Why is the UDO optically based on the JP6?
And why was the conditionally suitable program management also taken over ?

I've always loved the UI of the 80's Roland synths. The JP8, JP6, SH and to a lesser extent the JUNO series just filled me with wonder when I was first getting into music production. Actually the UI elements have more in common with the JP8. There are very similar sliders, pots and switches used in the voice area. The JP6 used much cheaper parts.

Hi can you help me understand your question?

Thanks George

i also like my 80s rolands, thanks for the answer.. be careful that roland doesn't sue you

to the 2nd question, preferably with a picture


With this display I can easily read program numbers, but not with your system

8 x 8 button matrix is my ideal programme selection system (well maybe 4 x 32.) Really glad you went for this option. LEDs instantly show you which patch you have selected in a very immediate and visual way. The bender instead of wheels? - not so much joy there.

Hi,

Yes LED displays can be handy I agree. I really wanted this synth with buttons only. Reading A1, B2 is a compromise and not as easy as reading numbers I agree, however it is so quick to load and store patches this way. The immediacy and responsiveness of simply two fast clicks addressing 64 patches (3 addressing 128) is very appealing to me but I do appreciate people have preferences for LCD's, LED's etc and some don't want presets at all, so it is hard to make something universally ideal.

Hope this helps explain our motivations! George

I'll put it this way: I prefer the display type of my jp8 to that of the jp6.
how i enter the numbers is another topic.

last question

just found in the network:
UDO e.g. has the analog part manufactured by an unknown US company

who might that be?