 or 106 and are absolutely nuts over the sound, it might be worthwhile to also buy whichever you don't already have for the 2 or 3 different features and the (theoretically) subtly different sound. But if you own a 60, there's literally no reason to own a 6. (unless you're some sort of bonkers completionist collector. *cough* Junkie XL *cough* [I would happily trade my left testicle for just half of the gear he has in storage, let alone what he actually has setup in his studio.])

Quote:
Plugging in a kenton box to get midi is easier than desoldering the voice chips i'd say. But doesn't the 106 have poly-portamento? That is something the 60 can't do. It has a bass bump too that the 60 doesn't. Keybed feels a little different too - I prefer the 60 on that.
Ehh...IMHO desoldering the voice chips is very, very easy if you're any good with an iron. (Desoldering a 60-pin SMD CPU without bending any pins, on the other hand...much less easy. XD )

In fact, I was shocked at how simple the 106 is to work on. Everything is just right there. The lid is even hinged!

Yes, it does have poly portamento, and from what I understand it was like the 2nd or 3rd synth to ever have that feature. (correct me if I'm wrong) It also just dawned on me that the -60 doesn't have the two different Poly Modes, nor (as far as I can tell) Unison. (which is activated by pressing both Poly switches at once) Poly 2 changes the way envelopes work to facilitate portamento chord playing. (although it lends a sort of organ-like quality to the sound which I'm not too crazy about. The upside is that Poly 2 will let you play a 106 with one or more dead voice chips without missing notes.) I wouldn't miss Unison if it stopped working. It doesn't detune any of the oscillators, and as a result it sounds pretty weird.

(To be clear, my previous analyses relate only to the actual raw -sound- of the instrument, rather than the differences in features)
Old 2nd January 2018 | Show parent
  #162
Here for the gear
 
ajsmcs's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zaphod Betamax ➡️
Having the IR3109 rather than *poof* a voice is gone,
to me seems like an advantage!YMMV
1) The 106 does have IR3109's. They're just stuck to an external PCB.

2) The fact that I can build a 100% reliable vintage Juno for the price of an MS20 Mini (all-in) and legitimately minimal effort is a way bigger advantage to me. But hey, I'm sure that arpeggiator is worth $2,400-$2,600 plus shipping.
Old 2nd January 2018 | Show parent
  #163
Deleted User
Guest
I was probably not 100% clear, but you would assume I meant the Juno 60, when I said IR3109, as the Juno 106 has the woopsy chip in it.
(even if it technically is a IR3109 minus the DIP package I knew and worked with back in the 80s!)

I don't disagree that some of the Junos are overpriced....

Quote:
Originally Posted by ajsmcs ➡️
1) The 106 does have IR3109's. They're just stuck to an external PCB.

2) The fact that I can build a 100% reliable vintage Juno for the price of an MS20 Mini (all-in) and legitimately minimal effort is a way bigger advantage to me. But hey, I'm sure that arpeggiator is worth $2,400-$2,600 plus shipping.
Old 2nd January 2018 | Show parent
  #164
Here for the gear
 
ajsmcs's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zaphod Betamax ➡️
I was probably not 100% clear, but you would assume I meant the Juno 60, when I said IR3109, as the Juno 106 has the woopsy chip in it.
(even if it technically is a IR3109 minus the DIP package I knew and worked with back in the 80s!)
I have no idea what exactly you're trying to say here.

It is literally an IR3109. That's what's called out in the schematic...

The way I see it, Roland's bad mechanical design is a positive, because it means that broken 106's are common and cheap, and because it convinced passionate engineers like the guy from Analog Renaissance to completely reengineer the chip to be 100% mechanically reliable, comprised of nothing but common parts, and electrically identical to the point of obsessive lunacy, where even aspects that one might consider "a design flaw" are purposefully replicated in exacting detail. I can keep my 106 sounding like a 106 for decades.

I spent a total of $489 on my Juno-106 because I wanted every chip to be bulletproof. But I didn't need to. It would have been at 100% @ $339.

So... $2600 for a Juno-60 - orrrrrrr - $2600 for a Juno-106 and a used Minimoog. Or maybe a 106 and a brand new Prophet Rev2. Or Hell, I could build 7 106's, sell 6 of them for $1,000 each, and buy myself an OB-Xa.
Any way you look at it, the 106 is the wiser choice.
Old 2nd January 2018 | Show parent
  #165
Deleted User
Guest
I had two JX-3Ps. one with one without PG-200- Now Gone.
My JX-8P will be sold as well.

I just do not dig the DCO phase lock that happens with 2 DCO designs,
and it is a waste of space to have a keybed with one DCO.

I always see 106s for sale in Canada for $1200-$1600CDN.
Way too much, as I sold my JX-3P with PG-200 for $800CDN.

And what I was getting at is the DIP version of the IR3109 seems to me
to be more reliable....

Did the vintage DCO thing...but now I dig VCOs, but that's just
my preference..



Quote:
Originally Posted by ajsmcs ➡️
I have no idea what you're trying to say here.

It is literally an IR3109. That's what's called out in the schematic...

The way I see it, Roland's bad mechanical design is a positive, because it means that broken 106's are common and cheap, and because it convinced passionate engineers like the guy from Analog Renaissance to completely reengineer the chip to be 100% mechanically reliable, comprised of nothing but common parts, and electrically identical to the point of obsessive lunacy, where even aspects that one might consider "a design flaw" are purposefully replicated.

I spent a total of $489 on my Juno-106 because I wanted every chip to be bulletproof. But I didn't need to. It would have been at 100% @ $339.

So... $2600 for a Juno-60 - orrrrrrr - $2600 for a Juno-106 and a used Minimoog. Or maybe a 106 and a brand new Prophet Rev2. Or Hell, I could build 7 106's, sell 6 of them for $1,000 each, and buy myself an OB-Xa.
Any way you look at it, the 106 is the wiser choice.
Old 2nd January 2018 | Show parent
  #166
Here for the gear
 
ajsmcs's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zaphod Betamax ➡️
I had two JX-3Ps. one with one without PG-200- Now Gone.
My JX-8P will be sold as well.

I just do not dig the DCO phase lock that happens with 2 DCO designs,
and it is a waste of space to have a keybed with one DCO.

I always see 106s for sale in Canada for $1200-$1600CDN.
Way too much, as I sold my JX-3P with PG-200 for $800CDN.

And what I was getting at is the DIP version of the IR3109 seems to me
to be more reliable....

Did the vintage DCO thing...but now I dig VCOs, but that's just
my preference..
I'd been considering a JX3P. That's good to know.

I agree that the Juno-106's original chips are of a terrible design, and that the 60's non-offboard filter chips are without question mechanically superior/more reliable. But with AR's replacement chips, its a non-issue in 2018.

I said earlier, but I was not actually in the market for a Juno when I found it. My dream polysynth (that I could realistically own) was - and still is - a JD800. The Juno was just so ridiculously cheap that I'd've been an idiot not to buy it.

I've fallen in love with its sound, but I would never buy one at market value. To many other things I'm more interested in. As I've tried explaining to my wife several times without avail, the Juno is awesome at certain, particular things but is IMO not a be-all end-all workstation type of instrument. ("Honey, look. Its like trying to paint a picture with only the color Blue. You can shade all you want, but it'll never look as interesting as it would with some other colors..." XD)
Old 2nd January 2018
  #167
VST
Lives for gear
 
VST's Avatar
 
4 Reviews written
🎧 5 years
The 106 is way better at crapping out and costing you more money.
Old 3rd January 2018 | Show parent
  #168
Here for the gear
 
ajsmcs's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by VST ➡️
The 106 is way better at crapping out and costing you more money.
...once, for new chips. After that, never again.*(1)

I mean, come on. You're talking about it like its a vintage Alfa Romeo.*(2) Its a fairly simple electronic keyboard from a major brand released during the zenith of mass-market analog synth manufacturing and usage. I know there was a time when the only way to fix one was to steal destined-to-fail-but-currently-functional voice chips from another Juno-106. And at that point in time it was expensive to keep one running. But its not 2003 anymore. It essentially has that one well-known, well-documented failure point and it is easily and affordably rectified in 2018.*(3) Other than that its bulletproof.

Let me put it this way: If you are in the market for a Juno-106 you should factor in the cost of new chips as a matter of course. Swap them right away, never worry about it again. If you own one already, buy them swap them never worry about em again.

Now, if we were talking about brand new instruments, needing to swap chips would obviously not be acceptable. But these are 27-36 year old instruments; maintenance and parts replacement is to be expected, and for the 106 that includes new chips. So when comparing Juno's, just assume the 106 has new chips.

Once again, a Juno-60 is $2400-$2600. A functional Juno-106 is $1000-$1200. Even if you end up replacing all of the original chips in that full price Juno-106, and even if you pay a pro to do it - the worst case scenario - it will still come out to be $700-$900 less than the Juno-60, and be every bit as reliable.*(4) And that's assuming you need to pay someone. Its extremely easy to do it yourself, and that's a savings of ~$200.

Seriously, it's 2018 - not 2003. This whole "the Juno-106 is an unreliable money pit" argument just doesn't hold weight anymore.


*(1) Excluding the routine care and maintenance you'd expect with any old instrument.
*(2) They're famously great-driving cars that are also famously unreliable money pits.
*(3) This is a link to the best source for new chips. I highly recommend reading all of his design notes for the current and previous iterations to fully appreciate the obsessive lengths this guy has gone to to replicate the original electrical characteristics while also infinitely increasing the reliability.
*(4) As an added bonus, the Analogue Renaissance chips are designed to use very common parts that are easily sourced and replaced in the unlikely event of failure, even 20 years from now. You can't say the same about the Juno-60's IR3109s. Food for thought.
Old 3rd January 2018 | Show parent
  #169
Lives for gear
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by ajsmcs ➡️
...once, for new chips. After that, never again.*(1)

I mean, come on. You're talking about it like its a vintage Alfa Romeo.*(2) Its a fairly simple electronic keyboard from a major brand released during the zenith of mass-market analog synth manufacturing and usage. I know there was a time when the only way to fix one was to steal destined-to-fail-but-currently-functional voice chips from another Juno-106. And at that point in time it was expensive to keep one running. But its not 2003 anymore. It essentially has that one well-known, well-documented failure point and it is easily and affordably rectified in 2018.*(3) Other than that its bulletproof.

Let me put it this way: If you are in the market for a Juno-106 you should factor in the cost of new chips as a matter of course. Swap them right away, never worry about it again. If you own one already, buy them swap them never worry about em again.

Now, if we were talking about brand new instruments, needing to swap chips would obviously not be acceptable. But these are 27-36 year old instruments; maintenance and parts replacement is to be expected, and for the 106 that includes new chips. So when comparing Juno's, just assume the 106 has new chips.

Once again, a Juno-60 is $2400-$2600. A functional Juno-106 is $1000-$1200. Even if you end up replacing all of the original chips in that full price Juno-106, and even if you pay a pro to do it - the worst case scenario - it will still come out to be $700-$900 less than the Juno-60, and be every bit as reliable.*(4) And that's assuming you need to pay someone. Its extremely easy to do it yourself, and that's a savings of ~$200.

Seriously, it's 2018 - not 2003. This whole "the Juno-106 is an unreliable money pit" argument just doesn't hold weight anymore.


*(1) Excluding the routine care and maintenance you'd expect with any old instrument.
*(2) They're famously great-driving cars that are also famously unreliable money pits.
*(3) This is a link to the best source for new chips. I highly recommend reading all of his design notes for the current and previous iterations to fully appreciate the obsessive lengths this guy has gone to to replicate the original electrical characteristics while also infinitely increasing the reliability.
*(4) As an added bonus, the Analogue Renaissance chips are designed to use very common parts that are easily sourced and replaced in the unlikely event of failure, even 20 years from now. You can't say the same about the Juno-60's IR3109s. Food for thought.
I'd just like to say I support all your reasoning, and thanks for your input on this thread - it may be useful for a lot of people in the future. These are the reasons I bought myself a mint 106 a while back for less than the cost of 2 JU-06s - mine doesn't even need the chips doing yet as it's been in storage for 25 years, but I know how to do it and am hoping to take them all out and acetone strip them when time allows. It sounds just the same to me as the 6s and 60s I played when these were new and I'm supper happy with it. As to the arpeggiator - I've put an SH01a on top and that solves that problem and then some for way less than the price of the others, with versatile midi and patch saving
Old 3rd January 2018
  #170
Lives for gear
 
🎧 10 years
The 106 and SH01a together - lovely looking combo
Attached Thumbnails
Anything  a Juno 106 is better at than the juno 60?-img_0052.jpg  
Old 3rd January 2018 | Show parent
  #171
Lives for gear
 
🎧 5 years
perfect midi sequencer and arpeggiator for the 106.

Last edited by ibtl; 3rd January 2018 at 08:59 PM..
Old 3rd January 2018 | Show parent
  #172
Here for the gear
 
ajsmcs's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by dr_Jezz ➡️
I'd just like to say I support all your reasoning, and thanks for your input on this thread - it may be useful for a lot of people in the future. These are the reasons I bought myself a mint 106 a while back for less than the cost of 2 JU-06s - mine doesn't even need the chips doing yet as it's been in storage for 25 years, but I know how to do it and am hoping to take them all out and acetone strip them when time allows. It sounds just the same to me as the 6s and 60s I played when these were new and I'm supper happy with it. As to the arpeggiator - I've put an SH01a on top and that solves that problem and then some for way less than the price of the others, with versatile midi and patch saving
Thank you. I appreciate that.

I'm usually more of a lurker than a contributor; most of the time I'm on a forum its to find answers from knowledgeable people for a problem I can't solve.

(At the risk of sounding like a pretentious blowhard - my least favorite type of person) on certain rare occasions I find myself in the position of "knowledge," so I try to do my part to contribute. Like you said, people will find this thread looking for answers on Google (I certainly did) - possibly even years from now - and I want them to have the best and most current information available.

Because nothing grinds my gears more than hearing people repeat the same BS ad nauseam because they heard other people repeat it ad nauseam for decades without anyone ever bothering to check the facts.*(1)

Quote:
The 106 and SH01a together - lovely looking combo
The things I'd do for a beautiful set of non-yellowed blue and white switch caps... I could live with the aged white, but the green-tint of my blue keys just looks rancid. One of these days I'm gonna try to paint them...

I'd been looking at the Boutique line lately. I hadn't even thought about using one as a mini sequencer. What do you think of the SH01? I had a TR08 on my Christmas list, but my wife instead opted to get me a meteorite and titanium wedding band to replace the $15 one I'd been wearing. I can't complain.

*(1) lol there's like an 8 page discussion on diymobileaudio of me trying to explain to a "30-year car audio competition veteran" why amp distortion doesn't kill speakers. Believe it or not, that theory is painfully common even among people who otherwise know what they're talking about. I guess Heavy Metal, Punk Rock, and the Square Wave setting are all just figments of my imagination...
Old 3rd January 2018 | Show parent
  #173
Here for the gear
 
ajsmcs's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by islandmonkey ➡️
LOL shame there isn't an analog juno that size
(well, a *little* bit bigger. i'm still after a viable desktop
replacement for 106/60 etc. - don't do keyboards - )
You could always go Euro. The Intellijel Atlantis is heavily based on the SH101 (Although it uses actual VCOs). Feed that into a Feedback 106 Chorus, and you'd get something at least vaguely similar to a Juno. Sure, it would be monophonic and cost about as much as an actual Juno-106, but if you're looking for compact and analog, there aren't too many options to get that sound. And if you wanted 6-voice poly...well, you better remortgage your house.
Old 3rd January 2018 | Show parent
  #174
Moderator
 
Don Solaris's Avatar
 
4 Reviews written
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by ajsmcs ➡️
For the sake of answering the original question, I'll add...

"More low end. (But only if you want it) "
If both units are properly refurbished and calibrated, their low end should be very similar.

The only thing i found as a difference was in the sound of PWM. On 60 it is more alive, while on 106 it is a bit more static. Not saying this because i own 60 but because even low quality youtube vid can confirm it. i.e: YouTube

That was the reason why in the end i sold the 106 and kept 60.

As of the envelopes, unfortunately i didn't do any proper test, because by that time i sold 106. TBH somehow i don't trust other ppl's tests. I can't really comment on the difference between software and hardware envelopes in Junos. But i can confirm that those on the 60 are as snappy and same responding as those on JP-8. They are probably some of the best envelopes ever designed.
Old 3rd January 2018 | Show parent
  #175
Lives for gear
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by ajsmcs ➡️
What do you think of the SH01?
No probs mate . I think the SH01a is great. I was looking for an SH101 for a while and kicked myself when I missed a couple of mint examples with the grip and original strap, but the prices have become absurd - the 106 was actually much cheaper to buy, and it's in good condition with original manual and dust cover (the box is supposed to be around somewhere but it never surfaced). As to the 01a - I used all the Junos and 101 back in the 80s and it has the vibe I remember. I don't know if every extreme setting sounds identical to other people's machines, and I don't care. It has all the vibe and inspiration to actually make you want to make music with it, and the quality is unquestionable. Now I have it - you know what one of my favourite features is? 4 note poly! I have always used poly synths in preference to monos, and I'm so happy with that, although I didn't expect it to be a big thing. Next - SIZE! This, along with the patch memory and sequencer storage and chord memory make this thing not only more usable than a 101, but actually more inspiring if you genuinely want to use the thing. This machine is actually way prefereable to an original 101 for me now - and I loved and played the originals when they were new. As a partner for the 106 - I don't think you'd be dissapointed. I just need to get my Dr110 out now to head back in time as soon as I have the chance
Old 3rd January 2018 | Show parent
  #176
Lives for gear
 
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by ajsmcs ➡️
You could always go Euro. The Intellijel Atlantis is heavily based on the SH101 (Although it uses actual VCOs). Feed that into a Feedback 106 Chorus, and you'd get something at least vaguely similar to a Juno. Sure, it would be monophonic and cost about as much as an actual Juno-106, but if you're looking for compact and analog, there aren't too many options to get that sound. And if you wanted 6-voice poly...well, you better remortgage your house.
still have my old 101. it's the 106 i sold, and the main reason was
size: i want the voice, but i don't want the keys. i'm kinda into
'boxes' - not really drawn by euro, it's all terribly expensive..

i've been *very* curious about the Boutiques, and haven't yet had a
chance to try one out. bit put off by reports of 15ms latency and
suddenly high 2nd hand price. (couldn't afford a new one at the time)

also not sure about the VA factor. my own feeling is i could live with that,
- and the sh01a seems to sound pretty great, and has some excellent
extras - but i'm slightly influenced by knee-jerk anti-VA reactions from a
couple of friends, and i'm still debating whether to keep a KSrack.
lol, so ..

in fact, it's more the principle: 'damn, why did they never make a better
format of it'.
Old 3rd January 2018 | Show parent
  #177
Here for the gear
 
ajsmcs's Avatar
Quote:
I think the SH01a is great. I was looking for an SH101 for a while and kicked myself when I missed a couple of mint examples with the grip and original strap, but the prices have become absurd
The prices on everything have gotten absurd. In the past two months alone the prices on Juno-106s went up by like $200, and the -60's by like $600. IMHO $1,000 to $1,200 is a fair price for a 106 in good nick, and $1,600 to $1,800 for the -60 (just because there are fewer of them).

Anything beyond that is insane, but yet here we are...with prices beyond that...

Its nuts. Now that I think of it, that was about the time when season 2 of Stranger Things - with its vintage analog soundtrack - came out. I wonder if that had anything to do with it...

EDIT: There's a Juno-60 on eBay right that's MORE EXPENSIVE than a Prophet 5 Rev.2 I saw on there yesterday...
The world has gone absolutely mad.

Quote:
Originally Posted by islandmonkey ➡️
still have my old 101. it's the 106 i sold, and the main reason was
size: i want the voice, but i don't want the keys. i'm kinda into
'boxes' - not really drawn by euro, it's all terribly expensive..
Euro's way more affordable if you're handy with an iron. All but two of mine (Mother-32 and μZeus) I DIY'd, including the case.
For example, I have Mutable Clouds, Streams, Tides, and Grids. If I'd bought them it would have cost $1,100. They only cost me $350 - TOTAL - to build. But in general I'm with you. Its ludicrously pricy, and a lot of the stuff I really want you can't DIY. (Well, you could in theory, but you'd need to get a hold of the schematic and some PCB etching supplies, and I have zero interest in doing that)
Quote:
i've been *very* curious about the Boutiques, and haven't yet had a
chance to try one out. bit put off by reports of 15ms latency and
suddenly high 2nd hand price. (couldn't afford a new one at the time)

also not sure about the VA factor. my own feeling is i could live with that,
- and the sh01a seems to sound pretty great, and has some excellent
extras - but i'm slightly influenced by knee-jerk anti-VA reactions from a
couple of friends, and i'm still debating whether to keep a KSrack.
lol, so ..

in fact, it's more the principle: 'damn, why did they never make a better
format of it'. i don't think i need one anymore.
I feel like you get to a certain point where you just need to play with the darn thing yourself. Borrow from a friend if you can, or find an internet retailer with a generous return policy and order one. If you hate it, just send it back. Takes all the stress out of the situation.

Quote:
btw, maybe you could dye the plastic some colour? some plastics take
clothes dye really well.
Maybe. I feel like the underlying color would tint the dye. It's weird nobody makes repro buttons, since its a very common problem. I mean, I have a transparent repro bender lever. Clearly theres a market for repro plastic.

I'd also thought about trying to sand off the surface layer, since everything not exposed to the sun is still the original color.

I've heard house paint is surprisingly good for doing them, and stores can match the color really well. I'd normally be more inclined toward spray paint but I doubt I could find the right color in a can. Now that I think of it, I have a proper, quality airbrush somewhere that I never learned to use. I could mix my own colors. Maybe that's the ticket...
Old 3rd January 2018
  #178
Lives for gear
 
With the kiwi mainboard, the 106 is only really useful

Kiwi-106 Upgrade for the Roland Juno-106

but the software envelopes remain
Old 5th January 2018 | Show parent
  #179
Lives for gear
 
Rob Ocelot's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Don Solaris ➡️
Has MIDI connection.

/thread
More to the point, the Juno 106 was by and far the preferred synth of the two in the late 80's and well into the 90's because it had MIDI. Retrofit kits for the 6/60 were unheard of (or very expensive if you wanted to line Kenton's pockets). There was quite a long period where a Juno 106 would cost you a lot more than a Juno 6/60.

Same deal for the MKS-80 and Jupiter-6 over the Jupiter-4 and Jupiter-8. There was a point where MIDI control was a more coveted feature than overall sound.

Of course that is now completely turned on it's head...
Old 5th January 2018 | Show parent
  #180
Lives for gear
 
robot gigante's Avatar
 
2 Reviews written
🎧 15 years
I was a long-time Juno 6 user. Don't have it any more. I loved it, it was a lot of fun. Also used the 106 but that was some time ago. Recently picked up an AJ2 and it's my favorite of the line.

The thing is I have a line now on either a 60 and a 106 or both at a reasonable price. Agree that the quoted prices are outrageous, but only the impatient or wealthy pay top dollar. I can't think of any reason to get both? I have plenty of space. My rule #1 is, never flip (or broker, don't ask). So whatever I get stays.

I have my own thoughts... all three are just different enough. Maybe should just stick with the 2, but I do like the others. Eeeh, GAS pains...
📝 Reply

Similar Threads

Thread / Thread Starter Replies / Views Last Post
replies: 70 views: 34698
Avatar for Deleted 859c1b8
Deleted 859c1b8 24th June 2016
replies: 2140 views: 207023
Avatar for Don Solaris
Don Solaris 23rd August 2012
replies: 9469 views: 861987
Avatar for greggybud
greggybud 4 days ago
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearspace Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…

Forum Jump
Forum Jump